一口气了解关税

00:27:15
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=uiMsul6sKus

Summary

TLDRThis video discusses the complexities of tariffs in the global economy, exploring their history, impact, and the ongoing debate regarding their benefits and drawbacks. It begins with an explanation of tariffs using a hypothetical scenario with two countries, highlighting the balance between protecting domestic businesses and the negative effects on consumers and efficiency. Historical examples, such as Trump's tariffs on washing machines and the broader implications of protectionism during the Great Depression, illustrate the mixed results of tariff imposition. The video culminates by discussing the modern challenges faced by organizations like the WTO amid rising economic nationalism and trade protectionism, emphasizing the need for careful strategies in international trade.

Takeaways

  • 📈 Tariffs can increase government revenue but raise consumer prices.
  • 🛡️ They protect domestic industries but can harm consumers' purchasing power.
  • ⚖️ Increased tariffs lead to trade-offs between industry support and consumer welfare.
  • 🛠️ The infant industry argument justifies temporary tariffs for emerging industries.
  • 🔄 'Tit-for-tat' strategies in trade help maintain cooperative relationships.
  • 🗺️ Historical examples, like the Smoot-Hawley Act, show the risks of excessive tariffs.
  • ⚠️ Deadweight losses occur when tariffs distort market efficiency.
  • 📉 Recent trends show a potential shift towards de-globalization.
  • 🤝 Organizations like the WTO aim to regulate trade disputes and tariffs.
  • ️🚧 Protectionist sentiments can have long-lasting effects on global trade.

Timeline

  • 00:00:00 - 00:05:00

    The discussion revolves around the concept of tariffs, highlighted by Trump's assertion that it is the 'most beautiful word' in the dictionary, while many economists warn that tariffs decrease economic efficiency and create deadweight losses. The video prompts viewers to explore the implications of tariffs in the macroeconomic context and their historical relevance in global trade.

  • 00:05:00 - 00:10:00

    Tariffs are described using an analogy involving two fictional countries, Milk Tea Kingdom and Dairy Kingdom, where the implementation of a 20% tariff on imported milk powder leads to increased consumer prices but benefits local producers. This example illustrates the basic mechanism and impacts of tariffs, noting the mixed outcomes: government revenue and producer benefits versus negative consumer effects.

  • 00:10:00 - 00:15:00

    Citing Trump's imposition of tariffs on washing machines, the video highlights the increase in domestic production jobs but also the corresponding rise in consumer prices. Thus, tariffs create a trade-off between employment benefits and consumer costs, leading to the question of whether tariffs collectively improve or worsen economic conditions for a country.

  • 00:15:00 - 00:20:00

    Delving into theoretical economics, the video explains how tariffs can produce deadweight losses—a well-known criticism in classical economics. While tariffs might protect certain industries and potentially foster future growth, their overall impact on consumers and the broader economy tends to be negative, suggesting a nuanced view of tariffs that is more complex than simply classifying them as beneficial or harmful.

  • 00:20:00 - 00:27:15

    The discussion transitions to the historical evolution of trade, where the UK initially engaged in protectionism with high tariffs before adopting free trade policies influenced by Ricardo's comparative advantage theory. The rise and fall of global tariffs, especially through the post-WWII trade agreements like GATT/WTO, highlight an ongoing cycle of globalisation and protectionism, emphasizing that navigating these dynamics requires strategic approaches like tit-for-tat retaliation in trade negotiations.

Show more

Mind Map

Video Q&A

  • What are tariffs?

    Tariffs are taxes imposed on imported goods to protect domestic industries by making imported products more expensive.

  • What impact do tariffs have on consumers?

    Tariffs generally lead to higher prices for consumers, as importers pass on the cost of the tariff.

  • Are tariffs good or bad for a country's economy?

    Tariffs can have both positive and negative effects; they may protect local industries but can also result in deadweight losses and reduced overall efficiency.

  • What is the infant industry argument?

    This is a theory suggesting that new industries need protection from competition until they become established.

  • What is the tit-for-tat strategy in trade?

    It involves responding to another country's tariffs with reciprocal actions, fostering cooperation in trade over time.

  • How have tariffs historically affected global trade?

    Tariffs have been a major factor in global trade tensions, with significant impacts during events like the Great Depression and response to globalization.

  • What was the Smoot-Hawley Tariff Act?

    This 1930 act raised tariffs on over 20,000 goods, worsening the Great Depression by prompting retaliatory tariffs from other countries.

  • What organizations help regulate global trade?

    The World Trade Organization (WTO) is the primary body that facilitates trade negotiations and dispute resolution among countries.

  • How do tariffs influence employment?

    In the short term, tariffs can protect jobs in specific industries, but they may lead to job losses in downstream sectors.

  • What are deadweight losses?

    Deadweight losses refer to the lost economic efficiency when equilibrium for a good or service is not achieved due to tariffs.

