EU has already lost the Trump vs. EU Trade War

[Marcin + 519]

I was asked about comparison:

- Education, R&D:

https://community.oilprice.com/topic/7955-comprehensive-report-concerning-innovation-education-rd-lots-of-graphs/?ct=1574194154

PISA 2015

- Physical infrastructure. Open any statistics, use google and wikipedia. There are very few countries, in specific areas that are ahead of China. Germany has relatively better highways access, Japan railways, United States more Statue of Liberty monuments to name a few examples.

[Guest]

Or ignore me and keep going on about China ...?   

''Since 1990 (collapse of Soviet Union) rise of China is the most important event in Geopolitics''.

This was your reply, on a ''Trump v EU''  thread, about ''why does everything turn into a China v USA thread?''

🤣  You're obsessed. 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

ChinaChinaChinaChinaChinaChinaChinaChinaChinaChinaChinaChinaChinaChinaChinaChinaChinaChinaChinaChinaChinaChinaChinaChinaChinaChinaChinaChinaChinaChinaChinaChinaChinaChinaChinaChinaChinaChinaChinaChinaChinaChinaChinaChinaChinaChinaChinaChinaChinaChinaChinaChinaChinaChinaChinaChinaChinaChinaChinaChinaChinaChinaChinaChinaChinaChinaChinaChinaChinaChinaChinaChinaChinaChinaChinaChinaChinaChinaChinaChinaChinaChinaChinaChinaChinaChinaChinaChinaChinaChinaChinaChinaChinaChinaChinaChinaChinaChinaChinaChinaChinaChinaChinaChinaChinaChinaChinaChinaChinaChinaChinaChinaChinaChinaChinaChinaChinaChinaChinaChinaChinaChinaChinaChinaChinaChinaChinaChinaChinaChinaChinaChinaChinaChinaChinaChinaChinaChinaChinaChinaChinaChinaChinaChinaChinaChinaChinaChinaChinaChinaChinaChinaChinaChinaChinaChinaChinaChinaChinaChinaChinaChinaChinaChinaChinaChinaChinaChinaChinaChinaChinaChinaChinaChinaChinaChinaChinaChinaChinaChinaChinaChinaChinaChinaChinaChinaChinaChinaChinaChinaChinaChinaChinaChinaChinaChinaChinaChinaChinaChinaChinaChinaChinaChinaChinaChinaChinaChinaChinaChinaChinaChinaChinaChinaChinaChinaChinaChinaChinaChinaChinaChinaChinaChinaChinaChinaChinaChinaChinaChinaChinaChinaChinaChinaChinaChinaChinaChinaChinaChinaChinaChinaChinaChinaChinaChinaChinaChinaChinaChinaChinaChinaChinaChinaChinaChinaChinaChinaChinaChinaChinaChinaChinaChinaChinaChinaChinaChinaChinaChinaChinaChinaChinaChinaChinaChinaChinaChinaChinaChinaChinaChinaChinaChinaChinaChinaChinaChinaChinaChinaChinaChinaChinaChinaChinaChinaChinaChinaChinaChinaChinaChinaChinaChinaChinaChinaChinaChinaChinaChinaChinaChinaChinaChinaChinaChinaChinaChinaChinaChinaChinaChinaChinaChinaChinaChinaChinaChinaChinaChinaChinaChinaChinaChinaChinaChinaChinaChinaChinaChinaChinaChinaChinaChinaChinaChinaChinaChinaChinaChinaChinaChinaChinaChinaChinaChinaChinaChinaChinaChinaChinaChinaChinaChinaChinaChinaChinaChinaChinaChinaChinaChinaChinaChinaChinaChinaChinaChinaChinaChinaChinaChinaChinaChinaChinaChinaChinaChinaChinaChinaChinaChinaChinaChinaChinaChinaChinaChinaChinaChinaChinaChinaChinaChinaChinaChinaChinaChinaChinaChinaChinaChinaChinaChinaChinaChinaChinaChinaChinaChinaChinaChinaChinaChinaChinaChinaChinaChinaChinaChinaChinaChinaChinaChinaChinaChinaChinaChinaChinaChinaChinaChinaChinaChinaChinaChinaChinaChinaChinaChinaChinaChinaChinaChinaChinaChinaChinaChinaChinaChinaChinaChinaChinaChinaChinaChinaChinaChinaChinaChinaChinaChinaChinaChinaChinaChinaChinaChinaChinaChinaChinaChinaChinaChinaChinaChinaChinaChinaChinaChinaChinaChinaChinaChinaChinaChinaChinaChinaChinaChinaChinaChinaChinaChinaChinaChinaChinaChinaChinaChinaChinaChinaChinaChinaChinaChinaChinaChinaChinaChinaChinaChinaChinaChinaChinaChinaChinaChinaChinaChinaChinaChinaChinaChinaChinaChinaChinaChinaChinaChinaChinaChinaChinaChinaChinaChinaChinaChinaChinaChinaChinaChinaChinaChinaChinaChinaChinaChinaChinaChinaChinaChinaChinaChinaChinaChinaChinaChinaChinaChinaChinaChinaChinaChinaChinaChinaChinaChinaChinaChinaChinaChinaChinaChinaChinaChinaChinaChinaChinaChinaChinaChinaChinaChinaChinaChinaChinaChinaChinaChinaChinaChinaChinaChinaChinaChinaChinaChinaChinaChinaChinaChinaChinaChinaChinaChinaChinaChinaChinaChinaChinaChinaChinaChinaChinaChinaChinaChinaChinaChinaChinaChinaChinaChinaChinaChinaChinaChinaChinaChinaChinaChinaChinaChinaChinaChinaChinaChinaChinaChinaChinaChinaChinaChinaChinaChinaChinaChinaChinaChinaChinaChinaChinaChinaChinaChinaChinaChinaChinaChinaChinaChinaChinaChinaChinaChinaChinaChinaChinaChinaChinaChinaChinaChinaChinaChinaChinaChinaChinaChinaChinaChinaChinaChinaChinaChinaChinaChinaChinaChinaChinaChinaChinaChinaChinaChinaChinaChinaChinaChinaChinaChinaChinaChinaChinaChinaChinaChinaChinaChinaChinaChinaChinaChinaChinaChinaChinaChinaChinaChinaChinaChinaChinaChinaChinaChinaChinaChinaChinaChinaChinaChinaChinaChinaChinaChinaChinaChinaChinaChinaChinaChinaChinaChinaChinaChinaChinaChinaChinaChinaChinaChinaChinaChinaChinaChinaChinaChinaChinaChinaChinaChinaChinaChinaChinaChinaChinaChinaChinaChinaChinaChinaChinaChinaChinaChinaChinaChinaChinaChinaChinaChinaChinaChinaChinaChinaChinaChinaChinaChinaChinaChinaChinaChinaChinaChinaChinaChinaChinaChinaChinaChinaChinaChinaChinaChinaChinaChinaChinaChinaChinaChinaChinaChinaChinaChinaChinaChinaChinaChinaChinaChinaChinaChinaChinaChinaChinaChinaChinaChinaChinaChinaChinaChinaChinaChinaChinaChinaChinaChinaChinaChinaChinaChinaChinaChina

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

Epstein knew too much ...

Cheers.

Edited November 19, 2019 by Guest

[Rob Plant + 2,756]

13 hours ago, Marcin said:

Rob, first hand experience is good but has to be more concrete. You are talking about the continent. "Witnessing" what it means for continental economy ? F.e. Albion cliffs could be nice but you still know nothing about the rest of Europe.

To know whether business has future, or specific site has future you need: knowledge of the industry, site tour, numbers, business analysis, later interviews with higher management when you know what questions to ask etc. It takes time. To have a rough knowledge about the prospects you need a few days, or a few hours if you are checking the site again.

