6 ms·

Ma seems... And that's where it stops. Ma made a general observation and that's it. Historically countries who trade less tend to be hostile toward each others

by mrb 10y ago

Ma seems... And that's where it stops. Ma made a general observation and that's it. Historically countries who trade less tend to be hostile toward each others, while countries who trade in bigger volumes are friendly. Also Ma isn't saying or implying "keep the trade deficit". He says "keep trading. period" (a surplus or a deficit, doesn't matter in the context of his argument.) By the way it's weird that people seem to think it's China's problem that the US have a trade deficit with them. The deficit can be solved by the US selling products and services to China. It's the US' problem to find what to sell. And only the US can solve it.

jdmichal 10y ago
Can a US-based business sell products and services to a Chinese one? At least, can they do it directly and not through some Chinese subsidiary?
- RobertoG 10y ago
  Are not American corporations getting a god deal here? Because it seems to me that they are profiting from the difference in wages. Maybe a case of eat your cake and have it?
gph 10y ago
> It's the US' problem to find what to sell. And only the US can solve it. Well there's the problem of China not respecting copyright or any type of intellectual property. And that's not just a problem for the Facebooks of the world, they are stealing our agricultural and industrial knowledge as well. And while it's not officially sanctioned by the CCP, it's unofficially encouraged.
- RobertoG 10y ago
  That's the standard book for developing an economy. The USA did that to Europe, specially to England.
  - gph 10y ago
    There is no standard for developing an economy, you've just taken two similar instances in history and correlated them. Or did Japan, Germany, et al. develop their economy through industrial espionage and I just haven't learned about it yet?
    - RobertoG 10y ago
      It's funny that you mention the Japanese. I don't know if you were around in the 80's but, if you were and have some memory, this song that we are listening now, should be familiar to you. And it seems to me that, yes, there is a standard for developing a country's economy: you build and industrial base. For that you need importing technology and knowledge. For that you need foreign currency. So, you sell the job of your people. By the way, what you don't do, if you are clever, is follow the IMF advice.
- izacus 10y ago
  This implies that the American way of looking at these things is the ONLY right way of looking at things and that Chinese need to accept western companies on western terms.
  - gph 10y ago
    If they are going to be part of the global economy then they need to accept the terms of the global economy. Yea their practices are mainly harming western countries at this point, but in the future maybe it's India or Singapore that has the lead in these areas. Would you think it's alright for China to do it then? Like it or not the global capitalist economy has to be built with some form of protection for content and IP producers. I fail to see how China's model is the 'right way of looking at things'. In fact if we all acted like China I'm guessing the global economy would collapse.
    - Juliate 10y ago
      "If they are going to be part of the global economy then they need to accept the terms of the global economy." This is an absolutely marvelous way of looking at things. For once, it ignores that the "global economy" may profit a lot from revising its own terms (especially regarding copyright/IP). Or that the "global economy" is more like the interests of the few powerful ones who say what it is.
      - gph 10y ago
        Sure there are theoretically better ways of doing things. If there are theoretically better ways of distributing food does that mean I get to go rob a grocery store? You can't flaunt the rules and regulations of world trade because you disagree with them or want to change them. Besides that's not what China wants. China wants to eat its cake and have it too. Edit: Wow looks like it's ok to lie, cheat, and steal because "the other guy does it and I think the system is unjust on top of that." Really spectacular arguments from the anti-establishment crowd.
        izacus 10y ago
- tossaway322 10y ago
  gph says:>"... the problem of China not respecting copyright or any type of intellectual property. " And, after thirty years' trying, mainland Chinese still make very low-quality hand tools and have severely damaged Western suppliers of the same. "Give me a good screwdriver and a place to stand - I will move the Earth." - Archimedes322 P.S. Why the downvote? Compare the quality of USA-, European- and Chinese-made (except Taiwanese, which are often exquisite) hand tools. The mainland Chinese don't measure up to a 1920's standards of manufacture in the West.
cloakandswagger 10y ago
>It's the US' problem to find what to sell. And only the US can solve it. This is completely wrong. China has huge barriers in place to dissuade the importation of products that compete with their own. 30% tariffs on certain items, selective application of VAT and currency manipulation all make it near impossible for the US to sell goods in China.
- 794CD01 10y ago
  And yet for all those barriers, Chinese consumers still can't get enough of the latest Apple products. mrb is exactly right. US companies CAN sell in China, if they figure out how to, and some have.
  - DarkKomunalec 10y ago
    Yes, they CAN sell in China, they're just at a huge disadvantage. Is your argument that because SOME products still sell, the barriers aren't significant, or that US firms aren't adversely affected by them, to the benefit of Chinese ones?
    - 794CD01 10y ago
      My argument is that when companies can't compete on technology as they may be used to, too frequently, they throw their hands up in the air and conclude that this means they can't compete period. However, we can see that Western companies are successful today competing along different axes. I would even extend that further by saying that if things dry up in the future and we have to keep innovating to stay ahead as China continues to copy and catch up, good. Let's do that. Everyone will be better off.
- makomk 10y ago
  Not to mention heavy restrictions on money transfers in and out of the country and a huge amount of red tape. Ian of Dangerous Prototypes set up a business in China a year or so back and wrote about what was involved, and it's astonishing: http://dangerousprototypes.com/blog/2016/02/04/how-to-china-importexport-permit-and-company-bank/ http://dangerousprototypes.com/blog/2016/02/04/how-to-china-...
Gargoyle 10y ago
>It's the US' problem to find what to sell. If it's trade or war, it's China's problem too.
sevensor 10y ago
> Historically countries who trade less tend to be hostile toward each others, while countries who trade in bigger volumes are friendly I can think of one big counterexample off the top of my head: trade between France and Germany in the years leading up to 1914. Strong economic ties didn't prevent Europe from going completely off the rails. Which historical trading partners did you have in mind?

by mrb 10y ago

jdmichal 10y ago

Can a US-based business sell products and services to a Chinese one? At least, can they do it directly and not through some Chinese subsidiary?

