6 ms·

Of course China is playing unfairly. Not many people disagree. The argument has been that the West should fight China as a unified bloc as opposed to the unila

Of course China is playing unfairly. Not many people disagree. The argument has been that the West should fight China as a unified bloc as opposed to the unilateral tariffs being imposed. It makes no sense to alienate Canada, the EU, Japan, and South Korea when confronting China. All of those countries (and the EU) have serious grievances and would have provided the US additional leverage. The current approach is rooted in showmanship rather than strategy. It’s meant to provide a spectacle.

67_45 8y ago
If the other Western countries have grievences, then their trade policy will reflect those grievances even if there is no 'bloc?' and the result of all those countries implementing their policy will be similar to if they had done it as a group. right? And the article points out that the us is singled out by China's tarrifs, so the rest of the bloc would not act in the interest of the US. You also mention SK and Japan but those countries have even higher tarrifs than China for the US, so should they not also be made subject to the global market (ie be engaged in 'trade wars') ? If their trade policy can't survive the free market, why should they not change?
dxhdr 8y ago
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_the_largest_trading_partners_of_China https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_the_largest_trading_pa... Looks like the US is the largest trading partner with China, how much leverage do you need? How long would it take a "unified bloc" to agree on doing anything?
- at-fates-hands 8y ago
  >> How long would it take a "unified bloc" to agree on doing anything? This is why most of the time the US does things unilaterally. Whether its militarily, economically or otherwise. We ask other countries if they want to stop China from laying huge tariffs on their products and they say, "Yes, for sure!" Then we say, "Okay, let's all impose tariffs on their imports and fight back!" and suddenly all those countries who were on board to do something suddenly get cold feet and don't want to get sucked into a trade war or deal with the short term consequences of standing up to them. Also, these trade wars with China have been off and on since the 1970's if not earlier.
  - cbnotfromthere 8y ago
    <quote>Also, these trade wars with China have been off and on since the 1970's if not earlier.</quote> You're obviously confusing between the trade wars with Japan and the trade wars with China.
  - ajross 8y ago
    > suddenly all those countries [...] get cold feet Seems like this is asking for a citation. That kind of rhetoric works for all purposes (surely EU trade negotiators have been similarly annoyed by US inaction on other issues, for example). If you have something specific to complain about, this is the place to do it.
  - graeme 8y ago
    Could you name a specific instance of asking other countries to impose tariffs on China? I'm in Canada, and can't recall the US ever asking. Further, the US keeps one foot out of international tools like the WTO or the UN law of the sea, neutering the very mechanisms with which the rest of the world could coordinate action.
- Nokinside 8y ago
  EU makes all trade deals as unified block. EU is China's biggest trading partner and China is now the EU's second-biggest trading partner behind the United States
  - abduhl 8y ago
    Europe is not the EU. Europe's total trade is 696.3 billion (with 403.2 billion exported); however, subtracting out JUST the UK's 78.5 billion brings this down to 617.8 billion and 343.6 exported. Remove Russia and you're at 549.8 and 308.8 exported. The US is 557 billion total with 409.2 exported. The US is China's biggest trading partner. Let's not even get started on the fact that the US is the major buyer of Chinese goods - nobody buys more. The US imports more dollars worth of goods than any other region except Asia.
donald123 8y ago
That's only one side story in US, all the arguments are for political or diplomatic goal. It's like a kid lost a game would claim unfairness ignoring all the established rules, just because he's not happy.
at-fates-hands 8y ago
>> The current approach is rooted in showmanship rather than strategy. It’s meant to provide a spectacle. Trump repeatedly said during his campaign he would go after China for their tariffs and how they manipulate their currency. For a lot of Trump voters, he's just following through with a campaign promise.
- berbec 8y ago
  The two aren't mutually exclusive. Trump can be engaging in showmanship and following through with a campaign promise. I'm not saying the China tarrifs are spectacle, but the wall certainly is security theater.
slysssassa 8y ago
The current approach seems to work so far against China though. 1.) S&P 500 up 5.3%, shanghai composite down 15.7% http://www.talkmarkets.com/content/us-markets/china-and-us-drifting-apart?post=183424 http://www.talkmarkets.com/content/us-markets/china-and-us-d... 2.) Yuan falls 1 year low vs dollar, losing 7% since 1st quarter https://www.reuters.com/article/china-stocks-hongkong-close/hk-shares-drop-led-by-airlines-as-yuan-falls-to-1-yr-low-vs-dollar-idUSZZN2NCL00 https://www.reuters.com/article/china-stocks-hongkong-close/... 3.) China has 33.3 billion yuan ($4.9 billion) in corporate bond defaults so far this year, already exceeds the full-year record of 30 billion yuan, set in 2016. https://www.bloomberg.com/news/articles/2018-07-19/why-china-s-local-bonds-are-defaulting-at-record-pace-quicktake https://www.bloomberg.com/news/articles/2018-07-19/why-china... 4.) Chinese manufacturing slowed in June as exports weakened http://www.startribune.com/surveys-show-chinese-manufacturing-growth-cooling/487077651/ http://www.startribune.com/surveys-show-chinese-manufacturin... also, it does look like each country/block is setting its own tariffs against China The European Union will impose import tariff quotas of 25% on a number of steel products https://www.marketwatch.com/story/eu-to-impose-tariff-quotas-on-foreign-steel-2018-07-18 https://www.marketwatch.com/story/eu-to-impose-tariff-quotas... The Canadian measures are expected to include new quotas on certain steel imports to prevent dumping, with tariffs applied above that threshold https://www.bloomberg.com/news/articles/2018-06-26/canada-said-to-prepare-steel-quotas-tariffs-on-china-others https://www.bloomberg.com/news/articles/2018-06-26/canada-sa...
