25% tariffs on Mexican & Canadian stuff starts tomorrow.

  • Thread starter Thread starter shar-vell Dan
  • Start date Start date
GreatRedDragon said:
“I’m going to get a little wonky and write about Donald Trump and negotiations. For those who don’t know, I’m an adjunct professor at Indiana University - Robert H. McKinney School of Law and I teach negotiations. Okay, here goes.
Click to expand...
Those who can, do; those who can't, teach.
 
GreatRedDragon said:
“I’m going to get a little wonky and write about Donald Trump and negotiations. For those who don’t know, I’m an adjunct professor at Indiana University - Robert H. McKinney School of Law and I teach negotiations. Okay, here goes.

Trump, as most of us know, is the credited author of “The Art of the Deal,” a book that was actually ghost written by a man named Tony Schwartz, who was given access to Trump and wrote based upon his observations. If you’ve read The Art of the Deal, or if you’ve followed Trump lately, you’ll know, even if you didn’t know the label, that he sees all dealmaking as what we call “distributive bargaining.”

Distributive bargaining always has a winner and a loser. It happens when there is a fixed quantity of something and two sides are fighting over how it gets distributed. Think of it as a pie and you’re fighting over who gets how many pieces. In Trump’s world, the bargaining was for a building, or for construction work, or subcontractors. He perceives a successful bargain as one in which there is a winner and a loser, so if he pays less than the seller wants, he wins. The more he saves the more he wins.

The other type of bargaining is called integrative bargaining. In integrative bargaining the two sides don’t have a complete conflict of interest, and it is possible to reach mutually beneficial agreements. Think of it, not a single pie to be divided by two hungry people, but as a baker and a caterer negotiating over how many pies will be baked at what prices, and the nature of their ongoing relationship after this one gig is over.

The problem with Trump is that he sees only distributive bargaining in an international world that requires integrative bargaining. He can raise tariffs, but so can other countries. He can’t demand they not respond. There is no defined end to the negotiation and there is no simple winner and loser. There are always more pies to be baked. Further, negotiations aren’t binary. China’s choices aren’t (a) buy soybeans from US farmers, or (b) don’t buy soybeans. They can also (c) buy soybeans from Russia, or Argentina, or Brazil, or Canada, etc. That completely strips the distributive bargainer of his power to win or lose, to control the negotiation.

One of the risks of distributive bargaining is bad will. In a one-time distributive bargain, e.g. negotiating with the cabinet maker in your casino about whether you’re going to pay his whole bill or demand a discount, you don’t have to worry about your ongoing credibility or the next deal. If you do that to the cabinet maker, you can bet he won’t agree to do the cabinets in your next casino, and you’re going to have to find another cabinet maker.

There isn’t another Canada.

So when you approach international negotiation, in a world as complex as ours, with integrated economies and multiple buyers and sellers, you simply must approach them through integrative bargaining. If you attempt distributive bargaining, success is impossible. And we see that already.

Trump has raised tariffs on China. China responded, in addition to raising tariffs on US goods, by dropping all its soybean orders from the US and buying them from Russia. The effect is not only to cause tremendous harm to US farmers, but also to increase Russian revenue, making Russia less susceptible to sanctions and boycotts, increasing its economic and political power in the world, and reducing ours. Trump saw steel and aluminum and thought it would be an easy win, BECAUSE HE SAW ONLY STEEL AND ALUMINUM - HE SEES EVERY NEGOTIATION AS DISTRIBUTIVE. China saw it as integrative, and integrated Russia and its soybean purchase orders into a far more complex negotiation ecosystem.

Trump has the same weakness politically. For every winner there must be a loser. And that’s just not how politics works, not over the long run.

For people who study negotiations, this is incredibly basic stuff, negotiations 101, definitions you learn before you even start talking about styles and tactics. And here’s another huge problem for us.

Trump is utterly convinced that his experience in a closely held real estate company has prepared him to run a nation, and therefore he rejects the advice of people who spent entire careers studying the nuances of international negotiations and diplomacy. But the leaders on the other side of the table have not eschewed expertise, they have embraced it. And that means they look at Trump and, given his very limited tool chest and his blindly distributive understanding of negotiation, they know exactly what he is going to do and exactly how to respond to it.

From a professional negotiation point of view, Trump isn’t even bringing checkers to a chess match. He’s bringing a quarter that he insists of flipping for heads or tails, while everybody else is studying the chess board to decide whether its better to open with Najdorf or Grünfeld.”

— David Honig
Click to expand...
So, what you are saying is a "community activist" would and did make a better President?
 
Geo said:
So, what you are saying is a "community activist" would and did make a better President?
Click to expand...
I'm not saying anything, I just thought it was an interesting read on the subject.