Marcin

I really wasnt going to reply as I think we're done on this thread, but I had to react to some of your presumptions.

Firstly how do you know what I know about Europe?

Secondly my colleague was in China for several weeks meeting dozens of suppliers he has dealt with for decades, they are personal friends. They are the owners of these businesses employing thousands of people. My colleague discusses in great detail how their businesses are performing, current/ future market conditions, trade war effects (all the points you raise). He is very experienced and knowledgeable and is very much pro China and is extremely worried that these businesses will fail in the near future (as are the owners of these factories).

He experienced zero positive replies on the state of each of their markets/businesses and came back with serious concerns about our supply chain.

You can argue that this is a very small sample of the thousands of factories in China, but the sentiment from all was negative and they all state every other factory is feeling the effect of the trade wars and its a real concern across the country.

Take that info as a barometer of Trump's tariffs or don't, I'm passed caring now.

On a side note I have visited China many times and the people I find to be lovely , hard working , generous people. No problem there from me.

Have you ever actually been to China? You seem to react to any negative comments towards China in a combative manner which I don't understand.

Edited November 20, 2019 by Rob Plant

[Marcin + 519]

I am sorry Rob, I forgot you are British, this stupid Albion comment was just an example, but it was personal attack if you are British.

Combative or overreacting is not about negative comments towards China. I really want to hear something negative about China in a constructive way. It is about lack of big picture understanding of powers at play here, at this forum. It is rather that I do not fit here than vice versa. People jump from one casual observation to generalization about the whole big country. I agree that there is gloomy sentiment at present, and this is doing more harm than actual effect of tariffs. There is some effect of tariffs, recession in many industries in China,  but it is difficult to discern it from Chinese themselves already offshoring labour intensive manufacturing to South- East Asia for a few years.

I do not say that your friend experience is not gauging this doom&gloom sentiment. I will just tell you what I have read from your comment. Suppliers, large corporation, visit by major client, mandatory sad face number 3 for every person at site, everything is bad, we are collapsing, hope guy will come back to headquarters will the most gloomy picture as possible, hope this year they will not squeeze us by another 2%-5% (as every year, targets for us depend on how ambitious are curent COO&CFO). One word: biased. This is my impression but it is just impression and anybody can have its own.

[Rasmus Jorgensen + 1,169]

@Rob Plant 

I don't agree with everything @Marcin states, but I think his underlying analysis (which I interpret to be : the comparative wealth "head-start" the West had / have towards the rest of world is only going to diminsh. This is essentially the macro driver for geo-pol tensions) is right. 

My personal opinon is that the sooner the West accepts above the sooner we plot a sensible strategy... 

[Marcin + 519]

5 minutes ago, Rasmus Jorgensen said:

@Rob Plant 

I don't agree with everything @Marcin states, but I think his underlying analysis (which I interpret to be : the comparative wealth "head-start" the West had / have towards the rest of world is only going to diminsh. This is essentially the macro driver for geo-pol tensions) is right. 

My personal opinon is that the sooner the West accepts above the sooner we plot a sensible strategy... 

I hope I will ever achieve the clear, non-combative way you present your views

[Rob Plant + 2,756]

Jabbar just posted this as part of a new thread regarding the oil price and US/China trade war

3. Tariffs DO HURT CHINA . . .  but China's loss is the rest of Asia's GAIN.  U.S. companies finally realize they need to diversify their Supply Train. The Asia/Pacific nations that wanted U.S. to sign trade agreement are much happier with their "Trade War Windfall" Anyone that thinks these tariffs are not hurting China 10X more than U.S. is clueless.

Please read his post as it sums it up well in 3 points

I sort of think that is largely my point on this whole debate.

China is in a mess because of this and Trump has Xi exactly where he wants him and is squeezing his balls right now

You may be right long term Marcin that China will be the next hegemony, but dont discount India and Russia, and you shouldn't believe the US will give up without a huge fight.

