5 ms·

What the current US government want to achieve is not clear neither. You can't expect China to say nothing and just abide to whatever. There's no long term vie

by boudin 7y ago

What the current US government want to achieve is not clear neither. You can't expect China to say nothing and just abide to whatever. There's no long term view, China has quite a few things they can use to pressure the US and it will be stupid for them not to use those. It's a self-harming game and the first one to bend will lose it. The longer US tarifs stays, the more some US companies that depends on those imports will be in trouble. China has plenty of cards to go the same route, controlling a huge part of the western companies production system. It feels to me that this is just a first card, and there's some more damaging ones to both China and the US to come. And to be honest, with the current US behaviour, between this and Iran, the only thing it achieve is that most of the world will want to be as independant as possible of the dollar in the future

zwaps 7y ago
Wait, did the US not state what it wants to achieve? It wants China to give the same market access as it enjoys in other countries in the world, including regulating and treating foreig companies as its own companies are treated. Also, IP theft. It also seems that in contrast to what you say, other countries are setting up to move away from China, to Vietnam, say. I wonder what recourse the CCP really has.
- dingaling 7y ago
  This being the same USA that caps foreign ownership of airlines to 25%, for example. And which country was built on unlicensed use of European IP... No country or bloc has a truly free market. Even the EU has rules preferring and protecting indigenous companies. Criticising China alone is just hypocrisy.
  - joaomacp 7y ago
    It's not hypocrisy, it's playing by the same rules: China bans US tech companies, US bans a China equipment company.
  - sgent 7y ago
    China is by far the worst offender. Their laws resemble a developing economy while they are significantly industrialized. Make no mistake that the majority of the US including the Democratic congress support Trump on the goals -- if not 100% on the methods. Quite stupidly the US picked a trade battle with Canada and the UK/EU before going after China. Trump's administration had the termidity to call Canada a security threat while the air defence of the US mainland's second in command is a Canadian General.
    - wuschb 7y ago
      Don't assume you talk for the majority without statistics to back it up. Make no mistake, this "Trade War" has the same implications as a real war. The only ones who will eventually suffer are poorest members of our society.
    - boudin 7y ago
      China is an offender in the eyes of the usa. They are free to have their own policies. They also have every right to have their own policies around IPs and patents. Now that it makes people unhappy in the US, I get it, it's a different mindset. But as much as the US has the right to disagree with China's policies and vision, China has every right to disagree with the US one. The US government as every right to try to protect its market but China has every right to fight back.
    - wbrasky 7y ago
      "termidity" What exactly does that mean?
- simula67 7y ago
  > It also seems that in contrast to what you say, other countries are setting up to move away from China, to Vietnam, say. As living standards in China rise, cost of manufacture in China was bound to rise. The Chinese have been preparing for this for quite some time. They have started automation and have begun an ambitious plan of infrastructure lead development called BRI and countries like Italy has signed up to join the project. > I wonder what recourse the CCP really has. I would assume plenty. China can slowly start dumping US treasuries and stop buying more. China can sanction US companies like Apple operating in China. China can start bilateral trade agreements with other countries and use it's financial clout to demand de-dollarization and move international trade to a more neutral currency like the IMF SDR. China can buy more oil from Iran. China can invade Taiwan. China can refuse to honor sanctions against North Korea etc
  - deleted 7y ago
    [deleted]
  - zwaps 7y ago
    Interesting points. > They have started automation and have begun an ambitious plan of infrastructure lead development called BRI and countries like Italy has signed up to join the project. Well the move away from China is not because of costs, but because of politics. Especially companies here (EU) are very worried about the IP theft and protectionist actions. Except if you are Mercedes or BMW, China is likely to copy your product and then push you out of the domestic market through government regulation, at least that's what I hear. Italy is special. On the one hand, its domestic politics. On the other hand, how meaningful can such an agreement truly be with an EU country? > China can slowly start dumping US treasuries and stop buying more. They already do that. But since this strengthens the yuan, isn't there a limit? So far, it did not seem to affect the US very much. > China can sanction US companies like Apple operating in China. While China is becoming an important market, it is a luxury market segment so I think Apple would survive. On the other hand, this would probably see all other companies leaving China very rapidly. I think this is the most realistic outcome, but I'd see China losing in the long run. > China can start bilateral trade agreements with other countries and use it's financial clout to demand de-dollarization and move international trade to a more neutral currency like the IMF SDR. What effect should that have except decrease Chinese exports and an increase in US exports? The EU does not do real aka meaningful trade agreements bilaterally. Anglo-Saxon countries would neither. For all other countries, China has been trying to expand its influence since the last five years, at least. They have had success in Africa, but have gotten a bad reputation from it. > China can invade Taiwan. I don't see that happening. If Japan, Korea and the US would defend Taiwain's sovereignity, that war would be over very quickly. And with Trump, would you really want to gamble? > China can refuse to honor sanctions against North Korea That is true and we have seen Trump trying to fix the NK situation for that reason. However, I feel like the impact would be rather small. I think we have seen that Kim does not really want nuclear weapons just because. If Trump would have lifted sanctions, he'd probably get rid of them. I guess I shold have asked whether there is any recourse which would damage the US more than China.

