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

[Marcin2 + 725]

16 minutes ago, 0R0 said:

 

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. 

War is bad for business. Nothing important to conquer in Poland or Eastern Europe and politically it is not feasible at present. I think integration of China into global economy increases safety. There is a lot of arable land in the world and when price is right China or anybody else could get any required supply of agriculture products. 

Economic relations are best in keeping countries in peace. Major source of Soviet exports during Cold War since 1960’s was crude oil and natural gas sold to Western Europe. US was against but it was instrumentary in keeping peace in Europe.

I am pro US but in rational way with some understanding of processes. Maybe at times I overestimate China, which is a good counter balance to underestimation of this country at this forum.

Edited May 11, 2020 by Marcin2
Typo

[0R0 + 6,251]

4 hours ago, Marcin2 said:

I agree that critical supply chains and industries should not be sold.

Electrical grid - I agree ,should be even state owned,

Mobile telephony infrastructure - should also be state owned,for example  in US mobile coverage is not adequate

Generally all natural monopolies should be heavily regulated or state owned. They are infrastructure that should serve society not private monopolists.

Pharmaceuticals - I only briefly had contact with this industry as insider so I do not know.

Meat processing : it is really not crucial who owns it. Agriculture policy is crucial. Concentration in the market is low even Smithfiled controls only about 15%. Production process in pork is really fast : from slaughter to packaging it is in hours maybe a few days tops, I do not remember. So whenever you want to control ALL pork market in US you get this control by administrative measures in a few days. Absolutely No problem with any disruption in the market.

I know that nearly all people have knowledge about such things, I mean how industries work, from press articles. They cannot write about details of Electricity transmission or pork processing- there would be No readers. In press article main narrative is important: here in story about Smithfield: there is demand for China related, best if China bad article. Journalists write to maximize readers for the media to maximize ad revenues.

I think you are off. That is remnants of Soviet block thinking stuck in your mind. 

Free markets is the only possible option. The disconnection of China from the US economy and financial system is a necessary step in a strategic repositioning that recognizes the potential of a bipolar China/Russia vs. US world. It must be undertaken on a war footing under a trading with the enemy act jurisdiction. The "not made in China" being an upcoming matter of legislation will force US companies to take out China from their supply chains more urgently than they have been. 

BTW in the US, 15% is a large share in what had been till recently a highly fragmented market. 

Agree that universities should kick out their Confucius institutes and refuse money from Chinese entities. The government and all levels has little capacity to press the issue unless they can prove that these are spy agencies.   

[0R0 + 6,251]

On 5/10/2020 at 1:03 PM, 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.

It was the government's job to conduct a CFIUS action. It cleared it. These days it likely would not have. 

From the moment Obama identified China as a potential rival rather than partner, which he had, at least officially, it has been a tough slog to impose any restriction on China purchases or investments of anything. The lobbying against it was fierce.  

[SUZNV + 1,197]

6 hours ago, Jee said:

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.

Much cheaper for them to buy the tech companies with patterns or IP theft when other countries economics are  down, just like they did in the past when Soviet Union collapsed. It is the fundamental for their military to be modernized to the current level . Back in 1979 their military performed poorly in border war with Vietnam. R&D will take generation to catch up while money can buy and  anything and CCP can concentrate their state companies income to buy key industries. They need to avoid trade war no matter what until they steal or buy enough because they do need money. 

So yes, they prefer someone like Obama,Bush, Clinton than Trump. They could not have rised to this power without Obama. Just look the way they treat Trump and Obama when they visited China.

---------------------

CCP goal is simple, earn as much money as they can to keep the  real estates bubble in China, give Chinese people hopes with military and economics powers and consolidate their power against democracy (who they will prove by weakening these democracy  countries' economies and corrupted their politicians). Chinese people will not ask for democracy if they think China is the most powerful country in economy and military, they will think their political  system is the best.

If the bubble was big enough and their military were strong enough, then they wouldn't mind invade the countries around them if they think they cannot keep up with the bubble. Exactly the way Hitler invaded Poland and Britain and France declared war but still waited for Germany to turn on France first. The only difference is by that time the Western Countries will be so divided and have  weak economies and military with full of corrupted politicians and everyone is worrying for their own welfare. None touch nuclear and there will be no world war. Being conquered is till much better than human extinction.

It will happen gradually for generations, the later the less choices and harder to turn the tide. And the excuse to postpone it will always be "China cannot catch up/ it is too late now /we should recover from the recession first".

They can reach their goal or not is another matter.

From my point of views, strong in trading and democracy or more civilized give no advantage in not to be corrupted from within and weaken by outside force. Genghis Khan started from scratch and  did conquer much more advance and civilized countries by military and captured technologies.  China can use money instead of military to captured technologies.

Underestimating CCP 's ability of corrupt other countries is lethal. Overestimate CCP's power right now is not good either. 15 years ago people may laugh if someone told them that China will go this far without turning into democracy political system so I don't think previous choices were good and what keep the Democracy World from keep making mistakes now if using mostly the same politicians? 

