Will the oil rich countries eventually collapse after their oil runs out? Are they diversifying their economy?

Rich Gulf countries must start factoring in an economy without oil. It is incumbent upon them to make the needed structural changes to their systems of government before they have to face smaller budgets not oil dependent. All the warning signs are there and the future can be bleak unless their economies are diversified and become less dependent on oil.

The International Monetary Fund has made clear warnings to the countries in the Gulf: Diversify, diversify and diversify starting now as the oil that made many Gulf countries extremely wealthy is a diminishing resource. The IMF’s 2017 report predicts the worst growth rate for the region since the global financial collapse in 2008.

Unless the people in the Gulf countries plan to go back to a simpler nomadic life in the dessert or return to shepherding like their ancestors. A good example of wealth mismanagement is Saudi Arabia which has been the largest oil producer in the region but has had a perennial issue with unemployment.

According to recent studies Saudi Arabia might run out of oil to export by 2030. Many Saudis feel that they wasted oil wealth in luxury and opulence and didn't make use of it in scientific advances that will benefit the country in the coming generations.

A “half oil plan” was introduced by scientist studying the effects of not oil dependent economies of the future. They continue, If we do nothing for efficiency or to invest in alternatives to oil the United States alone will consume 22 million barrels of oil every day by 2035. If the half oil plans is implemented the USA will be using 11 million fewer barrels of oil every single day by 2035. Moreover, this plan will help prevent the worst effects of climate change; it will save to the tune of $1.5 billion per day that would otherwise be spent on oil, and cut toxic air pollution to save the planet. The half oil plan can be expanded to include implementing higher efficiencies in “our buildings, and our planes, trains, and ships can save some 2.5 million barrels of oil per day.”

Also, an economic argument can be made that relies on a carbon tax. This tax can correct market failures and make the economy more efficient. One study from Tufts University, economist Gilbert Metcalf estimated that a “$15 per ton tax on CO2 emissions that rises over time would reduce greenhouse gas emissions by 14 percent,”

Although a carbon tax is not a welcome idea to US energy companies and new concept for the U.S. government, it already has been implemented in several European countries, Australia and three Canadian provinces. “California recently initiated a cap-and-trade system, which auctions carbon permits to companies and functions much like a tax.” Many carbon tax proponents admit that a carbon tax isn’t perfect but when considering the alternatives, it has an enormous amount of benefits to offer.

What is the Definition of Fair Trade?

Fair trade is one of the most burning issues dragging economic integration in the world. Achieving fair trade requires that nation agree and enforce what is taking too long to incorporate into the current WTO framework.

· Regional trade blocs like MERCOSUR , ASEAN, OATUU and others need to embrace international standards. UNCATAD is the international agency leading the way for collecting trade data on imposed tariff measures that cover most countries and can be freely disseminated.

· A burning issue in the markets today, is the lack of transparency on trade regulations by country. “Drawer” regulations that are made on the fly at border crossings impose a hidden cost on trade specially, in underdeveloped countries.

· In Africa, many exporters lose sometimes half of their potential export earnings because European Union regulations are different from the international standards set by the International Organization for Standardization. By adopting international standards of global best practices in trade should result in the promotion of sustainable development while decreasing negative impact on the environment.

· Adopting standard rules avoids the burden of red tape imposed by each country’s regulatory regime. The rules and guidelines are already available on the issue and embedded in WTO and OECD rules but the overall application of these set principles is in many cases missing.

· Procedural requirements at border crossing need to have technical assistance and training of law enforcers so that countries join together and accepted the rules of trade in order to streamline each country’s regulatory regimes and thus, reduce procedural obstacles.

Trust issues

Public health and environmental protection, has been the backlash against globalization and a growing influence of elites protecting their own turf to the detriment of everyone else. Moreover, just by simply reducing barriers or reducing restrictions to trade does not have linear correlation specially, when the mix includes influential politicians or well-connected elites. At the end of the day countries must evaluate if non-tariff measures to trade like subsidies are legitimate or be used as trade offs to bring about trade fairness and efficiency. Only then adopting these complementary policies, can individuals and the markets have credibility and fairness and become the vibrant drivers of jobs and incomes.

