There are times when you wonder if it would not be time to play "tu vo 'fa l'americano", mandatory, on every radio and TV in the country, every 20 minutes. Because it is bordering on ridicule, and I am convinced that if I read even more Italian newspapers I would probably remove the word "bordering".

So, hold on tight that the news arrives:

It turns out that following Trump's policy of not wanting to import things from Europe, someone else started importing more things than him. And this is obvious: if I start shouting that I don't buy any more in that shop, the other customers will overtake me in the category of good customers. What else could happen? Do I expect a shopkeeper to get attached to me, who he never sees in his shop, rather than those he sees every day?

And it is obvious that the shop manager will begin to treat other customers better: because they buy more.

I repeat: what else could happen?

At that point, since the trade between two strong industries is always bilateral, we discover that we have become "partners" of China. Nothing strange: after all, anyone who tells me that China does this for "expansionism", or "espionage", should explain to me why the Americans continue to hand over European data to the NSA.

But no: if Americans buy you things, then it's ok. If the Chinese do the same, then it is "a danger". I read the whole article, and I can't find ONE reason or one explanation of the "danger" we are running.

The whole article explains what dangers Biden's foreign policy runs, but I can't see what dire dangers we Europeans would see in this business partnership.

Then the article tries to "cubate" the data, mixing percentages and cardinality:

Since when you mix quantities (328.7 billion euros) with percentages, usually there is a crafty person who does not want to allow comparisons or comparisons, so I got suspicious and went to look for Eurostat numbers.

And I found them: only they are different, and they say very different things

First, the good news: overall Europe exports more than it matters, in the sense that the total surplus is 29 billion euros. Good.

Now let's go to the tables:

First, we note that the numbers are slightly different. But finally we find an answer to the questions we had asked ourselves.

• the danger for the EU is clear. While the balance against the US is positive, that is, the European industry is much more competitive than the US (and with the Euro worth more than the dollar), the one with CHINA is negative. And that means we buy more than we sell.
• the overcoming of the USA occurs in imports, but not in exports. This means that Europe is the important market for them, and not vice versa. Paradoxically, if China-EU ties were broken, we would gain in terms of trade balance.

In this sense, no geostrategic change is seen. China is an uncomfortable partner for the EU (negative trade balance), while the Americans would need to buy even more goods and services from the EU to beat it. To return to first place a little more than ten billion more, twenty in a year extrapolating the semester, and all the rest would be American power.

So the article is about nothing. It is McCarthyism, but it is not true McCarthyism. If they at least said "gomunisdi gaddivi ​​sbroc sbroc no ammigi gomunisdi" as they did with true McCarthyism, they might also think they resemble the period of TRUE American McCarthyism, when there was an analogue of Mussolini's special courts .

Done like this, it's just a sop:

• according to the data, the EU is more convenient to sell in the US where there is a positive trade balance than in China.
• according to that table, in terms of trade surplus, China CANNOT replace the US.
• the only obvious problem is the negative trade balance with China, plus the fact that Biden has to remedy the disaster made by Trump.

The rest is the stupid attempt of a journalist who shot fucking numbers, which do NOT come from Eurostat, attributing them to Eurostat.

Or he can't read the tables.

Who benefits from all this, only Elkann knows.