- ajross 8y ago
  > Yuan falls 1 year low vs dollar Your argument (I think) is that we're successfully limiting Chinese trade effectivenes, and your argument is that their currency is dropping? You understand how these things work, right? Sure, we've limited import of some small selection of items. And in exchange, everything else from China gets cheaper. > Chinese manufacturing slowed in June This seemed like such a whopper I actually followed the link. Chinese manufacturing growth slowed in June. That you conflate a derivative with the function tells me all I need to know about your seriousness.
- matachuan 8y ago
  Your numerous citations and that point 2) you made form an embarassing contrast but it's adorable though.
mc32 8y ago
Bill Clinton was very eager to get China into the WTO. Business and Industry and Clinton only saw gleeming $ signs. It blinded them to corruption, unfair practices, etc. They all had been warned about it. They all thought they knew better and could bring China in line. After Clinton, GWB didn’t even try. He was too distracted by bin Laden. Obama was trying to make nice to the rest of the world during his first term, then got embroiled with the unrest he started in the ME. They had all forgotten about blue collar America. They all thought people would change jobs and these jobs would offer a good living to blue collar workers. Surprise! It doesn’t work that way. Sure your ivy leaguers got nice cushy advisory jobs and consultancy jobs and got to talk about their adventures diring their two year China stint. All the whole mill workers, garment workers, furniture workers, tools workers were forgotten and left behind. Now, while inelegantly, someone is finally recognizing the grievance. It’s about time. It’s a shame it’s taken 20 years.
- vezycash 8y ago
  Let's not forget to blame the real culprit here, "Maximizing shareholder value." Afaik, without this constant need to cut a buck - everywhere, china would have nothing to steal because no one would go there in the first place. http://www.europeanfinancialreview.com/?p=883 http://www.europeanfinancialreview.com/?p=883
- pertsix 8y ago
  > They had all forgotten about blue collar America. They all thought people would change jobs and these jobs would offer a good living to blue collar workers. But.. people did change jobs? Unemployment is at an all-time low and goods and services are very cheap. Housing is not cheap, but that's a function of the wage rate (which could be argued is a function of housing costs). Just because there are more services industry jobs and less manufacturing does not mean that 'blue collar America' is forgotten -- it's just changed identities. Everyone benefits from global trade because the terms of trade should always benefit both parties.
  - mc32 8y ago
    Yes unemployment is low, but much of that is because many people have given up on finding jobs. U6 is something like 90 million. Also, most service sector jobs don’t afford you a mortgage and other lower middle class living. Most service sector workers struggle to get by, compared to your blue collar worker of yesteryear. Those people could afford a mortgage, raise three kids and send the off to state school. That ain’t happening no more.
mistermann 8y ago
> Of course China is playing unfairly. Not many people disagree. There's no way of knowing for sure, but based purely on what I see on TV and read in forums, I'd say 50%++ of people seem to disagree, and some of them extremely vehemently. And in my experience, you don't have to go too far to find similarly thinking people on HN either. This whole situation is incredibly frustrating to me because so many people seem to have such incredibly strong beliefs and certainty, yet only know, let alone understand, a tiny portion of the facts.....while accusing the other side of this very same thing, for an extra serving of delicious irony. > The argument has been that the West should fight China as a unified bloc as opposed to the unilateral tariffs being imposed. It makes no sense to alienate Canada, the EU, Japan, and South Korea when confronting China. All of those countries (and the EU) have serious grievances and would have provided the US additional leverage. That is "an" argument, that I've heard in very few places. Much more common is the stance that Trump is completely and unequivocally wrong on China practices and tariffs, full stop. > The current approach is rooted in showmanship rather than strategy. It’s meant to provide a spectacle. Facts and logic seem completely impotent, so it seems to me like a reasonable approach. Why he doesn't accompany it with some evidence like this article is a mystery and suggests that he in fact doesn't understand these things at a very deep level, but simultaneously I find that hard to believe. I wonder if we'll ever find out what's really going on in his head.

