Connecting the Dots

Trade and National Defense Are Now the Same Thing

July 11, 2017

Removing barriers to international trade has both upside and downside. Donald Trump is now president in part because he focused on the downside: lost US jobs, closed factories, blighted communities.

Even more important, he's fundamentally changing the way government looks at trade policy.

Trade negotiations have long had the implicit goal of promoting peace. It’s a fact that nations with active business relationships rarely attack each other, though the security aspect used to stay mostly unspoken.

Not anymore. President Trump has made it clear that he sees trade and defense as two sides of the same coin… and he’s explicitly demanding trade concessions in exchange for military protection.

Since the president has extensive power over trade policy, foreign governments will have to adapt—as will many within our own government.

We don’t yet know if his new approach will succeed. We do know that Trump intends to try it. For proof, just read his tweets.


Source: AP

Window to Thought

Many people wish Trump would stop tweeting already. I disagree, not because I like his ideas but because I like having this window into his thoughts. It lets us see policy developing from the inside, and almost in real time.

The president frequently talks about both trade and defense—sometimes in the same tweet.

For example, here’s one from April, right after the Mar-a-Lago meeting with Chinese President Xi Jinping. It’s the very definition of “quid pro quo”:

Here’s another one from May, when Trump had Germany on his mind, again killing two birds with one stone:

More recently, President Trump fired off these two tweets just seven minutes apart:

Of course, any president should promote US interests and deal with national-security threats. But misunderstandings in both policy areas can have extremely negative consequences—economic and otherwise. We’d all best hope he does this right.


Source: AP

How to Capitalize

Back in November, right after the election, I wrote a letter called, “The Trump Trade War Already Started.” I showed some of the ways national-security concerns had already set off a low-key trade war.

What you didn’t see, unless you subscribe to Macro Growth & Income Alert, was the simple option play that co-editor Robert Ross and I recommended to capitalize on those very trade trends. I can’t reveal the company but I’ll tell you the strategy.

Point 1: Even pre-Trump, broader forces were already slowing down—and in some ways reversing—globalization’s progress. This will continue no matter what Trump does.

Point 2: As we’ve seen after last week’s G-20 summit, President Trump’s linkage of trade and national security is clearly not playing well in foreign capitals. Any new US trade barriers will draw furious responses. That’s how trade wars begin.

Point 3: The US economy is better equipped to survive a trade war than many others. We have a large population, a diversified industry, and abundant energy supplies.

Point 4: US stocks are a different matter. Most large-cap companies heavily depend on export sales, imported raw materials, or both. A trade war will hit their bottom lines hard.

Point 5: The companies most likely to prosper in a trade war are those with primarily US supply chains and customers.

I use “prosper” in a relative sense here. If we dive into a full-on trade war with governments slapping tariffs on each other, very few businesses will win. But some will have much better odds than others.


Photo: Alessandro Tortoro via Flickr

So, the strategy Robert and I devised involved selling put options on a US-focused company that has shown to be virtually crisis-proof. In fact, the worse the economy, the better this company typically does.

We hope to buy the shares at a lower price if the market weakens, and in the meantime, we’re collecting option premium. Since we first recommended the company, we’ve earned $560 per contract in option income—that’s five times more than the $104 in dividends we would have earned if we had simply bought the stock.

This strategy also works on other stocks. The hard part is identifying a company’s import/export exposure. Maybe you know their component suppliers are in the US—but what about the suppliers’ suppliers? Chasing down that kind of information takes some heavy-duty research.

If you’re a sophisticated investor, you could try this strategy on your own. Or, if you like having someone else do the legwork, check out Macro Growth & Income Alert.

Don’t worry about missing out on the lucrative deal I mentioned. There’s more to come: later this week, we’re sending out a new issue to subscribers, with another option play designed to benefit from trade tensions.

Economic Consequences

International trade is a hybrid of economics and politics. Controlling what and who crosses your borders, and under what conditions, is why governments exist.

Those decisions have economic consequences. Some people win, others lose.

If we’re lucky, the US government and its foreign peers will reach agreements that help more people than they hurt.

