I am posting this as I hope it will help other Australian options traders trading in US options with their tax treatment for ATO (Australian Tax Office) purposes. The ATO provides very little guidance on tax treatment for options trading and I had to do a lot of digging to get to this point. I welcome any feedback on this post.

The Deloitte Report from 2011

My initial research led me to this comprehensive Deloitte report from 2011 which is hosted on the ASX website. I've been through this document about 20 times and although it's a great report to understand how different scenarios apply, it's still really hard to find out what's changed since 2011.
I am mainly relating myself to the scenario of being an individual and non-sole trader (no business set up) for my trading. I think this will apply to many others here too. According to that document, there isn't much guidance on what happens when you're an options premium seller and close positions before they expire.
Note that the ATO sometimes uses the term "ETO" (Exchange Traded Option) to discuss what we're talking about here with options trading.
Also note: The ATO discusses the separate Capital Gains Tax ("CGT") events that occur in each scenario in some of their documents. A CGT event will then determine what tax treatment gets applied if you don't know much about capital gains in Australia.

ATO Request for Advice

Since the Deloitte report didn't answer my questions, I eventually ended up contacting the ATO with a request for advice and tried to explain my scenario: I'm an Australian resident for tax purposes, I'm trading with tastyworks in $USD, I'm primarily a premium seller and I don't have it set up with any business/company/trust etc. In effect, I have a rough idea that I'm looking at capital gains tax but I wanted to fully understand how it worked.
Initially the ATO respondent didn't understand what I was talking about when I said that I was selling a position first and buying it to close. According to the laws, there is no example of this given anywhere because it is always assumed in ATO examples that you buy a position and sell it. Why? I have no idea.
I sent a follow up request with even more detail to the ATO. I think (hope) they understood what I meant now after explaining what an options premium seller is!

Currency Gains/Losses

First, I have to consider translating my $USD to Australian dollars. How do we treat that?
FX Translation
If the premium from selling the options contract is received in $USD, do I convert it to $AUD on that day it is received?
ATO response:

Subsection 960-50(6), Item 5 of the Income Tax Assessment Act 1997 (ITAA 1997) states the amount should be translated at the time of the transaction or event for the purposes of the Capital Gains Tax provisions. For the purpose of granting an option to an entity, the time of the event is when you grant the option (subsection 104-20(2) ITAA 1997).

This is a very detailed response which even refers to the level of which section in the law it is coming from. I now know that I need to translate my trades from $USD to $AUD according to the RBA's translation rates for every single trade.
But what about gains or losses on translation?
There is one major rule that overrides FX gains and losses after digging deeper. The ATO has a "$250k balance election". This will probably apply to a lot of people trading in balances below $250k a lot of the FX rules don't apply. It states:

However, the $250,000 balance election broadly enables you to disregard certain foreign currency gains and losses on certain foreign currency denominated bank accounts and credit card accounts (called qualifying forex accounts) with balances below a specified limit.

Therefore, I'm all good disregarding FX gains and losses! I just need to ensure I translate my trades on the day they occurred. It's a bit of extra admin to do unfortunately, but it is what it is.

Credit Trades

This is the scenario where we SELL a position first, collect premium, and close the position by making an opposite BUY order. Selling a naked PUT, for example.
What happens when you open the position? ATO Response:

The option is grantedCGT event D2 happens when a taxpayer grants an option. The time of the event is when the option is granted. The capital gain or loss arising is the difference between the capital proceeds and the expenditure incurred to grant the option.

This seems straight forward. We collect premium and record a capital gain.
What happens when you close the position? ATO Response:

Closing out an optionThe establishment of an ETO contract is referred to as opening a position (ASX Explanatory Booklet 'Understanding Options Trading'). A person who writes (sells) a call or put option may close out their position by taking (buying) an identical call or put option in the same series. This is referred to as the close-out of an option or the closing-out of an opening position.
CGT event C2 happens when a taxpayer's ownership of an intangible CGT asset ends. Paragraph 104-25(1)(a) of the ITAA 1997 provides that ownership of an intangible CGT asset ends by cancellation, surrender, or release or similar means.
CGT event C2 therefore happens to a taxpayer when their position under an ETO is closed out where the close-out results in the cancellation, release or discharge of the ETO.
Under subsection 104-25(3) of the ITAA 1997 you make a capital gain from CGT event C2 if the capital proceeds from the ending are more than the assets cost base. You make a capital loss if those capital proceeds are less than the assets reduced cost base.
Both CGT events (being D2 upon granting the option and C2 upon adopting the close out position) must be accounted for if applicable to a situation.

My take on this is that the BUY position that cancels out your SELL position will most often simply realise a capital loss (the entire portion of your BUY position). In effect, it 'cancels out' your original premium sold, but it's not recorded that way, it's recorded as two separate CGT events - your capital gain from CGT event D2 (SELL position), then, your capital loss from CGT event C2 (BUY position) is also recorded. In effect, they net each other out, but you don't record them as a 'netted out' number - you record them separately.
From what I understand, if you were trading as a sole tradecompany then you would record them as a netted out capital gain or loss, because the trades would be classified as trading stock but not in our case here as an individual person trading options. The example I've written below should hopefully make that clearer.
EXAMPLE:
Trade on 1 July 2020: Open position

SELL -1 SPY 85 PUT, exp 30 August 2020
Collect Premium USD$1 per unit, and brokerage USD$5
- = USD$100 premium collected, minus USD$5
- = Net amount of USD$95 collected
FX Translation rate on the date of the trade: AUD $1.00 = $USD 0.70
- Net Premium Collected in $AUD
- = USD$95 x (1/.7)
- = AUD$135.71
CGT Event D2 triggered and a capital gain of $135.71 is recorded

Trade on 15 July 2020: Close position

BUY 1 SPY 85 PUT, exp 30 August 2020
Pay Premium $0.50 per unit, and brokerage $5
- = $50 premium paid, plus $5
- = Net amount of USD$55 paid
FX Translation rate on the date of the trade: AUD $1.00 = $USD 0.60
- Net Premium Collected in $AUD
- = USD$55 x (1/.6)
- = AUD$91.66
CGT Event C2 triggered and a capital loss of $91.66 is recorded

We can see from this simple example that even though you made a gain on those trades, you still have to record the transactions separately, as first a gain, then as a loss. Note that it is not just a matter of netting off the value of the net profit collected and converting the profit to $AUD because the exchange rate will be different on the date of the opening trade and on the date of the closing trade we have to record them separately.

What if you don't close the position and the options are exercised? ATO Response:

The option is granted and then the option is exercisedUnder subsection 104-40(5) of the Income Tax Assessment Act 1997 (ITAA 1997) the capital gain or loss from the CGT event D2 is disregarded if the option is exercised. Subsection 134-1(1), item 1, of the ITAA 1997 refers to the consequences for the grantor of the exercise of the option.
Where the option binds the grantor to dispose of a CGT asset section 116-65 of the ITAA 1997 applies to the transaction.
Subsection 116-65(2) of the ITAA 1997 provides that the capital proceeds from the grant or disposal of the shares (CGT asset) include any payment received for granting the option. The disposal of the shares is a CGT event A1 which occurs under subsection 104-10(3) of the ITAA 1997 when the contract for disposal is entered into.
You would still make a capital gain at the happening of the CGT event D2 in the year the event occurs (the time the option is granted). That capital gain is disregarded when the option is exercised. Where the option is exercised in the subsequent tax year, the CGT event D2 gain is disregarded at that point. An amendment may be necessary to remove the gain previously included in taxable income for the year in which the CGT event D2 occurred.

This scenario is pretty unlikely - for me personally I never hold positions to expiration, but it is nice to know what happens with the tax treatment if it ultimately does come to that.

Debit Trades

What about the scenario when you want to BUY some options first, then SELL that position and close it later? Buying a CALL, for example. This case is what the ATO originally thought my request was about before I clarified with them. They stated:

When you buy an ETO, you acquire an asset (the ETO) for the amount paid for it (that is, the premium) plus any additional costs such as brokerage fees and the Australian Clearing House (ACH) fee. These costs together form the cost base of the ETO (section 109-5 of the ITAA 1997). On the close out of the position, you make a capital gain or loss equal to the difference between the cost base of the ETO and the amount received on its expiry or termination (subsection 104-25(3) of the ITAA 1997). The capital gain or loss is calculated on each parcel of options.

So it seems it is far easier to record debit trades for tax purposes. It is easier for the tax office to see that you open a position by buying it, and close it by selling it. And in that case you net off the total after selling it. This is very similar to a trading shares and the CGT treatment is in effect very similar (the main difference is that it is not coming under CGT event A1 because there is no asset to dispose of, like in a shares or property trade).

Other ATO Info (FYI)

The ATO also referred me to the following documents. They relate to some 'decisions' that they made from super funds but the same principles apply to individuals they said.

The ATO’s Interpretative Decision in relation to the tax treatment of premiums payable and receivable for exchange traded options can be found on the links below. Please note that the interpretative decisions below are in relation to self-managed superannuation funds but the same principles would apply in your situation [as an individual taxpayer, not as a super fund].

Premiums Receivable: ATO ID 2009/110

Key quote from this decision: CGT Event D2 will apply on the writing of an ETO by the Fund. The Fund as grantor of the option will make a capital gain (or loss) of the difference between the capital proceeds (that is, the premium receivable) and the cost of granting the option (for example, brokerage fees) at the time the option is granted
My take on this is that you will realise a capital gain on issuing of the selling position. I don't see how you could realise a capital loss in that scenario? Or maybe if you sell a position and the brokerage is so high that it outweighs the premium received (a dumb trade) then that would be a capital loss (a rare scenario).
Premiums Payable: ATO ID 2009/111
Key quote from decision: When the Fund opens a position by buying an ETO, no immediate taxation consequences arise. CGT Event C2 will happen to the Fund when its position under an ETO is closed out where the close-out results in the cancellation, release or discharge of the ETO

Some tips

Don't forget to declare your trades on your tax return and keep a nice spreadsheet
Keep track of the exchange rates for each day you make a trade. You could do as you go and check the RBA exchange rates website for the daily number, or just do it all at once at the end of the financial year
Finally - I recommend ensuring that you save a portion of your income to pay the capital gains tax at the end of the year so you don't have to withdraw it from your portfolio and pay exchange rate fees to convert it back to Australian dollars. It will depend on your marginal tax rate what that percentage will work out to be in the end.

No, the British did not steal $45 trillion from India

This is an updated copy of the version on BadHistory. I plan to update it in accordance with the feedback I got.
I'd like to thank two people who will remain anonymous for helping me greatly with this post (you know who you are)
Three years ago a festschrift for Binay Bhushan Chaudhuri was published by Shubhra Chakrabarti, a history teacher at the University of Delhi and Utsa Patnaik, a Marxist economist who taught at JNU until 2010.
One of the essays in the festschirt by Utsa Patnaik was an attempt to quantify the "drain" undergone by India during British Rule. Her conclusion? Britain robbed India of $45 trillion (or £9.2 trillion) during their 200 or so years of rule. This figure was immensely popular, and got republished in several major news outlets (here, here, here, here (they get the number wrong) and more recently here), got a mention from the Minister of External Affairs & returns 29,100 results on Google. There's also plenty of references to it here on Reddit.
Patnaik is not the first to calculate such a figure. Angus Maddison thought it was £100 million, Simon Digby said £1 billion, Javier Estaban said £40 million see Roy (2019). The huge range of figures should set off some alarm bells.
So how did Patnaik calculate this (shockingly large) figure? Well, even though I don't have access to the festschrift, she conveniently has written an article detailing her methodology here. Let's have a look.

How exactly did the British manage to diddle us and drain our wealth’ ? was the question that Basudev Chatterjee (later editor of a volume in the Towards Freedom project) had posed to me 50 years ago when we were fellow-students abroad.

This is begging the question.

After decades of research I find that using India’s commodity export surplus as the measure and applying an interest rate of 5%, the total drain from 1765 to 1938, compounded up to 2016, comes to £9.2 trillion; since $4.86 exchanged for £1 those days, this sum equals about $45 trillion.

This is completely meaningless. To understand why it's meaningless consider India's annual coconut exports. These are almost certainly a surplus but the surplus in trade is countered by the other country buying the product (indeed, by definition, trade surpluses contribute to the GDP of a nation which hardly plays into intuitive conceptualisations of drain).
Furthermore, Dewey (2019) critiques the 5% interest rate.

She [Patnaik] consistently adopts statistical assumptions (such as compound interest at a rate of 5% per annum over centuries) that exaggerate the magnitude of the drain

Moving on:

The exact mechanism of drain, or transfers from India to Britain was quite simple.

Convenient.