I might be a Canadian but I can't begrudge a country for looking out for their best interests. The fact that American companies are able to build auto plants right across the border and use my people for cheap labor is both bad for Americans and disgraceful for Canadians - we are not fucking Mexicans in sweaters.
 
yes it is and thanks. I had to cut ties w/a friend of 18 yrs today as he has the dRump virus and theres no known cure.
I was going to pass your article to him but would have no FX.
 
GreatRedDragon said:
I'm not saying anything, I just thought it was an interesting read on the subject.

I might be a Canadian but I can't begrudge a country for looking out for their best interests. The fact that American companies are able to build auto plants right across the border and use my people for cheap labor is both bad for Americans and disgraceful for Canadians - we are not fucking Mexicans in sweaters.
Click to expand...
The problem with criticizing every decision and scrutinizing choice issues is, it's not the bigger picture.

If waiting for the perfect person is the idea then, we will be waiting forever. And no one with any talent will want the job.
 
shar-vell Dan said:
yes it is and thanks. I had to cut ties w/a friend of 18 yrs today as he has the dRump virus and theres no known cure.
I was going to pass your article to him but would have no FX.
Click to expand...
Don't do it Dan, it's not worth it. Trump will come and go, 18 yr friends are a treasure.
 
GreatRedDragon said:
“I’m going to get a little wonky and write about Donald Trump and negotiations. For those who don’t know, I’m an adjunct professor at Indiana University - Robert H. McKinney School of Law and I teach negotiations. Okay, here goes.

Trump, as most of us know, is the credited author of “The Art of the Deal,” a book that was actually ghost written by a man named Tony Schwartz, who was given access to Trump and wrote based upon his observations. If you’ve read The Art of the Deal, or if you’ve followed Trump lately, you’ll know, even if you didn’t know the label, that he sees all dealmaking as what we call “distributive bargaining.”

Distributive bargaining always has a winner and a loser. It happens when there is a fixed quantity of something and two sides are fighting over how it gets distributed. Think of it as a pie and you’re fighting over who gets how many pieces. In Trump’s world, the bargaining was for a building, or for construction work, or subcontractors. He perceives a successful bargain as one in which there is a winner and a loser, so if he pays less than the seller wants, he wins. The more he saves the more he wins.

The other type of bargaining is called integrative bargaining. In integrative bargaining the two sides don’t have a complete conflict of interest, and it is possible to reach mutually beneficial agreements. Think of it, not a single pie to be divided by two hungry people, but as a baker and a caterer negotiating over how many pies will be baked at what prices, and the nature of their ongoing relationship after this one gig is over.

The problem with Trump is that he sees only distributive bargaining in an international world that requires integrative bargaining. He can raise tariffs, but so can other countries. He can’t demand they not respond. There is no defined end to the negotiation and there is no simple winner and loser. There are always more pies to be baked. Further, negotiations aren’t binary. China’s choices aren’t (a) buy soybeans from US farmers, or (b) don’t buy soybeans. They can also (c) buy soybeans from Russia, or Argentina, or Brazil, or Canada, etc. That completely strips the distributive bargainer of his power to win or lose, to control the negotiation.

One of the risks of distributive bargaining is bad will. In a one-time distributive bargain, e.g. negotiating with the cabinet maker in your casino about whether you’re going to pay his whole bill or demand a discount, you don’t have to worry about your ongoing credibility or the next deal. If you do that to the cabinet maker, you can bet he won’t agree to do the cabinets in your next casino, and you’re going to have to find another cabinet maker.

There isn’t another Canada.

So when you approach international negotiation, in a world as complex as ours, with integrated economies and multiple buyers and sellers, you simply must approach them through integrative bargaining. If you attempt distributive bargaining, success is impossible. And we see that already.

Trump has raised tariffs on China. China responded, in addition to raising tariffs on US goods, by dropping all its soybean orders from the US and buying them from Russia. The effect is not only to cause tremendous harm to US farmers, but also to increase Russian revenue, making Russia less susceptible to sanctions and boycotts, increasing its economic and political power in the world, and reducing ours. Trump saw steel and aluminum and thought it would be an easy win, BECAUSE HE SAW ONLY STEEL AND ALUMINUM - HE SEES EVERY NEGOTIATION AS DISTRIBUTIVE. China saw it as integrative, and integrated Russia and its soybean purchase orders into a far more complex negotiation ecosystem.

Trump has the same weakness politically. For every winner there must be a loser. And that’s just not how politics works, not over the long run.

For people who study negotiations, this is incredibly basic stuff, negotiations 101, definitions you learn before you even start talking about styles and tactics. And here’s another huge problem for us.

Trump is utterly convinced that his experience in a closely held real estate company has prepared him to run a nation, and therefore he rejects the advice of people who spent entire careers studying the nuances of international negotiations and diplomacy. But the leaders on the other side of the table have not eschewed expertise, they have embraced it. And that means they look at Trump and, given his very limited tool chest and his blindly distributive understanding of negotiation, they know exactly what he is going to do and exactly how to respond to it.