67_45 8y ago

If the other Western countries have grievences, then their trade policy will reflect those grievances even if there is no 'bloc?' and the result of all those countries implementing their policy will be similar to if they had done it as a group. right? And the article points out that the us is singled out by China's tarrifs, so the rest of the bloc would not act in the interest of the US. You also mention SK and Japan but those countries have even higher tarrifs than China for the US, so should they not also be made subject to the global market (ie be engaged in 'trade wars') ? If their trade policy can't survive the free market, why should they not change?

dxhdr 8y ago

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_the_largest_trading_partners_of_China https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_the_largest_trading_pa... Looks like the US is the largest trading partner with China, how much leverage do you need? How long would it take a "unified bloc" to agree on doing anything?

at-fates-hands 8y ago
>> How long would it take a "unified bloc" to agree on doing anything? This is why most of the time the US does things unilaterally. Whether its militarily, economically or otherwise. We ask other countries if they want to stop China from laying huge tariffs on their products and they say, "Yes, for sure!" Then we say, "Okay, let's all impose tariffs on their imports and fight back!" and suddenly all those countries who were on board to do something suddenly get cold feet and don't want to get sucked into a trade war or deal with the short term consequences of standing up to them. Also, these trade wars with China have been off and on since the 1970's if not earlier.
- cbnotfromthere 8y ago
  <quote>Also, these trade wars with China have been off and on since the 1970's if not earlier.</quote> You're obviously confusing between the trade wars with Japan and the trade wars with China.
- ajross 8y ago
  > suddenly all those countries [...] get cold feet Seems like this is asking for a citation. That kind of rhetoric works for all purposes (surely EU trade negotiators have been similarly annoyed by US inaction on other issues, for example). If you have something specific to complain about, this is the place to do it.
- graeme 8y ago
  Could you name a specific instance of asking other countries to impose tariffs on China? I'm in Canada, and can't recall the US ever asking. Further, the US keeps one foot out of international tools like the WTO or the UN law of the sea, neutering the very mechanisms with which the rest of the world could coordinate action.
Nokinside 8y ago
EU makes all trade deals as unified block. EU is China's biggest trading partner and China is now the EU's second-biggest trading partner behind the United States
- abduhl 8y ago
  Europe is not the EU. Europe's total trade is 696.3 billion (with 403.2 billion exported); however, subtracting out JUST the UK's 78.5 billion brings this down to 617.8 billion and 343.6 exported. Remove Russia and you're at 549.8 and 308.8 exported. The US is 557 billion total with 409.2 exported. The US is China's biggest trading partner. Let's not even get started on the fact that the US is the major buyer of Chinese goods - nobody buys more. The US imports more dollars worth of goods than any other region except Asia.

donald123 8y ago

That's only one side story in US, all the arguments are for political or diplomatic goal. It's like a kid lost a game would claim unfairness ignoring all the established rules, just because he's not happy.

at-fates-hands 8y ago

>> The current approach is rooted in showmanship rather than strategy. It’s meant to provide a spectacle. Trump repeatedly said during his campaign he would go after China for their tariffs and how they manipulate their currency. For a lot of Trump voters, he's just following through with a campaign promise.

berbec 8y ago
The two aren't mutually exclusive. Trump can be engaging in showmanship and following through with a campaign promise. I'm not saying the China tarrifs are spectacle, but the wall certainly is security theater.

slysssassa 8y ago

The current approach seems to work so far against China though. 1.) S&P 500 up 5.3%, shanghai composite down 15.7% http://www.talkmarkets.com/content/us-markets/china-and-us-drifting-apart?post=183424 http://www.talkmarkets.com/content/us-markets/china-and-us-d... 2.) Yuan falls 1 year low vs dollar, losing 7% since 1st quarter https://www.reuters.com/article/china-stocks-hongkong-close/hk-shares-drop-led-by-airlines-as-yuan-falls-to-1-yr-low-vs-dollar-idUSZZN2NCL00 https://www.reuters.com/article/china-stocks-hongkong-close/... 3.) China has 33.3 billion yuan ($4.9 billion) in corporate bond defaults so far this year, already exceeds the full-year record of 30 billion yuan, set in 2016. https://www.bloomberg.com/news/articles/2018-07-19/why-china-s-local-bonds-are-defaulting-at-record-pace-quicktake https://www.bloomberg.com/news/articles/2018-07-19/why-china... 4.) Chinese manufacturing slowed in June as exports weakened http://www.startribune.com/surveys-show-chinese-manufacturing-growth-cooling/487077651/ http://www.startribune.com/surveys-show-chinese-manufacturin... also, it does look like each country/block is setting its own tariffs against China The European Union will impose import tariff quotas of 25% on a number of steel products https://www.marketwatch.com/story/eu-to-impose-tariff-quotas-on-foreign-steel-2018-07-18 https://www.marketwatch.com/story/eu-to-impose-tariff-quotas... The Canadian measures are expected to include new quotas on certain steel imports to prevent dumping, with tariffs applied above that threshold https://www.bloomberg.com/news/articles/2018-06-26/canada-said-to-prepare-steel-quotas-tariffs-on-china-others https://www.bloomberg.com/news/articles/2018-06-26/canada-sa...