Now is the time to make some of those great deals the president talked about. We should all hope he makes it happen.

See you at the top,

Patrick Watson

P.S. If you’re reading this because someone shared it with you, click here to get your own free Connecting the Dots subscription. You can also follow me on Twitter: @PatrickW.

 

Subscribe to Connecting the Dots—and
Get a Glimpse of the Future

Discuss This

0 comments

We welcome your comments. Please comply with our Community Rules.

Comments

Patrick Watson

July 11, 9:54 a.m.

Dear Barry Levy: Yes, saying “$560 is 5.3846153 times more than $104” would have been more precise. Would it have given readers any additional useful information? No. But thanks for your comment. -Patrick

Barry@levyteam.com

July 11, 9:08 a.m.

560 vs 104 is not 5 times more.  It is four and a half times or five and a half times as much.  As a writer, you have an obligation to be careful with words and numbers.

Barry Levy


Use of this content, the Mauldin Economics website, and related sites and applications is provided under the Mauldin Economics Terms & Conditions of Use.

Unauthorized Disclosure Prohibited

The information provided in this publication is private, privileged, and confidential information, licensed for your sole individual use as a subscriber. Mauldin Economics reserves all rights to the content of this publication and related materials. Forwarding, copying, disseminating, or distributing this report in whole or in part, including substantial quotation of any portion the publication or any release of specific investment recommendations, is strictly prohibited.
Participation in such activity is grounds for immediate termination of all subscriptions of registered subscribers deemed to be involved at Mauldin Economics’ sole discretion, may violate the copyright laws of the United States, and may subject the violator to legal prosecution. Mauldin Economics reserves the right to monitor the use of this publication without disclosure by any electronic means it deems necessary and may change those means without notice at any time. If you have received this publication and are not the intended subscriber, please contact service@mauldineconomics.com.

Disclaimers

The Mauldin Economics website, Yield Shark, Thoughts from the Frontline, Patrick Cox’s Tech Digest, Outside the Box, Over My Shoulder, World Money Analyst, Street Freak, Just One Trade, Transformational Technology Alert, Rational Bear, The 10th Man, Connecting the Dots, This Week in Geopolitics, Stray Reflections, and Conversations are published by Mauldin Economics, LLC. Information contained in such publications is obtained from sources believed to be reliable, but its accuracy cannot be guaranteed. The information contained in such publications is not intended to constitute individual investment advice and is not designed to meet your personal financial situation. The opinions expressed in such publications are those of the publisher and are subject to change without notice. The information in such publications may become outdated and there is no obligation to update any such information. You are advised to discuss with your financial advisers your investment options and whether any investment is suitable for your specific needs prior to making any investments.
John Mauldin, Mauldin Economics, LLC and other entities in which he has an interest, employees, officers, family, and associates may from time to time have positions in the securities or commodities covered in these publications or web site. Corporate policies are in effect that attempt to avoid potential conflicts of interest and resolve conflicts of interest that do arise in a timely fashion.
Mauldin Economics, LLC reserves the right to cancel any subscription at any time, and if it does so it will promptly refund to the subscriber the amount of the subscription payment previously received relating to the remaining subscription period. Cancellation of a subscription may result from any unauthorized use or reproduction or rebroadcast of any Mauldin Economics publication or website, any infringement or misappropriation of Mauldin Economics, LLC’s proprietary rights, or any other reason determined in the sole discretion of Mauldin Economics, LLC.

Affiliate Notice

Mauldin Economics has affiliate agreements in place that may include fee sharing. If you have a website or newsletter and would like to be considered for inclusion in the Mauldin Economics affiliate program, please go to http://affiliates.ggcpublishing.com/. Likewise, from time to time Mauldin Economics may engage in affiliate programs offered by other companies, though corporate policy firmly dictates that such agreements will have no influence on any product or service recommendations, nor alter the pricing that would otherwise be available in absence of such an agreement. As always, it is important that you do your own due diligence before transacting any business with any firm, for any product or service.

© Copyright 2017 Mauldin Economics