 

Edited May 11, 2020 by SUZNV

[Jee + 27]

53 minutes ago, SUZNV said:

Much cheaper for them to buy the tech companies with patterns or IP theft when other countries economics are  down, just like they did in the past when Soviet Union collapsed. It is the fundamental for their military to be modernized to the current level . Back in 1979 their military performed poorly in border war with Vietnam. R&D will take generation to catch up while money can buy and  anything and CCP can concentrate their state companies income to buy key industries. They need to avoid trade war no matter what until they steal or buy enough because they do need money. 

So yes, they prefer someone like Obama,Bush, Clinton than Trump. They could not have rised to this power without Obama. Just look the way they treat Trump and Obama when they visited China.

---------------------

CCP goal is simple, earn as much money as they can to keep the  real estates bubble in China, give Chinese people hopes with military and economics powers and consolidate their power against democracy (who they will prove by weakening these democracy  countries' economies and corrupted their politicians). Chinese people will not ask for democracy if they think China is the most powerful country in economy and military, they will think their political  system is the best.

If the bubble was big enough and their military were strong enough, then they wouldn't mind invade the countries around them if they think they cannot keep up with the bubble. Exactly the way Hitler invaded Poland and Britain and France declared war but still waited for Germany to turn on France first. The only difference is by that time the Western Countries will be so divided and have  weak economies and military with full of corrupted politicians and everyone is worrying for their own welfare. None touch nuclear and there will be no world war. Being conquered is till much better than human extinction. It will happen gradually for generations, the later the less choices and harder to turn the tide.

They can reach their goal or not is another matter.

From my point of views, strong in trading and democracy or more civilized give no advantage in not to be corrupted from within and weaken by outside force. Genghis Khan started from scratch and  did conquer much more advance and civilized countries by military and captured technologies.  China can use money instead of military to captured technologies.

Underestimating CCP 's ability of corrupt other countries is lethal. Overestimate CCP's power right now is not good either. 15 years ago people may laugh if someone told them that China will go this far without turning into democracy political system so I don't think previous choices were good and what keep the Democracy World from keep making mistakes now if using mostly the same politicians? 

 

I see a lot of fantasies, it's THAT simple? Here I offer some counter views:

- You can never buy "tech" as a nation, it has never happened and never will, all the developed nations become so by growing tech curves organically. They may not be NO.1 in every tech aspect, but they have their own edges that they are known for that can't be bought, you can't buy an army of technicians and scientists, you have too build them. 

What has happened that resonates with your view on China stealing its way up, is a process known as patents for market shares. And patents can be bought, the companies who sold their patents for market shares to a NON-market economy knew their prices well, if they didn't like the price, they could have walked away from that market.

But patents<>technology or know-hows, take iPhone for example, you can get its patents for a price, but you still need an army of engineers, technicians and scientists to figure out how to mass produce these phones within a few weeks before rivals catch up. And that's where China today has its edge - reliable low-cost mass production in a short period of time that gives companies like Apple an upper hand in beating its rivals. 

- A nation serious about its fate would not rely its hope on any particular foreign leaders, it's not like hookers on whores. Strength grows from within, the only long term prosperity option is to transform into a advanced industrialization nation, and in that process it is inevitable to take the cakes from another country or counties, so whoever become president of this country, they will view China as a threat to this country's share of cakes, Obama or Trump are the same in that sense.

-When Trump visited China in 2016/17, they reserved the entire forbidden city for his state dinner. But this is another spot of naiveness I see in you, do you think a nation's most sophisticated officials would give away to the world their preferences by setting a less welcoming greeting for one president over his predecessor? You certainly know very little about politics and diplomacy..

In short, the trade war is good for China in many ways, for 1 it serves as a catalyst for Xi to eliminate internal opponents to his made in China 2025 and BRI plans (BRI is a trade plan in case you didn't notice), and 2 the collapse of globalization as we know it gives opportunities to a new world order, you never know what cards you have until there is a reshuffle.

Edited May 12, 2020 by Jee

[SUZNV + 1,197]

5 minutes ago, Jee said:

I see a lot of fantasies, it's THAT simple?

Yes, it is simple if you understand China's history and how can did they keep this big for more than 2 thousands year through many kingdoms. Not even India or Rome can do that.

CCP didn't really try to hide their intention. I cannot see how they are fantasies.

Edited May 11, 2020 by SUZNV

[Jee + 27]

40 minutes ago, SUZNV said:

Yes, it is simple if you understand China's history and how can did they keep this big for more than 2 thousands year through many kingdoms. Not even India or Rome can do that.

CCP didn't really try to hide their intention. I cannot see how they are fantasies.

It was a an opening to draw your attention, read the whole thing then quote.

[SUZNV + 1,197]

1 hour ago, Jee said:

 

When Trump visited China in 2016/17, they reserved the entire forbidden city for his state dinner. But this is another spot of naiveness I see in you, do you think a nation's most sophisticated officials would give away to the world their preferences by setting a less welcoming greeting for one president over his predecessor? You certainly know very little about politics and diplomacy..

