Chinese Trade War

[CID1990]

As if right on cue - Robert Kaplan with a powerful set of essays on China and why we get them so wrong-

https://nationalinterest.org/feature/am ... pire-63102

I've been saying a lot of this for a long time...

*China provides economic development without lectures on governance
*China is a Confucian state
*Our own culture of national pride is crumbling from within and college curricula are an indicator of that
*We are stabilizing Afghanistan for other countries to exploit, not us (that's for you, Clitz)
*China is not culturally or technologically inferior to us
*China got where they are due to an integrated strategy of investment, trade, theft, national focus, military development, and big-picture self awareness

The framework of the Chinese Empire is nearly complete and we take little notice

So how did the USA miss the boat? Not questioning you.

Kaplan spells it out pretty well

But it all comes down to the fact that we in the West remain preoccupied ... fixated on the most trivial domestic and foreign issues. Ironically, Kaplan doesn’t consider our 4 year political cycle to be a disadvantage, but it is.




Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

[Ivytalk]

I first encountered Kaplan’s work when I read Balkan Ghosts. He makes a number of sound points here, including those relating to India and Taiwan, and the benefits of “enlightened authoritarian” regimes. I often think Carter’s biggest foreign policy blunder was not Iran, but his unilateral abrogation of the Taiwan defense treaty. Also, there’s an underlying sense with Kaplan that all is not lost if the USA allows events in the Middle East and elsewhere to take their course and re-engages with the world in a reliable diplomatic way. Tall order, but not hopeless, particularly if Trump becomes a one-term aberration (as I believe he is).

And I think our four-year (really two-year, if you think about it, CID) political cycle is less of an obstacle than the “three-year rule” that Kaplan sees. The short attention span, the inability or unwillingness to grasp big issues: that’s the problem. Think strategically, not tactically, despite the lack of a cultural foundation for that approach.

[SeattleGriz]

So Trump turns up the heat on Xi, and now Xi is saying N Korea is headed in the right direction. Makes it look as if China was actually calling the shots.

Where's MJ#1 and #2 to tell us this was all due to Obama's leading from behind.

[SeattleGriz]

Who was it on here talking about broken supply chains?

https://www.bloomberg.com/news/articles ... na-is-over

[kalm]

Who was it on here talking about broken supply chains?

https://www.bloomberg.com/news/articles ... na-is-over

To my Friedman loving friends IT and UNI88...in your face!

Not Level

“The world is no longer flat,” said Tu, borrowing from Thomas Friedman’s book “The World Is Flat,” whose title in a metaphor for viewing the world as a level playing field for companies and trade. “The concept is no longer affordable in every place.”

This should pressure the Chinese to keep prices competitive which is a good thing as there are concerns regarding steel prices...

https://www.theatlantic.com/ideas/archi ... aign=share

[Ivytalk]

Who was it on here talking about broken supply chains?

https://www.bloomberg.com/news/articles ... na-is-over

To my Friedman loving friends IT and UNI88...in your face!

Not Level

“The world is no longer flat,” said Tu, borrowing from Thomas Friedman’s book “The World Is Flat,” whose title in a metaphor for viewing the world as a level playing field for companies and trade. “The concept is no longer affordable in every place.”

This should pressure the Chinese to keep prices competitive which is a good thing as there are concerns regarding steel prices...

https://www.theatlantic.com/ideas/archi ... aign=share

I didn’t say that I loved Friedman. Lots of what he says is pablum leftish claptrap. Did you ever read The World is Flat? If so, you’d see that you misinterpreted it.

“Tu” bad for you.

[JohnStOnge]

Who was it on here talking about broken supply chains?

https://www.bloomberg.com/news/articles ... na-is-over

To my Friedman loving friends IT and UNI88...in your face!

Not Level

“The world is no longer flat,” said Tu, borrowing from Thomas Friedman’s book “The World Is Flat,” whose title in a metaphor for viewing the world as a level playing field for companies and trade. “The concept is no longer affordable in every place.”

This should pressure the Chinese to keep prices competitive which is a good thing as there are concerns regarding steel prices...

https://www.theatlantic.com/ideas/archi ... aign=share

So the Chinese are approaching the situation more intelligently than Trump is? Wow. What a shocker.

[SeattleGriz]

To my Friedman loving friends IT and UNI88...in your face!






