Showing posts with label Trump. Show all posts
Showing posts with label Trump. Show all posts

Thursday, August 14, 2025

Strategy review in light of the US tariffs - 3

 …continuing from yesterday.

Wednesday, August 13, 2025

Strategy review in light of the US tariffs - 2

…continuing from yesterday.

Tuesday, August 12, 2025

Strategy review in light of the US tariffs

Thursday, August 7, 2025

MPC saves one for the external shock

The Monetary Policy Committee (MPC) of the Reserve Bank of India concluded its three-day meeting on Wednesday. The committee voted unanimously to keep the policy repo rate unchanged at 5.50 per cent. The MPC also decided to continue with the neutral monetary policy stance.

Thursday, July 31, 2025

Powell refuses to toe the Trump line, India stay guarded

 The Federal Open Market Committee (FOMC) of the US Federal Reserve (Fed) maintained its policy rates at 4.25% to 4.5% range, by a majority vote. It was the first occasion since 1993 when two Fed governors voted against the majority decision. Fed governors, Michelle Bowman and Christopher Waller, wanted a 25bps rate cut at the meeting, concluded on Wednesday.

Thursday, July 24, 2025

Two random thoughts

Antimicrobial resistance becoming ominous

Antimicrobial resistance (AMR) is fast emerging as one of the most ominous health concerns at global level.

As per the World Health Organization (WHO), “Antimicrobials – including antibiotics, antivirals, antifungals, and antiparasitic – are medicines used to prevent and treat infectious diseases in humans, animals and plants. Antimicrobial Resistance (AMR) occurs when bacteria, viruses, fungi and parasites no longer respond to antimicrobial medicines. As a result of drug resistance, antibiotics and other antimicrobial medicines become ineffective and infections become difficult or impossible to treat, increasing the risk of disease spread, severe illness, disability and death.

AMR is a natural process that happens over time through genetic changes in pathogens. Its emergence and spread are accelerated by human activity, mainly the misuse and overuse of antimicrobials to treat, prevent or control infections in humans, animals and plants.

Antimicrobial medicines are the cornerstone of modern medicine. The emergence and spread of drug-resistant pathogens threaten our ability to treat common infections and to perform life-saving procedures including cancer chemotherapy and caesarean section, hip replacements, organ transplantation and other surgeries.

In addition, drug-resistant infections impact the health of animals and plants, reduce productivity in farms, and threaten food security.”

Please note that AMR is not a future threat. It is unfolding now—insidiously, incrementally, and globally.

Wolf may enter the barn unnoticed

There’s another kind of resistance building—this time in global financial markets.

President Trump is seeking to alter the global terms of trade through tariffs. In a massive exercise his administration is undertaking a review of the US’s trade terms with all countries (except perhaps Russia and North Korea), regardless of the size of their economy and quantum of trade with the US.

Initially, the global markets were reacting with a good deal of volatility to each tariff related announcement coming out of the White House. The Trump administration would take note of such volatility and take a step back. Of late, something has changed - Markets have "priced in" chaos. Markets are becoming immune to such announcements, assuming the proposed tariffs will not be implemented, as has been the case previously. Taking advantage of this market complacency, the US administration has already implemented some tariff proposals, including a 50% tariff on copper imports into the US. Trade deals have been reportedly signed with key trade partners like UK, China, Vietnam, Japan, Indonesia, and Philippines, materially altering the US’s terms of trade with these countries.

It's a classic “boy who cried wolf” dynamic playing out. Markets are becoming resistant to all threatening news, be it trade, geopolitics or climate.

The question to be examined is whether this resistance is materially different from AMR; or it is similar and would eventually weaken the resilience of markets, making them susceptible to sudden collapses?

As of this morning, I have no view on markets susceptibility to sudden collapses, but I do believe that mindless use of Antimicrobial in India (both through prescription and self-medication) is fast assuming epidemic proportions, and could have catastrophic consequences.

Tuesday, July 15, 2025

A method in madness

It is a common adage amongst the financial market participants that “When America sneezes, the rest of the world catches a cold”. The origin of this belief is the global market turbulence in the aftermath of 1929 Wall Street crash. In the past 100 years, whenever the US economy or markets have faced any serious problem, most of the global economies and markets have witnessed elevated volatility and erosion in asset prices. The prime reason for this correlation of the US economy and markets has been the disproportionately large size of the US economy and markets; dominance of the US dollar in global trade; and over-reliance of emerging markets on the US for investment, development assistance and humanitarian aid.

