Stock market investors’ ability to ignore big geopolitical events is legendary. Give them a whiff of lower interest rates and most big-picture troubles can be relegated to the status of passing worries. In the absence of cheaper money, however, the story can be different. Tuesday’s early declines, which were really a continuation of a losing run that has lasted for most of October, marked a moment when investors were obliged to acknowledge that, yes, some global forces look genuinely alarming.

First, the trade war between China and the US is having an impact that US companies can count. Caterpillar, the manufacturer of earth-moving equipment, said the full-year whack from higher steel and aluminium prices will be about $100m (£77m).

The company did not seek to argue that President Donald Trump has saved a few US steel mills at the cost of imposing higher prices on major American companies who employ far more people. But that’s how many economists see things. Tariffs have consequences.

Second, the trade war may eventually hit harder in China. There is little evidence it is happening yet – the latest export figures were strong – but overall growth has slowed to the weakest rate since the financial crisis. Cuts in personal taxation – Beijing’s attempt to generate growth – strike many as inadequate. The policy is better than yet more mega-spending on under-used infrastructure, a game that creates long-term problems but the short-term boost to the economy may be hard to spot. External confidence, like the renminbi, is falling.

Third, the showdown between Italy and the European commission is unprecedented. Brussels has rejected the draft budget proposed by the populist administration in Rome on the grounds that it breaches budgetary rules. Penalties are supposed to follow if Rome refuses to spend less or tax more. There is no easy way out of the fix.

Fourth, the crisis in Saudi Arabia provoked by the killing of journalist Jamal Khashoggi could take almost any direction. Diplomatic isolation and higher oil prices are clearly possibilities. In the short-term, the flow of funding from Riyadh to the US technology sector looks to be over: it is hard to see how any self-respecting company could accept the cash.

Investors’ overall mood might improve if the US Federal Reserve sounded less keen on more rises in interest rates. But that, if it happens, is next year’s story. For the time being, the Fed can see inflationary pressures in the system and has set its course. The stock market will find its level but the steady selloff of recent weeks looks entirely rational.

Intu puts a positive spin on rental woes

As an exercise in accentuating the positive, it would be hard to beat the trading update from Intu, the shopping centre group that owns Lakeside in Essex, Merry Hill in Dudley and the Metrocentre in Gateshead. You’d almost believe the company owns only idyllic oases within an otherwise barren retailing landscape.

Intu’s operational performance was “strong and resilient”, reported its chief executive, David Fischel, “demonstrating the clear differentiation between winning destinations such as Intu owns and the rest”. Eighty-four new leases were signed at higher rents. Occupancy across the portfolio stands at a mighty 97%.

Jolly good, so these centres must be rising in value, right? Surely even dim-witted valuers can appreciate Intu’s ability to live with the rise of internet shopping? Unfortunately not. Intu’s net asset value fell 3% in three months. The valuation, said Fischel cheerfully “reflects current negative investor sentiment towards UK retail property” but, hey, Intu is confident it can “weather the challenges”.

If he is really so confident, there’s one way to show it. The board could declare that all takeover offers below Intu’s asset value – 344p or 297p, depending on which valuation method one prefers – will be rejected. So the message to the consortium led by John Whittaker’s Peel Group, which has pitched 215p, or £2.9bn, would be: “Sorry but you’re not even roughly in the right ballpark.”

In the real world, that’s unlikely to happen. If Peel Group, which already owns 27% of Intu, improves its offer, it will be a heavy favourite to succeed. The collapse of House of Fraser et al has frightened the stock market breed of property investor. Centres such as Intu’s may be survivors but their ability to charge higher rents looks seriously impaired.

Intu’s shares, after the collapse of the bid from Hammerson in April, were trading at 150p before Peel & co announced their move. Fischel can be defiant now but his own non-Peel shareholders will expect him to roll over if 240p-ish is on the table.