“The World Economic Forum’s E15 Initiative has emphasized the importance of efficient global trade in fostering economic growth. The scale and complexity of the modern, globalized, system is made clear by visualizations such as these, of global shipping.”

TTIP is a trade agreement currently being negotiated by the US and EU that would bring tariffs and regulatory barriers to minimum levels to transatlantic trade and investment. The goal is that each side of the Atlantic seaboard will give access to their companies to each other markets with standardized regulations and procedures.

It has been reported that the US and EU countries together represent $1 trillion in trade every year. This agreement would cover 45% of global GDP, making the TTIP the world’s largest trade agreement which would include pharmaceuticals, automotive, energy, finance, chemicals, clothing and food and drink among others.

The Internet is taking trade to a new dimension into what is now becoming push button trade in a fast pace environment which requires factories close to the markets and new distribution cyber platforms. The trend is provoking changes in the market and corporations are adapting by using multi-layer global platforms and supply chains. The age of digital transactions is here to stay in a fast economy that in the past tended to centralize for better management and quality control. But cloud computing is changing all that generating new level of cooperation between producers the supply chain and the ultimate consumer.

Big data management is surging not only as a new field in science but in commerce as well as giants like Alibaba, eBay, Amazon and the such apply this new technology not only as a point of sale but also to determine consumer preferences and tastes as new “learning” algorithms enter the market like autonomous driving cars.

This expanding global markets has been aided by the lowering cost of shipping transportation for long distance given new markets access to otherwise unreachable opportunity for smaller manufacturers and cottage industries providing consumers with more choices and prices.

Adapting and retooling is the new rule of global markets, re-engineering the supply chain, big data analysis and Internet cloud platforms are bringing new realities to trade beyond Bretton Woods and WTO. As a result, uninformed politicians like Trump should smell the coffee and bring the US to the new dawn of reality as international trade evolves without the intervention of hard headed and ignorant politicians.

What is meant by data management life cycle in the context of enterprise IT and value chain 

The life cycle of data varies with the needs of a particular enterprise: For instance the analysis of a flight data recorder’s life cycle ends with the one flight. But if a comparative analysis needs to be completed among several flights over a period of time the life cycle becomes flexible. In general, data life cycle management (DLM) is a policy-based for a particular enterprise as it manages the flow of an information system goes through its life cycle starting with recording the data points, classification, analysis and storage for its usefulness until time dictates the data has become obsolete and is deleted.

How is data integrated into the IT value chain is again particular to each enterprise’s needs. In general it can be defined as a series of activities that an enterprise performs in order to deliver its product or service. Either a product or a service must move through a chain of events before is delivered adding value at each step of the process. The value chain framework is designed for each activity in particular but in general is divided in two main categories:

1- Primary actions for production or delivery of goods or services for a business to be and function in a socio-economic environment

2- Supporting activities like logistics or financial needs which assist in providing efficiency of the primary activities as the they move through the value chain.

Quality control over data is increasingly important for organizations that make data driven decisions. However, several measures are essential for these activities as the expansion and management of data flow become challenging.

Presently, many organizations have an increasing demand for high quality data as the bar rises for analysis techniques and the availability of quality data, is demanded in order to comply with new regulations and legislation. However, this demand for quality data also implies quality sourcing not limited to the data residing in the organization’s IT system

High data quality is also demanded for the improvement of organizational performance, logistics support, growth, competitive advantage and compliance with the growing need of data collection regulations.

Various sectors of the economy are subject to stricter regulations like medical devices, financial services, telecommunication, pharmaceutical, consumer markets and others that collect personal information that are the subject of privacy legislation.

Data complexity and growth is also a challenge for an organization where it is unclear the understanding of data quality and that data management is an IT department responsibility rather than a business side responsibility.

