The best way to defeat Trump in this election: China cancels all trade war tariffs on American exports

[Marcin2 + 724]

-

Edited May 19, 2020 by Marcin2
-

[frankfurter + 562]

17 minutes ago, Jan van Eck said:

That this remark is total rubbish can be instantly seen by noting that only 7% of US GNP is earned in export.  The US is an internal-trade nation, producing and consuming inside its own borders.  Yes, the US imports from others, mostly without barriers, a generos approach that both helps less wealthy nations build up their earnings and allows US consumers to benefit from the rich variety of products found around the world.  But to suggest that the US has a Master Plan of "trade dominance and mercantile enrichment" is totally ridiculous. 

mench, you are drinking too much of the koolaid, and must have zero experience in trade.  uh what do you think the sanctions on NKorea, Iran, Russia are all about?  ever heard of the Nord stream?  

[Jan van Eck + 7,558]

Just now, frankfurter said:

mench, you are drinking too much of the koolaid, and must have zero experience in trade.  uh what do you think the sanctions on NKorea, Iran, Russia are all about?  ever heard of the Nord stream?  

I do not intend to engage with you further, so go find yourself another victim. 

[Hotone + 412]

6 hours ago, Douglas Buckland said:

Question:

Why, in Malaysia, is it okay for a Muslim to attempt to convert someone of another faith, but it is illegal for someone of another faith to attempt to convert a Muslim?

That's a good question, but let's not get into it.  Religion can be a controversial and emotional topic where you can't have a rational discussion.  It's enough that this forum focuses on Oil and US vs China, without going off on another heated tangent 😉

[Douglas Buckland + 6,308]

14 minutes ago, Hotone said:

That's a good question, but let's not get into it.  Religion can be a controversial and emotional topic where you can't have a rational discussion.  It's enough that this forum focuses on Oil and US vs China, without going off on another heated tangent 😉

 

Ah, I see that you are a Muslim.
 

YOU brought in religion with your comment above!!!!😖

[Tom Kirkman + 8,860]

23 minutes ago, Douglas Buckland said:

 

Ah, I see that you are a Muslim.
 

YOU brought in religion with your comment above!!!!😖

 

[Douglas Buckland + 6,308]

@Tom Kirkman
 

The new government has extended the ‘relaxed’ Movement Control Order (MCO) by another month!😖

I am guessing this is to control interstate movement during Ramadan and Hari Raya, as well as to ‘finish out’ the interrupted school year.

The country was losing RM2.4 billion a day during the 7 weeks of hard lockdown, no idea what they are losing during the soft lockdown, but it must be significant. They say half the workforce is back on the job, but that indicates that half aren’t.

They are also spending billions on a business aid package.

All of this, plus the fact that their GDP has been hammered by the crash in the oil price (serious reduction in dividend to the government from Petronas) makes you wonder if the economy will EVER recover.

[Tom Kirkman + 8,860]

12 minutes ago, Douglas Buckland said:

The new government has extended the ‘relaxed’ Movement Control Order (MCO) by another month!😖

 

What is the religious equivalent of Darwin Award?  Congrats on racing toward the Award.

(I'm trying to be politically correct in my question to the authorities over there.)

[Dan Warnick + 6,100]

1 hour ago, Marcin2 said:

China can choose to acquire only Airbus aircraft going forward

It is no longer a choice, since 28th April 2020. New controls effectively ban (at least state-owned which is ? 90% of demand) Chinese airlines acquisition of Boeing or any American aircraft. Or to be honest vast majority of US industrial products. I think Chinese airlines will also have problems with servicing Boeing fleet they already own, maybe not now but in 2-3 years. (The reason of these export controls is to prevent Chinese military from using US high-tech products, but it is formulated in a way to easily sanction any Chinese company. It would be irresponsible for Chinese companies to take such a huge risk).

but in order for their aircraft manufacturing to approach profitability, they will need scale that includes outside China sales

Chinese air transport market is similar to US, that means vast majority of passengers (about 85%) and miles (about 70%) are in domestic routes. Chinese domestic market is at present about 600 million passengers, US domestic market is larger at 800 million passengers. I do not know how COVID-19 would impact both markets, but before COVID-19 Chinese market should surpass US about 2023-2024.