by boudin 7y ago

zwaps 7y ago

Wait, did the US not state what it wants to achieve? It wants China to give the same market access as it enjoys in other countries in the world, including regulating and treating foreig companies as its own companies are treated. Also, IP theft. It also seems that in contrast to what you say, other countries are setting up to move away from China, to Vietnam, say. I wonder what recourse the CCP really has.

dingaling 7y ago
This being the same USA that caps foreign ownership of airlines to 25%, for example. And which country was built on unlicensed use of European IP... No country or bloc has a truly free market. Even the EU has rules preferring and protecting indigenous companies. Criticising China alone is just hypocrisy.
- joaomacp 7y ago
  It's not hypocrisy, it's playing by the same rules: China bans US tech companies, US bans a China equipment company.
- sgent 7y ago
  China is by far the worst offender. Their laws resemble a developing economy while they are significantly industrialized. Make no mistake that the majority of the US including the Democratic congress support Trump on the goals -- if not 100% on the methods. Quite stupidly the US picked a trade battle with Canada and the UK/EU before going after China. Trump's administration had the termidity to call Canada a security threat while the air defence of the US mainland's second in command is a Canadian General.
  - wuschb 7y ago
    Don't assume you talk for the majority without statistics to back it up. Make no mistake, this "Trade War" has the same implications as a real war. The only ones who will eventually suffer are poorest members of our society.
  - boudin 7y ago
    China is an offender in the eyes of the usa. They are free to have their own policies. They also have every right to have their own policies around IPs and patents. Now that it makes people unhappy in the US, I get it, it's a different mindset. But as much as the US has the right to disagree with China's policies and vision, China has every right to disagree with the US one. The US government as every right to try to protect its market but China has every right to fight back.
  - wbrasky 7y ago
    "termidity" What exactly does that mean?
simula67 7y ago
> It also seems that in contrast to what you say, other countries are setting up to move away from China, to Vietnam, say. As living standards in China rise, cost of manufacture in China was bound to rise. The Chinese have been preparing for this for quite some time. They have started automation and have begun an ambitious plan of infrastructure lead development called BRI and countries like Italy has signed up to join the project. > I wonder what recourse the CCP really has. I would assume plenty. China can slowly start dumping US treasuries and stop buying more. China can sanction US companies like Apple operating in China. China can start bilateral trade agreements with other countries and use it's financial clout to demand de-dollarization and move international trade to a more neutral currency like the IMF SDR. China can buy more oil from Iran. China can invade Taiwan. China can refuse to honor sanctions against North Korea etc
- deleted 7y ago
  [deleted]
- zwaps 7y ago
  Interesting points. > They have started automation and have begun an ambitious plan of infrastructure lead development called BRI and countries like Italy has signed up to join the project. Well the move away from China is not because of costs, but because of politics. Especially companies here (EU) are very worried about the IP theft and protectionist actions. Except if you are Mercedes or BMW, China is likely to copy your product and then push you out of the domestic market through government regulation, at least that's what I hear. Italy is special. On the one hand, its domestic politics. On the other hand, how meaningful can such an agreement truly be with an EU country? > China can slowly start dumping US treasuries and stop buying more. They already do that. But since this strengthens the yuan, isn't there a limit? So far, it did not seem to affect the US very much. > China can sanction US companies like Apple operating in China. While China is becoming an important market, it is a luxury market segment so I think Apple would survive. On the other hand, this would probably see all other companies leaving China very rapidly. I think this is the most realistic outcome, but I'd see China losing in the long run. > China can start bilateral trade agreements with other countries and use it's financial clout to demand de-dollarization and move international trade to a more neutral currency like the IMF SDR. What effect should that have except decrease Chinese exports and an increase in US exports? The EU does not do real aka meaningful trade agreements bilaterally. Anglo-Saxon countries would neither. For all other countries, China has been trying to expand its influence since the last five years, at least. They have had success in Africa, but have gotten a bad reputation from it. > China can invade Taiwan. I don't see that happening. If Japan, Korea and the US would defend Taiwain's sovereignity, that war would be over very quickly. And with Trump, would you really want to gamble? > China can refuse to honor sanctions against North Korea That is true and we have seen Trump trying to fix the NK situation for that reason. However, I feel like the impact would be rather small. I think we have seen that Kim does not really want nuclear weapons just because. If Trump would have lifted sanctions, he'd probably get rid of them. I guess I shold have asked whether there is any recourse which would damage the US more than China.