Unfamiliarity with collection methods within the organization such as robotic operated processes, especially if data is transported and transformed as it moves through the chain. Particularly when transformations are complex, it can require an IT specialist to determine which data elements belong to one another.

The inherited complexity of tracking data increases in companies with multipolar IT environments caused by many legacy systems that need improvement or replacement from its existing reporting flow. A known factor is that the more computing is required within a flow, the more complicated it is to capture and interpret its meaning

 NAFTA issue? (2019).

Other than replacing NAFTA acronym an unpronounceable letter soup as U.S.M.C.A., Trump only made cosmetic changes in order to put his own stamp of success on the agreement.

But in order to understand the issues address by the NAFTA agreement some economic principles need to be introduced.

1- Labor-intensive mass manufacturing used to be profitable in the U.S., but technological improvements and rising labor productivity combined with higher wages decreases the bottom line of many firms. These firms then adopt capital-intensive production technologies such as robotics or outsourcing jobs to other countries with cheaper labor cost of production.

2- Outsourcing also occurs when manufacturers use obsolete or older technologies that requires finding domestic workers at low wages or make the choice of either go out of business or find a profitable location to move its business.

These are the two burning issues that manufacturers together with policy makers are facing in today’s economic reality and must find a balance among interests. Trying to stop capital from finding safe heaven for profit domestically or abroad is counter-intuitive for a market economy.

Take Trump’s most visited argument against international trade—Trade Deficits—which, he uses as an illusion of the facts that blur the underlying issues.

As a reserve currency the U.S. can purchase goods from the world market simply by printing money or printing treasury obligations that are sold mainly to Asian countries, particularly, China and Japan. This exercise is an exchange of printed paper for goods which are destined to be accounted as trade deficits. However this issue is not new for after the end of the Bretton Woods system, the U.S. surged as stable preferred reserve currency. Financial trade markets as well as in manufactured goods markets begun to show a growing trade deficits that continue today and recognized among other reasons, in the poor saving rates of Americans.

A glance at macroeconomic theory reveals that in simple terms a trade deficit occurs when a country's imports exceeds its exports, in other words, an outflow of domestic currency to foreign markets. Economist use international trade balance among other factors to measure current account surplus or deficit. Net capital outflows are related to net exports, therefore, related to gross domestic production. The equation used to show the relationship between the current account, savings and investment is:

S = I + NX = I + NCO

S = savings

I = domestic investment

NX = net exports

NCO = net capital outflows

“The current account includes net income, such as interest and dividends, and transfers, such as foreign aid, although these components make up only a small percentage of the total current account. The current account represents a country’s foreign transactions and, like the capital account, is a component of a country’s balance of payments.”

The current thinking in trade economics is a choice for a company that has labor intensive manufacturing to either go out of business, or migrate to developing nations in order to shift its comparative advantage.

As a result advance economies like the U.S. experience de-industrialization and enter into a service-oriented welfare state that offers new jobs in technological evolution like healthcare, insurance and financial services that need to adopt advanced information technologies and hire highly skilled workers from a pool of well educated work force.

A trade war with China cannot stop the decline of American manufacturing and employment when it is driven mainly by “rapid technology progress, such as automation, robots and artificial intelligence.” The unintended consequences of such strife with creditor nations may significantly reduce American’s welfare and cause the U.S. to lose its leadership in free trade and its status as reserve currency. The result could mean a sell off by creditor nations or just dump U.S. securities bringing chaos to financial markets.

Walking out of WTO, renaming NAFTA or starting trade wars is not going to change basic economic principles of the financial or manufactured markets but could instead provoked a world recession as insecurity In the money market triggers run away inflation.

What happens with the money collected from the trade tariffs? Is it being used to partially offset the republican tax cut?

Recently, Trump made the absurd claim that the money raised from new import taxes will be used to pay down America's large debt. This is a ludicrous statement considering that the national debt is currently at $21.4 trillion! Tariffs generated a relatively small amount of revenue in 2017, $33.1 billion.