This makes steady and high demand for any Chinese domestic company. I think any significant international sales would be possible only after 5, maybe 10 years after sales in China. I do not know the exact demand but I think 100 C-919 a year should not be a problem to sell.

Of course Chinese program would be probably delayed cause I think Chinese air industry would be soon placed on US Entity List (like any advanced Chinese industry). They wold have to change to non-American engine suppliers and later develop own.

 

You raise some valid points regarding U.S. export controls.  These new and/or strengthened controls, or rules, appear to have already impacted purchases of Boeing aircraft, with only 45-50 delivered in 2019, although the bulk of Chinese orders were for 737-MAX aircraft which have been grounded/not delivering for over a year.  Airbus deliveries to China were down some 12% as well.  Chinese intentions are to replace purchases of the Boeing 737 and Airbus A320 models with the Chinese manufactured C919, which at present only offers the CFMI LEAP engine.  To your point, it is not clear if GE or any other U.S. aerospace company will continue being able to supply anything to the C919 program, and the LEAP engine is directly affected.  If the restrictions are severe enough, which it appears they may be, then it will set the production of the C919 back indefinitely.  Having said that, the investment in the development of the C919 is substantial and I am sure they will try to keep it alive.

Air transport: US mulls halting Leap engine sales to C919 programme

The United States is reportedly considering blocking the sale of engines for Comac’s C919 narrowbody programme.

Citing unnamed sources close to the matter, Reuters and the Wall Street Journal reported over the weekend that potential restrictions covering CFM International Leap-1C engines for the programme might be accompanied by limits on the export of other systems, such as Honeywell flight-control systems.

The US government will reportedly discuss the matter – as part of a larger discussion on how to restrict US technology exports to China – this week and later in the month, before arriving at a decision. The restriction would apparently take the form of a refusal to reapprove GE Aviation’s export licences for the engine. The enginemaker has obtained export licences from the US government for the Leap-1C engines since 2014, having most recently received one in March 2019. 

CFM is a joint venture between GE and France’s Safran. Apart from powering the C919, other variants of the Leap are also an option for the Airbus A320neo, and the exclusive powerplant for the grounded Boeing 737 Max. 

Responding to FlightGlobal’s request for comment, GE says: ”GE has provided products and services in the global marketplace for decades. We aggressively protect and defend our intellectual property and work closely with the US government to fulfill our responsibilities and shared security and economic interests.” 

Honeywell declined to comment, while Comac did not respond.

Comac has six C919 test aircraft flying, all fitted with the Leap-1C. It has more than 300 Leap-powered aircraft in its order book. Comac is looking at a 2021-2022 date for the C919’s service entry.

Apart from CFM engines, the C919 will also be fitted with Chinese-made powerplants.

Progress on the developmental CJ-1000AX high-bypass turbofan, manufactured by AECC Commercial Aircraft Engine, is still unclear. It was reported in 2018 that the CJ-1000AX demonstrator engine achieved power-on. Chinese media reports indicate the CJ-1000AX is looking to enter service in 2021.

Any restriction of Leap engines to China could deal a blow to the C919, pushing its timeline further to the right. It would also mark the latest event in a simmering back-and-forth between the Chinese and US governments over trade and technology transfer. 

[Dan Warnick + 6,100]

4 hours ago, Marcin2 said:

Gentlemen, food industry companies like Smithfield Foods are not diamonds or integrated circuits high-tech industry.

Why China bought Smithfield ? Because it was a good deal, it was just cheap. It was not politically motivated. I think I know a lot about food manufacturing industry (mainly pork & poultry) from the inside. It is not difficult to contract farmers, build reprocessing plants from slaughter house (brr, bad experience) to packaging. Contract wholesalers, supermarket chains like Wallmart etc.

Anybody can do this. But it takes time and money. You can create company like Smithfield but maybe in 10 years and with 20 billion dollars of investment ( I do not know whether numbers are right just example), and it was available for only 4.7 billion, just sounds like a good deal.

My point on this issue is that I don't think it is a good idea to allow corporations to sell off large portions of any critical supply chains to the highest bidder, with little or no consideration as to foreign control,  That could result in disruptions to those supplies being available to U.S. consumers.  I am aware that any such disruptions, IF they were to occur, would only be temporary, but it seems counterproductive to allow them to be put into place in the first place.  For another example, I don't think we should sell off critical portions of the electric grid.  Or pharmaceuticals.  It seems the U.S. government has been asleep at the wheel in these areas, and I think they need to reverse this trend.