This should pressure the Chinese to keep prices competitive which is a good thing as there are concerns regarding steel prices...

https://www.theatlantic.com/ideas/archi ... aign=share

So the Chinese are approaching the situation more intelligently than Trump is? Wow. What a shocker.

No, the Chinese are paying the tariffs to keep work in China.

[Skjellyfetti]

No, the Chinese are paying the tariffs to keep work in China.

wat

[SeattleGriz]

No, the Chinese are paying the tariffs to keep work in China.

wat

Extactly. China says that if you stay, China pay. Offset tariffs.

3D MAGA

[kalm]

wat

Extactly. China says that if you stay, China pay. Offset tariffs.

3D MAGA

That could be the case but let’s keep it real here...Trump struggles with even one dimensional English.

[SeattleGriz]

Question for China buffs.

Does Xi control Kim Jong Un?

If so, will Xi "give up" N Korea nukes for better trade with US?

[CID1990]

Question for China buffs.

Does Xi control Kim Jong Un?

If so, will Xi "give up" N Korea nukes for better trade with US?

That’s complicated

Kim already has nukes and to give them up would be a loss of face for Kim in any context

Xi probably won’t ask Kim to give them up since he knows Kim can’t do it... it would destabilize NK and that’s a huge problem for China

Xi might push Kim onto some middle-ground agreement though - like a moratorium on any new weapons development


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

[Ivytalk]

Good Reason article pointing out that, while tariffs are always bad economically, they can have effective political uses. The jury is still out on how well they’ll work with China, but the only effective non-tariff way of dealing with the Red Chunks may be countervailing multilateral trade agreements with allies or nonaligned countries, like the NPT was supposed to be. But that option went out the window, so it’s back to square one.

[GannonFan]

Good Reason article pointing out that, while tariffs are always bad economically, they can have effective political uses. The jury is still out on how well they’ll work with China, but the only effective non-tariff way of dealing with the Red Chunks may be countervailing multilateral trade agreements with allies or nonaligned countries, like the NPT was supposed to be. But that option went out the window, so it’s back to square one.

Indeed, good points. The attacks on free trade (and granted, free trade hasn't always been good about providing for those who are left behind in the globalization push that often comes with free trade so it's been its own worst enemy) have made it difficult for us to have a consistent approach in terms of international trade. Even when we were champions of the WTO and free trade there were segments of both parties (especially the left) bemoaning it. And now that we have the buffoon in the White House, the approach is to simply be the opposite of him, so with him now taking some protectionists approaches there is this 180 moaning that we should be opening up trade.

On the bright side, at least the tariffs have laid bare what China's strategy in all of this is. It's important to remember their bigger goal of their own version of Manifest Destiny and the return of the Middle Kingdom idea. Keeps things real.

[Skjellyfetti]

the only effective non-tariff way of dealing with the Red Chunks may be countervailing multilateral trade agreements with allies or nonaligned countries, like the NPT was supposed to be.

Yep.

TPP was an imperfect way to counter China. But, way better than a Trade War, imo.

Similarly, the Iran Deal was imperfect... but, better than current flexing, and obviously better than a war if it leads to that.

[Ivytalk]

the only effective non-tariff way of dealing with the Red Chunks may be countervailing multilateral trade agreements with allies or nonaligned countries, like the NPT was supposed to be.

Yep.

TPP was an imperfect way to counter China. But, way better than a Trade War, imo.

Similarly, the Iran Deal was imperfect... but, better than current flexing, and obviously better than a war if it leads to that.

Thank you for the correction. Obviously, my aged mind was veering off into the Non-Proliferation Treaty. But that’s another story for another day.

[JohnStOnge]

So the Chinese are approaching the situation more intelligently than Trump is? Wow. What a shocker.

No, the Chinese are paying the tariffs to keep work in China.

I just read the article you linked again and am wondering if you linked the article you meant to link. The article you linked is basically an argument that the Chinese are approaching this situation in a much more intelligent manner than Trump is. And I don't see anything in it at all about the Chinese paying tariffs to keep work in China. Instead, it is about things like the Chinese reducing tariffs on imports from other countries (such as Canada) while it increases tariffs on imports from the United States. In certain areas. It's also about China being selective in what it imposes tariffs on. The subtitle to the headline pretty much summarizes the point of the piece:

As Trump focuses on disruption, Beijing is evidently operating on a higher level.