 

It is clear that you know nothing about the differences in CCP attitudes between Trump and Obama and naively think they got the same hospitality.

Quote

 

But the leader of the world’s largest economy, who is on his final tour of Asia, was forced to disembark from Air Force One through a little-used exit in the plane’s belly after no rolling staircase was provided when he landed in the eastern Chinese city on Saturday afternoon.

When Obama did find his way on to a red carpet on the tarmac below there were heated altercations between US and Chinese officials, with one Chinese official caught on video shouting: “This is our country! This is our airport!”

 

https://www.theguardian.com/world/2016/sep/04/barack-obama-deliberately-snubbed-by-chinese-in-chaotic-arrival-at-g20

Many commercial technologies nowadays were researched for military purposes and spaces and then commercialized and vice versa. I did make examples their modern military technologies mostly bought from Soviet Union when they collapse and they can absorb the tech just fine. If they could do that then, why couldn't they do it now? The gap between China tech and Russia was much bigger back then.

They don't need phone quality or rival and make a better iphone. A much cheaper local phones will have 90% of the iphone functions and be sold at cheap price. And they can keep sell it in low budget market or when the world economy is down and people cannot afford luxury brands.

It seems like you agree that China cannot R&D to be top of the tech, it took generations, that is what I said too. So why would you worry that they can R&D and make better of their own? If they R&D one thing instead of stealing it, when it is out it may well be outdated. They don't need to buy individual patent, they can buy the whole companies or dominated ones by buying shares when stocks market are down. Owner of the companies will be the owner of patterns, then can steal all the patterns or sell it cheaply, and then dumb the stocks when it is high and even making profit from it. Soviet Union didn't have much trouble in stealing US nuclear bomb pattern, which shortened their research on nuclear more than 2 years.

Do you know how much money's needed for keeping the real estate bubble which their economy anchor on it, for corrupting developing and developed politicians, for sending scientists oversea for training and stealing or pay for oversea top talents? Do you know R&D would be costly and not guaranteed to have a better tech than the rivals. Soviet Union had an R&D race with the US in the Cold War and their economy collapsed so I would love to see CCP have one instead of  stealing by trading. Mao did try one with the Great Leap Forward and got a famine as a result. Surely CCP are smart enough to not fall into that trap and that is how they get where they are now. They need lots of money for doing these instead of putting it into R&D race for their own without no profits if it is outdated when the research completes. Apple can go bankruptcy without much negative effect on the US economy but CCP cannot afford bankruptcy. 

I suggest if you want to understand CCP, it is worth for you to research its history, in English not Mandarin. Or choose to live in your own bubble and think you know more than others. I couldn't care less.

Edited May 12, 2020 by SUZNV

[Jee + 27]

13 minutes ago, SUZNV said:

It is clear that you know nothing about the differences in CCP attitudes between Trump and Obama and naively think they got the same hospitality.

https://www.theguardian.com/world/2016/sep/04/barack-obama-deliberately-snubbed-by-chinese-in-chaotic-arrival-at-g20

Many commercial technologies nowadays were researched for military purposes and spaces and then commercialized and vice versa. I did make examples their modern military technologies mostly bought from Soviet Union when they collapse and they can absorb the tech just fine. If they could do that then, why couldn't they do it now? The gap between China tech and Russia was much bigger back then.

They don't need phone quality or rival and make a better iphone. A much cheaper local phones will have 90% of the iphone functions and be sold at cheap price. And they can keep sell it in low budget market or when the world economy is down and people cannot afford luxury brands.

It seems like you agree that China cannot R&D to be top of the tech, it took generations, that is what I said too. So why would you worry that they can R&D and make better of their own? If they R&D one thing instead of stealing it, when it is out it may well be outdated. They don't need to buy individual patent, they can buy the whole companies or dominated ones by buying shares when stocks market are down. Owner of the companies will be the owner of patterns, then can steal all the patterns or sell it cheaply, and then dumb the stocks when it is high and even making profit from it. Soviet Union didn't have much trouble in stealing US nuclear bomb pattern, which shortened their research on nuclear more than 2 years.

Do you know how much money's needed for keeping the real estate bubble which their economy anchor on it, for corrupting developing and developed politicians, for sending scientists oversea for training and stealing or pay for oversea top talents? Do you know R&D would be costly and not guaranteed to have a better tech than the rivals. Soviet Union had an R&D race with the US in the Cold War so I would love to see CCP have one instead of  trade & steal. Mao did try one with the Great Leap Forward and got a famine as a result. Surely CCP are smart enough to not fall into that trap and that is how they get where they are now. They need lots of money for doing these instead of putting it into R&D their own.

I suggest if you want to understand CCP, it is worth for you to research its history, in English not Mandarin. Or choose to live in your own bubble and think you know more than others.

Soviet was selling its assets for liquors in the 90s so I'm not surprised China got a good bargain for the patents it wanted. But if you think they are still sitting on that same patents today you are misled, China has developed far more advanced missile and naval technologies than the Soviet, so again, you can't buy technology, you can start it that way but it has to grow organically, which means building your science and engineering team and knowledge base.

