broadsword
Brigadier
Bet on it. It itself is located in Asia.
Chinese Economics Thread
- Thread starter Norfolk
- Start date
Bet on it. It itself is located in Asia.
Could certainly mean a lot of business for SK companies, what with $800 billion investment in infrastructure required in the Asia-Pacific area per year for the next 10 years at least.
it is almost a brilliant move, to court Britain when all spotlight was on Pacific's big three. secret diplomacy is almost certainly to have been involved in persuading Britain, as it is hard to imagine the US to have just stood by and watched Beijing undertake this scheme. I would like to see some revelation about this episode to surface in the future.
George Osborne, the UK finance minister, is proud that he has achieved for London to become the first place to have a RMB clearing house outside Asia. He also wanted UK to be a founding member of AIIB. Without those achievements London might soon have lost its position of major financial centre in the World. So why was Washington looking at SK and Australia and not at London?
This doesn't sound so much like a case of bad or good call in international investments beyond China in the aluminium industry but rather a case of how "too big to fail" is being built up inside China for that industry.
Engineer
Major
Money talks, b.s. walks.
broadsword
Brigadier
Hence, Beijing probably did not have to persuade.
AssassinsMace
Lieutenant General
I like how in a free trade agreement Japan gets to negotiate how much access the US can have in Japanese markets. What does free trade mean again?
The problem with the logic of TPP in regards to leaving China out which they claim puts China at a disadvantage because of the higher standards demanded is China isn't the one that is export dependent. Yeah if the members bought from China more than China bought from them then China would have to work to achieve those standards. But most of the members have China as their number one customer so those supposed higher standards mean nothing. It is these members that have to spend the money to keep up with the standards not China. And the irony is since China doesn't have to abide by those standards by not being a part of TPP, the US can still have their outsourced products made in China regardless of the standards. So countries thinking they can brag they were going to steal outsourcing from China just costs more for them because they have to abide by the standards. It's not like members of TPP are restricted with trading with only each other. Do you think Apple is going to stop selling iPhones to China, their largest market now? TPP isn't stopping trade with China. If that were the case China could ban trade with them. Who do you think wins since China is most of the membership countries and their corporations number one customer?