Home › Forums › Financial Markets/Economics › China
- This topic has 248 replies, 17 voices, and was last updated 4 years, 6 months ago by
FlyerInHi.
-
AuthorPosts
-
January 29, 2019 at 11:29 AM #811686January 30, 2019 at 1:55 AM #811688
FlyerInHi
Guest[quote=Myriad]
I question whether other countries would be able to replicate due to factors such as demographics, education, geography, etc.
[/quote]Look how Argentina welcomed Xi Jinping with a band at the airport and a state visit at the G20 meeting. Trump didn’t get it. But the red haired fat woman on Fox News still reported how the Air Force One landing in the dark was amazing and impressive, oh so patriotic to see the Beast too. Trump had no red carpet, nothing.
And after Trump flew back, Argentina and China were signing deals after deals. Did the American media report it? Yes, very lightly which leaves the American people so dumb and uninformed.
Look how China woos countries and honors their leaders with state visits in Beijing. China treats all countries with the same semblance of respect. Just look on YouTube to see how China welcomes all leaders the same way they welcome Donald Trump or Theresa May to Beijing.
All the while, we are retreating diplomatically. And we treat small countries as the shitholes that they are. When did we give the leader of Gabon, or some other shithole leader a full state visit in Washington?
[quote=Myriad]
But it’s not China threatening dominance that we are worried about China. It a change in the status quo of international commons, a return to mercantilism/state competition, and impact to democracy/personal rights.
[/quote]Really? We are the ones withdrawing from the status quo by leaving international institutions that we built, leaving empty space for China to fill.
[quote=Myriad]
The problem with SOEs (US, China, wherever) is that the prevent private companies from doing the job more efficiently. Because they are backed by the state, they can get favorable financial terms, which can cause distortions in the funding market (you see that in China now when the SOEs are too big relative to the private market). We accept the existence of SOE where it’s not easy for multiple private companies to compete – but we really would be better off if Amtrak had competition.
Outside the country is different – yes, countries can back certain businesses to work projects. The US does that too, just not companies like Caltrans. We have Bechtel and others that did that in the past – Or Boeing, Google, MSFT, Intel, etc now. The US economy has long moved away from large public works, while China’s economy is in this phase.Public transit in the US is often funded by via government and run like a government department. NYC’s system has been underfunded for 40+ years – it’ll take a long time to fix. But transit by itself is unable to pay for major capital projects without other sources of funds. You could wait for the government, but you could also follow the HK model
https://www.theatlantic.com/china/archive/2013/09/the-unique-genius-of-hong-kongs-public-transportation-system/279528/[/quote]
Long post of irrelevant stuff.
If you are so sure that SOEs are bad and inefficient. Then why not let China fail on its own?If you’re so sure the China’s economic model results in misallocations, then let them knock themselves out.
[quote=Myriad]
I have no problem with that and understand probably won’t materially change the trade deficit. However, it’ll create a vast inefficiency to trade with China directly.
The problem I have with China is that they had a chance to just work with the existing global trade/commons system to increase economic benefit. But now we have to deal with the BS territorial ambitions in SE and East Asia. If you go back 10 years, we didn’t have the military buildup going on in Asia. There wasn’t even an aircraft carrier assigned to the Pacific for a while. Now we have every country in Asia increasing their military.Also all the crap that China does in HK, Australia, and here – but I guess we’ve been allowing that to happen in our society.
But what is China’s end goal here? Do they really want global great power competition?
[/quote]Is China not allowed to have power ambitions just like we do? At the workplace, is the Chinese engineer not allowed to aspire to become CEO?
The military build-up by China is thanks to the growing size of their economy and what that affords them to buy. Strategically, they need to build their military before their ageing demographics makes it much harder. Do you expect them to not plan?
If we trade less with China, trade more with Vietnam (Philippines, or other countries), but if Vietnam buys telecom, infrastructure and tech from China (because Chinese stuff is best and cheapest for Vietnam’s stage of development), then China will become even better at building higher value tech, and that will help their military. TPP was designed to counter that by giving Vietnam preferential access to the US market, but with Trump departing TPP, Vietnam is now just like any WTO country. Why is the US not building high speed rail, seaports, etc.. for Vietnam on credit?
On territorial disputes, we already said that don’t have a dog in the race. The countries in the regions need to work it out among them themselves. And so far all is quiet so let them work it out.
If we want regional countries to counter China, why did we waste their time, a decade in negotiations? All to force them to join RCEP. Notice the absence of the USA.
[quote=Myriad]
We can make life a lot more difficult for China. We could also steal technology from China and hand it to our designated state champions. We can spend significant % of GDP on international development too.