In addition Trump’s outlandish claim on tariffs is that he is taxing foreigners, but the reality is that tariffs are taxes on U.S. companies and consumers. After the end of World War II, US public policy has moved towards free and open trade, and reduced trade barriers. This increase in international trade has led the global community to growth in employment, production, and incomes for the countries involved.

In recent economic history the United States has been the crusade toward free and open trade; nonetheless, the U.S. applies high tariffs on selective categories of goods. Instead of focusing on trade policy to reduce commercial barriers, Trump has been quick to levy new tariffs while at the same time, intimidating trading partners of further trade restrictions if the US does not get the trade concessions it wants.

Data shows that tariffs don’t achieve their intended objectives, and instead have the inverse result in higher prices, lower employment, and slower economic growth. Smart policy makers should not erect barriers to trade but promote free trade and the economic benefits it brings. If a U.S. manufacturer has to pay 10 or 25 percent more to get steel from Canada or from China, that same company has to pay the tariff when it imports that good and the U.S. business has the choice of either absorbing the extra cost or pass it on to consumers as simple as that.

There are already signs that inflation is creeping in because the effect of Trump's tariffs. One simple example is a soft drink makers that has to raise its price because aluminum tariffs are making the aluminum can it uses more expensive.

In terms of Trump's claim that money raised from the tariffs will be used to pay down the debt is false at best. The imposition of tariffs on $85 billion worth of foreign goods so far, would raise about $21 billion, a very small percentage (0.1 percent) of the debt. On the other hand, the money raised from the tariffs does little to counterbalance all the money Trump has added to the debt with his outlandish tax cuts to the wealthy. Additionally, Trump has announced a $12 billion aid package to farmers hurt by the tariffs. This only adds spending that will further reduce the revenue coming from his imposition of tariffs. The indicators as a whole are that the Trump administration has entered a circle of unintended consequences or worse yet, just plain ineptitude and lack of understanding of proven economic principles.

How will the tariffs on American products affect the national budget of Canada?

Trump thinks tariffs are “great” but as his increasing tariffs might sound great to his base of supporters there are international consequences to be aware of.

Improving a domestic economy by taxing imports might sound like a great idea for Trump, it is the equivalent of denying access to the largest economy in the world in order to get concessions from weaker allies who will certainly retaliate. This can have the effect of starting a tit-for-tat trade dispute that can escalate into a full blown trade war with the expectancy that the weaker economy will collapse first. A game of chicken or Russian roulette if one prefers with grave consequences for millions of consumers when in reality the simple issue is: Americans buy foreign products, just as other nations buy American-made products and crops resulting in what is known as international trade. Because of a of largely mechanized agricultural production of massive scale in the US the agricultural community depends on foreign buyers each year. So, retaliation to agricultural tariffs is a losing proposition for this industry.

The Chinese retaliatory tariffs of 25 percent on soybeans, in response to Trump’s $34 billion in tariffs on Chinese products, has shaken the cash market of soybeans as the spot market price tumbled 20 percent so far.

Steel and aluminum is another industry of concern, since Canada is one of the United States’ biggest trading partners, the retaliatory tariffs are certainly something to pay close attention to as Trump’s trade policy wobbles directionless. Canada has taken the initiative of inviting trade ministers from the EU and other countries for a WTO summit in Ottawa, however, Trudeau did not invite the US trade representative for Trump has manifested he wants to do away with this international trade body of trade rules which the US had a major role in founding!

Many American business leaders are legitimately concerned that these unprecedented Trump wobbling positions on trade can negatively affect the entire world of financial markets falling into recession or worse yet, a runaway inflation. Although, many consumer goods such as foods and beverages may have been produced domestically, they require imported steel or aluminum for their packaging. The resulting higher costs of manufacturing will adversely affect profits resulting in higher consumer prices at the grocery store. Analysts like Dan North state that “the roughly 150,000 jobs that could potentially be saved in steel and aluminum industries is dwarfed by the nearly 2 million jobs at risk in industries that use imported steel and aluminum" which again, will be passed on as higher prices for the end consumer ensuing inversely proportional to Trump’s intent!

