The U.S. and Britain will work out a “very big trade deal” once the U.K. has left the European Union, President Trump said Sunday morning in France, where Trump and other leaders have gathered for the G-7 summit.
The president also praised new British Prime Minister Boris Johnson on Brexit during their working breakfast on the second day of the summit.
"He needs no advice. He's the right man for the job,” Trump said.
The president appeared to slight former Prime Minister Theresa May – who he had frequently criticized – by adding that Johnson is “a new person.”
U.S. President Donald Trump, left, and Britain's Prime Minister Boris Johnson attend a working breakfast at the Hotel du Palais on the sidelines of the G-7 summit in Biarritz, France, Sunday, Aug. 25, 2019. (Associated Press)
Johnson, meanwhile, congratulated Trump on his handling of the U.S. economy, but added, “just to register a faint, sheeplike note of our view on the trade war, we're in favor of trade peace on the whole."
Johnson had told British reporters before the meeting that he would ask Trump not to escalate the U.S. trade hostilities with China.
Sunday's meeting was their first since Johnson succeeded May as prime minister in July.
Earlier Sunday, Trump told reporters "we're getting along well right now with China,” despite a new round of tariffs on Chinese goods Friday and saying that U.S. businesses are “hereby ordered” to leave China.
In retaliation, China has promised to impose new tariffs on $75 billion in U.S. goods.
The US must lift restrictions on UK businesses if it wants a trade deal with the UK, Boris Johnson has said.
Travelling to the G7 summit in Biarritz, France, the PM said there were "very considerable barriers in the US to British businesses".
Mr Johnson said he had already spoken to President Donald Trump about his concerns, adding he would do so again when they meet on Sunday morning.
The prime minister will also hold talks with EU Council President Donald Tusk.
"There are massive opportunities for UK companies to open up, to prise open the American market," Mr Johnson said.
"We intend to seize those opportunities but they are going to require our American friends to compromise and to open up their approach, because currently there are too many restrictions."
Offering an example of a restriction, Mr Johnson said: "Melton Mowbray pork pies, which are sold in Thailand and in Iceland, are currently unable to enter the US market because of, I don't know, some sort of food and drug administration restriction."
He continued: "UK bell peppers cannot get into the US market at all.
"Wine shipments are heavily restricted. If you want to export wine made in England to the US you have to go through a US distributor.
"There is a tax on British micro-breweries in the US that doesn't apply to US micro-breweries in the UK."
Last month, President Trump said talks about a "very substantial" trade deal with the UK were already under way.
He said a bilateral post-Brexit deal could lead to a "three to four, five times" increase in current trade - but provided no details about how that would be achieved.
However, the Speaker of the US House of Representatives, Nancy Pelosi, said a UK-US trade deal would not get through Congress if Brexit undermined the Good Friday Agreement.
Ms Pelosi said the UK's exit from the EU could not be allowed to endanger the 1998 Irish peace deal, which the US helped facilitate.
Trade deals involve two or more countries agreeing a set of terms by which they buy and sell goods and services from each other.
Deals are designed to increase trade by eliminating or reducing trade barriers. These barriers might include import or export taxes (tariffs), quotas, or differing regulations on things such as safety or labelling.
"Frankly, we must do something to tax fairly and properly the online businesses that have such colossal sales in our country," he told reporters. "We must do something to ensure we tax them properly.
"I am open to discussion about how we do that and I am willing to listen to our American friends about the modalities but we must do something to tax them fairly."
Mr Tusk said Mr Johnson risked being remembered as "Mr No Deal" - but the PM responded by saying it was Mr Tusk who would become "Mr No-Deal Brexit".
Mr Johnson has repeatedly stated he would prefer to leave the EU with a deal on 31 October, but insists the backstop - the insurance policy designed to avoid a hard border on the island of Ireland - must be removed from the withdrawal agreement.
"I've made it absolutely clear I don't want no deal, and that we've got to get rid of the backstop from the treaty, and if Mr Tusk doesn't want to go down as Mr No-Deal Brexit, I hope that point will be borne in mind too," Mr Johnson said.
Mr Tusk said the EU would listen to any suggestions from the UK on Brexit - as long as they were "operational, realistic and acceptable to all EU member states".
BIARRITZ, France (Reuters) - British Prime Minister Boris Johnson said on Saturday he would tell President Donald Trump at this weekend’s G7 summit to pull back from a trade war that is already destabilizing economic growth around the world.
Johnson and Trump are due to meet on Sunday morning for what are expected to be positive talks on their countries’ future bilateral trade relations and Brexit, as well as covering international topics where the two sides do not see eye to eye, like Russia, the Iran nuclear deal and trade policy on China.
Asked if he would be telling Trump he should not escalate the trade war with China, Johnson said “you bet”.
Speaking to reporters on arrival in the southwestern French city of Biarritz, Johnson said one of his priorities for the summit was “clearly the state of global trade. I am very worried about the way it’s going, the growth of protectionism, of tariffs that we’re seeing”.
A year-long trade war between the United States and China, the world’s two largest economies, has roiled financial markets and shaken the global economy. The dispute worsened just ahead of the summit with Washington and Beijing announcing further tariffs.
“Don’t forget that the UK is at risk of being implicated in this,” Johnson said.
“This is not the way to proceed. Apart from everything else, those who support the tariffs are at risk of incurring the blame for the downturn in the global economy, irrespective of whether or not that is true.
“I want to see an opening up of global trade, I want to see a dialing down of tensions and I want to see tariffs come off.”