Modern technologies don't take generations to develop, CPU chips take 1-2 year to double in capacity, that's not human generations. The advancement of AI, big data, cloud computing and 5G don't take generations to develop.

Ah RE bubble, another common misconception. To bet against the Chinese RE market is similar to betting against US stock market, you may win occasionally but you lose over the long run, because it's a different economic model, China does not have a free market flow or transparent capital market, their stock composites are frauds and people know it, so they either invest their retirement savings in RE or bonds. Unless there is a structural change in how its economy operates, which is possible, but until then its RE market will always suck in more money over time.

Edited May 12, 2020 by Jee

[Jee + 27]

20 minutes ago, SUZNV said:

It is clear that you know nothing about the differences in CCP attitudes between Trump and Obama and naively think they got the same hospitality.

https://www.theguardian.com/world/2016/sep/04/barack-obama-deliberately-snubbed-by-chinese-in-chaotic-arrival-at-g20

Many commercial technologies nowadays were researched for military purposes and spaces and then commercialized and vice versa. I did make examples their modern military technologies mostly bought from Soviet Union when they collapse and they can absorb the tech just fine. If they could do that then, why couldn't they do it now? The gap between China tech and Russia was much bigger back then.

They don't need phone quality or rival and make a better iphone. A much cheaper local phones will have 90% of the iphone functions and be sold at cheap price. And they can keep sell it in low budget market or when the world economy is down and people cannot afford luxury brands.

It seems like you agree that China cannot R&D to be top of the tech, it took generations, that is what I said too. So why would you worry that they can R&D and make better of their own? If they R&D one thing instead of stealing it, when it is out it may well be outdated. They don't need to buy individual patent, they can buy the whole companies or dominated ones by buying shares when stocks market are down. Owner of the companies will be the owner of patterns, then can steal all the patterns or sell it cheaply, and then dumb the stocks when it is high and even making profit from it. Soviet Union didn't have much trouble in stealing US nuclear bomb pattern, which shortened their research on nuclear more than 2 years.

Do you know how much money's needed for keeping the real estate bubble which their economy anchor on it, for corrupting developing and developed politicians, for sending scientists oversea for training and stealing or pay for oversea top talents? Do you know R&D would be costly and not guaranteed to have a better tech than the rivals. Soviet Union had an R&D race with the US in the Cold War and their economy collapsed so I would love to see CCP have one instead of  stealing by trading. Mao did try one with the Great Leap Forward and got a famine as a result. Surely CCP are smart enough to not fall into that trap and that is how they get where they are now. They need lots of money for doing these instead of putting it into R&D race for their own without no profits if it is outdated when the research completes. Apple can go bankruptcy without much negative effect on the US economy but CCP cannot afford bankruptcy. 

I suggest if you want to understand CCP, it is worth for you to research its history, in English not Mandarin. Or choose to live in your own bubble and think you know more than others. I couldn't care less.

And the Guardian article you are quoting, shows Obama was treated disrespectfully by Chinese, so how does it help justify your point that CCP favors Obama over Trump? 

Edited May 12, 2020 by Jee

[SUZNV + 1,197]

2 hours ago, Jee said:

And the Guardian article you are quoting, shows Obama was treated disrespectfully by Chinese, so how does it help justify your point that CCP favors Obama over Trump? 

With Trump they want to negotiate, as equal or higher, they don't want him to get mad and keep increasing tariffs. With Obama, or they felt safe to show disrespect or without worrying a trade war or any type of retaliation nor the need to show any respect for a stronger nation. Why is it? It shows that they are afraid of trade war from Trump and they were sure Obama won't do it. Obama was treated as a lesser and Trump was treated as a rival. And you thought they  treated Trump worse? And what Obama said after that? 

Quote

“I wouldn’t over-crank the significance of it because, as I said, this is not the first time that these things happen and it doesn’t just happen here. It happens in a lot of places including, by the way, sometimes our allies,” Obama said, adding that “none of this detracts from the broader scope of the relationship”.

Even China treated Japanese minister better, given their historical relationship. And what country have you been to not knowing these?

Your kept your interpretation wrongly and it seems you put words in my mouth and then lecture me about it from your naive thought. China in 1980s was very behind in technologies , after the failure of The Great Leap Forward, which mainly they tried to do R&D with heavy industry: metal casting, yet they could fully absorb all of the Soviet technologies after bought them cheaply. They didn't have to R&D from scratch for their own technologies. They can do the same things with the US. And you seem conflict with yourself when you suggested they will invest in R&D rather than buying patterns or stealing  because they  have the ability to R&D  their own  substitute techs from scratch?

Russia is still better in military tech, and liaoning aircraft carrier (bought from Ukraine, was created in late  Soviet Era) is the proof for their naval ability, which is an important requirement to be a super power. It is not like IT tech,  aircraft & missiles technology are not changing that fast. How long does it take for US to move from  F16 (s) to F35?  How long does it take for Russia to develop S400? Can China started from scratch to make something similar and how long will it take them, assuming US tech will sit and wait. That's why they have 1000 talents program. Back in mid 2000s, they invited lots of Chinese experts from oversea came back to China and paid very competitive salary, but now they still put on 1000 talents program for spying and stealing.