Drain theory possessed the political merit of being easily grasped by a nation of peasants. [...] No other idea could arouse people than the thought that they were being taxed so that others in far off lands might live in comfort. [...] It was, therefore, inevitable that the drain theory became the main staple of nationalist political agitation during the Gandhian era.

- Chandra et al. (1989)

The key factor was Britain’s control over our taxation revenues combined with control over India’s financial gold and forex earnings from its booming commodity export surplus with the world. Simply put, Britain used locally raised rupee tax revenues to pay for its net import of goods, a highly abnormal use of budgetary funds not seen in any sovereign country.

The issue with figures like these is they all make certain methodological assumptions that are impossible to prove. From Roy in Frankema et al. (2019):

the "drain theory" of Indian poverty cannot be tested with evidence, for several reasons. First, it rests on the counterfactual that any money saved on account of factor payments abroad would translate into domestic investment, which can never be proved. Second, it rests on "the primitive notion that all payments to foreigners are "drain"", that is, on the assumption that these payments did not contribute to domestic national income to the equivalent extent (Kumar 1985, 384; see also Chaudhuri 1968). Again, this cannot be tested. [...] Fourth, while British officers serving India did receive salaries that were many times that of the average income in India, a paper using cross-country data shows that colonies with better paid officers were governed better (Jones 2013).

Indeed, drain theory rests on some very weak foundations. This, in of itself, should be enough to dismiss any of the other figures that get thrown out. Nonetheless, I felt it would be a useful exercise to continue exploring Patnaik's take on drain theory.

The East India Company from 1765 onwards allocated every year up to one-third of Indian budgetary revenues net of collection costs, to buy a large volume of goods for direct import into Britain, far in excess of that country’s own needs.

So what's going on here? Well Roy (2019) explains it better:

Colonial India ran an export surplus, which, together with foreign investment, was used to pay for services purchased from Britain. These payments included interest on public debt, salaries, and pensions paid to government offcers who had come from Britain, salaries of managers and engineers, guaranteed profts paid to railway companies, and repatriated business profts. How do we know that any of these payments involved paying too much? The answer is we do not.

So what was really happening is the government was paying its workers for services (as well as guaranteeing profits - to promote investment - something the GoI does today Dalal (2019), and promoting business in India), and those workers were remitting some of that money to Britain. This is hardly a drain (unless, of course, Indian diaspora around the world today are "draining" it). In some cases, the remittances would take the form of goods (as described) see Chaudhuri (1983):

It is obvious that these debit items were financed through the export surplus on merchandise account, and later, when railway construction started on a large scale in India, through capital import. Until 1833 the East India Company followed a cumbersome method in remitting the annual home charges. This was to purchase export commodities in India out of revenue, which were then shipped to London and the proceeds from their sale handed over to the home treasury.

While Roy's earlier point argues better paid officers governed better, it is honestly impossible to say what part of the repatriated export surplus was a drain, and what was not. However calling all of it a drain is definitely misguided.
It's worth noting that Patnaik seems to make no attempt to quantify the benefits of the Raj either, Dewey (2019)'s 2nd criticism:

she [Patnaik] consistently ignores research that would tend to cut the economic impact of the drain down to size, such as the work on the sources of investment during the industrial revolution (which shows that industrialisation was financed by the ploughed-back profits of industrialists) or the costs of empire school (which stresses the high price of imperial defence)

Since tropical goods were highly prized in other cold temperate countries which could never produce them, in effect these free goods represented international purchasing power for Britain which kept a part for its own use and re-exported the balance to other countries in Europe and North America against import of food grains, iron and other goods in which it was deficient.

Re-exports necessarily adds value to goods when the goods are processed and when the goods are transported. The country with the largest navy at the time would presumably be in very good stead to do the latter.

The British historians Phyllis Deane and WA Cole presented an incorrect estimate of Britain’s 18th-19th century trade volume, by leaving out re-exports completely. I found that by 1800 Britain’s total trade was 62% higher than their estimate, on applying the correct definition of trade including re-exports, that is used by the United Nations and by all other international organisations.

While interesting, and certainly expected for such an old book, re-exporting necessarily adds value to goods.

When the Crown took over from the Company, from 1861 a clever system was developed under which all of India’s financial gold and forex earnings from its fast-rising commodity export surplus with the world, was intercepted and appropriated by Britain. As before up to a third of India’s rising budgetary revenues was not spent domestically but was set aside as ‘expenditure abroad’.

So, what does this mean? Britain appropriated all of India's earnings, and then spent a third of it aboard? Not exactly. She is describing home charges see Roy (2019) again:

Some of the expenditures on defense and administration were made in sterling and went out of the country. This payment by the government was known as the Home Charges. For example, interest payment on loans raised to finance construction of railways and irrigation works, pensions paid to retired officers, and purchase of stores, were payments in sterling. [...] almost all money that the government paid abroad corresponded to the purchase of a service from abroad. [...] The balance of payments system that emerged after 1800 was based on standard business principles. India bought something and paid for it. State revenues were used to pay for wages of people hired abroad, pay for interest on loans raised abroad, and repatriation of profits on foreign investments coming into India. These were legitimate market transactions.

Indeed, if paying for what you buy is drain, then several billions of us are drained every day.

The Secretary of State for India in Council, based in London, invited foreign importers to deposit with him the payment (in gold, sterling and their own currencies) for their net imports from India, and these gold and forex payments disappeared into the yawning maw of the SoS’s account in the Bank of England.

It should be noted that India having two heads was beneficial, and encouraged investment per Roy (2019):

The fact that the India Office in London managed a part of the monetary system made India creditworthy, stabilized its currency, and encouraged foreign savers to put money into railways and private enterprise in India. Current research on the history of public debt shows that stable and large colonies found it easier to borrow abroad than independent economies because the investors trusted the guarantee of the colonist powers.

Against India’s net foreign earnings he issued bills, termed Council bills (CBs), to an equivalent rupee value. The rate (between gold-linked sterling and silver rupee) at which the bills were issued, was carefully adjusted to the last farthing, so that foreigners would never find it more profitable to ship financial gold as payment directly to Indians, compared to using the CB route. Foreign importers then sent the CBs by post or by telegraph to the export houses in India, that via the exchange banks were paid out of the budgeted provision of sums under ‘expenditure abroad’, and the exporters in turn paid the producers (peasants and artisans) from whom they sourced the goods.

Sunderland (2013) argues CBs had two main roles (and neither were part of a grand plot to keep gold out of India):

Council bills had two roles. They firstly promoted trade by handing the IO some control of the rate of exchange and allowing the exchange banks to remit funds to India and to hedge currency transaction risks. They also enabled the Indian government to transfer cash to England for the payment of its UK commitments.

The United Nations (1962) historical data for 1900 to 1960, show that for three decades up to 1928 (and very likely earlier too) India posted the second highest merchandise export surplus in the world, with USA in the first position. Not only were Indians deprived of every bit of the enormous international purchasing power they had earned over 175 years, even its rupee equivalent was not issued to them since not even the colonial government was credited with any part of India’s net gold and forex earnings against which it could issue rupees. The sleight-of-hand employed, namely ‘paying’ producers out of their own taxes, made India’s export surplus unrequited and constituted a tax-financed drain to the metropolis, as had been correctly pointed out by those highly insightful classical writers, Dadabhai Naoroji and RCDutt.

It doesn't appear that others appreciate their insight Roy (2019):

K. N. Chaudhuri rightly calls such practice ‘confused’ economics ‘coloured by political feelings’.

Surplus budgets to effect such heavy tax-financed transfers had a severe employment–reducing and income-deflating effect: mass consumption was squeezed in order to release export goods. Per capita annual foodgrains absorption in British India declined from 210 kg. during the period 1904-09, to 157 kg. during 1937-41, and to only 137 kg by 1946.

Dewey (1978) points out reliability issues with Indian agriculutural statistics, however this calorie decline persists to this day. Some of it is attributed to less food being consumed at home Smith (2015), a lower infectious disease burden Duh & Spears (2016) and diversified diets Vankatesh et al. (2016).

If even a part of its enormous foreign earnings had been credited to it and not entirely siphoned off, India could have imported modern technology to build up an industrial structure as Japan was doing.

This is, unfortunately, impossible to prove. Had the British not arrived in India, there is no clear indication that India would've united (this is arguably more plausible than the given counterfactual¹). Had the British not arrived in India, there is no clear indication India would not have been nuked in WW2, much like Japan. Had the British not arrived in India, there is no clear indication India would not have been invaded by lizard people, ~~much like Japan.~~ The list continues eternally.
Nevertheless, I will charitably examine the given counterfactual anyway. Did pre-colonial India have industrial potential? The answer is a resounding no.
From Gupta (1980):

This article starts from the premise that while economic categories - the extent of commodity production, wage labour, monetarisation of the economy, etc - should be the basis for any analysis of the production relations of pre-British India, it is the nature of class struggles arising out of particular class alignments that finally gives the decisive twist to social change. Arguing on this premise, and analysing the available evidence, this article concludes that there was little potential for industrial revolution before the British arrived in India because, whatever might have been the character of economic categories of that period, the class relations had not sufficiently matured to develop productive forces and the required class struggle for a 'revolution' to take place.

A view echoed in Raychaudhuri (1983):

Yet all of this did not amount to an economic situation comparable to that of western Europe on the eve of the industrial revolution. Her technology - in agriculture as well as manufacturers - had by and large been stagnant for centuries. [...] The weakness of the Indian economy in the mid-eighteenth century, as compared to pre-industrial Europe was not simply a matter of technology and commercial and industrial organization. No scientific or geographical revolution formed part of the eighteenth-century Indian's historical experience. [...] Spontaneous movement towards industrialisation is unlikely in such a situation.

So now we've established India did not have industrial potential, was India similar to Japan just before the Meiji era? The answer, yet again, unsurprisingly, is no. Japan's economic situation was not comparable to India's, which allowed for Japan to finance its revolution. From Yasuba (1986):

All in all, the Japanese standard of living may not have been much below the English standard of living before industrialization, and both of them may have been considerably higher than the Indian standard of living. We can no longer say that Japan started from a pathetically low economic level and achieved a rapid or even "miraculous" economic growth. Japan's per capita income was almost as high as in Western Europe before industrialization, and it was possible for Japan to produce surplus in the Meiji Period to finance private and public capital formation.

The circumstances that led to Meiji Japan were extremely unique. See Tomlinson (1985):

Most modern comparisons between India and Japan, written by either Indianists or Japanese specialists, stress instead that industrial growth in Meiji Japan was the product of unique features that were not reproducible elsewhere. [...] it is undoubtably true that Japan's progress to industrialization has been unique and unrepeatable

So there you have it. Unsubstantiated statistical assumptions, calling any number you can a drain & assuming a counterfactual for no good reason gets you this $45 trillion number. Hopefully that's enough to bury it in the ground.
^{1. Several authors have affirmed that Indian identity is a colonial artefact. For example see} ^{Rajan 1969}^:

^{Perhaps the single greatest and most enduring impact of British rule over India is that it created an Indian nation, in the modern political sense. After centuries of rule by different dynasties overparts of the Indian sub-continent, and after about 100 years of British rule, Indians ceased to be merely Bengalis, Maharashtrians,or Tamils, linguistically and culturally.}

^{or see} ^{Bryant 2000}^:

^{But then, it would be anachronistic to condemn eighteenth-century Indians, who served the British, as collaborators, when the notion of 'democratic' nationalism or of an Indian 'nation' did not then exist.} ^[...] ^{Indians who fought for them, differed from the Europeans in having a primary attachment to a non-belligerent religion, family and local chief, which was stronger than any identity they might have with a more remote prince or 'nation'.}

