Skip to main content

Europe must not appease Trump on Greenland - Gideon Rachman - FT

Donald Trump’s threat to annex Greenland raised the once unthinkable prospect that the US could use its military to seize territory from Denmark — a Nato ally. Several European nations responded by dispatching troops to the island — ostensibly as part of an exercise to bolster Arctic security. Trump’s counter reaction was to accuse the European nations involved — which include France, Germany and the UK — of playing a “very dangerous game”. 

The US president has said that all these countries will be hit with tariffs of 10 per cent at the beginning of February, rising to 25 per cent in June. So what happens now? A wide range of outcomes is conceivable. At the more benign end, it is possible that Trump’s tariff threats will disappear into the mist. The US president has made empty tariff threats before — including a promise to impose 100 per cent levies on films made outside America and a 200 per cent tariff on champagne. Just last week, he was threatening to impose a 25 per cent tariff on any country that trades with Iran. But there has been little discernible follow up on that so far. 

Europe must not appease Trump on Greenland

 

Comments

Post a Comment

Popular posts from this blog

How The Economic Machine Works by Ray Dalio - Bridgewater

Source: How The Economic Machine Works by Ray Dalio
Post a Comment
Read more

Letter: Why the geopolitics of international currency choice matters - FT

This coincidence must alert readers that a tempest is brewing on subjects noted: lurking inflation, increasing debt, suppressed interest rates and the shifting of hegemonic power.  There are only two important questions in investing that also apply to subjects impacting the future stability of the world — tell me why and tell me when.  Plender gives us the “why”, the ever-increasing “intolerable burden” of government debt and suppressed rates leveraging the global financial system. He gives us the tipping point.  What we await is “the when”, as in when do we know we have “tipped”.  Paul Hackett Madison,  NJ, US    Letter: Why the geopolitics of international currency choice matters
Post a Comment
Read more

Enough cool heads are pulling back from the brink - John Authers - Bloomberg

  Beyond the duration of the shock, we also need to monitor the impact on central banks and on the macroeconomy. Societe Generale’s Manish Kabra lays out the criteria as follows: An exogenous shock lasts beyond a week, but oil spikes usually peak in three months. That’s the timeline and only two things matter: 1) shock duration and 2) the Fed’s reaction function. Alternatively, Henry Allen of Deutsche Bank suggests that for a risk-off bear market to follow an oil shock, three conditions need to be met: 1. Large and sustained oil price spike: An oil price spike of at least +50-100% that is sustained over several months. 2. Hawkish policy response: The shock forces a sharp, hawkish pivot from central banks to fight the resulting inflation (e.g. 1979, 2022). 3. Broader macro damage: The shock is big enough to tip an already-slowing economy into recession.   Iran Oil Panic: Enough Cool Heads Are Pulling Back From the Brink - Bloomberg  
Post a Comment
Read more