[Marcin + 519]

22 minutes ago, Rob Plant said:

Jabbar just posted this as part of a new thread regarding the oil price and US/China trade war

3. Tariffs DO HURT CHINA . . .  but China's loss is the rest of Asia's GAIN.  U.S. companies finally realize they need to diversify their Supply Train. The Asia/Pacific nations that wanted U.S. to sign trade agreement are much happier with their "Trade War Windfall" Anyone that thinks these tariffs are not hurting China 10X more than U.S. is clueless.

Please read his post as it sums it up well in 3 points

I sort of think that is largely my point on this whole debate.

China is in a mess because of this and Trump has Xi exactly where he wants him and is squeezing his balls right now

You may be right long term Marcin that China will be the next hegemony, but dont discount India and Russia, and you shouldn't believe the US will give up without a huge fight.

I once explained to Jabbar the fallacy of 80% of his yuan vs tariffs meme, but as he is at least 20% right so I will not correct him again. The same was about how leveraged is China and why. When I say what impact tariffs have it is just measured.

Jabbar asks question in the title of his topic. The answer is yes. He does not have a clue why the answer is yes. I know why the answer is yes, and tariffs have negligible impact on oil price. But I no longer  explain or correct errors.

I only care when the theads are more substantial and related to broader issues EU vs hegemonic conflict, 10% of threads in geopolitics. I do not read or comment any other threads.

[Marcin + 519]

And also the attitude is important. Chinese care and are learning fast. I once accidentally noted that Chinese government agency is making mistakes in major information releases. I quickly checked they are repeating them. Written just 10 sentences about it. They corrected this, thanked and are no longer making them.

[Rob Plant + 2,756]

They are truly the best copiers in the world, without doubt. Yes they learn quickly agreed. They are hard working and rarely complain.

However they are NOT innovative but have to rely on other countries for this (mostly Western Europe or US), this is why they "steal" tech from the West which has POTUS so angry. This is mostly down to the high level of control the state exerts on its own people, they are never encouraged to think in this way.

This may be their downfall and could ultimately halt their rise.

50 minutes ago, Marcin said:

They corrected this, thanked and are no longer making them.

Surely any government agency in the civilized world would do this??? i don't consider that to be impressive, i would consider a lack of mistakes (and some proof reading) in the first place to be far more impressive. I get your point though about them being quick to learn from their mistakes.

The Chinese do all currently believe in the grand strategy and it has worked for 30 years or so. However as there becomes wealth disparity which is already happening, there comes jealousy and greed in the populous, it is how this is handled/controlled by the state which will determine its success.

Edited November 20, 2019 by Rob Plant

[Otis11 + 551]

1 hour ago, Rob Plant said:

They are truly the best copiers in the world, without doubt. Yes they learn quickly agreed. They are hard working and rarely complain.

However they are NOT innovative but have to rely on other countries for this (mostly Western Europe or US), this is why they "steal" tech from the West which has POTUS so angry. This is mostly down to the high level of control the state exerts on its own people, they are never encouraged to think in this way.

This may be their downfall and could ultimately halt their rise.

This is the reason I believe they'll continue to close the gap on a per-capita basis... and could even pass the US in total GDP, but why they aren't really going to be the engine of the world economy. It takes about 2 generations to change this thought. Kids that grow up being taught 'Study hard and do what you're told - no questions' aren't going to be innovators. That has to change to 'Ask questions and challenge the status quo'. That's a drastic change.

And DT - this is relevant, because the EU losing their trade war is comparable to China's trade war with the US. Apparently. Maybe? 

Only link I can come up with...