It is pointless to arguing with you if you conflict with yourself and keep interpreting me wrongly and lecture me back. If it is because of English is not my native language, then so be it. There is no point of arguing if one side does not understand. It is a waste of time.

Edited May 12, 2020 by SUZNV

[Tom Kirkman + 8,860]

51 minutes ago, SUZNV said:

It is pointless to arguing with you if you conflict with yourself and keep interpreting me wrongly and lecture me back. If it is because of English is not my native language, then so be it. There is no point of arguing if one side does not understand. It is a waste of time.

Bingo.  You nailed it.

[Jee + 27]

12 hours ago, SUZNV said:

With Trump they want to negotiate, as equal or higher, they don't want him to get mad and keep increasing tariffs. With Obama, or they felt safe to show disrespect or without worrying a trade war or any type of retaliation nor the need to show any respect for a stronger nation. Why is it? It shows that they are afraid of trade war from Trump and they were sure Obama won't do it. Obama was treated as a lesser and Trump was treated as a rival. And you thought they  treated Trump worse? And what Obama said after that? 

Even China treated Japanese minister better, given their historical relationship. And what country have you been to not knowing these?

Your kept your interpretation wrongly and it seems you put words in my mouth and then lecture me about it from your naive thought. China in 1980s was very behind in technologies , after the failure of The Great Leap Forward, which mainly they tried to do R&D with heavy industry: metal casting, yet they could fully absorb all of the Soviet technologies after bought them cheaply. They didn't have to R&D from scratch for their own technologies. They can do the same things with the US. And you seem conflict with yourself when you suggested they will invest in R&D rather than buying patterns or stealing  because they  have the ability to R&D  their own  substitute techs from scratch?

Russia is still better in military tech, and liaoning aircraft carrier (bought from Ukraine, was created in late  Soviet Era) is the proof for their naval ability, which is an important requirement to be a super power. It is not like IT tech,  aircraft & missiles technology are not changing that fast. How long does it take for US to move from  F16 (s) to F35?  How long does it take for Russia to develop S400? Can China started from scratch to make something similar and how long will it take them, assuming US tech will sit and wait. That's why they have 1000 talents program. Back in mid 2000s, they invited lots of Chinese experts from oversea came back to China and paid very competitive salary, but now they still put on 1000 talents program for spying and stealing.

It is pointless to arguing with you if you conflict with yourself and keep interpreting me wrongly and lecture me back. If it is because of English is not my native language, then so be it. There is no point of arguing if one side does not understand. It is a waste of time.

Full of misinformation, let me give you a hint, go search for LiaoNing VS ShanDong, latter is their first domestically made AC by China, named in 2019, it's way more advanced than LiaoNing, the one they bought from Ukraine (which probably represents the peak of Soviet naval engineering).

I was not comparing Russia's military VS Chinese, I was pointing out the Chinese have developed technologically over the past decades, something you refuse to acknowledge, yet you take a side point of mine to write a BS article, good for you, just keep your eyes shut it will be all fine.

All the 1980/1990 craps are not as relevant now, you can't use the same logic of time and apply it universally, some nations use time more efficiently than others just like some people do, look around you, how much has changed in the last 10 years? 

The are negotiating with Trump because he wanted to have a trade war, Obama didn't start a trade war that's why they didn't negotiate, you are taking the tiniest piece of diplomatic story and try to paint a whole picture of international's relations, it's nonsensical at best.

Again, trade war is good for China, you don't agree? Trump does.

 

[Jee + 27]

12 hours ago, Tom Kirkman said:

Bingo.  You nailed it.

What's up Tom, any luck in that nursing home?

[SUZNV + 1,197]

29 minutes ago, Jee said:

Full of misinformation, let me give you a hint, go search for LiaoNing VS ShanDong, latter is their first domestically made AC by China, named in 2019, it's way more advanced than LiaoNing, the one they bought from Ukraine (which probably represents the peak of Soviet naval engineering).

I was not comparing Russia's military VS Chinese, I was pointing out the Chinese have developed technologically over the past decades, something you refuse to acknowledge, yet you take a side point of mine to write a BS article, good for you, just keep your eyes shut it will be all fine.

All the 1980/1990 craps are not as relevant now, you can't use the same logic of time and apply it universally, some nations use time more efficiently than others just like some people do, look around you, how much has changed in the last 10 years? 

The are negotiating with Trump because he wanted to have a trade war, Obama didn't start a trade war that's why they didn't negotiate, you are taking the tiniest piece of diplomatic story and try to paint a whole picture of international's relations, it's nonsensical at best.

Again, trade war is good for China, you don't agree? Trump does.