Bibliography

Chakrabarti, Shubra & Patnaik, Utsa (2018). Agrarian and other histories: Essays for Binay Bhushan Chaudhuri. Colombia University Press
Hickel, Jason (2018). How the British stole $45 trillion from India. The Guardian
Bhuyan, Aroonim & Sharma, Krishan (2019). The Great Loot: How the British stole $45 trillion from India. Indiapost
Monbiot, George (2020). English Landowners have stolen our rights. It is time to reclaim them. The Guardian
Tsjeng, Zing (2020). How Britain Stole $45 trillion from India with trains | Empires of Dirt. Vice
Chaudhury, Dipanjan (2019). British looted $45 trillion from India in today’s value: Jaishankar. The Economic Times
Roy, Tirthankar (2019). How British rule changed India's economy: The Paradox of the Raj. Palgrave Macmillan
Patnaik, Utsa (2018). How the British impoverished India. Hindustan Times
Tuovila, Alicia (2019). Expenditure method. Investopedia
Dewey, Clive (2019). Changing the guard: The dissolution of the nationalist–Marxist orthodoxy in the agrarian and agricultural history of India. The Indian Economic & Social History Review
Chandra, Bipan et al. (1989). India's Struggle for Independence, 1857-1947. Penguin Books
Frankema, Ewout & Booth, Anne (2019). Fiscal Capacity and the Colonial State in Asia and Africa, c. 1850-1960. Cambridge University Press
Dalal, Sucheta (2019). IL&FS Controversy: Centre is Paying Up on Sovereign Guarantees to ADB, KfW for Group's Loan. TheWire
Chaudhuri, K.N. (1983). X - Foreign Trade and Balance of Payments (1757–1947). Cambridge University Press
Sunderland, David (2013). Financing the Raj: The City of London and Colonial India, 1858-1940. Boydell Press
Dewey, Clive (1978). Patwari and Chaukidar: Subordinate officials and the reliability of India’s agricultural statistics. Athlone Press
Smith, Lisa (2015). The great Indian calorie debate: Explaining rising undernourishment during India’s rapid economic growth. Food Policy
Duh, Josephine & Spears, Dean (2016). Health and Hunger: Disease, Energy Needs, and the Indian Calorie Consumption Puzzle. The Economic Journal
Vankatesh, P. et al. (2016). Relationship between Food Production and Consumption Diversity in India – Empirical Evidences from Cross Section Analysis. Agricultural Economics Research Review
Gupta, Shaibal (1980). Potential of Industrial Revolution in Pre-British India. Economic and Political Weekly
Raychaudhuri, Tapan (1983). I - The mid-eighteenth-century background. Cambridge University Press
Yasuba, Yasukichi (1986). Standard of Living in Japan Before Industrialization: From what Level did Japan Begin? A Comment. The Journal of Economic History
Tomblinson, B.R. (1985). Writing History Sideways: Lessons for Indian Economic Historians from Meiji Japan. Cambridge University Press
Rajan, M.S. (1969). The Impact of British Rule in India. Journal of Contemporary History
Bryant, G.J. (2000). Indigenous Mercenaries in the Service of European Imperialists: The Case of the Sepoys in the Early British Indian Army, 1750-1800. War in History

Why Is Brexit Taking So Long Time?

200 achievements of Modi Govt

Fragile five to Fastest growing economy - India
11th largest to the 5th largest economy - India
Share of world GDP from 2.43% in 2014 to 3.08% in 2018
Average GDP 7.3% against 6.7% in previous regime
Forex reserves from 300 bn USD in 2014 to 420 bn USD in 2018
Doubling of FDI inflow from 36 bn USD in 2014 to 66 billion USD in 2018
Inflation less than 2.3 % (Nov 18) against 10.1% in 2014
Growth of sensex from 24,121.74 in 2014 to 36,395.03 on 12 Feb 19 (50.88%)
Fiscal deficit under control
Per capita income increased by 45% from Rs 86,647 in 2014 to Rs 1,25,397
IT exemption from 2 lakh in 2014 to 5 lakh (effectively 9.85 lakh with home loan)
Restaurant bills tax reduced from 18% in 2014 to 5%
Transaction charges through card down from 1% to 0%, domestic money transfer fee down from Rs 5 in 2014 to zero
Financial inclusion (32 crore bank accounts with 260 billion worth deposits). Almost 100% coverage from earlier 50%
DBT (savings of 83000 crores @ 15000 crore annually), No of govt schemes DBT applied to increased from 34 in 2014 to 433, 2.7 lakh fake mid-day meal students, 3.3 crore fake LPG connections, 87 lakh fake MNREGA job cards, 3 crore fake ration cards eliminated
Zero IT for businesses with turnover upto 60 lakhs
GST exemplifying cooperative federalism, rates of 83 items down from pre-GST rates, out of 1211 items only 35 items in above 18% slab, 39% reduction of cost of basic household items. Average 1 lk crore monthly revenue through GST collection. Exempted for business upto 40 lk
Insolvency and Bankruptcy Code, constitution of NCLT, 3 lakh crores of NPAs recovered, 66 cases resolved, 260 cases liquidated, resolution of stressed assets, 2100 companies pay back 83000 crore to banks settling their pending loan repayments
75 billion $ or Yen to Rupee exchange agreement with Japan
1 lakh shell companies deregistered, FCRA licenses of 4800 NGOs cancelled
Fugitive Economic Offenders Bill, properties of economic fugitives seized and auctioned
1.9 lakh km of rural roads. Rural road connectivity at 91% from 55%
36 new airports, from 65 in 7 decades to 106, all states now in air connectivity map
Effective international diplomacy following 59 visits to nations, 38 single, 10 double, 3 triple and 2 quadruple visits by PM.(Seen during Airstrikes,No Country opposed India)
Benami Act for action against Money Laundering
Rural sanitation coverage 95 % up from 39% (8.8 crore toilets)
Solar energy capacity increased 8 fold from 2.63 GW to 22 GW, 19. 8.5 GW of biogas grid installed.
Ganga waterway transportation, usage by shipping giant Maersk, cost of transportation reduced from 10/ton (road) / Rs 6/ton (rail) to Re 1/ton
More than 2.4 crore households lit up, rural electricity coverage to households up from 70 to 95%, only 19836 homes remain (in Chhatisgarh) out of 2,48,09,235
Electricity accessibility rank jump from 99 in 2014 to 26 in 2019
7 crore new gas connections to 3.5 crore households u/69000 conections per day, coverage 90% from 55%, 82% return for refill, 42% beneficiaries Dalits
14.4 crore mudra loans worth Rs 7 lakh crore disbursed
18000 remote villages connected with electricity
2.92 lakh km of optical fibre laid, 0.02% to 50% gram Panchayat connectivity
Swachh bharat mission has saved, according to WHO, 3 lakh lives and will save 1.5 lakh lives per year.
IT filers increase from 3.79 crore to 6.08 crore, enterprises registered for indirect tax up from 64 lk to 118 lakh
Entry of India in global regimes Missile Technology Control regime (MTCR), WA (Wassenaar Arrangement) and Australia Group
17 crore soil health cards
1.5 crore houses built, 91.37 crore in rural areas and 13.5 lakh in urban areas against 25 lakh houses built between 2010-2014. House for all target year is 2022.
1,78,346 houses built in NE over existing 2875 houses built till 2014
Home loan interest rate down from 10.3 % in 2014 to 8.4% in 2018, annual savings of Rs 47,160 for 30 lakhs over 30 years, no GST on affordable housing, 5% on remaining
Trading agreement in rupee with Iran and UAE
Common service centres up from 84k to 3 Lakh
OROP implemented after 43 years, 35000 crores disbursed to 8 crore veterans
India's vaccination programme Indradhanush amongst 12 best practices of world
5035 Jan Aushadhi and - 1054 medicines under price control (60-90% discounts).
More than 150 Amrit stores, reduction of cost of cromium cobalt Knee implant from 1.58-2.5 lakh to 54,720 and high flex implant from Rs181728 to 56490 (69%), 85% reduction in cardiac stent price to Rs 28000
87% reduction in 400 cancer drugs
Rate of Interest on higher education loans dropped from 14.75 in 2013 to 10.88% in 2019, savings of 1.18 lakh on 10 lakh loan over tenure of 60 months, Rs 2000 savings on EMI
Data revolution: Cost of 1 GB $0.26 in India against $12.37 in US, $6.66 in UK and $75.2 in Zimbabwe. Unlimited mobile+ 45 Gb data = Rs 150 against Rs 1000 in 2013; annual savings of 10,200
Katra rail line work completed after 16 years
Dhola Sadiya bridge work completed after 16 years
Sardar Sarovar Dam work completed after 15 years
Aadhaar act
Pakyong airport completed after 10 years
Chennai Nashri Tunnel after 10 years
Assam NRC after 40 years
National War Memorial after 50 years
NE cpas after 60 years
Kollam bypass after 43 years
Indo-Bangladesh enclaves after 42 years
Bansagar canal project after 40 years
Bogibeel bridge after 23 years
Western peri expressway after 15 years
Kota Chambal bridge after 11 years
Maibang-Lumding Stretch completed
Delhi Meerut Expressway completed
Ganga Expressway project (world's longest) underway
Metros in Ahmedabad, Nagpur, Jaipur, Lucknow, Washermenpet
All umanned level crossings eliminated
Ayushman Bharat: annual 5 lakh health care to every family, 15.05 lakh hospital admissions for secondary/ tertiary treatment, 2.4 crore e-cards generated as on 10 Mar 19 in 170 days. Target 50 crore people.
59minutes loan portal: 92,000 loan applications of MSME amounting to 30,000 crores approved, 6000 crores sanctioned till Nov 18
87% of farming house (owning land of 2 hctrs) or 12 cr ppl to get kisaan sammaan nidhi of Rs 6000 pr year. Rs 5215 cr transferred directly to 2.6 crore farmers in 37 days (for households with holding less than 0.01 hectares incm per month so far was Rs 8136 agnst exp of 6594
1.5 million electric rickshaws
Procurement of 36 Rafale on Government to Government Basis avoiding middlemen
05 billion$ S 400 Triumf air defence missile system deal with Russia
145 M777 howitzer deal
22 Apache AH 64E multi-role combat helos
200 KA-226T helicopters
56 EADS CASA C-295 transport aircraft
15 CH 47 Chinook tactical transport helicopters
2.3 lakh Bullet proof jackets
1.6 lakh Bullet-proof helmets
777 mn USD Barak 8 LRSAM contract
5 bn USD S-400 air defence systems
10 Heron TP armed drones
4 additional P8I MR aircraft
40 units of Laser sensor border fence installed
72,400 Sig Sauer Assault rifles
100 self-propelled K9 Vajra howitzers
700000 AK-103 Kalashnikov assault rifles indigenous facility
Surgical strikes in Myanmar, across LoC and in Pakistan. Only Country to bomb a Nuclear Powered Country
240 million visitors at Kumbh Mela 2019, cost 4236 crores @ Rs 177 per tourist, revenue 1.2 Lakh crores
833 teraflop supercomputer Param Shivay by IIT BHU at Rs 32.5 crores
Divisional status to Ladakh
470 bed ESIC hospital in Ennore
100 bed ESIC hospital in Tiruppur
Namami Gange - Ganga is 30% cleaner, 83 out of 97 ganga towns and 4456 villages achieved ODF status, 08 out of 16 drains emptying 16 crore l sewage into Ganga tapped. Target date Mar 2020
5,45,122 ODF villages, 598 ODF districts, 27 ODF states/ villages
RERA implementation
Udaan scheme - flight cost down from Rs 5000/1000 km in 2013 to 3400/1000 km in 2018, 34 airports operationalised, small towns connected, all states on aerial
Preventive conservation of 39275570 folios, curative conservation of 3656863 filios, digitisation of 2.83 lakh manuscripts consisting of 2.93 crore pages
India is now world's largest 2-wheeler manufacturer, 2nd largest smartphone manufacturer (94% of mobiles sold now made in India), 4th largest automaker, 2nd largest steel producer
5100 m Mandvi Bridge in Goa in 3.5 years
Ease of doing Business ranking jump from 134 in 2014 to 77 in 2019
Therubali - Singapur Bridge No 588
Restoration of Asurgarh Fort, Kalahandi
GeM portal with 731431 product categories, 180,862 registered sellers and 32114 govt buyers
10% EWS reservation
40% of ongoing 700 NH projects completed, adding 40,039 km between 2014-18 against 91,287 km between 1947-2014
Highway construction rate jumped from 12 km/day in 2014 to 27 km/day in 2019
101 terrorists and 11 offenders extradited
90,000 ex-partite Indians evacuated
Chabahar port, Sittwe port and Duqm port
Military installation in Seychelles
International logistics agreements with US, France and Singapore
Work underway on 25 MLD ZLD Common Effluent Treatment Plant at Gujarat Eco Textile Park and will save 25 million litres of water per day
Beautification of 65 railway stations, all stations fitted with LED lights, wi-fi, multi-brand food centres, kiosks, executive lounges, lifts (445 from 97 in 2014), escalators (603 from 199 in 2014), travellators and ramps
Record number of foot over bridges built
871 new train services
180 new rail lines
Dedicated railway freight corridor - 2 sections completed
100% electrification of railways underway, first solar powered railway station (Guwahati). First solar powered train (world's second), savings of Rs 40 Lakhs and 90,000 ltrs diesel per year
Make in India semi-high-speed trains - Tejas, Gatiman and Vande Bharat
Humsafar and Antodaya trains, Deen Dayalu and Anubhuti coaches, UDAY double decker, glass dome Vistadome coaches
Project Swarn and Project Utkrisht to upgrade Rajdhani/Shatabdi and Mail/Express respectively
Largest coach production in world at ICF, Chennai
No more human extreta on railway tracks. Installation of 1.37 lakh out of 2.5 lakh completed in Jun 18.
400 wi-fi railway stations (Aug 18)
80% reduction in rail accidents
10 high speed rail corridors underway, target date 2025-26
Export of world class customised coaches from MCF, Rae Bareli
LIC and Air India register profit
2300 km rail tracks constructed, speed jumped from 4.1 km/day in 2014 to 6.53 km/day in 2018
Neem coating of urea
Gokul mission - record 160 million ton milk production
Online availability of CBSE and NCERT books
10 crore LED bulbs distributed, 5000 crore savings
Investment in urban infrastructure jumped from 157703 crores to 795500 crores
Statue of Unity to commemorate Iron Man of India
Rs 2509 crore sales in Khadi
482.36 million digital transactions worth Rs 74,978 crores in Oct 2018 against 0.3 million transactions worth Rs 90 crores in Nov 2016
30% increase in ATMs, 208% increase of PoS machines from 10.81 lakh in May 14 to 33.32 lakh in Aug 18, 111% increase in credit cards from 1.94 crore in May 14 to 4.10 crore in Aug 18, 144% increase in debit cards from 40.17 crore to 98.02 crore
Ease of Doing Business Index 142 (2014) to 100 (2018)
Ease of getting electricity index 99 (2014) to 26 (2018)
UN's e-govt index 118 (2014) to 97(2018)
Globalisation index 112 to 107 (2018)
Innovation index 76 to 60 (2018)
Competitiveness index 71 to 39
Logistics performance index 54 to 35
Global peace index 141 to 137
DBR ranking 100 to 77
India ranks 3rd in global start up ecosystem
06 crore jobs in MSME sector based on CII data
448 million formal jobs based on EPFO, NPS and PPF data
10 crore jobs in entrepreneurship via mudra and other schemes
80% increase in tax payers, 51.3 % increase in gross tax revenue
Black Money report card - Voluntary income declaration scheme (Rs 65250 crore), IT search and survey operations (35,460 crore), Pradhan Mantri Garib Kalyan Yojana(5000 crore), Benami transactions Act (4300 crore), Black Money and Imposition of Tax Act (4100 crore)