Reporting by William James; Editing by Andrew Heavens and Frances Kerry
Some trains in the UK are now running on a rail line powered entirely by a solar farm in what's said to be a world first. Around 100 panels are keeping the signaling and lights up and running on the track near Aldershot in Hampshire, and the project could be a precursor to solar-powered trains on the nation's network.
Several UK train stations already run on solar. Network Rail, which manages most of the railway infrastructure on the British mainland, has earmarked billions of pounds to electrify rail lines, and aims to do so with solar power if the pilot project is successful. The UK government aims to eliminate the use of diesel on the rail network by 2040.
Those behind the solar project told the Guardianthe renewable energy could power 20 percent of the Liverpool Merseyrail network and 15 percent of commuter lines in Kent, Sussex and Wessex as well as solar trains in Edinburgh, Glasgow, Nottingham, London and Manchester. Along with being a greener form of power than diesel, the solar farms could supply cheaper power than electricity from the natural grid, which would reduce costs for railways.
The UK wouldn't be the first country to have solar-powered trains. More than 250 are in service in India with panels on their roofs. The subcontinent plans to establish trackside solar farms and Indian Railways hopes to have the first entirely green railway network in 10 years. Meanwhile, some UK trains are being refitted to run on hydrogen tanks and fuel cells.
All products recommended by Engadget are selected by our editorial team, independent of our parent company. Some of our stories include affiliate links. If you buy something through one of these links, we may earn an affiliate commission.
The first album written by Taylor Swift that was ever deemed respectable enough for Pitchfork to review was performed by Ryan Adams. The music blog gave the 1989 cover album by the since disgraced rocker a 4/10. No matter that Swift, who earned her first of 32 Grammy nominations over a decade ago, and became the youngest Album of the Year winner while still a teenager, has spent more than half her lifetime becoming one of the most prolific and successful singer-songwriters of all time. It’s only now that Pitchfork has decided that Swift’s career is worth considering as part of a serious canon of modern music.
Pitchfork began with a focus on independent music, and if the site simply ignored pop and country altogether, the absence of Swift from its reviews wouldn't have registered on any cultural Richter scale. But the same year that Pitchfork was reviewing Adams' cover, they reviewed Purpose by Justin Bieber. The Canadian crooner barely even wrote it. If Pitchfork wanted to reward artists who don't just perform but also create their own craft, it made no sense for them to validate Purpose, which required dozens of writers, and not any album by Swift, who's been writing her chart-toppers on her own since her debut album at age 16.
Pitchfork finally came around to reviewing the original 1989 as well as the rest of her oeuvre retrospectively, nearly two years after describing Reputation as "sadly conventional" in its first review of a Swift album. It only took Swift selling as many records as Whitney Houston and the Rolling Stones for them to do it.
"Back then," writes Maura Johnson at the blog of Swift's debut, "she had doubters."
Chief among them, the self-ordained tastemakers of the music industry. Pitchfork seems to have changed its tune on Swift, though, recognizing Joni Mitchell's influence on the singer's dexterous writing and artistic evolution, albeit with slight digs at Swift's "squeaky clean" image.
Swift, of course, would have the last laugh regardless of whether or not Pitchfork decided to cave. The site will be shuttered behind a paywall by the year's end. But still, four years after granting credence to the Adams cover, they finally covered 1989. They gave it a 7.7.
In our globalized economy, highly mobile capital works in favor of investors and consumers who value democratic protections. That dooms China's authoritarian model unless Beijing can force the world to submit to its peculiar form of feudal mercantilism.
Just look at Hong Kong.
Multiple reports on Thursday suggest that Alibaba, China's equivalent of Amazon, has suspended its plan to float shares on the Hong Kong Stock Exchange. That's just the tip of the iceberg. The head of Hong Kong-based Cathay Pacific Airways recently resigned, and the head of a subsidiary airline's union, Cathay Dragon, has been forced out. Qantas airlines is reducing flights to the Chinese territory, and Hong Kong's service economy is in free fall. The simple takeaway: Witnessing Hong Kong's battle between individual freedom and state authoritarianism, international businesses are turning away.
That Chinese weakness is America's opportunity. Our countermanding investment model: one that balances democratic protections and the rule-of-law to free-market capitalism is one that can attract those investors now disillusioned by Hong Kong. Defending against Chinese aggression and strengthening an investor-friendly stable economy, we can take advantage from China's economic isolation.
Still not convinced?
Then just look at the Hong Kong Stock Exchange (with my annotation). It has been spiraling downwards since the start of protests in April. Market stabilization has been impossible in face of oscillating protests.
(Screenshot via Hong Kong Stock Exchange)
Again, this is Beijing caught between reality and ideology.
The reality is that people do not want to kneel in submission to Chinese President Xi Jinping in return for whatever scraps he throws at them. They prefer to earn profits under protection of democratic law. But because Xi's ideology is centered in a long-term project to reshape the world under Chinese rule, he cannot yield to the protesters, which further hurts China's investment appeal.
It's not just absent freedom which makes China weak. It's the very model that Xi pursues. Where free markets allocate capital based on objective assessments of a return, Xi burns capital at the altar of his all-knowing delusion. Xi and his cronies believe they know better than the invisible hand. They are manifestly wrong.
Still, America must not take for granted our great systemic comparative advantage over China. President Trump's cultivation of chaos over the Federal Reserve is extraordinarily misguided. So too is it alarming that Democratic presidential front-runners now deride free markets. We should refocus on that which makes us economically great: freedom matched to capitalism.
If we do, Hong Kong shows that we'll win this new struggle for the 21st century.
