Revered Osman Ali Sadek Ibrahim,

Assalamualaikum.

I am supporting that President Joe Biden's decision and took the measures to safe their citizens in USA.

I am sure that the research budget will help to invent more production strategies and techniques to improve the US goods and services by their citizens to promote the GDP of US.

Dependency of any countries that means you are going to lose something your income and saving.

This policy could enhance the economy of US very strong level.

These policy decisions could improve not only macro economic investment aspects but also there could be in micro economics of the each individual households in US.

What Joe Biden had taken that this is the right steps to promote US and citizens as well.

Dependency syndrome will make you make lazy everyone rather than alert in any activities.

He has taken this policy decisions because there is serious world economic crisis ahead of the year 2023. This could bring good opportunity to earn income and saving at macro and micro level of the country.

Of course, the renewable energy sources like Biodiesel, solar energy, gases production etc have to be tapped up by the research innovations accordingly.

US economy could be promoted through Small and Micro Enterprises (SMEs) at the ground level.

I am confidently supporting the President Joe Biden broad Vision and Mission of the US future welfare strategies.

Who else will take this welfare decision except President? He is thinking about US economy and citizens welfares. None has the right to take decision to save their citizens.

Apart from, mega industries that US had to concentrate more on the Small and Medium Enterprises that will bring tremendous impact in the US economy.

While the genuine income will come through their economic productive labour power that the citizens will not think of the negative sources of earnings. US has given many golden opportunities to have promoted China on second half of the 20th century and the first quarter of the 21st century.

US citizens are equally capable of producing all kinds of manufacturing goods like other countries

There is gap in income generating opportunities in US over the years but the time has come to invite to their own citizens have to work in all categories of the jobs to save by themselves and their nation as well.

The Business and Development ventures have been completely blocked due to Corona pandemic situations on last 3 years.

Even Americans in all sectors in the economy have to wake up to involve all type of jobs. It could become worth while to save all.

Truly speaking that US is donating many third world countries for vulnerable activities to save the poor people, support the countries under war and natural catastrophe situation in some countries.

This is the right time that President Joe Biden's has taken right decision to save US and his citizens.

Regards

Senapathy

Ethiopia

I am sure that Biden's advisers lobbied for new research in the energy sector in the interests of big capital. Super-rich people want to be even richer and are trying to ensure the dominance of the United States. Africa and Asia are the resource base for the United States.

Regards

Vladislav

The economic impact would require a CBA weighing in the positive aspects (increased revenue, job creation, etc.) on the US manufacturing industry and the negative aspects on US consumers (as manufacturing costs are much higher in the US than in China, it'll certainly lead to an increase in prices). Economics isn't my area of expertise, so I am ill-equipped to do such CBA.

From a political economy standpoint, it involves matters such as international trade and cooperation (and in China's case, human rights issues), and energy independence. Wether the formers are to be prioritized over the latter is up to anyone's opinion (which could be greatly informed by the aforementioned CBA).

Finally, from a purely political point of view, perception is key to the impact on public opinion, and therefore on Biden's approval rating. The US manufacturing industry is much more organized and powerful than US consumers, which gives them better means to present their goals as desirable. The public might then perceive these measures as positive even if it negatively affects them or the country as a whole.

The declared trade war between the USA and China covers a major stake for the USA, historically the cantor of free trade, and tariff reductions all over the world. This recent article published on August 2022 (however already well-cited!), by researchers from Princeton University, Princeton, Columbia University, and the prestigious National Bureau of Economic Research, Cambridge, Massachusetts [1] presents an exhaustive review of the question. The authors attempt to answer two crucial questions for international trade, today and forever: 1. What are the global welfare consequences of trade barriers? 2. How is this overall change distributed?

Drawing on previous literature, the authors reviewed approaches that have addressed the different components of the China-US trade war, and in particular the pass-through of tariffs to import prices. They also studied the distributive consequences of the trade war on consumers and producers, employment across sectors, and spatial impacts on income and consumption in the United States.

The findings of the study are instructive and lead to a conclusion presented in the form of an open question. One may read at the very end of the paper:

"The US-China trade war is the most important trade policy shift in recent decades, and it provides researchers with an unusual opportunity to study the mechanics of global trade. Throughout this article, we mentioned several questions that remain under-explored, including the various conjectures for complete pass-through that we have discussed.

First, a natural follow-up is to examine the longer-run aggregate effects of the trade war. This includes re-examining pass-through at different time horizons and levels of aggregation, but also systematically examining how pass-through varies along the supply chain from the dock to retail...

Second, what are the impacts of trade barriers imposed by US and China in terms of production relocation, risk versus efficiency trade-offs, and national security implications?

Third, as noted, US and Chinese firms could request exemptions from import duties, which raises natural questions: How did expectations of potential tariff rebates affect importer behavior, and what political-economy channels influenced the decisions of firms to seek exemptions and the government decisions to grant them?

Fourth, what are the dynamic implications of potential reductions in investment, changes in capacity, and access to imported inputs?

Turning to the distributional consequences of the trade war, the studies to date analyze proxies for consumption, short-run employment effects, and model-based implications for wages.

As time passes:

- what will survey and administrative data reveal about the distributional consequences through consumption and income channels?

- What will be the long-run implications for the spatial distribution of economic activity; e.g., will the trade war “undo” the labor market impacts of the China shock? ... Finally, outside the scope of this review are questions about the geopolitical implications of the US-China trade war.

Answering such questions often do not lend themselves easily to clean econometric studies, but insights may be learned from theoretical frameworks and work from other fields.

Such questions include:

- How much global “soft power” did the US gain or lose by initiating the trade war?

- How will the trade war affect the political relationship between US and China?

- And, how will the world trading system evolve in response..

[1] Fajgelbaum PD, Khandelwal AK. The economic impacts of the us–china trade war. Annual Review of Economics. 2022 Aug 12;14:205-28.

Available on:

https://www.nber.org/system/files/working_papers/w29315/w29315.pdf