MK

Phase One trade deal, for China it is all about technology war

Recommended Posts

Additional purchases of 200 billion of US merchandice and services by China will allow to blunt the spire of US technology war.

How we can buy 200 billion of merchandice if you embargo purchases of so many products by Selected Chinese companies or Simply by China ?

Even if China buys additional 50 billion of products it really can source from US on market terms cause there is demand, and another 50 billion just to please Trump and US public, it still gets cheap. Assume China looses 25 billion on these additional 50 , half the price, it still means tech war has 2 billion per month cost, like nothing.

 

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Chinese imports from US decreased by 20.9% in 2019 in comparison with previous year. One type of merchandice, imports increased, yes integrated circuits.

Wiser Chinese companies ( like Huawei ) stockpile since May of 2018.

All others stockpile US components like hell, like there is no tomorrow since May 2019.

  • Haha 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

If you would have read 2018 Huawei Annual Report, stock piling is already visible at the year end. By rough estimation at the end of December 2018, Huawei already stockpiled already about 6 billion dollars of component more than their usual stocks. And it was just 7 months after ZTE. 6 billion dollars is over 6 months of purchases of US components in 2018.

But I think they stockpiled in worst case scenario, like anything with US tech content could be out of reach (every foreign components) for up to a few months after the embargo on US suppliers is established.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Note that all that inventory will be obsolete next year if not now, as the chip complement in modern 5G phones and network equipment is different from what has been used so far. Their production has only gone live last year and availability is still limited, first dibs to Apple and Samsung. 

The purpose of the US purchase commitments is to lock China into US supplied food and energy, thus making China dependent. Second is to pull them further into negative forex cash flow. As SAFE, the forex regulator is trying to get Chinese to repatriate export revenue and credit financing, which they are investing outside China, often leaving along with the capital they extracted from the country as exports. 

 

 

  • Like 2
  • Upvote 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

@0R0 look at the details of US exports to China, there is not much room, for increased purchases if there is no truce in tech war. On food and energy maximum you can achieve is going back to 2018 level of Chinese import. Strong dollar is also problem. 11 billion USD of exports would be Lost in 2020 on Huawei alone.

What I think both China and Trump agreed about 12 months of truce, he needs re-election, China needs another year to close tech gap.

So in 2020 i expect no tech war and large purchases.

Trump attacks Chinese tech, Chinese ban all imports of food and energy possible, Trump looses re-election.

Sounds like a fair deal.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

29 minutes ago, Marcin2 said:

Trump attacks Chinese tech, Chinese ban all imports of food and energy possible, Trump looses re-election.

This links to US polling and Trump is presently in big trouble on most metrics so will need to rely on apathy to get elected rather than ability.

Monday, January 13
General Election: Trump vs. Warren IBD/TIPP Warren 46, Trump 47 Trump +1
General Election: Trump vs. Buttigieg IBD/TIPP Trump 46, Buttigieg 47 Buttigieg +1
General Election: Trump vs. Bloomberg IBD/TIPP Bloomberg 47, Trump 45 Bloomberg +2
President Trump Job Approval IBD/TIPP Approve 43, Disapprove 51 Disapprove +8
President Trump Job Approval Quinnipiac Approve 43, Disapprove 52 Disapprove +9
Direction of Country Rasmussen Reports Right Direction 40, Wrong Track 55 Wrong Track +15
 
Friday, January 10
Race/Topic   (Click to Sort) Poll Results Spread
       
Wisconsin: Trump vs. Biden FOX News Biden 46, Trump 41 Biden +5
Wisconsin: Trump vs. Sanders FOX News Sanders 46, Trump 42 Sanders +4
Wisconsin: Trump vs. Warren FOX News Trump 42, Warren 44 Warren +2
Wisconsin: Trump vs. Buttigieg FOX News Buttigieg 42, Trump 41 Buttigieg +1
Nevada: Trump vs. Biden FOX News Biden 47, Trump 39 Biden +8
Nevada: Trump vs. Sanders FOX News Sanders 46, Trump 41 Sanders +5
Nevada: Trump vs. Warren FOX News Trump 42, Warren 43 Warren +1
Nevada: Trump vs. Buttigieg FOX News Trump 40, Buttigieg 41 Buttigieg +1
Thursday, January 9
Race/Topic   (Click to Sort) Poll Results Spread
       
Michigan: Trump vs. Biden Detroit News/WDIV-TV Biden 50, Trump 43 Biden +7
Michigan: Trump vs. Sanders Detroit News/WDIV-TV Sanders 49, Trump 45 Sanders +4
Michigan: Trump vs. Warren Detroit News/WDIV-TV Warren 46, Trump 44 Warren +2
Michigan: Trump vs. Buttigieg Detroit News/WDIV-TV Buttigieg 45, Trump 43 Buttigieg +2
Michigan: Trump vs. Bloomberg Detroit News/WDIV-TV Bloomberg 47, Trump 41 Bloomberg +6
Georgia: Trump vs. Biden Mason-Dixon Biden 44, Trump 51 Trump +7
Georgia: Trump vs. Sanders Mason-Dixon Trump 52, Sanders 42 Trump +10
Georgia: Trump vs. Warren Mason-Dixon Trump 54, Warren 40 Trump +14
Georgia: Trump vs. Buttigieg Mason-Dixon Trump 52, Buttigieg 43 Trump +9
President Trump Job Approval Reuters/Ipsos Approve 43, Disapprove 54 Disapprove +11
Direction of Country Reuters/Ipsos Right Direction 31, Wrong Track 59 Wrong Track +28

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

21 hours ago, Marcin2 said:

Additional purchases of 200 billion of US merchandice and services by China will allow to blunt the spire of US technology war.

How we can buy 200 billion of merchandice if you embargo purchases of so many products by Selected Chinese companies or Simply by China ?

Even if China buys additional 50 billion of products it really can source from US on market terms cause there is demand, and another 50 billion just to please Trump and US public, it still gets cheap. Assume China looses 25 billion on these additional 50 , half the price, it still means tech war has 2 billion per month cost, like nothing.

 

WE??? Marcin - Did you just admit to being from China?!?

  • Like 1
  • Haha 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Is that prohibited sir? 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

47 minutes ago, Papillon said:

Is that prohibited sir? 

No, just, unless I'm remembering wrong and confusing him with someone else - he's been very adamant that he's Polish and even more adamant that he's not from China despite his very pro-China comments. It's just noteworthy that he slipped up and showed his origin.

Also, noted that you didn't quote me nor tag me - hoping I didn't see this and respond so as to make me look bad?

Note - lest I get attacked by you for being racist like you attacked Jan - I make note of this not because anyone's opinions are less valid than another's, but because it helps me understand different political and cultural backgrounds people may have that allows them to see the same thing through a different viewpoint. (Unlike how you and a few other here categorically attack anyone who's American and belittle our views without actually addressing them. Which, frankly, I'm sick of. The fact I'm an American doesn't make my viewpoint or comment any less relevant or valid - nor does it lump me in with all the other Americans on this site or anywhere else. I often agree with other international commentators too, and I often disagree with my fellow American commentators.)

  • Haha 1
  • Upvote 2

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

(edited)

13 minutes ago, Otis11 said:

Also, noted that you didn't quote me nor tag me - hoping I didn't see this and respond so as to make me look bad?

Sir with respect you are becoming a little paranoid.

13 minutes ago, Otis11 said:

The fact I'm an American doesn't make my viewpoint or comment any less relevant or valid - nor does it lump me in with all the other Americans on this site or anywhere else.

I haven't stated anything like this have I sir? Where is this coming from?

13 minutes ago, Otis11 said:

Note - lest I get attacked by you for being racist like you attacked Jan

I apologise for attacking what I view as racism sir, it won't happen again. 

Edited by Papillon

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

12 minutes ago, Papillon said:

Sir with respect you are becoming a little paranoid.

I haven't stated anything like this have I sir? Where is this coming from?

I apologise for attacking what I view as racism sir, it won't happen again. 

My apologies if I'm mixing you up with someone else, but have you not been the one going on about american exceptionalism and using that as a phrase to undermine other's arguments?

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

(edited)

3 minutes ago, Otis11 said:

My apologies if I'm mixing you up with someone else

No problem sir.

3 minutes ago, Otis11 said:

american exceptionalism and using that as a phrase to undermine other's arguments?

I may have mentioned the USA with regard to some things, but suggesting I undermine others' views, due to being American at all, is false sir. I will peruse some threads and try to see who you may be referring to.