[Jan van Eck + 7,558]

1 hour ago, Dan Warnick said:

For another example, I don't think we should sell off critical portions of the electric grid.  Or pharmaceuticals.  It seems the U.S. government has been asleep at the wheel in these areas, and I think they need to reverse this trend.

Very true.

[Marcin2 + 724]

5 hours ago, Tom Kirkman said:

 

What is the religious equivalent of Darwin Award?  Congrats on racing toward the Award.

(I'm trying to be politically correct in my question to the authorities over there.)

Guys, which religion do you discuss ? Please show some pictures of prominent figures so I am not confused ?

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=X_kuC35F06E

Edited May 10, 2020 by Marcin2
typo

[Dan Warnick + 6,100]

18 hours ago, Dan Warnick said:

My point on this issue is that I don't think it is a good idea to allow corporations to sell off large portions of any critical supply chains to the highest bidder, with little or no consideration as to foreign control,  That could result in disruptions to those supplies being available to U.S. consumers.  I am aware that any such disruptions, IF they were to occur, would only be temporary, but it seems counterproductive to allow them to be put into place in the first place.  For another example, I don't think we should sell off critical portions of the electric grid.  Or pharmaceuticals.  It seems the U.S. government has been asleep at the wheel in these areas, and I think they need to reverse this trend.

This latest Breaking News (Thank you, Wolf) further shows what I have been alluding to:

(excerpts, more in the article)

As U.S. meat workers fall sick and supplies dwindle, exports to China soar

CHICAGO (Reuters) - U.S. President Donald Trump ordered meat processing plants to stay open to protect the nation’s food supply even as workers got sick and died. Yet the plants have increasingly been exporting to China while U.S. consumers face shortages, a Reuters analysis of government data showed.

 

Processors including Smithfield Foods, owned by China’s WH Group Ltd, Brazilian-owned JBS USA [JBS.UL] and Tyson Foods Inc temporarily closed about 20 U.S. meat plants as the virus infected thousands of employees, prompting meatpackers and grocers to warn of shortages. Some plants have resumed limited operations as workers afraid of getting sick stay home. 

The disruptions mean consumers could see 30% less meat in supermarkets by the end of May, at prices 20% higher than last year, according to Will Sawyer, lead economist at agricultural lender CoBank.

While pork supplies tightened as the number of pigs slaughtered each day plunged by about 40% since mid-March, shipments of American pork to China more than quadrupled over the same period, according to U.S. Department of Agriculture data. tmsnrt.rs/2YLF1XN

Smithfield, which China’s WH Group bought for $4.7 billion in 2013, was the biggest U.S. exporter to China from January to March, according to Panjiva, a division of S&P Global Market Intelligence. Smithfield shipped at least 13,680 tonnes by sea in March, Panjiva said, citing its most recent data.

China increased its purchases because of its dire need for protein after a pig disease called African swine fever led to the death of half the country’s herd over the past two years. Beijing lifted a nearly five-year ban on U.S. chicken imports in November and also waived retaliatory tariffs on meat shipments to help boost supplies.

Year-to-date, about 31% of U.S. pork has been exported, totaling about 838,000 tonnes, according to the U.S. Meat Export Federation. One-third of that volume went to China, accounting for more than 10% of total first-quarter production, the industry group said.

[Dan Warnick + 6,100]

And the beef industry has been taking massive hits while the U.S. government, seemingly, aids and abets:

Ranchers Oppose Marfrig Acquisition that would Spell More Foreign Control Over US Beef

American ranchers have already had to reckon with the power of Brazilian beef. Beef prices hit a record high in 2014. But in December 2015, Congress passed and President Obama signed a law repealing country of origin labeling rules for beef and pork, meaning that American and foreign-grown beef no longer had to be labeled as such in U.S. supermarkets. Also in 2016, the USDA reopened the U.S. to Brazilian beef imports, meaning that packers could import cheaper beef at will and limit their purchases of higher-priced American beef. Prices for market-ready cattle promptly collapsed, falling from approximately $1.70 pound to $1.10 per pound.