[Guest]

ChinaChinaChinaChinaChinaChinaChinaChinaChinaChinaChinaChinaChinaChinaChinaChinaChinaChinaChinaChinaChinaChinaChinaChinaChinaChinaChinaChinaChinaChinaChinaChinaEpsteindidn'tkillhimselfChinaChinaChinaChinaChinaChinaChinaChinaChinaChinaChinaChinaChinaChinaChinaChinaChinaChinaChinaChinaChinaChinaChinaChinaChinaChinaChinaChinaChinaChinaChinaChinaChinaChinaChinaChinaChinaChinaChinaChinaChinaChinaChinaChinaChinaChina

Edited November 20, 2019 by Guest

[JoMack + 549]

On 11/12/2019 at 4:55 AM, Tom Kirkman said:

I've mentioned repeatedly that I tend to view the EU as a "Mini Me" version of the United Nations.  Globalism run amok.  For example, Saudi Arabia is a member of the UN Human Rights Commission.

EU countries aren't really the problem.  The EU globalism agenda (and the larger UN globalism agenda) is definitely a problem, in my opinion. 

Obviously, we will disagree; no issue with differences of opinion.

And let's not forget in early October the U.N. gave Venezuela's Maduro regime a seat on the Human Rights Commission.  If that is not a reason to pull the U.S. out of the U.N. I don't know what is.

[Marcin + 519]

1 hour ago, Otis11 said:

This is the reason I believe they'll continue to close the gap on a per-capita basis... and could even pass the US in total GDP, but why they aren't really going to be the engine of the world economy. It takes about 2 generations to change this thought. Kids that grow up being taught 'Study hard and do what you're told - no questions' aren't going to be innovators. That has to change to 'Ask questions and challenge the status quo'. That's a drastic change.

And DT - this is relevant, because the EU losing their trade war is comparable to China's trade war with the US. Apparently. Maybe? 

Only link I can come up with...

Yes, I can agree about some sorts of innovation. As McKinsey has put it in their 2015 report on Chinese innovation: China needs to move on from being "innovation sponge": making smaller, incremental changes to technologies discovered around the world, to being innovation leader. Their major weakness is in basic research. Their current competitive advantage is mainly to reverse engineer, scale up production at fantastic pace, and make small, incremental improvements. However major metrics show that they are still closing the gap also in basic research, but are way behind major innovation powerhouses (like US, Japan, South Korea, Germany). My understanding is that to reach 30k GDP per capita you do not need to be on par with US in basic research. International co-operation makes it easy to acquire basic ideas and technologies and improve them.

[Otis11 + 551]

1 hour ago, Marcin said:

Yes, I can agree about some sorts of innovation. As McKinsey has put it in their 2015 report on Chinese innovation: China needs to move on from being "innovation sponge": making smaller, incremental changes to technologies discovered around the world, to being innovation leader. Their major weakness is in basic research. Their current competitive advantage is mainly to reverse engineer, scale up production at fantastic pace, and make small, incremental improvements. However major metrics show that they are still closing the gap also in basic research, but are way behind major innovation powerhouses (like US, Japan, South Korea, Germany). My understanding is that to reach 30k GDP per capita you do not need to be on par with US in basic research. International co-operation makes it easy to acquire basic ideas and technologies and improve them.

Agreed, you can have a very decent middle class economy without any significant innovations - just execute work, continue to invest in your own country, and don't throw money away on huge entitlement programs. USD30k per capita after correcting for purchase parity seem reasonable with that approach. Might cap out pretty close to that, but achievable. You're talking Hungary or Latvia. Heck, I'd argue that would get you closer to Spain or Italy in GDP (PPP) - just don't vote in their entitlements and the country would be stable without much above that.

It'll take another 40 years past that to jump that hurdle though... and it's a risky hurdle to jump for the CCP. Innovation requires thinking for yourself and challenging the status quo. Independent thought threatens the CCP... (Hence the Great Firewall of China, banning Pooh, etc)

[Marcin + 519]

Very good report about innovation.

Link below:

https://community.oilprice.com/topic/8685-global-innovation-index-2019/?ct=1574289873

Could be basis for many good discussions about innovation around the world.

There is also less focused report by American organization I do not remember which, I linked it a few comments before.

Enjoy