【By Observer Net, Yuan Jiaqi】

According to Hungarian media such as Hungary Today, on August 12th, it was reported that before the U.S.-Russia summit in Alaska, U.S. President Trump "revealed" that he had sought advice from Hungarian Prime Minister Orbán.

At a White House press conference held on the afternoon of August 11th, when asked if the U.S. and Russia could resume normal trade relations if the summit went smoothly, Trump gave a positive response, but with the condition that Russia could shift from war to commercial development.

He then mentioned that he had asked a "very, very smart" person about the Ukraine-Russia conflict. That person was Hungarian Prime Minister Orbán. Both are right-wing figures and have a close personal relationship.

Trump said that Orbán, being in the conflict area, knew both Ukraine and Russia well. He recalled that after hearing his question, "Ukraine can beat Russia?" "He (Orbán) looked at me, and that expression was like saying, 'What a stupid question.'"

According to Trump, the Hungarian prime minister compared Russia's military experience to China's trade strength. He quoted Orbán as saying, "He said, 'Russia gets everything it needs for national survival through war... China beats you with trade, Russia beats you with war.'" (China beats you with trade. Russia beats you with war.)

Trump said he found Orbán's comments "interesting." But the implication that America was losing out in trade with China clearly touched Trump's "raw nerve."

After revealing this, he quickly backtracked, "China won't beat us through trade. At least not while I'm in office. Biden lost to China..."

Then came another round of old clichés: "High tariffs can bring huge tariff revenue," "America has the advantage over China," which were so repetitive that they made people's ears sore, completely forgetting that he was originally answering questions about the U.S.-Russia summit.

But when it came to the issue of suspending Chinese tariffs, at the same press conference, Trump only responded briefly with "We'll see what happens" and "good cooperation" before quickly moving on to the next journalist.

On August 12th, China and the United States released a joint statement on economic and trade talks in Stockholm, agreeing to suspend the implementation of 24% tariffs and related non-tariff countermeasures against each other, effective immediately, for a period of 90 days.

Regarding the tariff issue, China has consistently opposed tariff wars and trade wars, opposing the use of tariffs as a tool for coercion and pressure. Imposing tariffs arbitrarily does not serve the interests of any party. On August 12th, Lin Jian, spokesperson for the Foreign Ministry, responded that China's position on Sino-U.S. relations and Sino-U.S. trade issues is consistent and clear.

White House video screenshot

While Trump was boasting and taking credit for his tariff policy, claiming that "hundreds of billions of dollars flowed into the U.S." and bragging that he did "a great job," a new survey report led by Goldman Sachs' chief economist Jan Hatzius hit him hard.

According to reports by CNBC and Fox News, the Goldman Sachs economist team investigated the impact of Trump's tariff policies on foreign exporters, American companies, and American consumers.

Initial analysis showed that by June of this year, American companies had suffered a 64% tariff cost impact, while American consumers bore 22%. Moreover, as American companies decided to raise prices to pass on costs and exporters refused to lower export prices to bear the costs, by October, the burden on American consumers would rise to 67%.

Last month, a report by Morgan Stanley also pointed out that over the next 10 years, the U.S. government may collect up to $2.7 trillion in tariffs, and this money will be paid by American consumers.

In other words, the tariffs collected by the U.S. government are currently paid by American companies for about two-thirds, and later, about two-thirds will be passed on to consumers. In any case, it's always the American people who end up paying the biggest price.

At the same time, the report warned that American companies raising prices would further push up domestic inflation. The Conference Board's third-quarter U.S. CEO confidence report released last week showed that 64% of CEOs have explicitly stated they will pass on the cost of price increases to consumers, with another 16% still considering it.

Data released by the Bureau of Labor Statistics in the U.S. on August 12th also confirmed this trend: the core consumer price index (CPI), excluding food and energy, rose 0.3% in July, the largest increase since January, and rose to 3.1% year-on-year, higher than 2.9% in June.

More dramatically, after seeing the Goldman Sachs report, Trump was "broken" and "completely broken."

On Tuesday (August 12th) local time, Trump posted on his own social media platform "Truth Social," attacking Goldman Sachs' CEO David Solomon, demanding that he either "replace" the economists at the institution or "focus on being a DJ instead of running a major financial institution." According to media reports, Solomon's side job is DJ, and he has been active at various parties and music festivals under the stage name "DJ D-Sol."

Regarding the content of the Goldman Sachs report, Trump continued to argue that tariffs were mainly borne by foreign enterprises and governments, and did not cause inflation or harm the economy. He criticized Goldman Sachs' judgment on market reactions and tariff effects as "completely wrong," and was dissatisfied that the institution "refused to give it the praise it deserved."

According to CNBC, a spokesperson for Goldman Sachs declined to comment on Trump's social media post.

Alexis Durant, a senior economist at the Tax Foundation based in Washington, said that the Trump administration found it difficult to convince the public that rising prices were unrelated to tariffs, "I don't think most people will be fooled by this argument."

He emphasized in an interview that tariffs are hitting many American companies that rely on imports, and American ordinary people will have to bear the serious costs of high tariffs. This is also the common view of many investment analysts and think tanks.

This article is exclusive to Observer Net. Unauthorized reproduction is prohibited.

Original: https://www.toutiao.com/article/7537972221399007744/

Statement: This article represents the views of the author and is welcome to express your attitude by clicking the [top/beat] buttons below.