 

If trade war is good for China, what stop them from starting it first but they had to wait? If they can make Shandong without learning from LiaoNing and have any idea about building their own AC, why should they buy Liaoning in the first place? Have China had any real experience with AC and naval? What's your opinion based on? We both read the news while I have different sources from different languages and have lived in 3 countries? Some fortune tellers told you? It is not long enough for you because to explain more in details for you to understand that would take forever or even never. You contradict yourself so you can just go round and round and round in your bubble. You need to think straight and stop worrying about me. Stay honest with yourself.

Edited May 12, 2020 by SUZNV

[Marcin2 + 725]

-

Edited May 19, 2020 by Marcin2
-

[Jee + 27]

1 hour ago, SUZNV said:

If trade war is good for China, what stop them from starting it first but they had to wait? If they can make Shandong without learning from LiaoNing and have any idea about building their own AC, why should they buy Liaoning in the first place? Have China had any real experience with AC and naval? What's your opinion based on? We both read the news while I have different sources from different languages and have lived in 3 countries? Some fortune tellers told you? It is not long enough for you because to explain more in details for you to understand that would take forever or even never. You contradict yourself so you can just go round and round and round in your bubble. You need to think straight and stop worrying about me. Stay honest with yourself.

They have been in a trade conflict with US for decades, which escalated to "war", so yes it is good for them, else they wouldn't have been doing it for DECADES.

China bought Liaoning around 2000 so what's your point? As I said they built engineering and science teams between then and now in order to build ShanDong, which part is confusing you? So Again they started purchasing something, spent time to grow the learning curve and years later that accumulated knowledge and HR reserves allow them to build a more advanced one, and that's the point I make - a nation cannot buy it's way up in the industrialization ladder, it has to grow from within. The trade "war" is good for them in the sense it helps eliminate Xi's opponents for his MIC2025 plan (grow technology organically) and BRI (new trade route).

On the other hand without the trade war Xi'd face more scrutiny from inside his country as plenty of business and government leaders would be happy to produce low margin products on the cost of exploiting their cheap labor and environment for Walmart and Amazon.

I'm not here to argue who has the advanced naval strength between Russia and China or whoever, that was an example used, you have an issue in reading.

Edited May 12, 2020 by Jee

[SUZNV + 1,197]

@Marcin2

About R&D, China did start once in the Great Leap Forward with metal casting, the skeleton of precision industry and failed. You can see they cannot catch up with a commercial jet engines, which is  one of the most complicated integrations with tech.

A pattern show nothing much, as they do have kind of Credit mania, so the numbers of patterns are not the same with the quality of the pattern. Secondly China don't have that good for a quality control system in manufacturing. 

I have Deng biography, I even have his natal chart to do research on his personality. I am familiar with CCP history, maybe more than Chinese people who were under constant brainwashed behind fire wall.

I do know about  China patterns in telecommunications. Because it fits in their target for supervising their citizens and ensure CPP power. Same with AI for identify people. It is useful for round up HK protest, for example.But in the extremely high tech level, all of the techs will be integrated to each other and China need to fill the gap even in non-strategic techs.

If it is from mainstream about US trade war cons and pros, you can safely assure I read them, mainstream keep making sure they can reach me in both languages. What you say is the main arguments against Trade War.

I can see what mainstream are missing but if you ask for a reputable sources from mainstream for my analysis, then there would be none. (Unless you can read Traditional Mandarin or Vietnamese or even Russian because they don't care). English news are very bias, the same with Simplified Chinese. Up to a level I think China is spending lots of money in these 2 languages. For the gap in each industry, we will need to go to a very deep level where it will not be popular in news. What will they archive in their R&D without stealing from IP theft  or from 1000 talents program, we don't know yet because it is in the long run. Surely they will have to change their mindset and habit first but in a national level, it will not be easy. They may change from stealing  oriented to legally buying US/EU  businesses rather than R&D. The more purchasing, the less R&D on their own. 

One thing I can assure you, China Government always try to show more than they have, their images in a rising up power is essential. It ensures their support in Nationalism as a Totalitarian party, no democracy needed.

So on on R&D issue, we should agree to disagree and only time will tell.

---------------

About Trade War:

I am curious that what mainstream are suggesting let them steal our IPs so they will keep depending on our  technologies? The moment you can stop them from stealing or buying key techs, they will have to start R&D their own, no matter trade war or not, so why not trade war? The main damage of trade war is not from making money from Chinese imports, but from it encourage manufacturers at least open factories in the US or other country. Fox Conn is one great example move to the US , Samsung is another. US can use tariff as a leverage for negotiation which is a good start. Before that? Besides, TPP which is useless. China even wouldn't care if we compare to trade war.

---------------------

CCP is like you say, just  like any other party and can have members from any public,private sectors. The main important things that different from democracy country.  A Party Decision can safely ignore the law. If you have differences idea, resolve internally, not on Congress or in Court. Congress just pass/not pass the policy that CCP agreed to pass. Common people and some low level CCP member has no say. 

Normally if we say China or Government, then Chinese people will misunderstand that we are against them, so CCP is used to call Chinese Government.