[SeattleGriz]

No, the Chinese are paying the tariffs to keep work in China.

I just read the article you linked again and am wondering if you linked the article you meant to link. The article you linked is basically an argument that the Chinese are approaching this situation in a much more intelligent manner than Trump is. And I don't see anything in it at all about the Chinese paying tariffs to keep work in China. Instead, it is about things like the Chinese reducing tariffs on imports from other countries (such as Canada) while it increases tariffs on imports from the United States. In certain areas. It's also about China being selective in what it imposes tariffs on. The subtitle to the headline pretty much summarizes the point of the piece:

As Trump focuses on disruption, Beijing is evidently operating on a higher level.

Which article? Are we talking the Bloomberg article? The one about Giant bicycles moving?

[SeattleGriz]

How exactly do you lose 1.2 Trillion?

https://asia.nikkei.com/Spotlight/Dataw ... disappears

The International Monetary Fund forecasts that China's current-account balance will turn negative in 2022, due to the effects of the U.S. trade war and other developments. Under the surface, a huge outflow of money is widening beyond the control of the government's strict regulators.

The trend raises the possibility of a shift in the global balance of power.

A total of $1.2 trillion has "disappeared" from China's statistics in a little over a decade, potentially undermining the clout the country has sought to build through the Belt and Road infrastructure initiative and huge investments in U.S. government bonds.

[SeattleGriz]

Ha! China's thinks putting the last guy they demoted back into the equation that they can go back to previous negotiations.

Trump says no concessions.

Only time will tell, it sure looks like Trump completely outmaneuvered Xi.

[CAA Flagship]

One of the underlying goals is to get US companies to get their goods manufactured in countries other than China. The Govt. can't force them to do it but the conditions can get them to do it willingly. CNBC did a report from Vietnam today that touched on the move many companies are making from China to Vietnam. The funny thing is, China is also moving many things to Vietnam also. China's rising wages are forcing them to seek cheaper labor too.

This chess match will not end anytime soon, but it is fascinating to watch.

[SeattleGriz]

One of the underlying goals is to get US companies to get their goods manufactured in countries other than China. The Govt. can't force them to do it but the conditions can get them to do it willingly. CNBC did a report from Vietnam today that touched on the move many companies are making from China to Vietnam. The funny thing is, China is also moving many things to Vietnam also. China's rising wages are forcing them to seek cheaper labor too.

This chess match will not end anytime soon, but it is fascinating to watch.

I'm just glad we finally have someone with the balls to negotiate a decent deal.

[CAA Flagship]

One of the underlying goals is to get US companies to get their goods manufactured in countries other than China. The Govt. can't force them to do it but the conditions can get them to do it willingly. CNBC did a report from Vietnam today that touched on the move many companies are making from China to Vietnam. The funny thing is, China is also moving many things to Vietnam also. China's rising wages are forcing them to seek cheaper labor too.

This chess match will not end anytime soon, but it is fascinating to watch.

I'm just glad we finally have someone with the balls to negotiate a decent deal.

There may never be a deal. A "deal" may or may not be the goal. This is economic warfare with a foreign state that cheats their asses off. Announcement of any "deal" would not mean much without following the spirit of the rules. Not sure that is in their interest.

[CID1990]

One of the underlying goals is to get US companies to get their goods manufactured in countries other than China. The Govt. can't force them to do it but the conditions can get them to do it willingly. CNBC did a report from Vietnam today that touched on the move many companies are making from China to Vietnam. The funny thing is, China is also moving many things to Vietnam also. China's rising wages are forcing them to seek cheaper labor too.

This chess match will not end anytime soon, but it is fascinating to watch.

Vietnam will not be a low cost option for long -

I have had the added perspective of seeing Vietnam develop from 2010 until now, and in those 9 years Vietnam has progressed economically more quickly than any country I have ever seen. It is possible that the PRC itself never saw such internal development over any 9 year period of its existence.

Anecdotally, Vietnam is quickly catching up to and will surpass Thailand as the most developed country in mainland SE Asia - it may happen in as little as 10 years. It is good to see and a golden opportunity for us because the Vietnamese consider China as their number one geopolitical adversary. That is a 1000 year, culturally ingrained conflict. Thailand, on the other hand, is increasingly under the sway of Beijing.

On a micro scale, you can’t get a Tiger beer for less than 30-40K dong in Saigon. That’s double what it was in 2012.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk