Trade War with China

Status
Not open for further replies.
I don't understand what are you trying to proof with this, if any your link only reinforce my point that China IS the single largest foreign holder of US debt, even beating out Japan by 100 billion USD.
I knew you were right, just wanted to see the list, which I then didn't delete, but reposted while drinking early morning coffee, is all
 

LesAdieux

Junior Member
the hawks in the west wing don't want a trade deal, they want a full blown trade war and use it to achieve three objects:
  1. displace China from the heart of global supply chains, force companies to source elsewhere, anywhere but China
  2. force multinational corporations to stop doing business in China
  3. deny China access to all high techs, strangle "Made in China 2025".
China must carefully assess the situation, it's not about concession or reconciliation, it's about how much damage you can do to your opponent.
 

Hendrik_2000

Lieutenant General
In 2017 China took -57% of US soybean exports -25% of Boeing aircraft -20% of US automobiles -14% of US ICs
Please, Log in or Register to view URLs content!
Please, Log in or Register to view URLs content!
Please, Log in or Register to view URLs content!


Dn8NiQ3XoAAwgAX.jpg


Dn8NiRPXUAA2Rq8.jpg

Dn8NiSAXkAAozZT.jpg

Dn8NiTDXkAIYc1u.jpg
 

Equation

Lieutenant General
Well the main problem with this is that if the Bear was too small, the Dragon in this case would be too big. If China were to dump the entirety of US bonds at once, yes it would seriously hurt the US, it might even bankrupt them. But if that were to happen China would also be burning off a significant part of their wealth as well if the US is unable to pay off the whole debt. And if the US was in a solvent position to do that, then selling off the debt would be pointless in the first place.
And if China takes the safer way to self off their debt in manageable steps, that would give the US enough time to adjust accordingly as well.
And even after all of this is said and done, it is still a question whether China's total US debt is enough to distablize the US. While China is without a doubt the single largest holder of US debt at 1.18 trillion USD, the total amount of debt it has amounts to 7.2% of total US debts owned.

Yeah but the bottom line is that the US is running on deficit of $21 Trillion and counting. Meaning that there already is NO money left in the governments vault to even pay off any portion of the US bonds sell off of that magnitude. In order to do that is by printing more money therefore devaluing the dollar or raise more taxes significantly and risk political career for any government officials, OR cut spending drastically enough to pay off those bond sales. Either way it is NOT a good sign and no US government officials in office would want to deal with that scenario.
 

AssassinsMace

Lieutenant General
The US government doesn't save money. They spend it. The US needs to keep selling bonds every year to pay for the government programs and pork they spend it on. If countries cashed out from the treasuries and bonds they bought, where's the government get the money for their programs? If China starts cashing out, that could lead other countries to follow. And Trump already threatened in general to pay out less than promised on bonds that were purchased. If he did that because China was cashing out, everyone foreign and domestic with bonds will be rushing to cash out. Bonds and treasuries are all about money the US government doesn't have. If they don't sell them, how does the US pay for anything? The US is plagued with partisan politics. You think they'll just simply cut programs that those bonds paid for? No they will be fighting what other programs to take it away from.
 

Anlsvrthng

Captain
Registered Member
The US government doesn't save money. They spend it. The US needs to keep selling bonds every year to pay for the government programs and pork they spend it on. If countries cashed out from the treasuries and bonds they bought, where's the government get the money for their programs? If China starts cashing out, that could lead other countries to follow. .

What they can cash for they bonds?
US dollars in bank?
If they want to get say euro as exchange for it they need to sell the dollar bonds to the Europeans.

IF they wants say the Saudi Aramco then they have to sell the bonds to the Saudis.

What other options they have to sell to ?
 

AndrewS

Brigadier
Registered Member
Somewhat related.