Chinese Government is not a government like Western Countries or Kingdoms who live in taxes. It is not like Soviet Union to get resources and distribute to people, no private sector (later on black market). Chinese Government is kind of a big mega corporation, which have many semi-private corporations in strategic industries and small private sector  at the bottom of strategic industries or in non strategic industries. Xi is the CEO. The semi-private corporations have Governments as their biggest share holders and earn half of the income and tax the other half and the private sector. 

So Government is main shareholders + center bank and they need to have a reserve to lend out and to reward among themselves. The bigger reserve, the more money they can lend out, but they are the business owner themselves. So they do need money to keep them in powers (read more in the RE bubble)

---------------------------

RE bubble:

I don't see the price going down. An apartment can decrease in value if it is older as the maintenance cost increase and the rent is  down (people with good money will rent better apartment, given in the same location). China bubble concentrates in new house prices, not old like big cities in Germany, UK or Japan. I don't live in China but live in the much smaller replicate who try to do everything China did (like NZ following UK in many policy).

https://www.ceicdata.com/en/china/nbs-property-price-monthly/property-price-ytd-avg-beijing

VN government's theory is that if China can manage that big, then it is safe to following without making big mistakes or people revolts. For example : the stock market, before there was stock market, not many people liked to have shares  and if the company had given the labor shares, they would have traded the shares for money(who know there would be a stock market). Many people knew about China stock market open a few year earlier and VN would follow sooner or later would hunt for these shares and the prices could increase 20 times. VN Gov have the same bubble but it may never collapse as long as VN Gov can always "rent" out strategic lands to China, or natural resources. 

Chinese people don't trust their government will look after them when they retire. I think the same like Singapore or Vietnam. Not sure about HK. So they buy a house first before they save for their old age. Then they will buy for their child as a kind of old age saving (Child looks after parents when they are old). If they cannot save enough, they will borrow from gov banks.

So the essential keys of CCP to be tolerated by Chinese and can continue to pocket public fund is houses and jobs (social welfare is negligible). If there is no job, CCP will have to spend to create, not stimulus but create. That why the need constantly building and exporting, to create jobs, to create hope. They cannot sell the houses cheap because people will stop buy new houses with high price, which prevent them to build more houses which in turn create more jobs.

They have to somehow make their people who have money to think they can be rich in next few years with RE from borrowing money or houses are limited. Most  of the houses hold by Speculators with very cheap rent. They hate people try to save gold or dollars and hide. Imagine US mortgage bubble in 2008, this is in national level where CCP is the mortgage bank.

So foreign investors get the factories out of China, they will have to spend more, to create jobs to fill the void. BRI is a way to lend other countries money and to export their labors to go these countries for jobs (and these countries will have to pay back for the projects, which value was inflated when they agree to borrow), this happens in Vietnam, Laos, Cambodia, Africa and they try to export their labors to Span, Italy as well. They know they have no experience in modern warfare. CCP goal, unlike Hitler is not to conquer the world, but pull the other legs and try to  keep their power domestically.

R&D is for creating job as well  but high risk may have no return , costly (talents are expensive) and not essential to keep their power domestically while the fund can be used for reserve to lend, for ODA, for pay back foreign debt, for corruptions, can give much much more jobs  than R&D. Most of their R&D fund will concentrate  in keeping them in power in case worst case scenario like military, communications (which is essential for communications), social networks for propaganda, firewall etc.  They may attack Taiwan the moment they cannot keep up with the bubble. Currently they don't have any mechanism to deflate the RE bubbles except wars, or open their country like the Soviet union, but I doubt they will chose that. This year they have Western "low performance" in Covid19 so they are selling hope to their people for losing jobs.

I don't want to repeat myself much on Bubble and R&D in China and that is all I got. China is a mysterious country in term of their economy or tech and most of the view came from the western point of views from the mainstream. I just gave my off stream view to balance out.

Edited May 12, 2020 by SUZNV

[SUZNV + 1,197]

4 hours ago, Jee said:

They have been in a trade conflict with US for decades, which escalated to "war", so yes it is good for them, else they wouldn't have been doing it for DECADES.

China bought Liaoning around 2000 so what's your point? As I said they built engineering and science teams between then and now in order to build ShanDong, which part is confusing you? So Again they started purchasing something, spent time to grow the learning curve and years later that accumulated knowledge and HR reserves allow them to build a more advanced one, and that's the point I make - a nation cannot buy it's way up in the industrialization ladder, it has to grow from within. The trade "war" is good for them in the sense it helps eliminate Xi's opponents for his MIC2025 plan (grow technology organically) and BRI (new trade route).

On the other hand without the trade war Xi'd face more scrutiny from inside his country as plenty of business and government leaders would be happy to produce low margin products on the cost of exploiting their cheap labor and environment for Walmart and Amazon.

I'm not here to argue who has the advanced naval strength between Russia and China or whoever, that was an example used, you have an issue in reading.

Xi came to power in 2012, and he face " scrutiny from inside his country as plenty of business and government leaders would be happy to produce low margin products on the cost of exploiting their cheap labor and environment for Walmart and Amazon." which was a result of China joined WTO in 2001? China wanted to join.