160 Rs 6000 financial assiatence for pregnant women
161/1 . Sagarmala: port capacity increase from 8 to 14.7 lakh ton, cargo up from 89 to 116 MMT 8 new national waterways including ganga waterway NW-1 and Brahmaputra waterway NW-2.
161/2. domestic cruise service between Mumbai and Goa, ro-ro services on Ghoga-Dahej reducing travel distance from 294 to 31 km
161/3. New international cruise terminals at Chennai and Goa, railway line between Haridaspur and Paradip underway, LNG import terminal at Kamarajar port, Oil berth ai Jawahar Dweep,Coal berth at Mangalore port
161/4 . deep draft Iron ore berth at Paradip berth, JNPT SEZ, Kandla and Paradip smart industrial port city, largest dry dock and international ship repair facility at CSL, modernisation of 17 fishing harbours

800 km Delhi-Mumbai Expressway underway
Replacement of bio-toilets with upgraded vacuum bio toilets in trains underway. Order for 500 placed on experimental basis.
No terror strikes in hinterland
103 new KVs
62 new Navodaya Vidyalayas
6 new IITs against 16 in previous 57 years
6 new IIMs against 13 in previous 57 years
7 IIITs against 7 in previous 57 years
02 new IISER
12 new AIIMS against 7 in previous 57 years.
141 new universities against 30 in previous 57 years
01 new NIT
Life Insurances @ Rs 12 annual and @ Rs 12 monthly premiums
Atal Pension Yojana
Pension to 42 crore people of unorganised sector
Ambedkar memorial
BHIM application for digital payments
Khelo India Initiative for tracking of athletes' development, Rs 5 lk per annum scholarship for 1000 budding athletes per year for eight years each; monthly Rs 50000 out-of -pocket exptr, 2000 PETs, salary cap of coaches doubled from Rs 1-2 lk per month, target 15 yrs
Special Task Force for Olympics
RERA Act
Bullet train maiden project

182/1. Rs 6.92 lakh crore Bharatmala project, 44 economic corridors with 9000 km road, 2000 km port connectivity, 9000km roads to connect district HQs with NH,
182/2. 2000 km road with Nepal, Bhutan, Bangladesh and Myanmar, opening up of 185 choke points, road development to char dham, 12 greenfield expressways spanning 1900 km

36 murtis retrieved and brought back to India in 2014-2019 under India Pride Project against 02 between 2000-2013, 02 in 90s, 03 in 80s, 01 in 70s and nil in 50s and 60s
Unemployment rate 3.8% against 13.8 % in 2013
India is a less-cash society now
Develpment of Trincomalee and Columbo port while checkmating China's Hambantota by taking operations of near by (15 km away) Mattala Rajapaksha International Airport
Plugging the 'double taxation avoidance' black money loophole through a new tax agreement with Mauritius
Deal with Switzerland for automatic tax data sharing from 01 Jan 2019

189/1 Varanasi - Varanasi ring road phase 1 completed, phase 2 underway, inland waterways terminal, Babatpur airport highway, 140 MLD Dinaput STP, facelift to railway station, big cow shelter for stray cattle, BPO centre, piped gas project, Varanasi-Balia rail project,
189/2. Vande Bharat Express, Kashi Vishwanath temple - Ganga Ghat corridor project, renovation of all bathings ghats, LED illuminations of ghats and major roads, underground electricity cabling,
189/3. new sewage plants, 02 cancer treatment facilities, 65th to 29th rank in swachhata sarvekshan (2016), 90% ODF district.

Creation of 100 Smart cities, 100 crore per year per city for 05 years, 500 acres for retrofitting, 50 acres for redevelopment, 250 acres for green field projects, 10% of energy from renewable resources, 80% of green building construction, special purpose vehicles.

191/1 Development of 500 AMRUT cities underway, urbanization project of rejuvenation and transformation which includes beach front development, prevention of beach erosion, improvement of water supply, replacement of pipelines,
191/2. New sewerage connections, greenery and open spaces, digital and smart facilities, e-governance, LED streetlights, public transport, storm water drainage projects in a phased manner, Target date 2022

Increase in Child Sex Ratio (CSR) in 104 BBBP (Beti Bachao Beti Padhao) districts, anti-natal care registration in 119 districts and institutional deliveries in 146 out of total 640 districts as in Mar 18. CSR of Haryana increased from 871 to 914.
International Yoga Day
Aspirational Districts Programme: 115 'backward' districts placed under 'prabharis' and for competitive development on the basis of 49 performance indicators, target year 2022.

195/1. Make in India: 16.4 lakh crore investment committments, 1.5 lakh crore investment inquiries, 60 bn USD FDI, 26 sectors covered, 23 positions jump in World Bank's Doing Business Report (DBR), 32 places in WEF's Global Competitiveness Index (GCI),
195/2 19 places in Logistics Performance Index, 42 places in Ease of Doing Business index, schemes include Bharatmala, Sagarmala, dedicate freight corridors, industrial corridors, UDAN-RCS, Bharat Broadband Network, Digital India.

251 Passport Seva Kendras (PSKs) and Post Office Passport Seva kendras (POPSKs) against 77 till 2014, target of one PSK every 50 km across India.
Unanimous election of Justice Dalveer Bhandari to ICJ forcing UK to pull out own nominee Christopher Greenwood, demonstrating India's clout in international arena.
India Post Payments Bank: India's biggest banking outreach with 1.55 lakh post offices (2.5 times banking network) linked to IPPB system
Philip Kotler award, Seoul Peace prize, Champion of the Earth Award, Grand Collar of the State of Palestine, Amir Abdulla Khan Award, King Abdulaziz Sash award, Amir Amanullah Khan award.
1900 gifts and memorabilia received by Modi auctioned and 11.7 crores added to Namami Gange fund, 1.4 c of Seoul Peace award also to Nammami Gange.

New Adds

Removal of article 370 and thereby also 35a after several decades.
Giving citizenship to persecuted minorities in Pakistan, Bangladesh and Afghanistan through passing of CAA.
Trust for creation of Ram Mandir underway.
Abolishment of Haj subsidy.
Abolishment and criminalization of instant triple talak.
Deal with Bodo community.
Getting Maulana Masood Azhar listed as an UN designated terrorist.

Source - https://www.reddit.com/IndiaRWResources/comments/bgkus6/200_achievements_of_modi_govt/

List more achievements in the comment section and lets make the list bigger, a big thank you to our fallen kar sevak u/Alive_Firefighter

EQIBank: Global Digital Bank

WHAT ARE CFDS?

If you hodl or trade, you`re the biggest problem with the world of cryptocurrencies.

There`s 3 components to a market economy: Spending, Savings & Investments. We only have 2 and those are way off balance.
Spending: Payments. Drives Inclusion & Adoption. Represents the primary bridge to real world assets.
Saving: Store of Value, Essential driver for stability. The ideea that your holdings are safe over time and don`t depreciate.
Investments: Trading, drives value of the economy, corrects inflation.
State of the nation:

Over 3000 coins traded on > 1000 Exchanges.
70 Mil users world wide. That`s less than 1% of the population.
250 Bil market cap.
and yet, less than 3% of merchants (online companies) world wide accept any form of cryptocurrency.
For those that do accept it, they average about 0.5% crypto transactions out of total transactions.

IF there`s any chance at adoption, don`t just HODL. Don`t just DayTrade. Spend what you have. Money needs to move.
The moment you start spending a portion of cryptocurrencies, that money moves. The entire supply chain benefits. Miners Mine, Exchangers Exchange, Businesses get paid, Taxes get taxed. The underlying value of your holdings grows as you tell more people how you paid your AliBaba supplier in Bitcoin and didn`t have any trouble with your EU based bank making a fuss over "why you`re sending money to Asia".
If the only thing you do with Crypto is to buy it, hold it or trade it, it has no impact on real life. It`s not inviting more people to use it. Demand doesn`t grow. the value chain remains closed and non-inclusive. And it`s against the basic principles of Blockchain. You, the person who only has 10 USD in Dogecoin or the Hodler who has 8 bitcoins since Satoshi was in diapers, you`re responsible for the value of your assets and growth of your community. If you don`t SPEND it, people around you have NO reason to adopt. And if they do adopt, they do it for the wrong reasons and simply add to the volatility.
Introduction:
I`ve been in this space since 2009, reading all I could get my hands on. Coming from a poorly banked background and still having frustrations due to the inability of making online purchases at the time, just coming out of a recession, Bitcoin`s vision struck a nerve with me. I`ve been an avid believer in blockchain ever since and at no point did I buy crypto to store value, hedge my bets, invest, digital gold or any of this. I went in because it was, and still is: the easiest way to send money across the world. Ethereum`s smart contracts bring this simple function to a new level, introducing conditions to be met for the transfer itself. Simple, open, transparent, inclusive. Period.
What we`ve become, as a community:
As a whole, this community went from a group of passionate people who wanted an alternative to banks, government and politics, people who wanted to deal directly with other people, to something weird I can`t describe as a whole, but more as personas. Here`s what I`m seeing:

The "I wanna buy Pizza with Bitcoin" crowd. I`m one of them. We just wanted a simple alternative, we were okay with volatility because we always knew the more people use it, more stable it gets as an alternative currency. Conspiracy theorists, tech geeks, scientists, curious people fascinated by the endless possibilities of a global, open banking system, built by the people, for the people. Joined from the first 3-4 years of Bitcoin, many still join it.
The Hodlers: Also coined as the true "Believers". They`re responsible for the initial traction, and would rather liquidate their house than to "sell off" their Bitcoins. They see Bitcoin and other currencies as a "store of value" and see not much difference between buying/storing Gold and Crypto. Joined after the first group and peacefully co-existed with everybody so far. Most dedicated miners came from this group/generation of adopters.
The Traders: People coming from the finance world. They either did Hedgefunds, Forex, VC. Smart opportunists that saw the first 2 groups, saw the potential value of the system as something to be gained from (nothing wrong with this) and heavily capitalize on it. These were the first guys to look at crypto as financial instruments and started fighting the compliance game. This is also where market manipulation started.
The "Tokenize the world" generation. Driven by technology on one side, by the ICO madness on the other side, this opportunistic group wanted to create a token (and respective ICOs) for everything they could think of. Huge similarities between how everything needed a website in the 2000`s, everything needed an app in 2010, everything needed a coin/token started around 2016. Dogecoin is the perfect example of a joke that got way out of proportion, while the original ideea was to make fun of this particular group. Oh well, this group still garners a lot of traction/interest. This group is why we have 3000 shitcoins and who knows how many that never saw the light of day.
The Consultants, Gurus, Ninjas. The "know it all`s". They`re all about the TREND, not about the substance. In the 90`s we had the "internet consultants" who were selling strategies for people to get online. Later the same people were selling strategies to get website traffic. Later, it was about the apps or about the cloud. Right now, it`s about blockchain, token economics, go to market, liquidity, or investing. Some are super smart, most are useless. The only thing that really bothers me is that consultants take no ownership in the success or failure of what they`re selling. As long as you cover their fees, they don`t care if their advice works or not and usually blame you for failing. These are the "market makers" of today, the youtube/facebook/twitteinstagram investment gurus who look at charts for 4 hours and make predictions without really having any skin in the game. Here`s what I never got my head around, if you know how to make a market for a coin, or really know how to invest in crypto.... WHY would you charge me 20k when you can make millions for yourself in less time than that? I guess it holds true: those that can, DO, those that can`t, Teach.

