an observation from the graph would be that both are still peaking and falling at the same times, which would suggest that many of the outside forces (that aren't the tariffs and tough talk on both sides) are affecting both.

i'd like to see some of the following events labelled, Trump's US-EU soybeans deal, EU-Japan trade deal announced, Trump's european visit, and other items. to at least see how the markets reacted to them.

i'd also like to see what the EU numbers look like with the US index included, it's not a viable strategy for them to invest heavily in the US for most of their gains, but it can offset some losses. the US invests in all sorts of foreign markets in things ranging from currency, to foreign businesses, to foreign outposts for domestic differences. excluding them serves an obvious purpose, a direct comparison, but it would be interesting to see none the less.

in either case the stocks alone don't settle the winner of a trade war, although they're a decent metric. Look at the soy bean deal, trump had to scramble to bail out farmers in a deal that's likely not in our favor, so that he could avoid massive subsidies on a budget he knows is already cramped. free trade is good, but that doesnt mean us trading in EU with our beans is purely to our benefit. the crop market has been about loss mitigation to avoid subsidies for decades, first it was corn syrup, then it was shifting grain feeds to more corn, then it was the govt backed research in ethanol (which is the price floor for corn). i'm sure farm stocks gained on the soy bean deal announcement, but that doesnt mean we won the engagement.

This post was edited by thesnipa on Sep 21 2018 08:53am

https://www.agriculture.com/markets/newswire/grains-soy-hits-10-year-low-on-huge-us-crop-china-trade-woes?

Im not sure how they can headline it with "trade woes?" and then also print that it's an increase in supply. corn has become increasingly cheaper to create, and farms continue to sell out to corporate mega farms, lowering production even further. chemicals and seed are drastically cheaper and better than before. beyond that some low grade corn is now grown for ethanol production, when before ethanol was a simple crop dump when bushel price was too low. im sure the price index is low on average, ethanol is increasing, e85 at every station.

the trade war of course has an effect, but that headline is fake news at best.

This post was edited by thesnipa on Sep 21 2018 09:36am

who's going to buy all our soy? surely conservatives won't, they don't want to be called "soy boys".

little known fact about farming, each year based on bushel price, futures, and the locks your local elevator is offering, you choose what to grow. farmers will chose to grow less soy. soy beans arent a great crop, their purpose isn't purely production its adding back nitrogen to the soil and giving field a fallow year from corn. theyre not great by bushel price, but better than putting a field to straw if you dont have livestock or neighbors with animals.

the farmers have a trade deal with the EU for soy right now. and china is ramping up its internal agriculture on a state level. they're also tying it in with their own work on clean energy. so they'll be beating us by enough in 10 years that we wont want to trade beans to them, the price will be awful. we're better off focusing on tofu production if anything. looming trade issues with mexico necessitate vegetable production moving north, i don't think we're far off from many smaller farmers going full vegetable or selling the back 40 to corporate overlords.

This post was edited by thesnipa on Sep 21 2018 09:44am

You just responded by re-stating your opinion. For someone who posts "Not an argument" all the time everywhere, you are awfully consistent at not posting arguments yourself.

the stock market = success is an argument, and one that's designed to exclude further arguments. it's the "SCOREBOARD" of arguments.

Except (1) the trade war isn't even over yet and (2) the causality is not clear. Besides, I think it's a bit short sighed to see it as an all-encompassing argument, since it only really shows whether certain large corporations are doing well. It does nothing to show the effect on anyone who doesn't own the mentioned shares.

As you said yourself, it's a decent metric to use, but the metric alone doesn't show everything. I, for one, am very interested in seeing how this will backfire on the consumers who have to pay for these tariffs. This is something that negatively impacts every involved country, and I don't see what advantages it brings to anyone.

This post was edited by Leevee on Sep 21 2018 11:56am

i agree, perhaps the comparison missed. "scoreboard" is just what crowds chant to make the other team mad. like if you're up 3-0 and the opposing team scores a goal, you dont get scared, you chant scoreboard to make them feel bad about their success. similar tactics were used in 2016-2017, no one needed to argue the left they just said "trump won". using only the stock market is what lazy people do.

I see. I had indeed misunderstood your previous post.