ajross 8y ago
> Yuan falls 1 year low vs dollar Your argument (I think) is that we're successfully limiting Chinese trade effectivenes, and your argument is that their currency is dropping? You understand how these things work, right? Sure, we've limited import of some small selection of items. And in exchange, everything else from China gets cheaper. > Chinese manufacturing slowed in June This seemed like such a whopper I actually followed the link. Chinese manufacturing growth slowed in June. That you conflate a derivative with the function tells me all I need to know about your seriousness.
matachuan 8y ago
Your numerous citations and that point 2) you made form an embarassing contrast but it's adorable though.

mc32 8y ago

Bill Clinton was very eager to get China into the WTO. Business and Industry and Clinton only saw gleeming $ signs. It blinded them to corruption, unfair practices, etc. They all had been warned about it. They all thought they knew better and could bring China in line. After Clinton, GWB didn’t even try. He was too distracted by bin Laden. Obama was trying to make nice to the rest of the world during his first term, then got embroiled with the unrest he started in the ME. They had all forgotten about blue collar America. They all thought people would change jobs and these jobs would offer a good living to blue collar workers. Surprise! It doesn’t work that way. Sure your ivy leaguers got nice cushy advisory jobs and consultancy jobs and got to talk about their adventures diring their two year China stint. All the whole mill workers, garment workers, furniture workers, tools workers were forgotten and left behind. Now, while inelegantly, someone is finally recognizing the grievance. It’s about time. It’s a shame it’s taken 20 years.

vezycash 8y ago
Let's not forget to blame the real culprit here, "Maximizing shareholder value." Afaik, without this constant need to cut a buck - everywhere, china would have nothing to steal because no one would go there in the first place. http://www.europeanfinancialreview.com/?p=883 http://www.europeanfinancialreview.com/?p=883
pertsix 8y ago
> They had all forgotten about blue collar America. They all thought people would change jobs and these jobs would offer a good living to blue collar workers. But.. people did change jobs? Unemployment is at an all-time low and goods and services are very cheap. Housing is not cheap, but that's a function of the wage rate (which could be argued is a function of housing costs). Just because there are more services industry jobs and less manufacturing does not mean that 'blue collar America' is forgotten -- it's just changed identities. Everyone benefits from global trade because the terms of trade should always benefit both parties.
- mc32 8y ago
  Yes unemployment is low, but much of that is because many people have given up on finding jobs. U6 is something like 90 million. Also, most service sector jobs don’t afford you a mortgage and other lower middle class living. Most service sector workers struggle to get by, compared to your blue collar worker of yesteryear. Those people could afford a mortgage, raise three kids and send the off to state school. That ain’t happening no more.

mistermann 8y ago

> Of course China is playing unfairly. Not many people disagree. There's no way of knowing for sure, but based purely on what I see on TV and read in forums, I'd say 50%++ of people seem to disagree, and some of them extremely vehemently. And in my experience, you don't have to go too far to find similarly thinking people on HN either. This whole situation is incredibly frustrating to me because so many people seem to have such incredibly strong beliefs and certainty, yet only know, let alone understand, a tiny portion of the facts.....while accusing the other side of this very same thing, for an extra serving of delicious irony. > The argument has been that the West should fight China as a unified bloc as opposed to the unilateral tariffs being imposed. It makes no sense to alienate Canada, the EU, Japan, and South Korea when confronting China. All of those countries (and the EU) have serious grievances and would have provided the US additional leverage. That is "an" argument, that I've heard in very few places. Much more common is the stance that Trump is completely and unequivocally wrong on China practices and tariffs, full stop. > The current approach is rooted in showmanship rather than strategy. It’s meant to provide a spectacle. Facts and logic seem completely impotent, so it seems to me like a reasonable approach. Why he doesn't accompany it with some evidence like this article is a mystery and suggests that he in fact doesn't understand these things at a very deep level, but simultaneously I find that hard to believe. I wonder if we'll ever find out what's really going on in his head.