This brings us to the state of the market today.

You don`t know how the price is set across exchanges.
You don`t know the real volumes of most exchanges
You can`t trust Gurus. Period.
Until your parents buy their Newports with Dogecoin and you pay your taxes with Bitcoin Cash, there is no adoption.

Proposed solution:
Don`t wait for your government to regulate, don`t wait for banks or institutional investors to kick in, don`t wait for the media frenzy. Just do your part: spend, save and invest your crypto just as you would your USD/Euro/Yen/etc. If you`re a freelancer, accept crypto payments. if you run a business, accept crypto payments. If you have crypto, make crypto payments. This is the main reason we have crypto today and it`s exactly what we don`t use it for. Go back to basics and let`s see how influenced by "market volatility" or "market manipulation" or "media bias" the price will get.
Disclosure: Yes, trying to solve the adoption issue has led me to build a platform for e-commerce that also solves crypto-to-fiat payments for more than 2000 tokens. We walk the walk, not talk the talk.
I`d love to hear if you guys agree or disagree, and most importantly, Why?
C:\>
P.S. I love you

200 achievements of Modi Govt

Fragile five to Fastest growing economy - India
11th largest to the 5th largest economy - India
Share of world GDP from 2.43% in 2014 to 3.08% in 2018
Average GDP 7.3% against 6.7% in previous regime
Forex reserves from 300 bn USD in 2014 to 420 bn USD in 2018
Doubling of FDI inflow from 36 bn USD in 2014 to 66 billion USD in 2018
Inflation less than 2.3 % (Nov 18) against 10.1% in 2014
Growth of sensex from 24,121.74 in 2014 to 36,395.03 on 12 Feb 19 (50.88%)
Fiscal deficit under control
Per capita income increased by 45% from Rs 86,647 in 2014 to Rs 1,25,397
IT exemption from 2 lakh in 2014 to 5 lakh (effectively 9.85 lakh with home loan)
Restaurant bills tax reduced from 18% in 2014 to 5%
Transaction charges through card down from 1% to 0%, domestic money transfer fee down from Rs 5 in 2014 to zero
Financial inclusion (32 crore bank accounts with 260 billion worth deposits). Almost 100% coverage from earlier 50%
DBT (savings of 83000 crores @ 15000 crore annually), No of govt schemes DBT applied to increased from 34 in 2014 to 433, 2.7 lakh fake mid-day meal students, 3.3 crore fake LPG connections, 87 lakh fake MNREGA job cards, 3 crore fake ration cards eliminated
Zero IT for businesses with turnover upto 60 lakhs
GST exemplifying cooperative federalism, rates of 83 items down from pre-GST rates, out of 1211 items only 35 items in above 18% slab, 39% reduction of cost of basic household items. Average 1 lk crore monthly revenue through GST collection. Exempted for business upto 40 lk
Insolvency and Bankruptcy Code, constitution of NCLT, 3 lakh crores of NPAs recovered, 66 cases resolved, 260 cases liquidated, resolution of stressed assets, 2100 companies pay back 83000 crore to banks settling their pending loan repayments
75 billion $ or Yen to Rupee exchange agreement with Japan
1 lakh shell companies deregistered, FCRA licenses of 4800 NGOs cancelled
Fugitive Economic Offenders Bill, properties of economic fugitives seized and auctioned
1.9 lakh km of rural roads. Rural road connectivity at 91% from 55%
36 new airports, from 65 in 7 decades to 106, all states now in air connectivity map
Effective international diplomacy following 59 visits to nations, 38 single, 10 double, 3 triple and 2 quadruple visits by PM.(Seen during Airstrikes,No Country opposed India)
Benami Act for action against Money Laundering
Rural sanitation coverage 95 % up from 39% (8.8 crore toilets)
Solar energy capacity increased 8 fold from 2.63 GW to 22 GW, 19. 8.5 GW of biogas grid installed.
Ganga waterway transportation, usage by shipping giant Maersk, cost of transportation reduced from 10/ton (road) / Rs 6/ton (rail) to Re 1/ton
More than 2.4 crore households lit up, rural electricity coverage to households up from 70 to 95%, only 19836 homes remain (in Chhatisgarh) out of 2,48,09,235
Electricity accessibility rank jump from 99 in 2014 to 26 in 2019
7 crore new gas connections to 3.5 crore households @69000 conections per day, coverage 90% from 55%, 82% return for refill, 42% beneficiaries Dalits
14.4 crore mudra loans worth Rs 7 lakh crore disbursed
18000 remote villages connected with electricity
2.92 lakh km of optical fibre laid, 0.02% to 50% gram Panchayat connectivity
Swachh bharat mission has saved, according to WHO, 3 lakh lives and will save 1.5 lakh lives per year.
IT filers increase from 3.79 crore to 6.08 crore, enterprises registered for indirect tax up from 64 lk to 118 lakh
Entry of India in global regimes Missile Technology Control regime (MTCR), WA (Wassenaar Arrangement) and Australia Group
17 crore soil health cards
1.5 crore houses built, 91.37 crore in rural areas and 13.5 lakh in urban areas against 25 lakh houses built between 2010-2014. House for all target year is 2022.
1,78,346 houses built in NE over existing 2875 houses built till 2014
Home loan interest rate down from 10.3 % in 2014 to 8.4% in 2018, annual savings of Rs 47,160 for 30 lakhs over 30 years, no GST on affordable housing, 5% on remaining
Trading agreement in rupee with Iran and UAE
Common service centres up from 84k to 3 Lakh
OROP implemented after 43 years, 35000 crores disbursed to 8 crore veterans
India's vaccination programme Indradhanush amongst 12 best practices of world
5035 Jan Aushadhi and - 1054 medicines under price control (60-90% discounts).
More than 150 Amrit stores, reduction of cost of cromium cobalt Knee implant from 1.58-2.5 lakh to 54,720 and high flex implant from Rs181728 to 56490 (69%), 85% reduction in cardiac stent price to Rs 28000
87% reduction in 400 cancer drugs
Rate of Interest on higher education loans dropped from 14.75 in 2013 to 10.88% in 2019, savings of 1.18 lakh on 10 lakh loan over tenure of 60 months, Rs 2000 savings on EMI
Data revolution: Cost of 1 GB $0.26 in India against $12.37 in US, $6.66 in UK and $75.2 in Zimbabwe. Unlimited mobile+ 45 Gb data = Rs 150 against Rs 1000 in 2013; annual savings of 10,200
Katra rail line work completed after 16 years
Dhola Sadiya bridge work completed after 16 years
Sardar Sarovar Dam work completed after 15 years
Aadhaar act
Pakyong airport completed after 10 years
Chennai Nashri Tunnel after 10 years
Assam NRC after 40 years
National War Memorial after 50 years
NE cpas after 60 years
Kollam bypass after 43 years
Indo-Bangladesh enclaves after 42 years
Bansagar canal project after 40 years
Bogibeel bridge after 23 years
Western peri expressway after 15 years
Kota Chambal bridge after 11 years
Maibang-Lumding Stretch completed
Delhi Meerut Expressway completed
Ganga Expressway project (world's longest) underway
Metros in Ahmedabad, Nagpur, Jaipur, Lucknow, Washermenpet
All umanned level crossings eliminated
Ayushman Bharat: annual 5 lakh health care to every family, 15.05 lakh hospital admissions for secondary/ tertiary treatment, 2.4 crore e-cards generated as on 10 Mar 19 in 170 days. Target 50 crore people.
59minutes loan portal: 92,000 loan applications of MSME amounting to 30,000 crores approved, 6000 crores sanctioned till Nov 18
87% of farming house (owning land of 2 hctrs) or 12 cr ppl to get kisaan sammaan nidhi of Rs 6000 pr year. Rs 5215 cr transferred directly to 2.6 crore farmers in 37 days (for households with holding less than 0.01 hectares incm per month so far was Rs 8136 agnst exp of 6594
1.5 million electric rickshaws
Procurement of 36 Rafale on Government to Government Basis avoiding middlemen
05 billion$ S 400 Triumf air defence missile system deal with Russia
145 M777 howitzer deal
22 Apache AH 64E multi-role combat helos
200 KA-226T helicopters
56 EADS CASA C-295 transport aircraft
15 CH 47 Chinook tactical transport helicopters
2.3 lakh Bullet proof jackets
1.6 lakh Bullet-proof helmets
777 mn USD Barak 8 LRSAM contract
5 bn USD S-400 air defence systems
10 Heron TP armed drones
4 additional P8I MR aircraft
40 units of Laser sensor border fence installed
72,400 Sig Sauer Assault rifles
100 self-propelled K9 Vajra howitzers
700000 AK-103 Kalashnikov assault rifles indigenous facility
Surgical strikes in Myanmar, across LoC and in Pakistan. Only Country to bomb a Nuclear Powered Country
240 million visitors at Kumbh Mela 2019, cost 4236 crores @ Rs 177 per tourist, revenue 1.2 Lakh crores
833 teraflop supercomputer Param Shivay by IIT BHU at Rs 32.5 crores
Divisional status to Ladakh
470 bed ESIC hospital in Ennore
100 bed ESIC hospital in Tiruppur
Namami Gange - Ganga is 30% cleaner, 83 out of 97 ganga towns and 4456 villages achieved ODF status, 08 out of 16 drains emptying 16 crore l sewage into Ganga tapped. Target date Mar 2020
5,45,122 ODF villages, 598 ODF districts, 27 ODF states/ villages
RERA implementation
Udaan scheme - flight cost down from Rs 5000/1000 km in 2013 to 3400/1000 km in 2018, 34 airports operationalised, small towns connected, all states on aerial
Preventive conservation of 39275570 folios, curative conservation of 3656863 filios, digitisation of 2.83 lakh manuscripts consisting of 2.93 crore pages
India is now world's largest 2-wheeler manufacturer, 2nd largest smartphone manufacturer (94% of mobiles sold now made in India), 4th largest automaker, 2nd largest steel producer
5100 m Mandvi Bridge in Goa in 3.5 years
Ease of doing Business ranking jump from 134 in 2014 to 77 in 2019
Therubali - Singapur Bridge No 588
Restoration of Asurgarh Fort, Kalahandi
GeM portal with 731431 product categories, 180,862 registered sellers and 32114 govt buyers
10% EWS reservation
40% of ongoing 700 NH projects completed, adding 40,039 km between 2014-18 against 91,287 km between 1947-2014
Highway construction rate jumped from 12 km/day in 2014 to 27 km/day in 2019
101 terrorists and 11 offenders extradited
90,000 ex-partite Indians evacuated
Chabahar port, Sittwe port and Duqm port
Military installation in Seychelles
International logistics agreements with US, France and Singapore
Work underway on 25 MLD ZLD Common Effluent Treatment Plant at Gujarat Eco Textile Park and will save 25 million litres of water per day
Beautification of 65 railway stations, all stations fitted with LED lights, wi-fi, multi-brand food centres, kiosks, executive lounges, lifts (445 from 97 in 2014), escalators (603 from 199 in 2014), travellators and ramps
Record number of foot over bridges built
871 new train services
180 new rail lines
Dedicated railway freight corridor - 2 sections completed
100% electrification of railways underway, first solar powered railway station (Guwahati). First solar powered train (world's second), savings of Rs 40 Lakhs and 90,000 ltrs diesel per year
Make in India semi-high-speed trains - Tejas, Gatiman and Vande Bharat
Humsafar and Antodaya trains, Deen Dayalu and Anubhuti coaches, UDAY double decker, glass dome Vistadome coaches
Project Swarn and Project Utkrisht to upgrade Rajdhani/Shatabdi and Mail/Express respectively
Largest coach production in world at ICF, Chennai
No more human extreta on railway tracks. Installation of 1.37 lakh out of 2.5 lakh completed in Jun 18.
400 wi-fi railway stations (Aug 18)
80% reduction in rail accidents
10 high speed rail corridors underway, target date 2025-26
Export of world class customised coaches from MCF, Rae Bareli
LIC and Air India register profit
2300 km rail tracks constructed, speed jumped from 4.1 km/day in 2014 to 6.53 km/day in 2018
Neem coating of urea
Gokul mission - record 160 million ton milk production
Online availability of CBSE and NCERT books
10 crore LED bulbs distributed, 5000 crore savings
Investment in urban infrastructure jumped from 157703 crores to 795500 crores
Statue of Unity to commemorate Iron Man of India
Rs 2509 crore sales in Khadi
482.36 million digital transactions worth Rs 74,978 crores in Oct 2018 against 0.3 million transactions worth Rs 90 crores in Nov 2016
30% increase in ATMs, 208% increase of PoS machines from 10.81 lakh in May 14 to 33.32 lakh in Aug 18, 111% increase in credit cards from 1.94 crore in May 14 to 4.10 crore in Aug 18, 144% increase in debit cards from 40.17 crore to 98.02 crore
Ease of Doing Business Index 142 (2014) to 100 (2018)
Ease of getting electricity index 99 (2014) to 26 (2018)
UN's e-govt index 118 (2014) to 97(2018)
Globalisation index 112 to 107 (2018)
Innovation index 76 to 60 (2018)
Competitiveness index 71 to 39
Logistics performance index 54 to 35
Global peace index 141 to 137
DBR ranking 100 to 77
India ranks 3rd in global start up ecosystem
06 crore jobs in MSME sector based on CII data
448 million formal jobs based on EPFO, NPS and PPF data
10 crore jobs in entrepreneurship via mudra and other schemes
80% increase in tax payers, 51.3 % increase in gross tax revenue
Black Money report card - Voluntary income declaration scheme (Rs 65250 crore), IT search and survey operations (35,460 crore), Pradhan Mantri Garib Kalyan Yojana(5000 crore), Benami transactions Act (4300 crore), Black Money and Imposition of Tax Act (4100 crore)