RobertoG 10y ago
Are not American corporations getting a god deal here? Because it seems to me that they are profiting from the difference in wages. Maybe a case of eat your cake and have it?

gph 10y ago

> It's the US' problem to find what to sell. And only the US can solve it. Well there's the problem of China not respecting copyright or any type of intellectual property. And that's not just a problem for the Facebooks of the world, they are stealing our agricultural and industrial knowledge as well. And while it's not officially sanctioned by the CCP, it's unofficially encouraged.

RobertoG 10y ago
That's the standard book for developing an economy. The USA did that to Europe, specially to England.
- gph 10y ago
  There is no standard for developing an economy, you've just taken two similar instances in history and correlated them. Or did Japan, Germany, et al. develop their economy through industrial espionage and I just haven't learned about it yet?
  - RobertoG 10y ago
    It's funny that you mention the Japanese. I don't know if you were around in the 80's but, if you were and have some memory, this song that we are listening now, should be familiar to you. And it seems to me that, yes, there is a standard for developing a country's economy: you build and industrial base. For that you need importing technology and knowledge. For that you need foreign currency. So, you sell the job of your people. By the way, what you don't do, if you are clever, is follow the IMF advice.
izacus 10y ago
This implies that the American way of looking at these things is the ONLY right way of looking at things and that Chinese need to accept western companies on western terms.
- gph 10y ago
  If they are going to be part of the global economy then they need to accept the terms of the global economy. Yea their practices are mainly harming western countries at this point, but in the future maybe it's India or Singapore that has the lead in these areas. Would you think it's alright for China to do it then? Like it or not the global capitalist economy has to be built with some form of protection for content and IP producers. I fail to see how China's model is the 'right way of looking at things'. In fact if we all acted like China I'm guessing the global economy would collapse.
  - Juliate 10y ago
    "If they are going to be part of the global economy then they need to accept the terms of the global economy." This is an absolutely marvelous way of looking at things. For once, it ignores that the "global economy" may profit a lot from revising its own terms (especially regarding copyright/IP). Or that the "global economy" is more like the interests of the few powerful ones who say what it is.
    - gph 10y ago
      Sure there are theoretically better ways of doing things. If there are theoretically better ways of distributing food does that mean I get to go rob a grocery store? You can't flaunt the rules and regulations of world trade because you disagree with them or want to change them. Besides that's not what China wants. China wants to eat its cake and have it too. Edit: Wow looks like it's ok to lie, cheat, and steal because "the other guy does it and I think the system is unjust on top of that." Really spectacular arguments from the anti-establishment crowd.
      - izacus 10y ago
tossaway322 10y ago
gph says:>"... the problem of China not respecting copyright or any type of intellectual property. " And, after thirty years' trying, mainland Chinese still make very low-quality hand tools and have severely damaged Western suppliers of the same. "Give me a good screwdriver and a place to stand - I will move the Earth." - Archimedes322 P.S. Why the downvote? Compare the quality of USA-, European- and Chinese-made (except Taiwanese, which are often exquisite) hand tools. The mainland Chinese don't measure up to a 1920's standards of manufacture in the West.

cloakandswagger 10y ago

>It's the US' problem to find what to sell. And only the US can solve it. This is completely wrong. China has huge barriers in place to dissuade the importation of products that compete with their own. 30% tariffs on certain items, selective application of VAT and currency manipulation all make it near impossible for the US to sell goods in China.

794CD01 10y ago
And yet for all those barriers, Chinese consumers still can't get enough of the latest Apple products. mrb is exactly right. US companies CAN sell in China, if they figure out how to, and some have.
- DarkKomunalec 10y ago
  Yes, they CAN sell in China, they're just at a huge disadvantage. Is your argument that because SOME products still sell, the barriers aren't significant, or that US firms aren't adversely affected by them, to the benefit of Chinese ones?
  - 794CD01 10y ago
    My argument is that when companies can't compete on technology as they may be used to, too frequently, they throw their hands up in the air and conclude that this means they can't compete period. However, we can see that Western companies are successful today competing along different axes. I would even extend that further by saying that if things dry up in the future and we have to keep innovating to stay ahead as China continues to copy and catch up, good. Let's do that. Everyone will be better off.
makomk 10y ago
Not to mention heavy restrictions on money transfers in and out of the country and a huge amount of red tape. Ian of Dangerous Prototypes set up a business in China a year or so back and wrote about what was involved, and it's astonishing: http://dangerousprototypes.com/blog/2016/02/04/how-to-china-importexport-permit-and-company-bank/ http://dangerousprototypes.com/blog/2016/02/04/how-to-china-...

Gargoyle 10y ago

>It's the US' problem to find what to sell. If it's trade or war, it's China's problem too.

sevensor 10y ago

> Historically countries who trade less tend to be hostile toward each others, while countries who trade in bigger volumes are friendly I can think of one big counterexample off the top of my head: trade between France and Germany in the years leading up to 1914. Strong economic ties didn't prevent Europe from going completely off the rails. Which historical trading partners did you have in mind?