In the past couple of years, serious concerns have emerged about the sustainability of the US public debt and fiscal deficit. The overall GDP growth has been aligned to the average of the post global financial crisis (GFC) period. The efforts to accelerate growth have not yielded much results.

Since January 2025, when the incumbent President (Mr. Trump) assumed charge, things have been rather volatile. Mr. Trump has presented some radical ideas to tackle the economic problems distressing the US economy. These ideas include renegotiating terms of trade with all the trade partners; drastically reducing the budget for global development assistance and humanitarian aid programs; optimizing the size of US administration; and reducing the US commitment to strategic alliance (e.g., NATO); multilateral institutions including the UN and IMF etc.

The impact of these measures, whenever these are effectively implemented (or abandoned), may be felt in the US economy and markets, as well as the global economy and markets. Till then expect the markets to remain tentative and sideways.

Trump Plan

Notwithstanding the theatrics of Mr. Trump, a method in his madness is conspicuous. As I see it, the primary problem of the US is its unsustainable debt. At last count the US public debt was out US$36trn (appx 123% of its GDP), entailing over US$1trn in annual interest payments.

The conventional way to reduce this debt is to use a judicious mix of —

(i)    Curtailing government expenses;

(ii)   Increasing revenue;

(iii)  Inflating the economy to reduce the value of money

(iv)  Weakening the currency; and

(v)   Lowering the debt servicing cost through lower rates.

Mr. Trump is trying to achieve through tariffs (higher revenue and inflation); lower expenses (reducing the size of government, cutting foreign aid, lower clean energy subsidies, etc.); additional revenue (higher VISA fee, new taxes etc.); weaker USD; and coaxing the Fed to cut rates.

How much success he gets in his endeavor, we will know in the next 6-12 months. For now, I see nothing to worry about whatever is emanating from the US. In the next 12 months, the situation will either be the same or significantly better. I shall stay hopeful, though.

Thursday, July 10, 2025

A Tremendous Day in the White House – The Best Ever!

 Trump: Hey Susie, you’re looking absolutely fantastic, nobody does it better! How’s the morning going? Did my posts on Truth Social and that failing platform “X” – terrible name, by the way – absolutely ROCK the world last night? Total game-changers!

Thursday, June 12, 2025

The world urgently needs a revival of statesmanship

The recent violence in Los Angeles, California, stemming from protests against Immigration and Customs Enforcement (ICE) raids starting June 6, 2025, has evoked strong responses from global communities. The militarized response to what began as localized unrest has triggered a much wider debate, both within the United States and internationally. The deployment of 2,000 National Guard troops and the placement of 700 U.S. Marines on “high alert,” coupled with the use of tear gas, rubber bullets, and curfews, has drawn sharp criticism. This heavy-handed approach is not entirely unexpected, given President Trump’s experience with the 2021 Capitol Hill riot, which underscored his administration’s preference for forceful responses to civil unrest. The ensuing tension between the California state government, led by Governor Gavin Newsom and Mayor Karen Bass, and the federal government has raised further concerns about governance, human rights, and the risk of escalating conflict.

The global response has been swift and critical. The United Nations has called for de-escalation, urging U.S. authorities to avoid “further militarization” of the response to the LA protests and to uphold the right to peaceful assembly. Australian Prime Minister Anthony Albanese expressed concern over the handling of the unrest, particularly the use of rubber bullets. Canada, Ireland, Germany, and the Netherlands have issued travel advisories for their citizens visiting the U.S., citing risks of detention due to aggressive immigration enforcement. Amnesty International USA condemned the deployment of National Guard troops as an “unnecessary militarized reaction” aimed at “crushing dissent” rather than protecting communities. Human Rights Watch (HRW) framed the LA protests as part of a broader fight for human rights in the U.S., noting that ICE raids targeting sensitive locations like courthouses, schools, and workplaces have sparked nationwide demonstrations. The Economist described the U.S. administration’s response as appearing to “create confrontation” and fuel a “cycle of protest, violence, and repression” for political gain, rather than prioritizing order.

Notably, the U.S. is not alone in witnessing violent protests or militarized responses to civic unrest, particularly in recent years. Civilians have faced brutality in active war zones like Israel-Palestine and Russia-Ukraine; in terrorism- and gang-war-infested countries such as Pakistan, Sudan, Somalia, Syria, Lebanon, Colombia, Venezuela, Ecuador, Peru, South Africa, and Kenya; and in nations governed by non-democratic regimes, including Myanmar, Bangladesh, the Democratic Republic of Congo, and Haiti. In India also, ethnic violence and alleged state oppression in Manipur have led to civilian suffering, internet shutdowns, and persistent unrest. These cases highlight a grim reality: the use of force against civilians is a global phenomenon, often exacerbated by weak governance, conflict, or authoritarianism.