View more video summaries

Get instant access to free YouTube video summaries powered by AI!
Subtitles
en
Auto Scroll:
  • 00:00:00
    Hi
  • 00:00:00
    Today we are going to dismantle
  • 00:00:02
    what can be said to be
  • 00:00:04
    the hottest term in the global economy
  • 00:00:06
    which is Tariff
  • 00:00:09
    Trump said
  • 00:00:09
    Tariff is the most beautiful word in the dictionary
  • 00:00:12
    Tariff is more beautiful than love
  • 00:00:14
    "It's music to my ear."
  • 00:00:16
    Meanwhile most economists
  • 00:00:17
    believe that tariffs will reduce the efficiency of the economy,
  • 00:00:19
    saying that tariffs will bring deadweight losses.
  • 00:00:22
    In the past hundreds of years,
  • 00:00:24
    economists, politicians, and the public
  • 00:00:25
    have been divided on tariff
  • 00:00:28
    arguing endlessly
  • 00:00:28
    What kind of chain reactions
  • 00:00:30
    will this seemingly simple concept trigger
  • 00:00:31
    in this complex macroeconomy?
  • 00:00:33
    What role does tariffs play
  • 00:00:34
    in the game between countries?
  • 00:00:36
    What kind of strategy is optimal?
  • 00:00:37
    Ultimately
  • 00:00:38
    are tariffs good or bad
  • 00:00:39
    for a country?
  • 00:00:43
    After gaining a more comprehensive understanding
  • 00:00:45
    let's take a look at the history of global trade
  • 00:00:46
    over the past 300 years, examining its ups and downs
  • 00:00:49
    I believe everyone will have
  • 00:00:51
    their own understanding and judgment.
  • 00:00:56
    First, let's take a look at what tariffs are.
  • 00:00:57
    For example, there is a country called Milk Tea Kingdom
  • 00:01:00
    next to it is a country specialised in milk powder production
  • 00:01:02
    called Dairy Kingdom
  • 00:01:03
    Milk Tea Kingdom
  • 00:01:04
    needs to import a large amount of milk powder from Dairy Kingdom
  • 00:01:06
    Normally,
  • 00:01:07
    milk powder is sold to consumers for 100 milk coins per barrel.
  • 00:01:13
    But suddenly one day,
  • 00:01:14
    the government of Milk Tea Kingdom
  • 00:01:15
    decided to impose a tariff on imported milk powder
  • 00:01:17
    of say 20%
  • 00:01:18
    In this way, the importer of milk powder
  • 00:01:19
    needs to pay a tariff of 20 milk coins
  • 00:01:21
    to the government of the Milk Tea Kingdom
  • 00:01:22
    for every barrel of milk powder he imports
  • 00:01:24
    In order to maintain his own profits, the importer
  • 00:01:26
    sells the price at 120 milk coins per barrel
  • 00:01:28
    to consumers.
  • 00:01:30
    This is the most basic operating mechanism of tariffs.
  • 00:01:32
    Let’s analyse some of the most basic pros and cons
  • 00:01:34
    of this tariff from the perspective of Milk Tea Kingdom
  • 00:01:37
    First of all, the government charges a tariff of 20 milk coins,
  • 00:01:40
    which is equivalent to generating income. It is a plus point.
  • 00:01:42
    On the consumer side, they can only
  • 00:01:43
    buy milk powder from Dairy Kingdom
  • 00:01:45
    at a more expensive price
  • 00:01:46
    so the effect becomes worse, so it's a minus point
  • 00:01:48
    For the milk powder manufacturers in the Milk Tea Kingdom
  • 00:01:51
    the prices of their competitors have become higher and
  • 00:01:53
    have been suppressed, right?
  • 00:01:54
    This will make them happy
  • 00:01:54
    that a large number of milk powder consumers will
  • 00:01:56
    turn to the milk powder produced in the Milk Tea Kingdom
  • 00:01:58
    because the milk powder in the Dairy Kingdom has become more expensive.
  • 00:02:01
    In this way,
  • 00:02:02
    the milk powder manufacturers in the Milk Tea Kingdom will make money.
  • 00:02:04
    Then expand production to attract foreign investment and increase employment
  • 00:02:07
    This is a bonus.
  • 00:02:09
    This is the most simplified version of tariffs
  • 00:02:12
    and its most direct impact.
  • 00:02:14
    For example, in 2018, Trump began
  • 00:02:16
    to impose 20% to 50% tariffs
  • 00:02:17
    on imported washing machines.
  • 00:02:20
    This was mainly because overseas brands
  • 00:02:21
    such as Samsung, LG, Haier
  • 00:02:23
    are too competitive
  • 00:02:24
    that they are
  • 00:02:25
    squeezing the space of local brands
  • 00:02:27
    such as Whirlpool, GE.
  • 00:02:28
    So what happened after this policy?
  • 00:02:29
    First of all, the U.S. government
  • 00:02:31
    received $1 billion in revenue
  • 00:02:32
    in the next three years.
  • 00:02:34
    The price of washing machines
  • 00:02:35
    rose by about 34%
  • 00:02:37
    in the next five years.
  • 00:02:38
    Home appliances increased by about 23% in the same period.
  • 00:02:40
    So washing machines prices increased by about 10% more
  • 00:02:43
    than the entire home appliances .
  • 00:02:44
    What is interesting is that
  • 00:02:45
    not just the prices of washing machines imported from South Korea and China
  • 00:02:48
    have increased.
  • 00:02:48
    The prices of washing machines produced by local manufacturers
  • 00:02:50
    have also increased
  • 00:02:51
    including the prices of dryers.
  • 00:02:53
    These price increases
  • 00:02:54
    are naturally borne by American consumers.
  • 00:02:56
    In terms of jobs,
  • 00:02:57
    Samsung and LG
  • 00:02:58
    have begun to increase
  • 00:02:59
    factory production in the US in response to tariffs,
  • 00:03:02
    including Whirlpool
  • 00:03:03
    has also begun to expand production scale.
  • 00:03:04
    It is estimated that the total
  • 00:03:05
    increase is about 2,000 jobs.
  • 00:03:08
    You see, this is
  • 00:03:09
    consistent with the theory we just mentioned.
  • 00:03:11
    Of course, this is just a small example, just an appetiser.
  • 00:03:13
    However, it does reflect
  • 00:03:16
    the direct consequences of tariffs
  • 00:03:17
    The government and producers have become better,
  • 00:03:19
    but for consumers it has become worse.
  • 00:03:21
    Did you notice that
  • 00:03:22
    tariffs, to a certain extent
  • 00:03:24
    is a trade-off between consumption and employment.
  • 00:03:27
    For example, if you increase tariffs for a certain industry,
  • 00:03:29
    it is equivalent to
  • 00:03:30
    taking part of the effect of consumers to
  • 00:03:32
    replenish the manufacturers of this industry.
  • 00:03:33
    Of course, this also includes the government.
  • 00:03:35
    You see, this tariff makes some people have become better and
  • 00:03:37
    others have become worse.
  • 00:03:38
    Then we naturally think of a question.
  • 00:03:40
    From the perspective of a country as a whole,
  • 00:03:42
    do tariffs make it better
  • 00:03:44
    or worse?
  • 00:03:47
    This is actually
  • 00:03:48
    a key factor in a country's government deciding whether to impose tariffs.
  • 00:03:51
    I think
  • 00:03:51
    it is necessary to first briefly understand
  • 00:03:54
    the most classic economic model.
  • 00:03:56
    Look at Milk Tea Kingdom, when there are no tariffs,
  • 00:03:57
    the total remaining area is like this
  • 00:03:58
    After adding tariffs, it is like this
  • 00:04:00
    these two small triangles are lost.
  • 00:04:01
    It refers to the loss in the sense of well-being for the entire population
  • 00:04:03
    They are called deadweight losses.
  • 00:04:05
    I guess you might never heard of it
  • 00:04:06
    Let me break it down for you in detail.
  • 00:04:09
    So the conclusion is that
  • 00:04:11
    we'll just look at the conclusion.
  • 00:04:14
    increasing tariff is worse off for consumers
  • 00:04:16
    better off for government and manufacturers
  • 00:04:17
    In overall there's deadweight losses, it's worse off
  • 00:04:21
    Let me emphasise that
  • 00:04:21
    this is just a theoretical framework of classical economics.
  • 00:04:24
    Generally, first-year economics students
  • 00:04:25
    will take this thing.
  • 00:04:26
    Textbooks will tell you that
  • 00:04:28
    trade liberalisation is the most efficient.
  • 00:04:29
    Tariffs, subsidy restrictions, etc.
  • 00:04:31
    are all bad and will reduce and efficiency
  • 00:04:33
    reduce the overall efficiency of society.
  • 00:04:34
    According to this classic economic model,
  • 00:04:36
    tariffs will bring deadweight losses
  • 00:04:38
    then the government should never impose tariffs, right?
  • 00:04:40
    This is obviously a bit too absolute and idealistic.
  • 00:04:43
    In reality, tariffs
  • 00:04:44
    still have many additional effects, which
  • 00:04:46
    this model does not take into account.
  • 00:04:47
    First, tariffs can protect the development of specific industries in the country.
  • 00:04:52
    It was the first U.S. Secretary of the Treasury, Hamilton,
  • 00:04:54
    who in the 18th century proposed a theory called
  • 00:04:57
    the infant industry argument
  • 00:04:58
    For many industries, they need to be protected in their infancy.
  • 00:05:01
    You can’t just look at models.
  • 00:05:02
    We can sacrifice some consumer surplus
  • 00:05:05
    to protect these industries.
  • 00:05:05
    In the long run,
  • 00:05:07
    the return on investment may be very worthwhile.
  • 00:05:09
    So in the 19th century, the United States and Germany
  • 00:05:11
    were trying their best to protect their
  • 00:05:12
    textile industry, steel, automobiles, etc.
  • 00:05:15
    moreover there's British’s divine assistance
  • 00:05:17
    which we will talk about in a moment,
  • 00:05:18
    made the manufacturing industries of the US and Germany to rise rapidly
  • 00:05:21
    For example, Mainland China
  • 00:05:22
    imposed tariff on imported cars 30 years ago
  • 00:05:24
    almost over 200%
  • 00:05:25
    coupled with vigorous efforts to attract foreign investment,
  • 00:05:27
    it has been supported bit by bit.
  • 00:05:28
    This can be said to be the infant Chinese automobile industry.
  • 00:05:31
    For example, among the world's major countries,
  • 00:05:32
    do you know which country has the most severe trade protection
  • 00:05:34
    or the highest average tariff?
  • 00:05:37
    It is
  • 00:05:37
    India
  • 00:05:39
    Since 10 years ago
  • 00:05:40
    Modi has implemented his Make in India plan
  • 00:05:42
    Although he has been subject to various restrictions from the WTO
  • 00:05:44
    he still does his best to raise tariffs
  • 00:05:46
    to protect the country's manufacturing industry.
  • 00:05:47
    This has also led to many countries
  • 00:05:48
    going to the WTO to sue him every day.
  • 00:05:51
    In fact, not only India, but
  • 00:05:52
    most developing countries now
  • 00:05:54
    have significantly higher tariffs than developed countries.
  • 00:05:55
    The main reason
  • 00:05:56
    is to increase tariffs to protect their key industries
  • 00:05:59
    Another negative consequence
  • 00:06:01
    is that it not only makes consumers bear higher prices.
  • 00:06:04
    If the imported product
  • 00:06:05
    is not the final product,
  • 00:06:07
    it will also lead to domestic downstream manufacturers in the supply chain
  • 00:06:10
    bearing higher costs
  • 00:06:10
    which affects the development of downstream industries
  • 00:06:12
    For example, Milk Tea Kingdom has increased tariffs on milk powder,
  • 00:06:15
    which will cause the price of milk powder to rise
  • 00:06:16
    The entire downstream of milk tea industry may be affected.
  • 00:06:19
    Another example is the United States,
  • 00:06:21
    which particularly likes to
  • 00:06:22
    implement trade protection on steel and increase tariffs
  • 00:06:24
    In 2018
  • 00:06:25
    Trump imposed a 25% tariff on steel
  • 00:06:27
    and a 10% tariff on aluminum.
  • 00:06:29
    This did give the U.S. steel manufacturing industry
  • 00:06:31
    a chance to breathe.
  • 00:06:32
    However, the rise in steel prices
  • 00:06:33
    has made prices higher for downstream manufacturers that need steel
  • 00:06:35
    For example, General Motors, Ford, Caterpillar, etc.
  • 00:06:38
    have all suffered.
  • 00:06:39
    Ford's CEO himself said at the time
  • 00:06:41
    that these steel tariffs
  • 00:06:42
    had cost them at least $1 billion.
  • 00:06:44
    So very early on, the famous economist Keynes
  • 00:06:47
    made a suggestion that
  • 00:06:48
    in order to avoid this happening,
  • 00:06:49
    tariffs should only be levied on manufactured goods.
  • 00:06:55
    The next impact of tariffs
  • 00:06:56
    this time the advantage
  • 00:06:57
    which is under normal circumstances
  • 00:06:58
    it will get some public support
  • 00:07:02
    because most people may subconsciously think that
  • 00:07:04
    if I import things, it means that money is flowing out,
  • 00:07:06
    which means that I'm benefitting others.
  • 00:07:07
    So if I impose tariffs to protect domestic industries,
  • 00:07:10
    it will get some public support.
  • 00:07:12
    This kind of public support
  • 00:07:13
    is especially obvious
  • 00:07:14
    during economic downturn or economic malaise.
  • 00:07:17
    So one phenomenon you often see in history
  • 00:07:19
    is that when the economy begins to decline,
  • 00:07:21
    trade protection becomes more obvious.
  • 00:07:23
    For example, during the Great Depression in the US
  • 00:07:24
    they implemented
  • 00:07:25
    very severe and extensive trade protectionism.
  • 00:07:27
    This is actually
  • 00:07:29
    one of the reasons why the subsequent economic recovery was extremely slow.
  • 00:07:31
    Increasing tariffs can help gain public support
  • 00:07:33
    and there's quite an interesting phenomenon in this
  • 00:07:34
    let's talk a bit about this
  • 00:07:35
    We know that the key factors influencing the U.S. election
  • 00:07:38
    are mainly a few swing states
  • 00:07:40
    and the unions of key industries in these states
  • 00:07:42
    have a great influence on the elections
  • 00:07:44
    Therefore, the unions in these swing states will
  • 00:07:47
    have a key influence on the government’s decision-making.
  • 00:07:49
    Therefore, you will have a vague feeling that many of these tariff policies
  • 00:07:52
    are beneficial to the industries of these swing states.
  • 00:07:55
    For example, we just mentioned that
  • 00:07:56
    during Trump’s first term,
  • 00:07:57
    a very important tariff policy targeted steel and aluminium.
  • 00:08:00
    It happens that the famous steel-producing state in the US
  • 00:08:03
    is Pennsylvania,
  • 00:08:04
    and the city of Pittsburgh
  • 00:08:06
    Steel City
  • 00:08:07
    Pennsylvania, happens to be
  • 00:08:09
    the most important swing state in the past few U.S. elections.
  • 00:08:11
    It can be said to be a state that plays a decisive role.
  • 00:08:16
    You must know that the steel union in the U.S is very large
  • 00:08:18
    with more than 1.2 million people
  • 00:08:20
    The headquarters is in Pennsylvania.
  • 00:08:21
    Two years ago, Japan Steel originally negotiated
  • 00:08:23
    to acquire U.S. Steel.
  • 00:08:24
    As a result, the steel union protested and lobbied,
  • 00:08:27
    plus some national security considerations.
  • 00:08:29
    Finally, on January 3 this year, Biden signed an executive order
  • 00:08:32
    to block the acquisition.
  • 00:08:34
    In fact, it is not only Trump, Biden
  • 00:08:35
    including Bush Jr, Carter, Reagan
  • 00:08:37
    have all implemented strong steel protection policies before
  • 00:08:39
    Of course, we cannot say that
  • 00:08:40
    these decisions are all because of the power of the steel union
  • 00:08:43
    but more or less you will find that
  • 00:08:44
    the key industries of
  • 00:08:45
    these swing states in the U.S
  • 00:08:47
    have a very large impact
  • 00:08:49
    on U.S. trade policy tariffs.
  • 00:08:51
    But do you know what is interesting?
  • 00:08:53
    Other countries
  • 00:08:54
    also know that these swing states are the pain points of the U.S
  • 00:08:56
    so they will rub salt on these wounds
  • 00:09:01
    Back in 2018
  • 00:09:02
    Trump imposed tariffs on steel and aluminium right
  • 00:09:04
    Canada was not happy.
  • 00:09:05
    He said we are going to impose tariff
  • 00:09:08
    on 125 products from U.S.
  • 00:09:09
    but he didn't actually say which products
  • 00:09:12
    just wait, we'll be back with the list
  • 00:09:14
    Two days later
  • 00:09:16
    they come back with a list
  • 00:09:17
    which is very interesting.
  • 00:09:19
    Look at the products they impose tariffs on
  • 00:09:20
    ketchup, orange juice
  • 00:09:21
    toilet paper, mayonnaise, etc
  • 00:09:23
    Feels like
  • 00:09:24
    why are they all unrelated
  • 00:09:26
    However, if you look closely
  • 00:09:28
    Heinz ketchup is based in Pennsylvania.
  • 00:09:30
    Orange juice is mainly from Florida.
  • 00:09:32
    Toilet paper, mayonnaise is mainly produced in Wisconsin.
  • 00:09:35
    Did you notice
  • 00:09:36
    one distinct feature here?
  • 00:09:37
    The tariff is mainly put on those swing states
  • 00:09:40
    I can only impose tariff on so much products
  • 00:09:42
    so I will make the best use of them
  • 00:09:43
    targeting your pain point
  • 00:09:47
    Finally, U.S negotiated with Canada
  • 00:09:50
    A year later, the tariffs on Canadian steel were withdrawn.
  • 00:09:52
    Both sides also reached a new version of the North American trade agreement, the USMCA
  • 00:09:57
    You see,
  • 00:09:58
    we have just discussed the impact of tariffs for a country
  • 00:10:00
    there are good and bad.
  • 00:10:01
    But for the opponent country,
  • 00:10:03
    it is basically negative.
  • 00:10:04
    Which is to say, tariff is not necessarily beneficial to oneself,
  • 00:10:06
    but it is definitely harmful to others.
  • 00:10:08
    In fact, what benefit does it have for the country
  • 00:10:10
    Tariffs can be used as
  • 00:10:12
    an important means of threat in negotiations.
  • 00:10:15
    You see, we first talked about the impact of tariffs on the economy,
  • 00:10:17
    the impact on the government, and the impact on people's hearts.
  • 00:10:19
    Another one is impact on negotiations.
  • 00:10:21
    If you don’t agree with me,
  • 00:10:22
    I will increase tariffs to make you uncomfortable
  • 00:10:24
    Or that between the two countries
  • 00:10:25
    conditions or relations are unreasonable.
  • 00:10:26
    If I don’t like it, I will increase tariffs
  • 00:10:28
    to make you uncomfortable and come to negotiate with me.
  • 00:10:30
    Trump really likes to do this.
  • 00:10:32
    I’m not sure how good he is economically,
  • 00:10:35
    but he is really an expert in negotiations
  • 00:10:37
    For example, few days ago he had a similar strategy
  • 00:10:40
    with the World Health Organisation (WHO)
  • 00:10:41
    I'll just say that I want to withdraw
  • 00:10:42
    it's not certain he'll withdraw
  • 00:10:43
    but we can negotiate a new deal
  • 00:10:45
    For example, in 2017,
  • 00:10:46
    Trump announced in a very high-profile manner that
  • 00:10:48
    he would withdraw from the North American Free Trade Agreement (NAFTA)
  • 00:10:50
    and then began to impose a series of tariffs on Canada.
  • 00:10:52
    Canada immediately couldn't sit still.
  • 00:10:53
    The counterattack we just mentioned
  • 00:10:55
    was also part of the counterattack here.
  • 00:10:56
    Then both sides began to renegotiate
  • 00:10:57
    and finally reached a new agreement,
  • 00:10:59
    which allowed the U.S to obtain more protective provisions,
  • 00:11:01
    especially in the fields of automobiles and agriculture.
  • 00:11:04
    You see recently Trump has started
  • 00:11:06
    talking about imposing 25% tariffs on Canada and Mexico again
  • 00:11:08
    I don’t know if he is really planning to do this
  • 00:11:10
    or if he is just putting on a show.
  • 00:11:12
    To be honest, I think this move is quite harsh.
  • 00:11:14
    So you see, tariff will damage the opponent country,
  • 00:11:16
    so it can be used as a bargaining chip in negotiations.
  • 00:11:18
    This can be considered half of its benefits.
  • 00:11:21