Edited by Papillon
  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

(edited)

2 hours ago, Otis11 said:

WE??? Marcin - Did you just admit to being from China?!?

I just cited how Chinese could speak about it with US. It is interesting that you perceive me as being pro Chinese and just not biased to any side, objective. I think my observations are just observations with arguments to back them, and opinions about them.

It would be genuinely interesting for me to know which part of my opinions, specifically you judge as biased. You just could mention 1 or 2 examples that stricken you. It is not sth to start heated conversation with you, I just Really could be biased proChina and not be conscious about it, biased opinions are often about lack of awareness about self-bias.

 

Edited by Marcin2
Typo
  • Like 1
  • Upvote 2

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Just now, Papillon said:

No problem sir.

I may have mentioned the USA with regard to some things but suggesting I undermine others' views due to being American at all is false sir. I will peruse some threads and see who you may be referring to.

Well, if not, again, my apologies - I may be mixing people up. (Or it may not have been how you intended it, but rather how I read it)

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

1 minute ago, Marcin2 said:

I just cited how Chinese could speak about it with US. It is interesting that you perceive me as being pro Chinese and just not biased to any side. I think my observations are just observations with arguments to back them, and opinions about them.

It would be genuinely interesting for to know which part of my opinions, specifically you judge as biased. It is not sth to start heated conversation with you, I just Really could be biased proChina and not be conscious about it, biased opinions are often about lack of awareness about self-bias.

 

Yes, everyone (including me) has a bias. The best we can do is be aware of them and try to identify our own biases to keep them in check and remain logical.

And if you say so Marcin - I'll take you at your word, but I'm still suspicious. 🤣 (Pleas note the teasing tone)

I do have a perception that you're pro-China, but I don't have anything to immediately cite. I'll point it out next time I see it - if you'd like. (Again, we all have biases, simply being aware that others perceive you as having a bias may make you identify it. I, for one, know others here perceive me as having a very Conservative bias simply because of the topics being discussed, however in daily interactions, much fewer people perceive me that way)

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

If I could put my intentions and views in a few sentences it would be:

China is formidable opponent of US and EU and current world order

I acknowledge that current world order is not fair for developing countries, but I do not mind cause I am part of this order as from EU and NATO country.

I observe that this order is being actively and succesfully changed mainly by China

I observe that US has important economic political and societal problems of systemie nature.

US needs to sort them out and ally with EU to be counter weight to Chinese expansion.

  • Like 1
  • Great Response! 3

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

6 minutes ago, Marcin2 said:

 

I observe that US has important economic political and societal problems of systemie nature.

US needs to sort them out and ally with EU to be counter weight to Chinese expansion.

BIAS ALERT

Important economic and political problems??  By problems you mean "things you disagree with"?   

Do you observe China or EU political and societal problems??  Ever think the EU needs to sort out their 'problems' and ally with the US to counter weight Chinese expansion.

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

38 minutes ago, Bob D said:

BIAS ALERT

Important economic and political problems??  By problems you mean "things you disagree with"?   

Do you observe China or EU political and societal problems??  Ever think the EU needs to sort out their 'problems' and ally with the US to counter weight Chinese expansion.

I will explain, in 1,000 years of its history since 966 Poland has never been in such a beneficial situation both in economic and defense terms. 70 years without wars on our territory.

Fantastic economic conditions are ensured by EU membership and defence, safety conditions by being ally/vassal state of US ( not NATO, NATO without US is completely irrelevant).

And notice that both partners could give us, what they are currently providing, and NOT the other type.

EU would never be able to be defence partner, weak militaries of small Europeans countries, not in next 30 years.

US would never be economic partner in EU meaning because of distance.

We have bad geography between strongest European countries and No geographical barriers, tank can go all the way from Moscow to Calais on a nice, flat plain.

And only country that EXIST that can give some probability of protection is US.

Weak US would not be able to provide this type of protection.

So at the end of the day I REALLY do not care about problems of China unless they harm everyone like their CO2 emissions.

And I actually do not care about EU problems cause we can do with weak and divided EU and even without EU, much poorer but still can live decent life.

We cannot live without US, that simple that is why I care .

  • Like 2
  • Upvote 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

20 minutes ago, Marcin2 said:

So at the end of the day I REALLY do not care about problems of China unless they harm everyone like their CO2 emissions.