800 km Delhi-Mumbai Expressway underway
Replacement of bio-toilets with upgraded vacuum bio toilets in trains underway. Order for 500 placed on experimental basis.
No terror strikes in hinterland
103 new KVs
62 new Navodaya Vidyalayas
6 new IITs against 16 in previous 57 years
6 new IIMs against 13 in previous 57 years
7 IIITs against 7 in previous 57 years
02 new IISER
12 new AIIMS against 7 in previous 57 years.
141 new universities against 30 in previous 57 years
01 new NIT
Life Insurances @ Rs 12 annual and @ Rs 12 monthly premiums
Atal Pension Yojana
Pension to 42 crore people of unorganised sector
Ambedkar memorial
BHIM application for digital payments
Khelo India Initiative for tracking of athletes' development, Rs 5 lk per annum scholarship for 1000 budding athletes per year for eight years each; monthly Rs 50000 out-of -pocket exptr, 2000 PETs, salary cap of coaches doubled from Rs 1-2 lk per month, target 15 yrs
Special Task Force for Olympics
RERA Act
Bullet train maiden project

36 murtis retrieved and brought back to India in 2014-2019 under India Pride Project against 02 between 2000-2013, 02 in 90s, 03 in 80s, 01 in 70s and nil in 50s and 60s
Unemployment rate 3.8% against 13.8 % in 2013
India is a less-cash society now
Develpment of Trincomalee and Columbo port while checkmating China's Hambantota by taking operations of near by (15 km away) Mattala Rajapaksha International Airport
Plugging the 'double taxation avoidance' black money loophole through a new tax agreement with Mauritius
Deal with Switzerland for automatic tax data sharing from 01 Jan 2019

Creation of 100 Smart cities, 100 crore per year per city for 05 years, 500 acres for retrofitting, 50 acres for redevelopment, 250 acres for green field projects, 10% of energy from renewable resources, 80% of green building construction, special purpose vehicles.

Increase in Child Sex Ratio (CSR) in 104 BBBP (Beti Bachao Beti Padhao) districts, anti-natal care registration in 119 districts and institutional deliveries in 146 out of total 640 districts as in Mar 18. CSR of Haryana increased from 871 to 914.
International Yoga Day
Aspirational Districts Programme: 115 'backward' districts placed under 'prabharis' and for competitive development on the basis of 49 performance indicators, target year 2022.

251 Passport Seva Kendras (PSKs) and Post Office Passport Seva kendras (POPSKs) against 77 till 2014, target of one PSK every 50 km across India.
Unanimous election of Justice Dalveer Bhandari to ICJ forcing UK to pull out own nominee Christopher Greenwood, demonstrating India's clout in international arena.
India Post Payments Bank: India's biggest banking outreach with 1.55 lakh post offices (2.5 times banking network) linked to IPPB system
Philip Kotler award, Seoul Peace prize, Champion of the Earth Award, Grand Collar of the State of Palestine, Amir Abdulla Khan Award, King Abdulaziz Sash award, Amir Amanullah Khan award.
1900 gifts and memorabilia received by Modi auctioned and 11.7 crores added to Namami Gange fund, 1.4 c of Seoul Peace award also to Nammami Gange.

addaff

Trump Didn’t Kill the Global Trade System. He Split It in Two.

This article is taken from the Wall Street Journal written about nine months ago and sits behind a a paywall, so I decided to copy and paste it here. This article explains Trump's policies toward global trade and what has actually happened so far. I think the article does a decent job of explaining the Trade War. While alot has happenedsince the article was written, I still think its relevant.
However, what is lacking in the article, like many articles on the trade war, is it doesn't really explain the history of US trade policy, the laws that the US administration is using to place tariffs on China and the official justification for the US President in enacting tariffs against China. In my analysis I will cover those points.

SUMMARY

When Trump entered the White House people feared he would dismantle the global system the US and its allies had built over the last 75 years, but he hasn't. He has realign into two systems. One between the US and its allies which looks similar to the one built since the 1980s with a few of quota and tariffs. As the article points out

Today, Korus and Nafta have been replaced by updated agreements(one not yet ratified) that look much like the originals. South Korea accepted quotas on steel. Mexico and Canada agreed to higher wages, North American content requirements and quotas for autos. Furthermore, the article points out Douglas Irwin, an economist and trade historian at Dartmouth College, calls these results the “status quo with Trumpian tweaks: a little more managed trade sprinkled about for favored industries. It’s not good, but it’s not the destruction of the system.” Mr. Trump’s actions so far affect only 12% of U.S. imports, according to Chad Bown of the Peterson Institute for International Economics. In 1984, 21% of imports were covered by similar restraints, many imposed by Mr. Reagan, such as on cars, steel, motorcycles and clothing. Protectionist instincts go so far in the US, there are strong lobby groups for both protectionist and freetrade in the US.

The second reflects a emerging rivalry between the US and China. Undo some of the integration that followed China accession to the WTO. Two questions 1) How far is the US willing to decouple with China 2) Can it persuade allies to join.

The second is going to be difficult because China's economic ties are greater than they were between the Soviets, and China isn't waging an ideological struggle. Trump lacks Reagan commitment to alliance and free trade. The status quo with China is crumbling Dan Sullivan, a Republican senator from Alaska, personifies these broader forces reshaping the U.S. approach to the world. When Mr. Xi visited the U.S. in 2015, Mr. Sullivan urged his colleagues to pay more attention to China’s rise. On the Senate floor, he quoted the political scientist Graham Allison: “War between the U.S. and China is more likely than recognized at the moment.” Last spring, Mr. Sullivan went to China and met officials including Vice President Wang Qishan. They seemed to think tensions with the U.S. will fade after Mr. Trump leaves the scene, Mr. Sullivan recalled. “I just said, ‘You are completely misreading this.’” The mistrust, he told them, is bipartisan, and will outlast Mr. Trump. both Bush II and Obama tried to change dialogue and engagement, but by the end of his term, Obama was questioning the approach. Trump has declared engagement. “We don’t like it when our allies steal our ideas either, but it’s a much less dangerous situation,” said Derek Scissors, a China expert at the American Enterprise Institute whose views align with the administration’s more hawkish officials. “We’re not worried about the war-fighting capability of Japan and Korea because they’re our friends.”

The article also points out unlike George Kennan in 1946 who made a case for containing the Soviet Union, the US hasn't explicitly made a case for containing the Soviets, Trump's administration hasn't, because as the the article explains its divided Michael Pillsbury a Hudson Institute scholar close to the Trump team, see 3 scenarios

New Cold War with drastically reduced economic ties
China resolve their tensions, integrate and run the world together
Transactional US-China relationship of the sort during the 1980s

Pillsbury thinks the third is most likely to happen, even though the administration hasn't said that it has adopted that policy. The US is stepping efforts to draw in other trading partners. The US, EU and Japan have launched a WTO effort to crack down on domestic subsidies and technology transfers requirement. US and Domestic concerns with prompted some countries to restrict Huawei. The US is also seeking to walloff China from other trade deals. However, there are risk with this strategy

Other countries like Japan and South Korea to dependent on China. Too integrated.
Raise objections to Belt and Road. But no alternative
The administration is not up to the task

ARTICLE

Trump Didn’t Kill the Global Trade System. He Split It in Two.

INTRODUCTION

My main criticism of this article is it tries like the vast majority of articles to fit US trade actions in the larger context of US geopolitical strategy. Even the author isn't certain "The first goes to the heart of Mr. Trump’s goal. If his aim is to hold back China’s advance, economists predict he will fail.". If you try to treat the trade "war" and US geopolitical strategy toward China as one, you will find yourself quickly frustrated and confused. If you treat them separately with their different set of stakeholders and histories, were they intersect with regards to China, but diverge. During the Cold War, trade policy toward the Soviet Union and Eastern Bloc was subordinated to geopolitical concerns. For Trump, the trade issues are more important than geopolitical strategy. His protectionist trade rhetoric has been fairly consistent since 1980s. In his administration, the top cabinet members holding economic portfolios, those of Commerce, Treasury and US Trade Representative are the same people he picked when he first took office. The Director of the Economic Council has changed hands once, its role isn't as important as the National Security Advisor. While State, Defense, CIA, Homeland Security, UN Ambassador, National Security Advisor have changed hands at least once. Only the Director of National Intelligence hasn't changed.
International Trade makes up 1/4 of the US economy, and like national security its primarily the responsibility of the Federal government. States in the US don't implement their own tariffs. If you add the impact of Treasury policy and how it relates to capital flows in and out of the US, the amounts easily exceed the size of the US economy. Furthermore, because of US Dollar role as the reserve currency and US control of over global system the impact of Treasury are global. Trade policy and investment flows runs through two federal departments Commerce and Treasury and for trade also USTR. Defense spending makes up 3.3% of GDP, and if you add in related homeland security its at most 4%. Why would anyone assume that these two realms be integrated let alone trade policy subordinate to whims of a national security bureaucracy in most instances? With North Korea or Iran, trade and investment subordinate themselves to national security, because to Treasury and Commerce bureaucrats and their affiliated interest groups, Iran and the DPRK are well, economic midgets, but China is a different matter.
The analysis will be divided into four sections. The first will be to provide a brief overview of US trade policy since 1914. The second section will discuss why the US is going after China on trade issues, and why the US has resorted using a bilateral approach as opposed to going through the WTO. The third section we will talk about how relations with China is hashed out in the US.
The reason why I submitted this article, because there aren't many post trying to explain US-China Trade War from a trade perspective. Here is a post titled "What is the Reasons for America's Trade War with China, and not one person mentioned Article 301 or China's WTO Commitments. You get numerous post saying that Huawei is at heart of the trade war. Its fine, but if you don't know what was inside the USTR Investigative report that lead to the tariffs. its like skipping dinner and only having dessert When the US President, Donald J Trump, says he wants to negotiate a better trade deal with other countries, and has been going on about for the last 35 years, longer than many of you have been alive, why do people think that the key issues with China aren't primarily about trade at the moment.