Should the European Union agree to negotiate a bilateral agreement with the US as proposed by Donald Trump?

Trump does not like multi-lateral trade agreements because countries as a group can exercise muscle during negotiations while in bilateral trade agreements the US has the advantage of economic size to extract disadvantageous concessions from the weaker nation. Case in point is The Trans-Pacific Partnership (TPP) and the Transatlantic Trade and Investment Partnership (TTIP). The TPP that was agreed with 11 negotiating partners, including Canada and Mexico. Trump dumped TPP and has shown no interest in the TTIP.

Trump has said that “Tariffs are the Greatest! “may want to be more ambitious by dumping all barriers to trade than the deals or negotiations he inherited and likes to get rid of protectionism in a number of areas, including anti-dumping, countervailing duties, and Jones Act restrictions on shipping to and from American ports, along with agriculture subsidies.

These action would be a remarkable about-face for his current administration policies on trade but it would require an agreement from Congress and these remaining areas of U.S. trade protection have survived years of liberalization attempts and have deep-rooted support from members of Congress.

However, removing these barriers in bilateral negotiations have other issues, if the United States were to drop tariffs on X items for a given country, WTO rules would require the United States do so as well against all other countries. This is one reason why other Presidents have favored multilateral negotiations.

There is an additional set of problems than just dropping subsidies and barriers because they include regulatory issues such as tech companies engaged in anti-competitive behavior. Tech companies and the agricultural sector might want to use the opportunity of a trade deal to lean their weight as leverage due to their bigger size. Nonetheless, these changes would not address the obsession Trump has with trade deficit, since that reflects the difference between savings and investment, not trade policy.

Tackling trade deficits would require heavy government intervention in the economy where the United States would need to stop borrowing from the rest of the world especially, Asia as U.S. borrowing is the mirror image of a trade deficit. This would likely require substantially higher interest rates in the United States, in order to entice the public into higher savings rate.

We are witnessing a recent experience with China, that “one tweet can halt communication between the two parties, and rapidly escalate into the imposition of tariffs" that can lead to a full blown trade war.

While global trade war risks have dominated the agenda of late another red flag is the ongoing flattening of the US yield curve. In addition, financial markets have to contend with dollar reserves being exchange for euros and other currencies as Asian countries strip their dollar reserves to a historical low of 62%.

Current economic condition is forcing central bank policy normalization and higher short-term rates; while longer-term pessimism over the global economy is prompting a financial flight to safety. Trump is terrified of the Feds increase in interest rates because that would put a hole on his bluffing balloon regarding trade and his bloated tax cuts which is adding to a mounting deficit of debt to GDP ratio of 108% in 2018.

Press reports indicate that China’s holdings of US sovereign debt dropped to $1.165 trillion in August, from $1.171 trillion in July. Tokyo cut its holdings of US securities to $1.029 trillion in August, the lowest since October 2011.

Discharging US Treasuries, one of the world's most active reserve financial papers, has recently become a trend among major holders. Russia dumped 84 % of its holdings this year as relations between Moscow and Washington are at their lowest point in decades despite Trump’s election which was favored by the Russians.

Goldman Sachs reports that Turkey and India have followed suit. Like Russia, Turkey has dropped out of the top-30 list of holders of American debt following a conflict with Washington over the attempted military coup in the country two years ago. While India remains among the top-30, the country has cut its US Treasury holdings for the fifth consecutive month, from $157 billion in March to $140 billion in August. Russia, China and Iran, dragged down the dollar’s share of global central-bank reserves and these data is confirmed by the International Monetary Fund.

If Trump economic dominoes start to fall the US economy will suffer unknown consequences as this is entirely new territory the current administration is trekking on.