Aiden Chia

OUR HISTORY I read and catalogued every major event that happened from 1900 so you don’t have to. History is a fun rabbit hole to fall into when you can connect the dots, understand how things came to be, and learn some timeless lessons. Hope you get something useful out of this 🧵

Fun prompt: Based on all of our chats, what job do you think I work in, and what job do you think I ought to be at, if it is different (although it doesnt have to be)?

Trump should be realising by now that he in fact does not have all the cards

Exactly. Dollar hegemony is the bedrock of American power, it is what allows them to impose their will on others and safeguard their interests. But it has come at a cost as they’ve gotten addicted to overspending with the bill never coming due. Now a rival power is providing the world with an alternative. And like any unhinged addict that gets their toys taken away, the first response is not to address the underlying issues that got them into trouble in the first place, but to go on a rampage kicking and screaming, hurting friends, making enemies, and digging an even deeper hole for themselves.

The inability to attract and retain the best Chinese scientists, researchers and students will show up a decade later by the stark difference in the inventiveness of Chinese companies vs U.S. China will be the one leading the major breakthroughs while U.S. will be copying

As I mentioned in a previous post, indeed Japan is the largest foreign nation holding treasuries, >$1T They are currently facing their own domestic issues with 11-year record high bankruptcy rates, >90% for SMEs. This is due to the BOJ normalising rates after two decades of deflation and ultra-loose monetary policy, as well as as the largest wage hikes in the last two Shunto - annual spring wage negotiations. That it is limited only to SMEs doesn’t mean it’s a trivial problem - about 70% of Japan’s workforce is employed by SMEs, and even the big MNCs also have supply chains that are dependent on these SMEs. Given how important the administration’s focus is on keeping the 10Y yield down, U.S. / Japan relations are of vital importance and hence why Bessent was tasked to lead negotiations with them. Key discussions between both countries: - Japan securing Alaskan LNG imports (the country’s cost base is highly sensitive to energy inputs) - Japan agreeing not to “manipulate currency” ie dump Treasuries like they did back in 2022-23 - U.S. / Japan trade deficits and tariffs - Nippon steel investment in U.S. steel (Biden blocked it probably for political reasons) - Japan / China relations

Statin drugs inhibit the mevalonate pathway, which affects production of a whole host of other important molecules, especially CoenzymeQ10 (CoQ10) This can lead to increased risk of heart failure, as CoQ10 plays a crucial role as an electron carrier in the Electron Transport Chain (ETC), without which mitochondria’s ability to produce ATP is impaired. Lower cholesterol production also affects production of testosterone as its a precursor. Think there is a fundamental misunderstanding here about LDL being a “bad” cholesterol, which is a widespread but I believe mistaken belief. The main problem is excessive inflammation and oxidation. HDL/LDL’s job is to shuttle cholesterol, vitamins, anti-inflammatory molecules to and from the site of inflammation to fight and repair. They are so essential to the body that the body makes most of it. Dietary cholesterol doesn’t move the needle at all. That LDL ends up getting deposited along the coronary arteries, oxidised, and turning into plaques is like blaming firemen for dying at a fire. The original problem is the fire i.e. inflammation. The cause of that inflammation? Smoking, sugar, stress, and (poor) sleep.

Of the last 16 times the global dominant power was challenged by a rising power, 13 of them resulted in war, 1 was a Cold War, and only 2 were peaceful transitions. Of those 2 peaceful transitions, 1 was between Spain & Portugal (15th - 17th century Iberian rivalry), and the other was Britain & the U.S (post-WWII). Both involved empires with similar cultural values and economic co-dependence. Today, U.S. & China don’t have the same cultural values, are trying to economically separate from one another, and both sides view each other with suspicion. Full-scale war is less likely today given the threat of nuclear war. But history tells us that some form of aggression - cyber warfare, drone wars, proxy wars, trade wars - will probably occur. A tale as old as time.

While Trump is playing Chess (badly), Xi is playing Go (well)

The first trade war taught China to reduce their import dependence from the U.S. and they’ve done so. American farmers have been hurt badly by Trump’s tariffs & USTR Chinese vessel penalty proposal. Trump likely will seek re-negotiations / firm re-commitment to the U.S. & China Phase 1 deal, but with Brazil’s upcoming bumper soy & corn crop, he will not have strong leverage over them.