Since 1996, an average of nearly 11,000 cattle operations have gone out of business each year. These closure rates have remained constant both in years when Americans ate more beef and in years when they ate less, and Meyer and other ranchers blame consolidation for the losses. “We’ve lost so many farmers and ranchers,” says Meyer.

Lower payments to ranchers have not helped eaters either. Data shows that even in years of falling prices, the meatpackers don’t pass those savings on to the consumer.

Bullard and his fellow ranchers hope the Trump Administration will block the Marfrig deal, in part because they see parallels between their situation and that of U.S. manufacturing workers, who President Trump has promised to help by fighting against “unfair trade practices.” “The country of Brazil’s efforts to take over US beef processing is what China is doing to U.S. manufacturing,” Bullard says.

Edited May 11, 2020 by Dan Warnick

[Dan Warnick + 6,100]

Stop China’s predatory investments before the US becomes its next victim

Stop China’s predatory investments before the US becomes its next victim

By: Jeffery A. Green    April 17

 

 

From left, the executive director and chairman of WH Group, Wan Long; the executive director and president of Smithfield Foods, Larry Pope; Smithfield Chief Financial Officer Kenneth Sullivan; and the Smithfield executive vice president, Robert Manly, attend a news conference in Hong Kong on April 14, 2014. Chinese pork producer WH Group had the year prior bought U.S. company Smithfield Foods (Philippe Lopez/AFP via Getty Images)

 

An ancient Chinese stratagem instructs military leaders: “Chen huo da jie,” or “loot a house when it’s on fire.” The tactic is simple and self-explanatory — strike when your enemy is most vulnerable. As America’s people and industries reel from the impact of a global pandemic, the United States must take immediate action to protect our economic interests from being looted by a uniquely opportunistic adversary.

Many U.S. companies have been substantially weakened in both market cap and revenue by the COVID-19 pandemic. With countless companies struggling to survive this crisis, the U.S. should institute a temporary but immediate and total ban on the sale of any U.S. company deemed “critical infrastructure,” whose value has been materially impacted by the pandemic, to a Chinese-owned or controlled entity.

China’s aggressive weaponization of its economy is no secret. Whether through currency manipulation or the withholding of critical materials, such as rare earth minerals, from the global supply chain, China has a reputation for using its economy in a targeted manner to further its ambitious global plans. Be it overtly or obliquely, through direct ownership or by de facto monopoly, China has encroached on or outright assaulted nearly every meaningful sector of the U.S. economy.

But China’s infiltration and manipulation of the American economy and psyche began well before the COVID-19 crisis. From a national security perspective, Chinese companies have taken ownership of U.S. companies critical to the strategic supply chain, such as cutting-edge battery technologies and microelectronics. The U.S. is entirely dependent on China for segments of the supply of rare earth minerals, which are necessary for everything from cellphones to critical weapon systems. In 2013, a Chinese company purchased Smithfield Foods, simultaneously making the company the owner of both the largest pork producer globally and more than $500 million of American farmland.

In 2004, China launched the Confucius Institute program, with the stated goal of promoting Chinese culture and language overseas. With mounting concerns about the spread of Chinese Communist Party propaganda through these institutes, as well as fears of possible espionage originating from them, universities across the world began canceling their affiliations. To date, more than two dozen U.S. universities have cut ties with these programs.

[Marcin2 + 724]

-

Edited May 19, 2020 by Marcin2
-

[Marcin2 + 724]

-

Edited May 19, 2020 by Marcin2
-

[BradleyPNW + 282]

On 5/9/2020 at 9:49 PM, ronwagn said:

It was just tested when Trump won the last election. The electoral college gave rural America and many less populous states an important voice that prevented the largest population centers from electing his opponent. 

The EC was an aristocratic construct intended to keep an aristocracy in control of the executive branch. Further, it was pretty much cobbled together by men worn down by working in the heat of an 18th century Philadelphia summer in a building where the doors and windows were closed to maintain privacy. Hot and miserable as hell. 

2016 was an unintended consequence of the EC. The framers of the US Constitution would have hated the outcome because they despised ignorant criminal garbage like Donald Trump. The 2016 EC backfired on the founding fathers and America. 

Do you know what a modern interpretation of the EC consistent with the framer's intent would look like? A small number of academics and political insiders (American aristocracy) would choose the president. They'd never allow the lower classes of rural America to elect a president. 