Yet, the phenomenon of violent protests and their suppression by force is not confined to the developing world or conflict zones. Developed democracies like Canada, France, the United Kingdom, Germany, the Netherlands, Ireland, Belgium, and Spain have also experienced significant civil unrest in recent years. The Allianz Risk Barometer 2025 identifies France, the UK, Germany, and Spain as global hotspots for protest and riot activity, with over 80,000 incidents recorded in 2024 alone. In France, protests over economic policies and immigration have frequently turned violent, while the UK has seen riots linked to immigration and political polarization. Germany and the Netherlands have faced farmer protests and demonstrations over energy costs, and Ireland has grappled with tensions over immigration policies. These parallels with the U.S. and Canada underscore a troubling trend: even stable democracies are not immune to the forces driving public discontent and violence.

In most cases, the catalysts for violent civilian protests are clear: restrictive immigration policies that limit labor mobility, economic stress inducers, e.g., unemployment, inflation, and unfair taxation, curbs on personal liberties such as religious freedom or reproductive rights, suppression of ethnic or religious minorities, and deepening political polarization. These issues, while diverse, share a common thread: they erode trust between governments and their citizens, creating fertile ground for unrest. The Los Angeles protests, sparked by ICE raids targeting immigrant communities, exemplify how policy decisions can ignite broader social tensions, particularly when met with disproportionate force.

In my view, the primary reason behind the rise in violent tendencies in recent times is the overwhelming dominance of divisive and parochial political agendas across the world. Statesmanship, a hallmark of much of the 20th century, has all but vanished from the global stage. The world once saw leaders like Franklin D. Roosevelt, Winston Churchill, Nelson Mandela, and Nehru, who, despite their flaws, prioritized unity, long-term vision, and humanitarian values over short-term political gains. Today, too many leaders are elected on platforms that amplify division, fear, and narrow self-interest. These leaders often lack a global perspective or a commitment to addressing the root causes of unrest—poverty, inequality, and injustice. Instead, they resort to populist rhetoric or militarized responses, further alienating their citizens and fueling cycles of protest and repression.

The absence of statesmanship is not just a leadership failure; it is a systemic crisis. Global challenges like climate change, migration, and economic inequality require cooperative, forward-thinking solutions, yet many leaders prioritize domestic political survival over collective progress. In the U.S., the LA unrest reflects a failure to bridge divides between immigrant communities and policymakers, exacerbated by a federal response that prioritizes control over dialogue. Similarly, in Europe, protests over immigration and economic policies highlight a disconnect between governments and their increasingly frustrated populations. Even in war-torn regions like Sudan or Myanmar, the lack of visionary leadership perpetuates cycles of violence and displacement.

To break this cycle, the world urgently needs a new generation of statesmen and stateswomen—leaders who can rise above parochial agendas and embrace a humanitarian approach to governance. These leaders must prioritize dialogue over confrontation, addressing the root causes of unrest rather than merely suppressing its symptoms. For instance, immigration policies could focus on integration and economic opportunity rather than punitive enforcement, as seen in the LA raids. Economic reforms could tackle inequality and inflation through inclusive growth, rather than austerity measures that disproportionately harm the vulnerable. Political polarization could be countered by fostering civic engagement and rebuilding trust in institutions, rather than exploiting divisions for electoral gain.

Moreover, the international community has a role to play in fostering statesmanship. The UN, regional organizations, and civil society must hold leaders accountable for human rights abuses and militarized responses, while supporting initiatives that promote peacebuilding and social cohesion. Grassroots movements, empowered by technology and global connectivity, can also pressure governments to prioritize the common good over divisive politics. Education and public discourse must emphasize empathy, critical thinking, and global citizenship, equipping future leaders to navigate an interconnected world.

The violence in Los Angeles, like unrest elsewhere, is a symptom of a deeper malaise: a world led by division rather than vision. The global outcry over the LA protests—whether from the UN, human rights groups, or concerned citizens on platforms like X—signals a shared desire for change. Yet, change will not come without leadership that transcends borders, ideologies, and short-term gains. The world urgently needs statesmen and stateswomen who can heal divides, inspire hope, and forge a path toward a more just and peaceful future. Only then can we move beyond the cycles of protest, violence, and repression that define our time.