[/quote]So why don’t we? Especially the international development part. China is completing a bridge for Panama; we should build them 2 beautiful bridges as Trump would say. Panama will love us more.
If you want to woo a beautiful girl, you need to buy her gifts. If you only just prance around flexing your muscles but buy her nothing, she may go with the other guy even though you’re more handsome.
Why do you think Panama ditched recognition of Taiwan for China over US protests?
[quote=Myriad]
We could call BS on the one country, two systems and recognize Taiwan independence. Spheres of influence in Africa – that can happen too. But heh this time, I doubt the Belgians will go back to the Congo and Italy to Ethiopia ;)[/quote]One-country, two systems is a British/Western concept that China agreed to with the return of Hong Kong. If you call BS on it, then Hong Kong is just like any other city in China.
Recognize Taiwan’s independence? The US made a commitment to the One-China policy in 1971.
Sure, we could “refudiate” the One-China police but then we lose credibility and nobody would trust us ever again. BTW, Taiwan never declared independence and they have their own internal politics to work out as they still claim to represent all of China.In Africa, want people to love us? Do better than China.
BTW, China worked really hard over the last few decades to win over Africa. Africans countries now vote with China at the UN.China built so much infrastructure for Africa. Where was the USA?
In summary, don’t bitch about China. Do better than China and show the world that our ideas result in more concrete material wealth that people can see and use. Talk is cheap.
January 31, 2019 at 6:31 PM #811692GuestWeijian Shan talks about China.
65% of Qualcomm’s sales are in China. We, San Diegans, better not want a trade war.
February 1, 2019 at 7:18 PM #811694Myriad
Participant[quote=FlyerInHi]
Really? We are the ones withdrawing from the status quo by leaving international institutions that we built, leaving empty space for China to fill. [/quote]
Agree with that. The US has some pretty shitty foreign policy. The last time we had a coherent policy was probably back in the Cold War.[quote=FlyerInHi]
If you’re so sure the China’s economic model results in misallocations, then let them knock themselves out. [/quote]
Right, the system won’t be a collapse. Just private companies in China suffer. We’ll see if it’s a contributor to the middle income trap. [/quote][quote=FlyerInHi]
The military build-up by China is thanks to the growing size of their economy and what that affords them to buy. Strategically, they need to build their military before their ageing demographics makes it much harder. Do you expect them to not plan?
If we trade less with China, trade more with Vietnam (Philippines, or other countries), but if Vietnam buys telecom, infrastructure and tech from China (because Chinese stuff is best and cheapest for Vietnam’s stage of development), then China will become even better at building higher value tech, and that will help their military. TPP was designed to counter that by giving Vietnam preferential access to the US market, but with Trump departing TPP, Vietnam is now just like any WTO country. Why is the US not building high speed rail, seaports, etc.. for Vietnam on credit? [/quote]
Nothing wrong with each country building up their own miltiary. I have no issue with that. Japan, Korea, India all have large militaries.
Agree on TPP – that goes back to the crap foreign poliicies of the US.[quote=FlyerInHi]
On territorial disputes, we already said that don’t have a dog in the race. The countries in the regions need to work it out among them themselves. And so far all is quiet so let them work it out. [/quote]
We only have a stake in that the freedom of access to air and oceans is allowed beyond the 12 mile limit for recognized territories. It is not all quiet in the region – which is why everyone is building their military up. If China didn’t create an ADIZ over the South China Sea and built “miltiary” facilities islands in contested areas, we probably wouldn’t be headed to a Cold War. Plenty of stories of China fisheries vessels blocking other countries from free access to what would be considered areas outside their EEZ.[quote=FlyerInHi] One-country, two systems is a British/Western concept that China agreed to with the return of Hong Kong. If you call BS on it, then Hong Kong is just like any other city in China. [/quote]
That’s right, HK is just another city in China now. Which is why Taiwan is calling BS on the One-country, two systems (China uses that term when referring to Taiwan sometimes).[quote=FlyerInHi] Recognize Taiwan’s independence? The US made a commitment to the One-China policy in 1971.
Sure, we could “refudiate” the One-China police but then we lose credibility and nobody would trust us ever again. BTW, Taiwan never declared independence and they have their own internal politics to work out as they still claim to represent all of China. [/quote]
It’s not an impossibilty – certainly isn’t going to happen soon. But let’s say the US and China get into a full Cold War where everything is segregated. Anything could be on the table at that point.