    Of course, the interests of the other side being damaged,
  • 00:11:23
    he will naturally fight back.
  • 00:11:25
    In fact, this is also
  • 00:11:27
    a very, very big cost in tariffs
  • 00:11:29
    especially in many cases,
  • 00:11:30
    the intensity of the counterattack is uncertain.
  • 00:11:32
    For example, in 1963,
  • 00:11:34
    U.S. and West Germany had a fight called
  • 00:11:37
    the "Chicken Truck War."
  • 00:11:39
    At that time, U.S. exported a lot of chickens,
  • 00:11:41
    and West German chicken farmers were not happy about it
  • 00:11:43
    Europe directly imposed a 40% tariff on American chickens.
  • 00:11:46
    As a result, the amount of chicken imported by Europe from U.S. plummeted
  • 00:11:49
    from $50 million
  • 00:11:49
    to $20 million in one year.
  • 00:11:51
    The Americans were immediately angry.
  • 00:11:52
    You blocked my chicken, I will stop your car
  • 00:11:55
    and impose a 25% tariff on European light trucks.
  • 00:11:58
    Sure enough,
  • 00:11:59
    the number of trucks exported by Volkswagen to U.S. has also been cut in half.
  • 00:12:01
    The final result is that the price
  • 00:12:02
    of American trucks has also increased, and the price of
  • 00:12:03
    European chicken has also increased.
  • 00:12:05
    Consumers on both sides bear the burden.
  • 00:12:06
    But the happy ones may be European chicken farms
  • 00:12:09
    and American truck manufacturers
  • 00:12:12
    Tariff also has another benefit
  • 00:12:13
    which is the one point that Trump said the most
  • 00:12:16
    is that it can reduce the trade deficit.
  • 00:12:19
    This is certainly true in theory in the short term, right?
  • 00:12:21
    If you increase tariffs on imports, you will reduce imports
  • 00:12:23
    when imports decrease, trade deficit decrease.
  • 00:12:25
    However, in fact, most tariffs
  • 00:12:26
    are targeted at a small range of goods.
  • 00:12:29
    For example, like what we mentioned
  • 00:12:30
    washing machines, chicken, milk powder, etc.
  • 00:12:32
    Their size is actually not enough
  • 00:12:34
    to compare with a country’s overall trade deficit.
  • 00:12:37
    But if it is really a large-scale tariff
  • 00:12:39
    that affects everyone
  • 00:12:41
    as Trump said,
  • 00:12:41
    then the price it affects
  • 00:12:42
    is not the price of one or two goods,
  • 00:12:44
    but the price of the entire country,
  • 00:12:46
    the industrial structure of the entire country , plus other
  • 00:12:48
    countries on the other side.
  • 00:12:49
    There may be large-scale retaliatory tariffs
  • 00:12:51
    and there is another key factor that
  • 00:12:53
    we have not discussed just now, exchange rate
  • 00:12:55
    All these effects combined
  • 00:12:56
    the long-term result is definitely very uncertain
  • 00:12:58
    In fact, have you ever thought
  • 00:13:00
    about why the United States has
  • 00:13:01
    such a large and sustained trade deficit?
  • 00:13:05
    Is it because it is too rich?
  • 00:13:06
    Or is it because labour costs are low in other countries and things are cheap ?
  • 00:13:09
    Or is it simply because Americans can afford to spend so much money?
  • 00:13:12
    Let me tell you, this problem
  • 00:13:13
    may not be that simple
  • 00:13:14
    We can talk about it if we have the chance.
  • 00:13:19
    Actually, tariffs also have many hidden costs.
  • 00:13:22
    For example, they limit the diversity of goods,
  • 00:13:25
    limit the exchange of international ideas, limit competition, etc.
  • 00:13:28
    This is actually one of the benefits of
  • 00:13:29
    international trade that we often mention
  • 00:13:31
    You can see that our table of advantages and disadvantages of tariffs
  • 00:13:33
    it is very comprehensive
  • 00:13:38
    After considering all these various
  • 00:13:39
    real-world factors and the overall pros and cons
  • 00:13:42
    the general consensus in the industry is that
  • 00:13:44
    if you indiscriminately impose tariffs
  • 00:13:47
    it will lead to losses and
  • 00:13:48
    more detrimental to the overall economy
  • 00:13:50
    But if the tariff is being imposed
  • 00:13:51
    in the right place and at the right time
  • 00:13:53
    to properly protect some of the country's early-stage industries
  • 00:13:55
    and stimulate employment
  • 00:13:56
    then it will be more beneficial in the long run.
  • 00:14:00
    So, tariffs are not something that
  • 00:14:01
    can be simply categorised as good or bad
  • 00:14:02
    it is a double-edged sword
  • 00:14:04
    But when someone like Trump says they want to impose tariffs on Canada, Mexico
  • 00:14:07
    and even all imported goods
  • 00:14:09
    many economists would step forward to oppose that.
  • 00:14:11
    For example, there is a very famous economist
  • 00:14:13
    named Krugman.
  • 00:14:14
    He won the Nobel Prize for his trade theory.
  • 00:14:16
    He believes that this large-scale indiscriminate attack
  • 00:14:19
    will have a huge impact on the U.S. economy.
  • 00:14:21
    The exact words are: "It doesn't make any sense"
  • 00:14:22
    "It doesn't make any sense"
  • 00:14:24
    Of course, he also said that
  • 00:14:26
    he can only analyse it from an economic point of view.
  • 00:14:28
    But President Trump
  • 00:14:29
    may have many non-economic considerations in it,
  • 00:14:32
    so it is not clear and it is not easy to evaluate.
  • 00:14:35
    Well, what we have just analysed is the pros and cons of tariffs.
  • 00:14:37
    This is not over yet. Based on the analysis of these pros and cons,
  • 00:14:40
    we know that after the implementation of tariff
  • 00:14:42
    who may benefit and who may be disadvantaged
  • 00:14:43
    we can further see
  • 00:14:45
    whether there is an optimal strategy
  • 00:14:46
    for the tariff game
  • 00:14:47
    between the countries
  • 00:14:49
    This further extends to a
  • 00:14:51
    game theory problem.
  • 00:14:53
    We know that
  • 00:14:54
    a very classic case of game theory is the prisoner's dilemma.
  • 00:14:56
    In fact, trade can also be a very similar problem.
  • 00:14:59
    Let me build a small model for you.
  • 00:15:01
    Don't worry, it's not complicated at all.
  • 00:15:02
    For example, if there are two countries, country A and country B,
  • 00:15:05
    we will simplify it
  • 00:15:06
    Two countries, two strategies
  • 00:15:07
    one is trade openness and the other is trade protection,
  • 00:15:09
    so there are four situations in total:
  • 00:15:11
    both open , both protect
  • 00:15:13
    A open, B protect, or A protect, B open.
  • 00:15:15
    In a single game,
  • 00:15:16
    let's now assume
  • 00:15:17
    the incomes of different scenarios.