From a professional negotiation point of view, Trump isn’t even bringing checkers to a chess match. He’s bringing a quarter that he insists of flipping for heads or tails, while everybody else is studying the chess board to decide whether its better to open with Najdorf or Grünfeld.”

— David Honig
Click to expand...
Excellent analytical post.

The Chinese political leaders are playing Go, not chess. And you can betcha that China learned a lot dealing with Trump the first time around.
 
Floyd Eye said:
Tanqueray is ok, but it sucks balls compared to Bombay Sapphire or Hendricks.
Click to expand...

Hendricks is good for sure. What I don't like about it is that the bottle (glass) is heavy and you can't see inside, therefore the quantity left is deceptive.

Tanqueray and Smirnoff are OK. I drink a lot of gin, as it is one of my favorites, so I'm really not that picky.


d6noI4kl.jpg
 
JTyson said:
Well I guess that’s true, it appears phoney baloney got the hammer, I must have missed that. What happened?
Click to expand...

This post in this very thread :lol: He told JBT to eat a dick. :gethim:???

P

Post in thread '25% tariffs on Mexican & Canadian stuff starts tomorrow.'

JackBootedThug said:
I’m not reading through all this but here’s my take. I don’t care. ? fuck Mexico and fuck Canada. Mexico has allowed illegal migration because it does nothing but benefit them. They dump their trash on us and they send tons of money back to ole mehico… not even going to mention the the dope and cartels… and Canada… great people but fuck them to. They enjoy our protection so they spend little on defense and trade with them is completely one sided. Fuck that. The only thing Trump has done is expose these things and troll the fuck out of them…and he’s the bad guy? The mood of this country...
Click to expand...
  • PhoneyIommi
  • Haha
  • Love
  • Wow
 
311splawndude said:
This post in this very thread :lol: He told JBT to eat a dick. :gethim:???

P

Post in thread '25% tariffs on Mexican & Canadian stuff starts tomorrow.'

JackBootedThug said:
I’m not reading through all this but here’s my take. I don’t care. ? fuck Mexico and fuck Canada. Mexico has allowed illegal migration because it does nothing but benefit them. They dump their trash on us and they send tons of money back to ole mehico… not even going to mention the the dope and cartels… and Canada… great people but fuck them to. They enjoy our protection so they spend little on defense and trade with them is completely one sided. Fuck that. The only thing Trump has done is expose these things and troll the fuck out of them…and he’s the bad guy? The mood of this country...
Click to expand...
  • PhoneyIommi
  • Haha
  • Love
  • Wow
Click to expand...
And here he was trying to make himself look like an educated person ??
Educated people worldwide all know not to piss off the MURDERATOR…
I think he realized he was in way over his head in here and needed an easy way out.
Kinda like suicide by cop ?
 
I was talking to some colleagues earlier today & one chatty dude was just rambling on. At some point I made an innocous comment,

Me: That's typical behavior of a cult.

Chatty dude: You know what's a cult? The MAGA people. They've been brainwashed into thinking certain things.

Me: Brainwashed is a term that's not used in the psychiatric or psychological clinical and medical field. That term was invented by some lay person to generally describe some form of mental condition without knowing what (s)he is talking about & without empirical evidence/observations.

Chatty dude: Brainwashed is what the Trump people are.

Me: So what? The 1st Amendment trumps all. MAGA people can believe & think what they want as they have the freedom & right to do so. As the chronologically oldest in the room, you should have learned that in your Civics high-school class.

After I made the statement,

Everyone: Absolute silence. Everyone with glaring looks at chatty dude.

Chatty dude left the room in a huff. When chatty dude was gone,

Me: Well now that I know what he's like, someone's going to get a MAGA hat as a present with their name embroidered on it.

Everyone busts out laughing.

2nd colleague: Make sure it's blazing red.
 
jb44 said:
I was talking to some colleagues earlier today & one chatty dude was just rambling on. At some point I made an innocous comment,

Me: That's typical behavior of a cult.

Chatty dude: You know what's a cult? The MAGA people. They've been brainwashed into thinking certain things.

Me: Brainwashed is a term that's not used in the psychiatric or psychological clinical and medical field. That term was invented by some lay person to generally describe some form of mental condition without knowing what (s)he is talking about & without empirical evidence/observations.

Chatty dude: Brainwashed is what the Trump people are.

Me: So what? The 1st Amendment trumps all. MAGA people can believe & think what they want as they have the freedom & right to do so. As the chronologically oldest in the room, you should have learned that in your Civics high-school class.

After I made the statement,

Everyone: Absolute silence. Everyone with glaring looks at chatty dude.

Chatty dude left the room in a huff. When chatty dude was gone,

Me: Well now that I know what he's like, someone's going to get a MAGA hat as a present with their name embroidered on it.

Everyone busts out laughing.

2nd colleague: Make sure it's blazing red.
Click to expand...
This definitely happened
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top