I’m Chinese, I do know their’s a lots of internal issues in Taiwan regarding independence. Lot of the reasons have to do with the economy, trade with China, and that the Taiwanese have huge investments in China. After all, Foxconn is Taiwanese.[quote=FlyerInHi] In summary, don’t bitch about China. Do better than China and show the world that our ideas result in more concrete material wealth that people can see and use. Talk is cheap.[/quote]
Agree with that. The US has some really shitty incoherent foreign policy for the past 3 decades. The real failure of leadership in both the US & China is that we are now heading towards a world that will be less open, more divergent, and segregated. Sure some countries are going to benefit from great power competition, but most will not. We’re at a point where travel & investment is beginning to restricted between US & China/Russia depending on what company/industry you are in. I don’t believe China is going to collapse or crash – the reality is that when the all the corporate and soverign debt becomes a problem in the next crisis, the US & China will be equally affected.February 2, 2019 at 3:19 PM #811697Guest[quote=Myriad][quote=FlyerInHi]
If you’re so sure the China’s economic model results in misallocations, then let them knock themselves out. [/quote]
Right, the system won’t be a collapse. Just private companies in China suffer. We’ll see if it’s a contributor to the middle income trap. [/quote]Yes, that’s why SOEs are a public good… sort of the social safety net of China.
In USA we have welfare.
China is worried about social unrest due to 4th industrial revolution disruptions. SOEs are a way to keep people employed.
BTW, China’s SOEs are pretty efficient compared to Caltrans or Amtrak, even the Army Corps of Engineers. The Chinese innovate and build stuff all over the world. I don’t see us doing it.
But yeah, China knows they need to reform. They are taking a wait and see approach.
As far as the US model for a poor country in Asia, that was the Philippines. After WWII, the PI was the richest country in Asia. And now?
And if the goal is to keep China poor so that they cannot build their military, they why would you want to “force” them to reform and become more efficient. Let them stay inefficient, and then you have no need for containment.
[quote=Myriad]
We only have a stake in that the freedom of access to air and oceans is allowed beyond the 12 mile limit for recognized territories. It is not all quiet in the region – which is why everyone is building their military up. If China didn’t create an ADIZ over the South China Sea and built “miltiary” facilities islands in contested areas, we probably wouldn’t be headed to a Cold War. Plenty of stories of China fisheries vessels blocking other countries from free access to what would be considered areas outside their EEZ.
[/quote]freedom of navigation is just a pretext for the USA to send warships. Has any cargo ship been prevented from sailing?
The fishing skirmishes are none of our business. Remember the row with Japan when China suspended rare earth shipments to Japan? It’s now water under the bridge and, in October of last year, Shinzo Abe went on a state visit to China.
The small Asia countries don’t trust the USA anymore since we wasted their time with TPP. Since that happened, they deepened ties with China.
Be careful what you wish for. I am sure the Chinese will have ships 12 miles from our coasts in the future. If we set the example, others will follow it when they can.
For long term stability, the US needs to show restraint in order to expect the same from others in the future.
[quote=Myriad]
their’s a lots of internal issues in Taiwan regarding independence. Lot of the reasons have to do with the economy, trade with China, and that the Taiwanese have huge investments in China. After all, Foxconn is Taiwanese.
[/quote]Actually when the US recognized the PRC, we hedge our bets. At the time, all the small countries still recognized Taiwan. So the US, if we needed to, could to the UN and flip back to ROC under the guise of international law.
But little by little, especially while we were busy in the middle east, China, one by one, won over African and Latin American countries. China now has strong support at the UN.
So now, if the US wanted to recognize Taiwan’s independence (if Taiwan declares it), or ROC as the legitimate representative of all of China, we would lose a vote at the UN and veto by Russia and China on the Security Council. And we would be isolated. Taiwan independence is not a realistic prospect.
[quote=Myriad]
Agree with that. The US has some really shitty incoherent foreign policy for the past 3 decades. The real failure of leadership in both the US & China is that we are now heading towards a world that will be less open, more divergent, and segregated. Sure some countries are going to benefit from great power competition, but most will not. We’re at a point where travel & investment is beginning to restricted between US & China/Russia depending on what company/industry you are in. I don’t believe China is going to collapse or crash – the reality is that when the all the corporate and soverign debt becomes a problem in the next crisis, the US & China will be equally affected.[/quote]In my opinion, we have a divergent world because the US, in choosing expediency, failed to work hard in building alliance. We are withdrawing from international institutions we built.
The US uses the US Dollar not just an economic instrument of trade but also as an economic bludgeon. So instead of relying on the international systems, countries are working out currency swaps and alternative system. France, Britain and Germany (our allies) develop a new system to trade with Iran to circumvent out sanctions.
by using the USD as a political tool, we are accelerating the eventual demise of the USD as a reserve currency. We will suffer decades in the future.