OVERVIEW OF THE UNITED STATES TRADE ORIENTATION

Before 1940s, the US could be categorized as a free market protectionist economy. For many this may seem like oxymoron, how can an economy be free market and protectionist? In 1913, government spending made up about 7.5% of US GDP, in the UK it was 13%, and for Germany 18% (Public Spending in the 20th Century A Global Perspective: Ludger Schuknecht and Vito Tanzi - 2000). UK had virtual zero tariffs, while for manufactured goods in France it was 20%, 13% Germany, 9% Belgium and 4% Netherlands. For raw materials and agricultural products, it was almost zero. In contrast, for the likes of United States, Russia and Japan it was 44%, 84% and 30% respectively. Even though in 1900 United States was an economic powerhouse along with Germany, manufactured exports only made up 30% of exports, and the US government saw tariffs as exclusively a domestic policy matter and didn't see tariffs as something to be negotiated with other nations. The US didn't have the large constituency to push the government for lower tariffs abroad for their exports like in Britain in the 1830-40s (Reluctant Partners: A History of Multilateral Trade Cooperation, 1850-2000).
The Underwood Tariffs Act of 1913 which legislated the income tax, dropped the tariffs to 1850 levels levels.Until 16th amendment was ratified in 1913 making income tax legal, all US federal revenue came from excise and tariffs. In contrast before 1914, about 50% of UK revenue came from income taxes. The reason for US reluctance to introduced income tax was ideological and the United State's relative weak government compared to those in Europe. After the First World War, the US introduced the Emergency Tariff Act of 1921, than the Fordney–McCumber Tariff of 1922 followed by a Smoot-Hawley Act of 1930. Contrary to popular opinion, the Smoot-Hawley Act of 1930 had a small negative impact on the economy, since imports and exports played a small part of the US economy, and the tariffs were lower than the average that existed from 1850-1914.
Immediately after the Second World War, when the US economy was the only industrialized economy left standing, the economic focus was on rehabilitation and monetary stability. There was no grandiose and ideological design. Bretton Woods system linked the US dollar to gold to create monetary stability, and to avoid competitive devaluation and tariffs that plagued the world economy after Britain took itself off the gold in 1931. The US$ was the natural choice, because in 1944 2/3 of the world's gold was in the US. One reason why the Marshall Plan was created was to alleviate the chronic deficits Europeans countries had with the US between 1945-50. It was to rebuild their economies so they could start exports good to the US. Even before it was full implemented in 1959, it was already facing problems, the trade surpluses that the US was running in the 1940s, turned to deficits as European and Japanese economies recovered. By 1959, Federal Reserves foreign liabilities had already exceeded its gold reserves. There were fears of a run on the US gold supply and arbitrage. A secondary policy of the Bretton woods system was curbs on capital outflows to reduce speculation on currency pegs, and this had a negative impact on foreign investment until it was abandoned in 1971. It wasn't until the 1980s, where foreign investment recovered to levels prior to 1914. Factoring out the big spike in global oil prices as a result of the OPEC cartel, it most likely wasn't until the mid-1990s that exports as a % of GDP had reached 1914 levels.
Until the 1980s, the US record regarding free trade and markets was mediocre. The impetus to remove trade barriers in Europe after the Second World War was driven by the Europeans themselves. The EEC already had a custom union in 1968, Canada and the US have yet to even discuss implementing one. Even with Canada it took the US over 50 years to get a Free Trade Agreement. NAFTA was inspired by the success of the EEC. NAFTA was very much an elite driven project. If the Americans put the NAFTA to a referendum like the British did with the EEC in the seventies, it most likely wouldn't pass. People often look at segregation in the US South as a political issue, but it was economic issue as well. How could the US preach free trade, when it didn't have free trade in its own country. Segregation was a internal non-tariff barrier. In the first election after the end of the Cold War in 1992, Ross Perot' based most of independent run for the Presidency on opposition to NAFTA. He won 19% of the vote. Like Ross Perot before him, Donald Trump is not the exception in how America has handled tariffs since the founding of the Republic, but more the norm.
The embrace of free trade by the business and political elite can be attributed to two events. After the end of Bretton Woods in 1971, a strong vested interest in the US in the form of multinationals and Wall Street emerged advocating for removal of tariffs and more importantly the removal of restrictions on free flow of capital, whether direct foreign investment in portfolio investment. However, the political class embrace of free trade and capital only really took off after the collapse of the Soviet Union propelled by Cold War triumphalism.
As mentioned by the article, the US is reverting back to a pre-WTO relations with China. As Robert Lighthizer said in speech in 2000

I guess my prescription, really, is to move back to more of a negotiating kind of a settlement. Return to WTO and what it really was meant to be. Something where you have somebody make a decision but have it not be binding.

The US is using financial and legal instruments developed during the Cold War like its extradition treaties (with Canada and Europe), and Section 301. Here is a very good recent article about enforcement commitment that China will make.‘Painful’ enforcement ahead for China if trade war deal is reached with US insisting on unilateral terms
NOTE: It is very difficult to talk about US-China trade war without a basic knowledge of global economic history since 1914. What a lot of people do is politicize or subordinate the economic history to the political. Some commentators think US power was just handed to them after the Second World War, when the US was the only industrialized economy left standing. The dominant position of the US was temporary and in reality its like having 10 tonnes of Gold sitting in your house, it doesn't automatically translate to influence. The US from 1945-1989 was slowly and gradually build her influence in the non-Communist world. For example, US influence in Canada in the 1960s wasn't as strong as it is now. Only 50% of Canadian exports went to the US in 1960s vs 80% at the present moment.

BASIS OF THE US TRADE DISCUSSION WITH CHINA

According to preliminary agreement between China and the US based on unnamed sources in the Wall Street Journal article US, China close in on Trade Deal. In this article it divides the deal in two sections. The first aspects have largely to do with deficits and is political.

As part of a deal, China is pledging to help level the playing field, including speeding up the timetable for removing foreign-ownership limitations on car ventures and reducing tariffs on imported vehicles to below the current auto tariff of 15%. Beijing would also step up purchases of U.S. goods—a tactic designed to appeal to President Trump, who campaigned on closing the bilateral trade deficit with China. One of the sweeteners would be an $18 billion natural-gas purchase from Cheniere Energy Inc., people familiar with the transaction said.

The second part will involve the following.

Commitment Regarding Industrial Policy
Provisions to protect IP
Mechanism which complaints by US companies can be addressed
Bilateral meetings adjudicate disputes. If talks don't produce agreement than US can raise tariffs unilaterally

This grouping of conditions is similar to the points filled under the 301 investigation which serve the basis for initiating the tariffs. I have been reading some sources that say this discussion on this second group of broader issues could only be finalized later
The official justifications for placing the tariffs on Chinese goods is found under the March 2018 investigation submitted by the office of the President to Congress titled FINDINGS OF THE INVESTIGATION INTO CHINA’S ACTS, POLICIES, AND PRACTICES RELATED TO TECHNOLOGY TRANSFER, INTELLECTUAL PROPERTY, AND INNOVATION UNDER SECTION 301 OF THE TRADE ACT OF 1974. From this investigation the United States Trade Representative (USTR) place US Tariffs on Chinese goods as per Section 301 of the Trade Act of 1974. Here is a press release by the USTR listing the reasons for placing tariffs, and the key section from the press release. Specifically, the Section 301 investigation revealed:

China uses joint venture requirements, foreign investment restrictions, and administrative review and licensing processes to require or pressure technology transfer from U.S. companies.
China deprives U.S. companies of the ability to set market-based terms in licensing and other technology-related negotiations.
China directs and unfairly facilitates the systematic investment in, and acquisition of, U.S. companies and assets to generate large-scale technology transfer.
China conducts and supports cyber intrusions into U.S. commercial computer networks to gain unauthorized access to commercially valuable business information.

In the bigger context of trade relations between US and China, China is not honoring its WTO commitments, and the USTR issued its yearly report to Congress in early February about the status of China compliance with its WTO commitments. The points that served as a basis for applying Section 301, also deviate from her commitments as Clinton's Trade Representative Charlene Barshefsky paving the way for a trade war. Barshefsky argues that China's back sliding was happening as early as 2006-07, and believes the trade war could have been avoided has those commitments been enforced by previous administrations.
I will provide a brief overview of WTO membership and China's process of getting into the WTO.
WTO members can be divided into two groups, first are countries that joined in 1995-97, and were members of GATT, than there are the second group that joined after 1997. China joined in 2001. There is an argument that when China joined in 2001, she faced more stringent conditions than other developing countries that joined before, because the vast majority of developing countries were members of GATT, and were admitted to the WTO based on that previous membership in GATT. Here is Brookings Institute article published in 2001 titled "Issues in China’s WTO Accession"

This question is all the more puzzling because the scope and depth of demands placed on entrants into the formal international trading system have increased substantially since the formal conclusion of the Uruguay Round of trade negotiations in 1994, which expanded the agenda considerably by covering many services, agriculture, intellectual property, and certain aspects of foreign direct investment. Since 1994, the international community has added agreements covering information technology, basic telecommunications services, and financial services. WTO membership now entails liberalization of a much broader range of domestic economic activity, including areas that traditionally have been regarded by most countries as among the most sensitive, than was required of countries entering the WTO’s predecessor organization the GATT.
The terms of China’s protocol of accession to the World Trade Organization reflect the developments just described and more. China’s market access commitments are much more far-reaching than those that governed the accession of countries only a decade ago. And, as a condition for membership, China was required to make protocol commitments that substantially exceed those made by any other member of the World Trade Organization, including those that have joined since 1995. The broader and deeper commitments China has made inevitably will entail substantial short-term economic costs.

What are the WTO commitments Barshefsky goes on about? When countries join the WTO, particularly those countries that weren't members of GATT and joined after 1997, they have to work toward fulfilling certain commitments. There are 4 key documents when countries make an accession to WTO membership, the working party report, the accession protocol paper, the goods schedule and service schedule.
In the working party report as part of the conclusion which specifies the commitment of each member country what they will do in areas that aren't compliant with WTO regulations on the date they joined. The problem there is no good enforcement mechanism for other members to force China to comply with these commitments. And WTO punishments are weak.
Here is the commitment paragraph for China
"The Working Party took note of the explanations and statements of China concerning its foreign trade regime, as reflected in this Report. The Working Party took note of the commitments given by China in relation to certain specific matters which are reproduced in paragraphs 18-19, 22-23, 35-36, 40, 42, 46-47, 49, 60, 62, 64, 68, 70, 73, 75, 78-79, 83-84, 86, 91-93, 96, 100-103, 107, 111, 115-117, 119-120, 122-123, 126-132, 136, 138, 140, 143, 145, 146, 148, 152, 154, 157, 162, 165, 167-168, 170-174, 177-178, 180, 182, 184-185, 187, 190-197, 199-200, 203-207, 210, 212-213, 215, 217, 222-223, 225, 227-228, 231-235, 238, 240-242, 252, 256, 259, 263, 265, 270, 275, 284, 286, 288, 291, 292, 296, 299, 302, 304-305, 307-310, 312-318, 320, 322, 331-334, 336, 339 and 341 of this Report and noted that these commitments are incorporated in paragraph 1.2 of the Draft Protocol. "
This is a tool by the WTO that list all the WTO commitment of each country in the working paper. In the goods and service schedule they have commitments for particular sectors. Here is the a press release by the WTO in September 2001, after successfully concluding talks for accession, and brief summary of key areas in which China hasn't fulfilled her commitments. Most of the commitments made by China were made to address its legacy as a non-market economy and involvement of state owned enterprises. In my opinion, I think the US government and investors grew increasingly frustrated with China, after 2007 not just because of China's back sliding, but relative to other countries who joined after 1997 like Vietnam, another non-market Leninist dictatorship. When comparing China's commitments to the WTO its best to compare her progress with those that joined after 1997, which were mostly ex-Soviet Republics.
NOTE: The Chinese media have for two decades compared any time the US has talked about China's currency manipulation or any other issue as a pretext for imposing tariffs on China to the Plaza Accords. I am very sure people will raise it here. My criticism of this view is fourfold. First, the US targeted not just Japan, but France, Britain and the UK as well. Secondly, the causes of the Japan lost decade were due largely to internal factors. Thirdly, Japan, UK, Britain and France in the 1980s, the Yuan isn't undervalued today. Lastly, in the USTR investigation, its China's practices that are the concern, not so much the trade deficit.

REASONS FOR TRUMPS UNILATERAL APPROACH

I feel that people shouldn't dismiss Trump's unilateral approach toward China for several reasons.