  • 00:15:19
    If they are both open,
  • 00:15:21
    the incomes to both countries are +3.
  • 00:15:22
    If they are both protect, the incomes are both -3.
  • 00:15:25
    If you open and I protect, then I will take the most advantage and
  • 00:15:28
    my income will be +8,
  • 00:15:29
    and your income is -5
  • 00:15:31
    and the reverse is also true.
  • 00:15:32
    This assumption is actually very simplistic.
  • 00:15:34
    Don't be too serious.
  • 00:15:35
    Let me first explain
  • 00:15:36
    the setting of my income logic
  • 00:15:37
    I think it makes sense.
  • 00:15:38
    First of all, it is better for everyone to open than to protect.
  • 00:15:41
    Then we assume that the tariff is set
  • 00:15:43
    very well and very reasonably.
  • 00:15:44
    If the other party does not fight back,
  • 00:15:45
    it will indeed make the country's income higher,
  • 00:15:47
    But for these two countries, the overall income is greater when both sides are open
  • 00:15:50
    rather than one side being open while the other is protect
  • 00:15:52
    and better than both sides protect
  • 00:15:54
    Okay we are done with the assumptions
  • 00:15:55
    let’s briefly analyse the strategies of these two countries
  • 00:15:59
    For example, these two countries were open at the beginning
  • 00:16:01
    For country A,
  • 00:16:02
    if I change from trade openness to trade protection,
  • 00:16:05
    my income will change from 3 to 8.
  • 00:16:07
    If originally B is protect, and A is open .
  • 00:16:09
    if at this time, I change from open to protect
  • 00:16:11
    my total income impove from -5 to -3,
  • 00:16:14
    becomes better
  • 00:16:15
    Did you notice
  • 00:16:16
    if I am country A,
  • 00:16:17
    no matter what B is like at the beginning,
  • 00:16:18
    as long as I change from open to protect
  • 00:16:20
    my income will improve
  • 00:16:21
    Country A’s optimal strategy is trade protection.
  • 00:16:24
    In turn, country B is the same,
  • 00:16:25
    so they will choose to protect.
  • 00:16:27
    They all protect,
  • 00:16:28
    which is the only Nash equilibrium point under this model.
  • 00:16:33
    But obviously
  • 00:16:33
    if we treat the two as a whole,
  • 00:16:35
    from the perspective of overall income
  • 00:16:37
    they undoubtedly chose the worst outcome
  • 00:16:39
    and stuck at status quo
  • 00:16:40
    This actually fell into a prisoner's dilemma
  • 00:16:42
    or in our model
  • 00:16:44
    it is called a tariff dilemma.
  • 00:16:47
    So what should we do?
  • 00:16:48
    There is no solution.
  • 00:16:49
    Do we all have to stay in the worst option?
  • 00:16:51
    Absolutely not, there are two common solutions
  • 00:16:54
    the most classic one is through repeated game
  • 00:16:58
    the model we just mentioned is a single game
  • 00:17:00
    but international trade is definitely not a one-shot deal.
  • 00:17:02
    Everyone wants to do business for a long time
  • 00:17:04
    so it is a long-term repeated game.
  • 00:17:06
    In the case of repeated games,
  • 00:17:07
    Country A can establish this strategy
  • 00:17:10
    I will open it first, and then I will warn country B.
  • 00:17:12
    If you dare to start trade protection
  • 00:17:13
    I will immediately turn against you
  • 00:17:15
    In this way, as country B,
  • 00:17:17
    I will not have the option of trade protect while A is open
  • 00:17:19
    Either both protect or open up
  • 00:17:21
    In this case, it is open on both sides
  • 00:17:23
    which will become a long-term rational choice
  • 00:17:25
    and a new Nash equilibrium point
  • 00:17:27
    to achieve the maximisation of overall interests.
  • 00:17:29
    This strategy is the famous tit-for-tat strategy
  • 00:17:32
    Tit for Tat
  • 00:17:33
    For example, the UK
  • 00:17:34
    suffered the loss not doing tit for tat
  • 00:17:37
    In the 18th and 19th centuries, the UK was
  • 00:17:39
    an empire on which the sun never sets.
  • 00:17:40
    It was the most powerful country in the world.
  • 00:17:42
    It realised that trade can drive development
  • 00:17:44
    and wanted everyone to open
  • 00:17:46
    up to free trade.
  • 00:17:48
    Since we are an empire on which the sun never sets,
  • 00:17:49
    We should broaden our perspective and show some grace.
  • 00:17:51
    We opened the country first and lowered tariffs.
  • 00:17:53
    They wanted to use this method to influence people from other countries
  • 00:17:55
    and work with them to lower tariffs and free trade
  • 00:17:58
    In fact, many small countries are very cooperative and
  • 00:18:00
    actively open up free trade.
  • 00:18:01
    But there are two countries
  • 00:18:03
    United States and Germany.
  • 00:18:05
    They did not follow the British approach and
  • 00:18:07
    continued to protect their agriculture and manufacturing and rose rapidly
  • 00:18:09
    and overtook the United Kingdom in the 20th century.
  • 00:18:11
    This is why we just said
  • 00:18:12
    U.S and Germany's trades were assisted by UK
  • 00:18:14
    Of course, there must be many factors for the decline of the UK
  • 00:18:16
    but opting out to retaliate in trade
  • 00:18:18
    is also one of the very important reasons here.
  • 00:18:31
    The famous quote just now comes from a non-famous person, Xiao Lin.
  • 00:18:34
    It may sound a bit absolute
  • 00:18:35
    but I think famous quotes
  • 00:18:37
    have to be more absolute to be more powerful.
  • 00:18:39
    I just want to make it funny.
  • 00:18:40
  • 00:18:41
    In fact, tit-for-tat is a very good strategy
  • 00:18:43
    in many complex systems.
  • 00:18:46
    For example, many animals
  • 00:18:46
    have some very beautiful altruistic behaviours,
  • 00:18:48
    including people living in society,
  • 00:18:50
    such as workplace, socialisation
  • 00:18:52
    In fact, in many cases,
  • 00:18:53
    you can use the tit-for-tat strategy
  • 00:18:55
    I open my arms first,
  • 00:18:57
    but I told you that
  • 00:18:58
    if you dare to mess with me, I will
  • 00:19:00
    (make you happy).
  • 00:19:01
    The key to this strategy
  • 00:19:03
    is not to just make your own decision
  • 00:19:04
    in silence while waiting for others to provoke
  • 00:19:06
    When others provoke me, I will punch
  • 00:19:08
    The key is to let the other party feel the threat
  • 00:19:10
    and let others know that you have this strategy
  • 00:19:12
    To put it bluntly, I am not that easy to bully.
  • 00:19:14
    From a theoretical model perspective
  • 00:19:16
    it is actually more conducive to everyone's long-term development
  • 00:19:19
    Back to the topic
  • 00:19:21
    the first way to break free from the prisoner's dilemma