Polish people emit more CO2 per capita than the Chinese and your beloved USA is responsible for the majority of the planet's cumulative additional CO2 since the industrial revolution although you would not show any bias here would you?

  • Upvote 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

39 minutes ago, remake it said:

Polish people emit more CO2 per capita than the Chinese and your beloved USA is responsible for the majority of the planet's cumulative additional CO2 since the industrial revolution although you would not show any bias here would you?

You are right US 15 Poland 8 China 6.7. The way I formulated this was like China was to blame that it has 1.4 billion people, I am sorry.

US is not beloved, it is just the only solution, this is fact, not opinion.

What more important China cannot change its coal reliance cause there is not enough hydrocarbons on these planet for China to Overconsumption them the US way. And nuclear needs still 20 years to be scaled up.

 

  • Rolling Eye 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

46 minutes ago, remake it said:

Polish people emit more CO2 per capita than the Chinese and your beloved USA is responsible for the majority of the planet's cumulative additional CO2 since the industrial revolution although you would not show any bias here would you?

Might be interesting: https://www.populationpyramid.net/carbon-emissions/china+russian-federation+united-states-of-america+europe/

 

Per person, China is now on par with Europe (and this is with a lot of people still living in energy poverty in China)

Data only goes through 2015 on this chart (but couldn't find a better one). Unless there's been a drastic change in the curve, though, I'd expect China to pass the US in total CO2 emissions within 2.5-3 years of the end of this chart... which was end of 2018. Shockingly, I can't find anyone who has published data past 2017. Even Wikipedia ends at 2017. Could it be that they don't want to show this?

  • Upvote 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

23 minutes ago, Marcin2 said:

US is not beloved, it is just the only solution, this is fact, not opinion.

A fact would need to be true so you cannot therefore exhibit a bias against China which seems to be a far less interventionist nation than the USA and also does not have the woeful recent record of the USA in terms of armed conflicts of its own instigation.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

(edited)

17 minutes ago, Otis11 said:

Data only goes through 2015 on this chart (but couldn't find a better one). Unless there's been a drastic change in the curve, though, I'd expect China to pass the US in total CO2 emissions within 2.5-3 years of the end of this chart... which was end of 2018.

This might change your mind and in any case China is not yet a mature industrialized nation so it is no different to those many other nations aspiring to bring all its citizens into the first world.

Edited by remake it
added the link

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

(edited)

Greta will eventually turn her evil stare at China as the trends will continue.

Edited by Bob D
Removed Bias!
  • Haha 2

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

2 hours ago, remake it said:

A fact would need to be true so you cannot therefore exhibit a bias against China which seems to be a far less interventionist nation than the USA and also does not have the woeful recent record of the USA in terms of armed conflicts of its own instigation.

China not interventionist? Have you looked at what China is doing in Korea? Taiwan? SE Asia? Africa? Really, anywhere they have the BRI (which they use to essentially force nations into economic servitude).

Ok, just double checking.

2 hours ago, remake it said:

This might change your mind and in any case China is not yet a mature industrialized nation so it is no different to those many other nations aspiring to bring all its citizens into the first world.

So China is essentially equal to Poland on Per-Capita. China has a huge portion of people who are still in energy poverty. Combining these facts - someone in China who has modern energy is more poluting that a comparable person in Poland.

Also, you're looking at Per-Capita, My post was on total cumulative emissions. I've never claimed the US was low on per capita. We're at 1.8X Poland and decreasing. Once China gets everyone in China to modern standards, they'll be higher than Poland and likely around where the US is (not because they use much energy per person, but because China's carbon emissions per unit energy is so high).

So no, you didn't present any contradiction to anything I said. What was I supposed to change my mind about?

China, to date, likely has more cumulative emissions that the US (likely passed in 2018, but no one will show this data)
The US has more emissions per capita because we use more energy per person
China has more emissions per unit energy produced
As China uses more units of energy per capita, they are currently on track to pass the US in emissions per capita (though, this may very well change if they clean their grid - just looking at trends)

Please note - none of this is Anti-China, it's just the facts and trends.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Join the conversation

You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.

Guest
You are posting as a guest. If you have an account, please sign in.
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Paste as plain text instead

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.