The multilateral approach won't work in many issues such as the trade deficit, commercial espionage and intellectual property, because US and her allies have different interest with regard to these issues. Germany and Japan and trade surpluses with China, while the US runs a deficit. In order to reach a consensus means the West has to compromise among themselves, and the end result if the type of toothless resolutions you commonly find in ASEAN regarding the SCS. Does America want to "compromise" its interest to appease a politician like Justin Trudeau? Not to mention opposition from domestic interest. TPP was opposed by both Clinton and Trump during the election.
You can't launch a geopolitical front against China using a newly formed trade block like the TPP. Some of the existing TPP members are in economic groups with China, like Malaysia and Australia.
China has joined a multitude of international bodies, and at least in trade, these bodies haven't changed its behavior.
Dealing with China, its a no win situation whether you use a tough multilateral / unilateral approach. If the US endorse a tough unilateral approach gives the impression that the US is acting like the British during the Opium War. If you take a concerted Western approach you are accused of acting like the 8 Powers Alliance in 1900.
Trump was elected to deal with China which he and his supporters believe was responsible for the loss of millions manufacturing jobs when China joined the WTO in 2001. It is estimate the US lost 6 Million jobs, about 1/4 of US manufacturing Jobs. This has been subsequently advanced by some economists. The ball got rolling when Bill Clinton decided to grant China Most Favored Nation status in 1999, just a decade after Tiananmen.
China hasn't dealt with issues like IP protection, market access, subsidies to state own companies and state funded industrial spying.

To his credit, Trump has said his aim was not to overthrow authoritarian governments, and that even applies to the likes of Iran. The Arab spring scared Russia and China, because the US for a brief moment placed the spread of democracy over its security interest.

UNDERSTANDING HOW THE US MAKES DECISIONS REGARDING CHINA

At this moment, China or the trade war isn't an area of great concern for the American public, among international issues it ranks lower than international terrorism, North Korea and Iran's nuclear program.

According to the survey, 39 percent of the country views China’s growing power as a “critical threat” to Americans. That ranked it only eighth among 12 potential threats listed and placed China well behind the perceived threats from international terrorism (66 percent), North Korea’s nuclear program (59 percent) and Iran’s nuclear program (52 percent). It’s also considerably lower than when the same question was asked during the 1990s, when more than half of those polled listed China as a critical threat. That broadly tracks with a recent poll from the Pew Research Center that found concern about U.S.-China economic issues had decreased since 2012.

In looking at how US conducts relations foreign policy with China, we should look at it from the three areas of most concern - economic, national security and ideology. Each sphere has their interest groups, and sometimes groups can occupy two spheres at once. Security experts are concerned with some aspects of China's economic actions like IP theft and industrial policy (China 2025), because they are related to security. In these sphere there are your hawks and dove. And each sphere is dominated by certain interest groups. That is why US policy toward China can often appear contradictory. You have Trump want to reduce the trade deficit, but security experts advocating for restrictions on dual use technology who are buttressed by people who want export restrictions on China, as a way of getting market access.
Right now the economic concerns are most dominant, and the hawks seem to dominate. The economic hawks traditionally have been domestic manufacturing companies and economic nationalist. In reality the hawks aren't dominant, but the groups like US Companies with large investment in China and Wall Street are no longer defending China, and some have turned hawkish against China. These US companies are the main conduit in which China's lobby Congress, since China only spends 50% of what Taiwan spends lobbying Congress.
THE ANGLO SAXON WORLD AND CHINA
I don't think many Chinese even those that speak English, have a good understanding Anglo-Saxon society mindset. Anglo Saxons countries, whether US, UK, Canada, Australia, New Zealand and Ireland are commerce driven society governed by sanctity of contracts. The English great philosophical contributions to Western philosophy have primarily to do with economics and politics like Adam Smith, John Locke, David Hume and Thomas Hobbes. This contrast with the French and Germans. Politics in the UK and to a lesser extent the US, is centered around economics, while in Mainland Europe its religion. When the Americans revolted against the British Empire in 1776, the initial source of the grievances were taxes.
Outside of East Asia, the rest of the World's relationship with China was largely commercial, and for United States, being an Anglosaxon country, even more so. In Southeast Asia, Chinese aren't known for high culture, but for trade and commerce. Outside Vietnam, most of Chinese loans words in Southeast Asian languages involve either food or money. The influence is akin to Yiddish in English.
Some people point to the Mao and Nixon meeting as great strategic breakthrough and symbol of what great power politics should look like. The reality is that the Mao-Nixon meeting was an anomaly in the long history of relations with China and the West. Much of China-Western relations over the last 500 years was conducted by multitudes of nameless Chinese and Western traders. The period from 1949-1979 was the only period were strategic concerns triumphed trade, because China had little to offer except instability and revolution. Even in this period, China's attempt to spread revolution in Southeast Asia was a threat to Western investments and corporate interest in the region. During the nadir of both the Qing Dynasty and Republican period, China was still engaged in its traditional commercial role. Throughout much of history of their relations with China, the goals of Britain and the United States were primarily economic,
IMAGINE JUST 10% OF CHINA BOUGHT MY PRODUCT
From the beginning, the allure of China to Western businesses and traders has been its sheer size I. One of the points that the USTR mentions is lack of market access for US companies operating in China, while Chinese companies face much less restrictions operating in the US.

China uses joint venture requirements, foreign investment restrictions, and administrative review and licensing processes to require or pressure technology transfer from U.S. companies.
China deprives U.S. companies of the ability to set market-based terms in licensing and other technology-related negotiations.

This is supported by remarks by Henry Paulson and Charlene Barshefsky. As Paulson remarked

Trade with China has hurt some American workers. And they have expressed their grievances at the ballot box.
So while many attribute this shift to the Trump Administration, I do not. What we are now seeing will likely endure for some time within the American policy establishment. China is viewed—by a growing consensus—not just as a strategic challenge to the United States but as a country whose rise has come at America’s expense. In this environment, it would be helpful if the US-China relationship had more advocates. That it does not reflects another failure:
In large part because China has been slow to open its economy since it joined the WTO, the American business community has turned from advocate to skeptic and even opponent of past US policies toward China. American business doesn’t want a tariff war but it does want a more aggressive approach from our government. How can it be that those who know China best, work there, do business there, make money there, and have advocated for productive relations in the past, are among those now arguing for more confrontation? The answer lies in the story of stalled competition policy, and the slow pace of opening, over nearly two decades. This has discouraged and fragmented the American business community. And it has reinforced the negative attitudinal shift among our political and expert classes. In short, even though many American businesses continue to prosper in China, a growing number of firms have given up hope that the playing field will ever be level. Some have accepted the Faustian bargain of maximizing today’s earnings per share while operating under restrictions that jeopardize their future competitiveness. But that doesn’t mean they’re happy about it. Nor does it mean they aren’t acutely aware of the risks — or thinking harder than ever before about how to diversify their risks away from, and beyond, China.

What is interesting about Paulson's speech is he spend only one sentence about displaced US workers, and a whole paragraph about US business operating in China. While Kissinger writes books about China, how much does he contribute to both Democrats and the Republicans during the election cycle? China is increasingly makING it more difficult for US companies operating and those exporting products to China.

CONTINUED

EU financial transaction tax will hit FX users hard -report. 3 Min Read * Costs could rise by 700 percent for businesses * Fear of drag on trade as Europe seeks to exit crisis * FTT would not ... The financial transaction tax is a bad idea whose time probably hasn’t come. Congressional Democrats have proposed a 0.1% levy on transactions of stocks, bonds, and derivatives that they say ... Legal Advice Deals Blow to EU's Financial Transaction Tax Sep 12 2013 By Forexbrokerz.com Forexbrokerz.com The Legal Service of the Council of the European Union (EU) has recently issued a paper , in which it slams a proposed directive regarding the financial transaction tax (FTT) in the bloc. The critical tax question for most retail off-exchange forex traders is how to handle spot forex. Guidance from the IRS is uncertain on spot forex. We’ve done extensive work on forex taxation, and spot forex in particular. We believe that in many cases, spot forex can be treated like forex forwards, qualifying for lower 60/40 tax rates in Section 1256(g) on major currency pairs only. If you ... Overview of the Proposed Financial Transaction Tax. Join the iFX EXPO Asia and discover your gateway to the Asian Markets. The financial transaction tax, often referred to as “Tobin tax” after its original advocator, James Tobin, in the 1970s, would impose a levy on individual transactions undertaken by financial institutions. This tax would be payable on all transactions of equities and ... Trade Transaction Tax - The Death Of All Us! 91 replies Financial Transaction Tax - You think it's still possible to win the game? 16 replies Transaction Tax: .025%! 5 replies Transaction 1 – Rs. 5,00,000: No Tax will be collected since the amount is below Rs 7,00,000/- Transaction 2 – Rs 8,00,000: TCS will be applicable on Rs 6,00,000 [(Rs 5,00,000 + Rs 8,00,000 = Rs 13,00,000) – Rs 7,00,000 = Rs 6,00,000] Transaction 3 – Rs 1,50,000: TCS will be applicable on Rs 1,50,000 entirely since Rs 7,00,000 limit has been exceeded in transaction 2 only. Case 2. Now ... If you can table the financial-transaction tax, you can count this number as saved jobs. Rep. Peter DeFazio (D-Ore.) continues to support the tax as a way to pay for a jobs bill he is drafting with Rep. Ed Perlmutter (D-Colo.) titled “Let Wall Street Pay for the Restoration of Main Street Act of 2009.” They are proposing a 0.25-percent tax ... Abstract: We focus on the impact of the French 2012 financial transaction tax (FTT) on trading volumes and volatility. We extend the empirical research by identifying FTT announcement and short-run treatment effects, which can distort difference-in-differences estimates. We also consider long-run volatility measures that better fit the French FTT’s legislative design, the heterogeneity of ... Forex Options and Futures Traders . For tax purposes, forex options and futures contracts are considered IRC Section 1256 contracts, which are subject to a 60/40 tax consideration.In other words ...

TOBiN TAX, WHAT is TOBiN TAX

This video is a continuation of previous video where Burhan sir has taken up the sums of the concepts of Foreign Exchange Transactions. He continues with the... Gambling profits are thus not subject to income tax . The effect is that any profits that are derived are taxes as a bet, not as a financial transaction. In most jurisdictions, this is very ... This online lecture video discusses the concepts and procedures applied in accounting for foreign currency transactions. ... Tax Differences in Financial Accounting - Duration: 7:23. Edspira ... How I Mastered Forex In 1 Year In this video Jay Wayne shows you what it takes to be successful in trading forex. In 1 year he was able to make 15K from a $3... Some say they are highly speculative forms of gambling and therefore not subject to tax. Others say they are similar to other financial derivative products and are treated like any other investment. Learn more here: https://bit.ly/2ShPRPx Here' why you'll never make money in Forex. It's all because of the Forex cycle of doom. Many aspiring traders who ar... At Transaction Advisors M&A conference at the University of Chicago Deloitte tax professionals James Watson, Tax Partner and Lindsay Wietfeld, Tax Senior Manager presented Select Current Events ... A financial transaction tax aimed at preventing speculative capital movements for short-term profit. It is envisaged that the Tobin Tax, in theory, will put an end to exchange rate mobility and ... Forex Trade With Us http://bit.ly/2EYIbgI Email: [email protected] P.S MY INSTAGRAM IS GONE NOW SO IF SOMEBODY WRITES YOU ITS NOT ME ALSO IM NOT ON T...

Why a Financial Transaction Tax Is Doomed to Fail Barron's

ATO Australian tax treatment for options trades 🇦🇺

The Deloitte Report from 2011

ATO Request for Advice

Currency Gains/Losses

Credit Trades

Debit Trades

Other ATO Info (FYI)

Some tips

No, the British did not steal $45 trillion from India

Bibliography

Why Is Brexit Taking So Long Time?

200 achievements of Modi Govt

EQIBank: Global Digital Bank

Digital Asset Custody

EQIBank: Elite banking, card services, and digital asset custody – all on one platform.

Jason Blick

WHAT ARE CFDS?

WHAT ARE CFDS: FEATURES AND BENEFITS

Why is it profitable to trade CFD

If you hodl or trade, you`re the biggest problem with the world of cryptocurrencies.

200 achievements of Modi Govt

addaff

What Is Capitalism?

Capitalism

Understanding Capitalism

KEY TAKEAWAYS

Capitalism and Private Property

Capitalism, Profits, and Losses

Free Enterprise or Capitalism?

Feudalism the Root of Capitalism

Mercantilism Replaces Feudalism

Growth of Industrial Capitalism

Industrial Capitalism's Effects

Capitalism and Economic Growth

Capitalism vs. Socialism

Equity

Efficiency

Employment

Mixed System vs. Pure Capitalism

Crony Capitalism

Start with $30 trading bonus

Trump Didn’t Kill the Global Trade System. He Split It in Two.

SUMMARY

ARTICLE

Trump Didn’t Kill the Global Trade System. He Split It in Two.

INTRODUCTION

OVERVIEW OF THE UNITED STATES TRADE ORIENTATION

BASIS OF THE US TRADE DISCUSSION WITH CHINA

REASONS FOR TRUMPS UNILATERAL APPROACH

UNDERSTANDING HOW THE US MAKES DECISIONS REGARDING CHINA

CONTINUED

TOBiN TAX, WHAT is TOBiN TAX