THE TRADE AGREEMENT BETWEEN THE UNITED STATES AND CHINA IS A CATASTROPHE

Experts on the global economy who were assembled at the World Economic Forum in Davos, Switzerland, which just finished up, believe that the phase agreement between the United States and China was both a geopolitical mistake and the beginning of an economic calamity. The vast majority of the professionals who have gathered here argue that the trade deal disregards the threat that China poses to the global economy, moves away from the principles of free trade, and disregards the issues of intellectual property theft as well as the support of state-sponsored companies in international markets. Others have gone on to challenge the practicability of such a contract and its “unrealistic statistics, which calls the whole feasibility of the arrangement into doubt.” [Citation needed] One individual who is especially negative about the accord is Chad Bown, who is a former international trade economist in the White House and now works at the Peterson Institute for International Economics. On the other hand, he is not a fan of the condition that mandates China to purchase products from the United States for a total of two hundred billion dollars during the next two years. China has committed to purchasing at least forty billion dollars’ worth of agricultural products from marketplaces in the United States as part of this international deal. He contends that the only way for China to do this is by drawing attention away from its economic partners, such as the European Union, Canada, and Brazil. According to Jeff Currie, a commodities analyst at Goldman Sachs, there is “a lot of doubt about how you would reach $40 billion or maybe even $50 billion in agricultural acquisitions.” These thoughts were shared by Jeff Currie. The fact that the first phase of the pact does not solve the blockage of trade tariffs between Washington and Beijing has also been brought up by economic news experts who are investigating the arrangement. In accordance with a research that was recently published by Oxford Economics, these tariffs have an impact on more than two-thirds of all items that are imported from China. Furthermore, they have increased from an average of three percent in 2016 to fifty-three percent in 2019. And despite the fact that the Trump administration is insistent that Chinese corporations would be the ones to face the duties, there is sufficient evidence to suggest that these tariffs will trickle down to retailers, small businesses, and consumers in the form of a hidden tax. All of these factors, in addition to the fact that it does not address the Chinese government’s restrictions on international business or the encouragement of state-owned subsidiaries to compete on a global scale, render it incompatible with the economic well-being of the United States and the rest of the world. trade agreement that was influenced by politics President Trump said that he was “righting the wrongs of the past and providing a future of economic fairness and security for American workers, farmers, and families” when he was signing the trade agreement. The particulars of the agreement, on the other hand, could not be farther disconnected from this reality. At the beginning of his mission to make America great again, President Trump made a commitment to battle against anybody and everyone who is actively working to undermine the economy and companies of the United States. The Trump administration seems to be giving in to Beijing by ignoring important problems like the theft of intellectual property via their failure to take these concerns into consideration. The hurried signing of the pact has also been called into doubt by some who are opposed to the Trump administration, and some of them have even referred to it as a political campaign weapon. They believe that in light of the fact that the 2020 elections are growing increasingly closer and that serious political difficulties such as the possibility of impeachment are hanging over Trump’s administration, he need a significant victory, which is why the China trade agreement was not too well thought out. However, experts at the Globe Economic Forum were not unaware of the stabilizing influence that the accord has on the economy of the whole world. To begin, the president of the World Trade Organization, Roberto Azevedo, made the argument that the deal’s “political importance cannot be underestimated.” On the other side, the Mexican Minister of Economy, Graciela Márquez Colín, expressed similar thoughts, describing the agreement as a “intermediate step” towards reducing the wide-ranging political and economic conflicts that are occurring throughout the world.