China - EU: Xi Says Cooperation Is Mainstream In Their Ties

[pinto + 293]

Cooperation is the mainstream in China-Europe relations, and even if there are differences and competition, it is benign competition, Chinese President Xi Jinping said on Tuesday during a visit to Paris.

The last time EU leaders held strategy talks on China was just after the Tiananmen Square massacre... Almost 30 years later, the European Council will use a summit this week to focus once more on China — and decide whether it is time to get tough again.

[Pavel + 384]

maybe Huawei needs a more space for spy game

[francoba + 93]

2 minutes ago, Pavel said:

maybe Huawei needs a more space for spy game

EU nations will be required to share data on 5G cybersecurity risks and produce measures to tackle them by the end of the year, the European Commission said on Tuesday, shunning U.S. calls to ban China's Huawei Technologies across the bloc. 

[pinto + 293]

But do not forget that some of the unreasonable US policy practices pushes the EU towards China .... It could be real bad axis for EU: between Russia and China

[damirUSBiH + 327]

It's a warning, at a pivotal moment. So, EU are open to Belt and Road initiative?

[50 shades of black + 254]

7 minutes ago, damirUSBiH said:

It's a warning, at a pivotal moment. So, EU are open to Belt and Road initiative?

This whole visit has been so weird. "Mr Juncker said that labeling China a rival was meant as a "compliment" to the country." Silk road from one side, Belt and Road Initiative  from the other side...It doesn't smell good

[shadowkin + 584]

All war is based on deception - Sun Tzu

[ronwagn + 6,290]

2 hours ago, pinto said:

But do not forget that some of the unreasonable US policy practices pushes the EU towards China .... It could be real bad axis for EU: between Russia and China

Please list our unreasonable policy practices. I don't know of any. 

[shadowkin + 584]

3 hours ago, pinto said:

But do not forget that some of the unreasonable US policy practices pushes the EU towards China .... It could be real bad axis for EU: between Russia and China

You have this backwards. One example is higher EU/Chinese tariffs on American cars than our tariffs (pre-Trump) on theirs. China doesn't practice free-trade, she practices mercantilism. Germany, to a lesser extent, does so as well.

[Rasmus Jorgensen + 1,169]

2 hours ago, shadowkin said:

You have this backwards. One example is higher EU/Chinese tariffs on American cars than our tariffs (pre-Trump) on theirs. 

Do you know what the Jones Act is?

[shadowkin + 584]

6 hours ago, Rasmus Jorgensen said:

Do you know what the Jones Act is?

Do you understand the Jones Act?

Countries shipping from their port directly to one of ours is not an issue with the exception of Guam, Hawaii, Alaska, and Puerto Rico. This is a tiny fraction of the US population. They may not move from one US port to another though with goods. But do you think China would want to sail to Long Beach and then hop up to SF anyway? No they unload and it’s trucked up.

If anything you could argue it hurts our own shipping industry so on balance it is worse for us.

There is also a national security aspect to this.

Look I won’t argue we don’t have a few protectionist measures. Same goes for every country. But this pales in comparison to what the Chinese are doing. Why you’re defending that is a mystery because they’re doing the same to the EU.

[Rasmus Jorgensen + 1,169]

7 hours ago, shadowkin said:

Do you understand the Jones Act?

Apparently I understand the Jones Act better than you do. 

In offshore oil & gas (and soon offshore wind) it is effectively being used as local content legislation, which has isolated the US GoM market from the rest of the world. Only US built, flagged and operated vessels are allowed there. 

7 hours ago, shadowkin said:

Look I won’t argue we don’t have a few protectionist measures. Same goes for every country. But this pales in comparison to what the Chinese are doing. 

Agree.

7 hours ago, shadowkin said:

Why you’re defending that is a mystery because they’re doing the same to the EU.

I commented on your comment that EU put unfair tarifs on American cars. I mentioned nothing about China. 

[shadowkin + 584]

2 hours ago, Rasmus Jorgensen said:

Apparently I understand the Jones Act better than you do. 

In offshore oil & gas (and soon offshore wind) it is effectively being used as local content legislation, which has isolated the US GoM market from the rest of the world.