  • 00:19:23
    or the tariff dilemma, that we just mentioned
  • 00:19:25
    is to play tit-for-tat and repeated game
  • 00:19:26
    There is another method that is also very common
  • 00:19:28
    which is to establish a community of interests.
  • 00:19:31
    Everyone can either build an organisation together
  • 00:19:33
    typical example is the WTO
  • 00:19:35
    or a more extreme one, like the European Union
  • 00:19:38
    or everyone can sign a long-term contract together .
  • 00:19:40
    For example US, Canada and Mexico
  • 00:19:42
    signed North American Free Trade Agreement (NAFTA)
  • 00:19:43
    This also counts.
  • 00:19:44
    WTO, which has 166 member countries,
  • 00:19:46
    accounting for more than 98% of the world's trade,
  • 00:19:48
    basically covering most countries.
  • 00:19:50
    Its purpose is to maximise collective interests
  • 00:19:52
    and avoid the prisoner's dilemma
  • 00:19:56
    There is also an arbitration committee here, and
  • 00:19:58
    if you have any violations,
  • 00:20:00
    they can fine you.
  • 00:20:01
    If you unilaterally protect
  • 00:20:02
    your income will not be positive.
  • 00:20:03
    However, many times countries
  • 00:20:06
    don't adhere to the WTO's rulings and fines
  • 00:20:08
    What should we do at this time?
  • 00:20:09
    We can go back to the first rule
  • 00:20:11
    tit-for-tat
  • 00:20:12
    That is, I can allow
  • 00:20:13
    other countries to increase tariffs on you in turn.
  • 00:20:15
    For example, if you impose a certain amount of tariffs on others
  • 00:20:16
    I will give them an equivalent amount of quotas
  • 00:20:18
    allow them to retaliate against you.
  • 00:20:20
    A very famous case here
  • 00:20:21
    is that the U.S and the EU have been at odds over aircraft subsidies for
  • 00:20:24
    twenty years.
  • 00:20:26
    First, in 2004,
  • 00:20:28
    U.S complained to the WTO
  • 00:20:29
    that Europe had unfair subsidies for Airbus exports
  • 00:20:32
    EU bit back and said that
  • 00:20:34
    U.S also had unfair subsidies for Boeing.
  • 00:20:36
    Initially, the WTO arbitrated and said that neither of you is clean
  • 00:20:39
    and both of you must stop these subsidies
  • 00:20:40
    As a result, both sides were dissatisfied
  • 00:20:41
    and kept arguing and no one stopped the subsidies.
  • 00:20:43
    Finally, the WTO took a big move and allowed them to do tit for tat
  • 00:20:47
    In 2019,
  • 00:20:47
    WTO said that the EU does have unfair subsidies for Airbus.
  • 00:20:51
    The U.S can have an amount of $7.5 billion per year
  • 00:20:53
    to impose retaliatory tariffs on goods imported from the EU.
  • 00:20:55
    In 2020, WTO said again
  • 00:20:56
    that the U.S also has many subsidies for Boeing,
  • 00:20:59
    so the EU has $40 billion per year to
  • 00:21:01
    impose retaliatory tariffs.
  • 00:21:02
    Anyway, each side has a fifty-fifty deal.
  • 00:21:03
    Finally, the two sides have become honest.
  • 00:21:05
    In 2021,
  • 00:21:06
    the two sides announced that they have to talk
  • 00:21:07
    Let's suspend the tariff war for 5 years
  • 00:21:11
    For example, the United States and Canada
  • 00:21:13
    Their dispute actually lasted the longest and was the largest in scale
  • 00:21:16
    also involved the largest number of jobs
  • 00:21:17
    do you know what it is?
  • 00:21:18
    It’s wood.
  • 00:21:19
    Both have been arguing since 1982.
  • 00:21:21
    U.S said that Canada was illegally subsidising wood.
  • 00:21:24
    I will impose anti-dumping sanctions on you
  • 00:21:25
    Canada said no, no, no, I didn't
  • 00:21:26
    Then Canada went to the WTO.
  • 00:21:28
    The WTO finally ruled that
  • 00:21:29
    the U.S.'s anti-dumping sanctions were unreasonable,
  • 00:21:31
    so it allowed Canada to impose retaliatory tariffs.
  • 00:21:34
    In the end, both reached a settlement and the U.S. lowered its tariffs.
  • 00:21:36
    In fact, there are many, many similar trade disputes
  • 00:21:37
    arguing all the time
  • 00:21:39
    But in short, tit for tat and building a community of interests
  • 00:21:42
    are two very important strategies.
  • 00:21:44
    Over the past nearly century
  • 00:21:46
    it can be said to have greatly promoted the development of global trade
  • 00:21:48
    and reduced tariffs across countries
  • 00:21:51
    Now we understand the advantages and disadvantages of tariffs
  • 00:21:53
    and have analysed some
  • 00:21:55
    common strategies in the game
  • 00:21:57
    Let’s review the global trade in the
  • 00:21:59
    past 300 years.
  • 00:22:00
    I believe everyone will be more aware of the process.
  • 00:22:04
    Before the 19th century,
  • 00:22:05
    there was actually no concept of global free trade.
  • 00:22:08
    It mainly consisted of
  • 00:22:09
    some trade transactions between Britain and its colonies around the world.
  • 00:22:12
    Of course, this was not considered a cooperation
  • 00:22:13
    but more of an occupation or exploitation
  • 00:22:16
    Britain has actually also followed a policy of trade protectionism in its external trade
  • 00:22:18
    especially for wool products.
  • 00:22:20
    The average tariff on finished products was 50%,
  • 00:22:22
    which was the highest among all European countries at that time.
  • 00:22:24
    Until the 19th century,
  • 00:22:25
    a very key figure named Ricardo appeared.
  • 00:22:28
    Note that he has nothing to do with Li Ka-shing.
  • 00:22:29
    He was an Englishman named David Ricardo
  • 00:22:33
    He was a very famous master of classical economics,
  • 00:22:36
    at that time, he proposed the theory of comparative advantage
  • 00:22:37
    which meant that each country should divide labour
  • 00:22:39
    and liberalise trade,
  • 00:22:40
    each doing what they are good at,
  • 00:22:42
    so that everyone would benefit
  • 00:22:43
    and it became the cornerstone of modern trade theory.
  • 00:22:45
    This wave of thought, along with the rapid technological advancements
  • 00:22:48
    ed Britain to start lowering tariffs
  • 00:22:50
    and engage in more frequent trade with various countries
  • 00:22:53
    At that time, the proportion of global exports
  • 00:22:54
    to the world's total GDP
  • 00:22:56
    increased from 5% to more than 10%.
  • 00:22:58
    This period was also called the first wave of globalisation
  • 00:23:03
    However, in this wave of globalisation,
  • 00:23:04
    two countries basically did not participate much
  • 00:23:06
    and just kept silent on their own.
  • 00:23:08
    As we mentioned just now, they are the United States and Germany.
  • 00:23:10
    Especially the United States.
  • 00:23:13
    Don't be fooled by the fact that the United States