[Jee + 27]

Are you saying that the CCP want someone other than Trump to be president, so they should do what's within their power, like cutting tariffs, to make it happen? If that's what you are implying, you are dillusional.

The CCP have no reason to want to avoid the pain of the trade war, what would help them tho is to prolong this trade deal talk from months to years to buy themselves more time.

The main reason (besides others) they are suffering more in this trade war, is because their industries are not as advanced as the US. And they will never have the internal willingness to move up on the industrialization ladder if their business and political leaders are happy with being world manufactures of low profit margin products. This trade war has been a whip from God to force their business and government leaders to invest more in R&Ds, advanced infrastructures and political influences over the world to ensure long term prosperity.

If Xi's Made in China 2025 plan had faced scrutinies and difficulties from within, Trumps trade war has helped him big time and no one is doubt now, that unless China converts into an advanced industrialization nation by doing whatever it takes, it will have no place in this food chain to survive in the long term.

[Marcin2 + 724]

-

Edited May 19, 2020 by Marcin2
-

[Marcin2 + 724]

I think increased meat exports from US is strictly commercial phenomenon. Prices in China on average +50% so import volume doubled to 3 million ton YTD April 2020. US exports fraction of total cause imports are from all over the world.

Maybe administrative measures are needed to curb US exports ?

Edited May 11, 2020 by Marcin2
Typo

[Jee + 27]

39 minutes ago, Marcin2 said:

I think increased meat exports from US is strictly commercial phenomenon. Prices in China on average +50% so import volume doubled to 3 million ton YTD April 2020. US exports fraction of total cause imports are from all over the world.

Maybe administrative measures are needed to curb US exports ?

Increased imports of US meat is beneficial, it keeps cost of foods down, China does not have the capacity to feed its massive population with desirable level of meat proteins on its own, same applies to energies imports.

Edited May 11, 2020 by Jee

[Jee + 27]

56 minutes ago, Marcin2 said:

Actually I do not know what CCP want. My rationale was that pet topic of propaganda: China is a threat would be less intensive. Sometimes I think it is something that is already out of control and would end badly. Trump needs to Double down on blaming others in order to deflect attention from difficult economic situation. He had limited impact, there would be recession whatever his actions, but Americans blame Presidents in such instances.

Maybe you are right that trade war was Sputnik moment for China. But I am from small European country, and heated conflict between US and China, seems to engage most of US resources so other topics are No longer on US agenda. And being blackmailed by both much stronger powers to take sides in conflict is notcomfortable for small countries. 

One thing we know from history and human nature, is that when things are out of control, people blame others.

[0R0 + 6,251]

On 5/10/2020 at 8:38 AM, Marcin2 said:

I do not know how 7% was calculated, but for US foreign trade is of secondary importance. And there is also one other country in the world. It is also huge, has large domestic market and large GDP and they also do not need trade for development.

Yes US and China has this one in common: can rely on their domestic markets.

That is why all other 180 countries are so pissed off on US for starting trade war.

1. Donald Trump gained his presidency winning title: Trump the China Conqueror. He made China to sign trade deal.

2. China (and thus its president Xi Jinping) gained titile: The Other Superpower in bipolar world. True elevation of status.

But all other countries just say: Why the hell we need to be involved in this battle, we suffer much more, we gain nothing, we get blackmailed by each of the large powers: US and China to take sides.

The Chinese equivalent is 17.4% exports. But its "domestic service economy" is driven by the limited millennial generation's well abused credit cards. The little princelings and princesses are tapped out and jobless. They have dropped imports by 40% as exports have only recovered to clear some of the backlog and then fell due to lack of new orders. Food inflation is rapidly draining disposable incomes. If they increase further credit and monetary stimulus it will just get worse. 

You, in particular, @Marcin need to pick the US side because your country is one of those most likely to be taken over by Russia and Germany in the case of China remaining integrated into the global economy. The sole and unique reason for the road and rail portion of the BRI is to create a means for China to obtain exclusive access to E European food production. To turn Ukrainians and Poles and Hungarians into slaves to feed China, after it had destroyed 40% of its arable land. Think. 

[Steve1 + 2]

I don't care what China thinks will happen if they do this thing or that.  I WILL VOTE FOR PRESIDENT TRUMP!!!