February 2, 2019 at 3:25 PM #811698GuestLook at the new city Singapore and China are building. I’m impressed. Sim city or what?
As someone who loves real estate, I’m amazed much wealth is created. I’d rather own a condo in Singapore-China Knowledge city than in a house in Jacksonville, Fl. So almost instantly, many Chinese will have more housing equity than established Americans who worked for decades.
February 8, 2019 at 6:33 PM #811717GuestAustralia had 27 years without a recession. Thanks to China. Natural resources, Chinese investments and immigration.
February 11, 2019 at 4:23 PM #811721The-Shoveler
ParticipantOK the real challenge,
Who will put the first Human on Mar’s?
We are already rolling all over that planet.
February 14, 2019 at 1:13 PM #811783GuestMyriad, Parag Kanna has a new book about the “Asian System” as he calls it.
He talks about his views with Ian Bremmer.I think the US will lose the trade war because where we sanction China, Europe, Japan and Korea will fill the gaps with technology the Chinese lack. And with US tariffs, Chinese companies will just move production to other Asian countries.
March 23, 2019 at 12:15 PM #812197GuestI enjoyed this video by Ian Bremer. He’s certainly not a china dove.
I like Keyu Jin, the LSE professor.May 7, 2019 at 4:22 PM #812459ParticipantInteresting Schumer supports Trump on Trade deal with China.
Sooner or later we would need to address this.
This game is for all the marbles.
You have to be pragmatic and not just follow party lines, we are getting seriously divided if it is just My party must win at all costs.
May 14, 2019 at 8:29 PM #812496GuestShoveler, I think you mentioned automation as growing manufacturing in USA.
If automation is such savior, then why did we cede solar panel production to China? I was talking to friend about that and my answer was lack of US industrial policy.
May 15, 2019 at 1:39 AM #812497temeculaguy
ParticipantBrian you have posted pro-china comments on most of the threads in the top active threads, It’s kinda suspicious. Maybe you’re not a chinabot, just a trump hater looking to root against your country for political reasons. Your posts went pretty silent post Mueller for a few days, so I’ll give you the benefit of the doubt and assume you are just a partisan.
https://www.reuters.com/article/us-usa-trade-china-options-idUSKCN1SL0OU
I say bring it, China is out of ammo in this trade war. They have been gaming the system for too long and it’s time to find some balance. Red and Blue states stand to benefit from a better trade deal, actually the US and China will both benefit, however the communist party will lose some ground in China. Just checked MSNBC’s homepage, no mention of the trade war. Lots on congresswomen Omar and AOC, lot’s of other stuff but even they are shying away from the China trade story. Maybe you aren’t getting the e-mail with the talking points but stay away from this because it is a non partisan issue and will likely end up being a trump win so best to be silent on it or you are not going to get invited to the progressive parties.
Let’s not even talk about China and it’s dealings with Taiwan, Tibet, Venezuela, animal cruelty and endangered animals being killed for Chinese medicine, the South China Sea. If anyone needs a “chin check” it’s China.
If Hilary had won she’d be doing the same thing, it was on the to do list regardless of party. China didn’t bring a dish to the potluck but wants to take the leftovers, someone had to say something.
May 15, 2019 at 10:55 AM #812498GuestI don’t think that I am pro China. I am just looking at this objectively as a citizen of the world and not as an American.
If we think that China is unfair, then let’s have policies that counteract. But let’s not launch a trade war the consequences of which we don’t understand. There is no end game or strategy that i see.
China is entitled to have an industrial policy. We believe the free markets work best so let’s see which ones work better. And let’s apply global rules consistently regardless of whether the target is China, Germany or the USA. That’s what WTO is for. BTW, there are many sectors of the US economy such as government procurement closed to foreign competition. But Trump wants the Chinese State to buy American farmers’ commodities. Such a ridiculous argument in its face. What if the US Federal government agreed to buy Italian olive oil?
Should we be able to ban Huawei but demand that Chase Bank be able to operate in China?
We need a rules based order such as WTO. And we need to strengthen and improve the world order for when we act unilaterally, other countries will feel free to do so in the future. We lose the moral argument and world support.
May 15, 2019 at 11:12 AM #812499ParticipantYes- I agree,
We should encourage IP theft, Demand that everything sold here be made here and that all technology used be shared.
Only give/help others if there is something in it for us.
anyway it’s a start LOL.
BTW we do make solar panels right here in riverside.
But seriously we should subsidize some critical industries more to eliminate any foreign competition.
-
AuthorPosts
- You must be logged in to reply to this topic.