Probably the biggest trigger that caused Trump to fold was the move higher in yields, a real Liz Truss type situation Other countries now know they don’t have to give much in concessions, just watch the bond market and you know the strength of Trump’s hand And it seems USTR now also walking back on their proposal to penalise Chinese vessels. They finally recognise how much damage they inflicted on American farmers & U.S. export competitiveness in general. And of course now Trump wants to find a way to provide “financial assistance” to farmers. How on earth does he expect to make up to them the 50cpb drop in corn futs from Feb to March? Basis didn’t move up nearly enough to compensate It was the best window for marketing their corn then - they only had to compete with Argentina. Soon they will have to compete with the flood of Brazilian corn once its harvested Two very poorly executed policy decisions imo, but apparently that’s the Art of the Deal!

Here are some Chinese companies with low to zero exposure to the U.S and pretty decent fundamentals. Despite that, they’ve fallen in tandem with the rest of the world, declining 7.7% - 14.3% in the last 3 days. Just simply looking at current vs historical min/max multiples also suggests pretty attractive risk/reward ratios. With China doubling down their focus on boosting consumption as a key driver to hit GDP growth target, the Chinese consumer will return once again. Remember that China as a nation only has 3% GDP exposure to U.S. These companies individually have even less exposure than that.

The political pressure on Powell to exercise his put will be relentless now They need an easy monetary runway of at least a few months leading up to the Midterms to recover from the tariff shock Other countries also know this. So everyday the Fed does not play ball, Trump’s negotiating power is theta decaying

Biggest risks to Trump admin grand plan 1) Underestimating China’s resilience. Only 3% of GDP exposure to U.S. Diversified exports that can find a home elsewhere besides the U.S. 2) Underestimating how quickly global trade flows will re-route and integrate deeper with China as matter of survival. Trust once broken will be difficult to repair. Probably the most consequential 2nd-order impact. 3) Underestimating speed, cost, and feasibility of re-shoring. Plenty of analysis done already by other experts on X. Tariffs makes sense only if they’re targeted to specific sectors that are critical for securing national security - pharamaceuticals, semiconductor, shipbuilding, but including Nike shoes and iPhones as well is a self-inflicted wound. Of course tariffs in their current form are probably Art of the Deal type negotiating tactics and real plan is to scale them back But if above risks are miscalculated by Trump’s advisors, I wonder if the administration is over-confident about the true strength of their hand at the negotiating table

I used to think U.S. politicians criticisms about other countries democracies and human rights as hypocrisy, holier-than-thou, and simply just none of their business. But now I realise that perhaps it was all along their intention to promote “democracy” around the world because it’s easier to influence and manipulate elections through covert channels, as opposed to deadling with say, a group of communist leaders who prioritise national interests that may or may not align with U.S. strategic interests. It’s part of why they get freaked out by Xi Jinping and the CPC - even though they have undeniably achieved massive success in uplifting the standards of living of their own people - because they fear what they cannot control. There’s conclusive evidence that the CIA has been interfering in foreign nations elections, starting at least from the Italian elections in 1948, Chile in the 1960s, Japan in the 50s and 60s, etc. Imo, the best long-term outcome for humanity is for the U.S. and China to have friendly relations. Two great powers working jointly together in the age of AI will yield incredible breakthroughs in science, medicine, space exploration, sustainable energy, etc, that would be a net benefit for us all. That’s why I think discussions around “who will win the AI race, U.S. or China?” reflects entrenched zero-sum thinking. As if AI - particularly at the application layer where there’s still so much value to unlock - is something binary and winner-takes-all. It’s not. This is the most consequential Stag Hunt of our lifetime and how both U.S. and China chooses to act will determine our collective prosperity

Dietary added sugar intake is still above the WHO recommended level of 50g, ideal level is <25g. Meaning reduced sugar intake trends might only slow obesity rates of increase but not reverse increase. NHANES data seems to back that up (though this needs more investigation, I just Grok-ed it). There is also a lagging effect - dietary intake changes can take years of cumulative impact to see it in outcomes. So you can’t just overlay the two time series directly and draw a conclusion right away. In addition, while added sugar intake has fallen, the total carb intake, specifically the refined carb component, has remained relatively constant. More importantly, fibre intake has barely budged at all. This is what matters. The body doesn’t distinguish between natural and added sugars - it’s chemically the same thing. The difference is that the sucrose and fructose from an apple - eaten whole - comes with fibre. Whereas if you drink say apple juice, the insoluble fibres have been destroyed by the shearing action of the blender. Without adequate fibre, excessive sugar levels eventually result in insulin resistance and cause metabolic illness, obesity, Type 2 diabetes, MI, etc. This is where thinking from first principles - understanding what the science shows about what sugar actually does to the body at a biochemical level and the body’s endocrinological response - matters. It is easy to be fooled by being purely data-driven without balancing it with first principles.

Likewise for SEA and Oceania. So who holds the cards? Fgos, this is total trade volume, so it’s not just imports from but also exports to China.