Trade conflicts with US for decades and US let them joined WTO in 2001 and get to where they are now? And they gained in influence in WTO and UN with their charms?

Xi has been eliminating his opponents longs before the trade war and continue it now. Now you say it is because of the trade war? What world are you living on?

Edited May 12, 2020 by SUZNV

[Jee + 27]

6 hours ago, SUZNV said:

Xi came to power in 2012, and he face " scrutiny from inside his country as plenty of business and government leaders would be happy to produce low margin products on the cost of exploiting their cheap labor and environment for Walmart and Amazon." which was a result of China joined WTO in 2001? China wanted to join.

Trade conflicts with US for decades and US let them joined WTO in 2001 and get to where they are now? And they gained in influence in WTO and UN with their charms?

Xi has been eliminating his opponents longs before the trade war and continue it now. Now you say it is because of the trade war? What world are you living on?

Yes big corporations wanted China to join WTO, they also moved jobs to China, so in that sense those corporations have been helping to fuel the decades long trade tensions, it's not news, so the answer to your question is yes if you call US corporations "US" (obviously).

Human nature is to stick with what pays off in the short term, that means continued exploitation of cheap labor and environment IF it pays off to do so in the short term, meaning local officials and business owners would have little incentive to move away from it without an escalation of the trade tensions. Xi can't force private business owners to invest more in R&D, even if he can make it a law, unless there is incentive people will always find loopholes in that law and corrupting more local officials in doing so so they can spend that money elsewhere, so again the trade war helps Xi pushing forward his agenda.

Edited May 13, 2020 by Jee

[Douglas Buckland + 6,308]

On 5/12/2020 at 5:33 AM, Steve1 said:

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

I like someone who doesn’t waffle and just ‘puts it out there’!😂

[ralfy + 55]

About China in the 1980s, consider this article from 2017:

"The White House is only telling you half of the sad story of what happened to American jobs"
 

Quote

 

So the narrative from the White House is that China's big push into global markets is the root cause for stagnant economic and wage growth since the turn of the millennium. But that narrative has a really basic flaw: It's only half the story. And with only half the story, you're not going to find a whole solution to the slow growth, low wage, low unemployment predicament we find ourselves in now.

The problem didn't start in the 1990s, it started in the 1980s, when Ronald Reagan — a hero of the Trump administration — was president, and neoliberal economics were first making their mark on policy. Reagan and his ilk distrusted government and believed that the private sector could make the best decisions when left on its own. You've heard about this — it's called laissez faire economics.

 

 

 

 

[Marcin2 + 725]

-

Edited May 19, 2020 by Marcin2
-

[Jason Martin + 58]

On 5/2/2020 at 5:34 PM, Marcin2 said:

I do not think China would do this, but I cannot imagine the better swift, tactical move.

The maximum cost of this magnanimous decision would be about 30 billion dollars this year.

This disarms Trumps anti-Chinese narrative in many areas.

Nobody could say that China is breaching trade war truce.

Decision should be packed as a friendship, humanitarian action to ease suffering "of our American brothers and sisters".

I think this is mostly a non-sequitur. The primary issue with China is not really tariffs, that is as you pointed out, a tactical move. Wars are not won with tactics, battles are, there are many in a war, and the overarching reason to combat China is to prevent their ascendancy. I call this the Duncan McCleod school of geopolitics. There can be only one.

The "multipolar" philsophy only benefits non-hegemons in the same way that equality only benefits losers. For a hegemon it is always best to invest in preventing the ascension of competing powers. The fact that the US hasn't been doing this since the 1960s is pretty much the definition of treason. 

If you remove the trade deficit pretext, the US will simply have to find or manufacture another. COVID-19 seems serendipitous, as there is a rich history of China and Asia in general exporting pandemics of one variety or another. Add to that a leading cause of the panic was the supply chain, Trump has ample ammunition to relocate industry and to provide plenty of enticement in tax breaks.

There is also the conveniently large body of unemployed laborers, all we need is an elimination of the minimum wage and you have the recipe for an massive industrial boom and the elimination of one of China's biggest buyers. 

Essentially, the "growth" and "wealth" of China is really just a transfer of value from the West to the East (why do you think China is bartering their 5G tech for PPE? They want customers. Trapped, contractually obligated customers). If China loses the US market (either through politics, or a significant financial crisis) then China will fall pretty hard. The American Economy is the whale of all industry. 

[Dan Warnick + 6,100]

Democrat Election Strategy:  Do you still beat your wife?

Biden pledges not to pardon TrumpMore

Former Vice President Joe Biden vowed Thursday that, if elected to the White House in November, he would not use his new executive powers to pardon President Donald Trump of any potential crimes.

The pledge from the presumptive Democratic presidential nominee came during a virtual town hall on MSNBC, when Biden was asked by a voter whether he would be willing to commit “to not pulling a President Ford” and pardoning Trump “under the pretense of healing the nation.”

“Absolutely, yes. I commit,” Biden responded, adding: “It’s hands-off completely. Look, the attorney general of the United States is not the president’s lawyer. It’s the people’s lawyer.”