Apparently not. This is one part of it. And the trade you mentioned is, once again, a fraction of our overall trade. What China is doing is across the board. I was more referring to shipping to/from US and increased shipping costs.

Again this arguably hurts us more than it helps from an economic viewpoint.

3 hours ago, Rasmus Jorgensen said:

I commented on your comment that EU put unfair tarifs on American cars. I mentioned nothing about China.

They do. EU tariff on US cars shipped to EU are 10%. Cars shipped from EU to US 2.5% (pre-Trump).

[shadowkin + 584]

On 3/26/2019 at 8:19 AM, francoba said:

EU nations will be required to share data on 5G cybersecurity risks and produce measures to tackle them by the end of the year, the European Commission said on Tuesday, shunning U.S. calls to ban China's Huawei Technologies across the bloc. 

This is a joke and is to make their public think they can control the threat. Even if allowed to inspect the source code this can be changed after this 'inspection'. EU just handed over trade secrets to the Chinese.

[Rasmus Jorgensen + 1,169]

16 hours ago, shadowkin said:

Apparently not. This is one part of it. And the trade you mentioned is, once again, a fraction of our overall trade. What China is doing is across the board. I was more referring to shipping to/from US and increased shipping costs.

I know what you meant. I was pointing out that US OSV shipowners can compete freely in Europe with their American ships and European OSV owners can not compete in the US GoM with their European ships. I don't know how the value of these markets  compares to cars. 

17 hours ago, shadowkin said:

Again this arguably hurts us more than it helps from an economic viewpoint.

I agree that in the longterm protectionist policies always does more damage than good.

 

17 hours ago, shadowkin said:

They do. EU tariff on US cars shipped to EU are 10%. Cars shipped from EU to US 2.5% (pre-Trump).

So following your logic that protectionist policies hurt then EU and actually hurting European carmakers. 

[shadowkin + 584]

14 hours ago, Rasmus Jorgensen said:

I know what you meant. I was pointing out that US OSV shipowners can compete freely in Europe with their American ships and European OSV owners can not compete in the US GoM with their European ships. I don't know how the value of these markets  compares to cars.

I think it's safe to say they don't make as much money or employ as many people as the auto industry.

14 hours ago, Rasmus Jorgensen said:

So following your logic that protectionist policies hurt then EU and actually hurting European carmakers. 

No. By my logic if the EU's higher car tariffs were preventing a separate industry from developing that could potentially be on par or greater than her (re: Germany's) auto industry you could argue they are more a disadvantage to her. Can you think of such an industry?

I don't believe all protectionist measures hurt, especially if in response to some other countries' protectionist measures. I'm saying it could be argued the Jones Act hurts therefore we derive no competitive advantage overall (although it's possible we do in that specific industry in that specific region which is not a significant part of our economy).

You may be interested to know Germany is planning even more protectionist measures.

https://www.reuters.com/article/us-germany-industry-altmaier-idUSKCN1R81GD

[Rasmus Jorgensen + 1,169]

10 hours ago, shadowkin said:

I think it's safe to say they don't make as much money or employ as many people as the auto industry.

The OSV industry was extremely profitable untill about 5 - 6 years ago. 

Edited March 29, 2019 by Rasmus Jorgensen

[Rasmus Jorgensen + 1,169]

10 hours ago, shadowkin said:

I don't believe all protectionist measures hurt, especially if in response to some other countries' protectionist measures

This is essentially what I call fair trade - i.e. everybody needs to trade on the same terms. You just choose a more confrontational was of putting it. 

10 hours ago, shadowkin said:

I'm saying it could be argued the Jones Act hurts therefore we derive no competitive advantage overall (although it's possible we do in that specific industry in that specific region which is not a significant part of our economy).

Currently the Jones Act is giving American OSV Owners a significant economic advantage globally. If you take a 50 - 60 year view it has done more damage than good. And that is exactly what makes these discussion so difficult - balancing macro consideration with the short-term impact on individuals. 

ps I know the Jones Act very well which is why I used it as an example. I know the full picture is much more complex.