  • 00:23:14
    or rather in recent decades, has been promoting free trade
  • 00:23:16
    in the early days of its establishment,
  • 00:23:18
    it was known for trade protectionism.
  • 00:23:19
    Until 1914,
  • 00:23:21
    The U.S. federal government’s almost sole sources of income
  • 00:23:23
    are tariffs and excise taxes
  • 00:23:24
    Hamilton, the first Secretary of the Treasury of the United States,
  • 00:23:27
    was the man who
  • 00:23:28
    proposed infant industry protectionism
  • 00:23:29
    He did not believe in Ricardo's theory of comparative advantage
  • 00:23:32
    or at least he felt that it was not applicable to the U.S at that time.
  • 00:23:34
    Look, after 1860,
  • 00:23:35
    both Britain and France lowered tariff
  • 00:23:37
    to less than 10%
  • 00:23:39
    but on the contrary, the United States
  • 00:23:40
    increased tariffs to account for more than 40%,
  • 00:23:42
    becoming one of the countries with the highest import tariffs in the world.
  • 00:23:46
    Between 1867 and 1900, during these three decades
  • 00:23:49
    Trade protection helped increase the United States' steel production
  • 00:23:51
    by more than 500 times
  • 00:23:52
    The overall manufacturing industry in the U.S was also developing rapidly
  • 00:23:54
    helping the U.S gradually overtake the UK
  • 00:23:56
    So on the British side
  • 00:23:57
    they only saw the benefits of free trade
  • 00:23:59
    Ricardo, he may have said one less thing
  • 00:24:00
    if one open, then the rest must open
  • 00:24:02
    That's why we later had
  • 00:24:03
    the famous quote from an unknown scholar
  • 00:24:11
    Time moved into the 20th century
  • 00:24:12
    World War I and the subsequent Great Depression
  • 00:24:14
    caused global trade protectionism to begin to rise.
  • 00:24:16
    In 1930, U.S
  • 00:24:17
    introduced the famous "Smoot-Hawley Tariff Act"
  • 00:24:20
    which increased tariffs on more than 20,000 U.S. goods
  • 00:24:22
    by 20% to 60%
  • 00:24:24
    However, what is different this time is that
  • 00:24:26
    Europe started to retaliate
  • 00:24:28
    tit for tat
  • 00:24:29
    and launched retaliatory tariffs one after another
  • 00:24:31
    The world entered a trade winter.
  • 00:24:34
    The United States’ imports and exports decreased by two-thirds,
  • 00:24:36
    and the proportion of global exports
  • 00:24:37
    fell back to the level of a hundred years ago,
  • 00:24:39
    this also heralded the end of the first wave of globalisation.
  • 00:24:43
    The industry generally believes that
  • 00:24:44
    this period of trade protectionism has greatly prolonged
  • 00:24:47
    and deepened the recession in the U.S
  • 00:24:48
    leading to an increase in unemployment in the U.S and around the world
  • 00:24:51
    However, on the other hand,
  • 00:24:52
    this lesson
  • 00:24:53
    is also the key to starting the second wave of globalisation.
  • 00:24:58
    After World War II,
  • 00:24:58
    almost all countries in the world suffered
  • 00:25:00
    the losses of the previous two decades of trade protectionism.
  • 00:25:02
    Under the leadership of the U.S, they finally began to sit down for grand negotiations
  • 00:25:05
    and signed the General Agreement on Tariffs and Trade in 1947.
  • 00:25:08
    The name GATT
  • 00:25:09
    It may sound a bit unfamiliar to you
  • 00:25:10
    but it has since evolved into
  • 00:25:12
    a well-known organization now
  • 00:25:14
    the WTO.
  • 00:25:16
    In fact, after World War II,
  • 00:25:17
    it is not that everyone immediately opened their hearts
  • 00:25:19
    and started to embrace each other.
  • 00:25:20
    The negotiations also went through a very long process,
  • 00:25:22
    and trust was accumulated bit by bit.
  • 00:25:24
    In 1949, the first negotiation in France,
  • 00:25:26
    the countries agreed to
  • 00:25:27
    jointly reduce more than 5,000 tariffs.
  • 00:25:28
    In 1951, another round of negotiations in London
  • 00:25:31
    reduced more than 8,000 tariffs.
  • 00:25:32
    By the 1960s,
  • 00:25:33
    the trust has actually been gradually accumulated.
  • 00:25:35
    The level of trust is getting higher and more open,
  • 00:25:37
    but there is another episode between the U.S and Europe.
  • 00:25:40
    What is it
  • 00:25:41
    the Chicken-Truck War
  • 00:25:43
    not an official name.
  • 00:25:44
    I came up with it
  • 00:25:45
    But overall, the process of globalisation
  • 00:25:47
    has been advancing steadily bit by bit.
  • 00:25:48
    The average tariff within GATT
  • 00:25:50
    was 22% in 1947.
  • 00:25:52
    After several rounds of negotiations
  • 00:25:53
    it dropped to 15% in the 1960s.
  • 00:25:55
    By 2000, it had dropped to only 5%
  • 00:25:57
    The proportion of exports in global GDP has been continuously rising
  • 00:26:00
    Over the course of sixty years, it increased from 5% to 25%
  • 00:26:02
    At the same time, along with the rapid growth of global GDP,
  • 00:26:05
    it has entered a golden age of globalisation.
  • 00:26:12
    In the past ten years, Brexit,
  • 00:26:14
    and a series of high-tariff measures in the U.S
  • 00:26:16
    and the China-US trade war
  • 00:26:17
    have marked
  • 00:26:18
    the beginning of a new round of trade protectionism in the world.
  • 00:26:20
    Especially after the pandemic,
  • 00:26:21
    many countries, whether active or passive,
  • 00:26:23
    have set off a wave of economic nationalism,
  • 00:26:25
    emphasising the protection of industry and domestic production.
  • 00:26:29
    Actually, if we look at the entire content today
  • 00:26:31
    we have analysed the pros and cons of tariffs
  • 00:26:33
    and the corresponding strategies
  • 00:26:34
    everyone should be clear that responding to trade sanction
  • 00:26:36
    as the country being sanctioned
  • 00:26:37
    from the perspective of the long-term game,
  • 00:26:39
    you must have trade counterattacks
  • 00:26:40
    and must retaliate tit for tat.
  • 00:26:41
    Therefore, this kind of protective sentiment
  • 00:26:43
    is actually extremely contagious.
  • 00:26:44
    It is difficult to dissipate in a short period of time and
  • 00:26:46
    is irreversible.
  • 00:26:49
    In fact, in recent years, organisations like the WTO
  • 00:26:51
    have also faced unprecedented crises.
  • 00:26:52
    Its dispute settlement mechanism is gradually paralysed.
  • 00:26:59
    It seems that global trade
  • 00:27:00
    will most likely enter a
  • 00:27:02
    long de-globalisation process.
Tags
  • Tariffs
  • Global Economy
  • Trade Policy
  • Economic Efficiency
  • Consumer Impact
  • Infant Industry Argument
  • Trade Protectionism
  • Game Theory
  • WTO
  • Economic Nationalism