MADDENING is how this proposal is INCONSISTENT with Trump's own "Phase One" deal with China
Problematic is prioritization of China making $200 (or was it $300? $400? $500?) billion of purchase commitments, which was clearly done for campaigning...
cnbc.com/2020/01/21/wef…
China's $200 billion of purchase commitments are almost certainly unreachable
The ONLY way China gets close is if Beijing acts more and more in a "non-market" way by DIRECTING companies (eg, its SOEs) to buy from America and NOT the rest of the world
piie.com/blogs/trade-an…
Why should the rest of the world sign up at the WTO to such a Trump proposal?
Even for those who could believe in the value of market-orientation, Trump has already shown he is fine with throwing markets under the bus for political gain.
I and others have been thinking A LOT (probably too much?) about how important the issue of “market orientation” is for the WTO.
It would just be nice if the US administration engaged with it seriously, consistently, and by relying on evidence.
piie.com/publications/w…