Europe, Russia and China join forces with a new mechanism to dodge Iran sanctions
CNBC

  • European Union's foreign policy chief announced Monday that the bloc was creating a new payment mechanism to allow countries to transact with Iran while avoiding U.S. sanctions.
  • Called the "special purpose vehicle" (SPV), this mechanism would aim to "assist and reassure economic operators pursuing legitimate business with Iran," according to a joint statement released by the remaining members of the Iran nuclear deal
  • The U.S. has the power to expand its sanctions to target the mechanism, putting the venture's feasibility into doubt.
Read more
Please, Log in or Register to view URLs content!
 

tidalwave

Senior Member
Registered Member
the hawks in the west wing don't want a trade deal, they want a full blown trade war and use it to achieve three objects:
  1. displace China from the heart of global supply chains, force companies to source elsewhere, anywhere but China
  2. force multinational corporations to stop doing business in China
  3. deny China access to all high techs, strangle "Made in China 2025".
China must carefully assess the situation, it's not about concession or reconciliation, it's about how much damage you can do to your opponent.
Even after Trump, whoever the next president , will continue this trade war. Right now both Republican and Democratic support this against China.
 

AndrewS

Brigadier
Registered Member
the hawks in the west wing don't want a trade deal, they want a full blown trade war and use it to achieve three objects:
  1. displace China from the heart of global supply chains, force companies to source elsewhere, anywhere but China
  2. force multinational corporations to stop doing business in China
  3. deny China access to all high techs, strangle "Made in China 2025".
China must carefully assess the situation, it's not about concession or reconciliation, it's about how much damage you can do to your opponent.

Those 3 objectives aren't achievable in the medium term.

In 2018, China will likely have a larger consumer retail market (circa USD 6 Triillion) than the USA, and which will continue to grow a lot faster.
As per the National Science Foundation, in 2018/2019 China will be spending more on technology R&D than the USA. And that R&D spending is still ramping upwards.

That will support the market for hi-tech products in China and also the next phase of Chinese growth beyond the middle-income trap when companies fail to move up the technology value chain.
It also means foreign multinationals can't ignore China or leave the Chinese market.
----

I would say China's strategy should be really be about how to maximise its growth rate, irrespective of what the USA does.

---
If the USA was actually wanted to achieve those 3 objectives, Trump should have listened to his rational advisors and could have gone with building a bigger US/EU/JP coalition to bully China into submission

And in another world if TPP had gone ahead, it would also have created a bigger coalition, and encouraged China to join and sign up to those terms.

Given China is going to be spending so much more on technology R&D than the USA anyway, it is likely to have its own hi-tech multinationals and TPP would have forced the USA/Asia to keep the trade door open.
 
Last edited:
yes, I read this
Opinion: America can't deny the surplus of interest in its trade with China
2018-09-26 11:14 GMT+8
Please, Log in or Register to view URLs content!

In the China-US economic and trade frictions that have been escalating over the last six months, one of the American complaints is that the United States has a huge trade deficit with China, and as a result it has suffered a loss. But is it true – has the United States really suffered because of its trade with China?

The trade imbalance is only the difference in the trading volume, not a profit and loss statement, explained Fu Ziying, China International Trade Representative and Vice Minister of Commerce.

Speaking on Tuesday in Beijing, the former accounting industry professional explained that the United States has not suffered losses in its bilateral trade with China, as evidenced by the far higher profits of American companies compared to those in China. Instead, the United States enjoys a "surplus of interest."

The surplus of interest in favor of the United States is a true portrayal of the bilateral economic and trade relationship. After nearly 40 years of development, the two economies have become deeply integrated and interdependent.

The scale of their trade has reached 700 billion US dollars, with the annual sales income of US-funded enterprises in China reaching 700 billion US dollars and their profits exceeding 50 billion US dollars.

China and the United States are in different positions in the global industrial chain, and the global value chain. The United States is at the high end, while China remains at the low end. This is reflected by the fact that China's companies are more likely to earn processing fees, while American companies benefit from product design, parts supply and marketing.

Apple's iPhones provide an example: They're designed and developed in the United States for sale around the world. They're assembled in China, to the benefit of this American company. According to Goldman Sachs research released this year, if Apple transferred its production and assembly to the United States, its production costs would rise by 37 percent.

And for consumers, a large number of high-quality and reasonably-priced goods manufactured in China that are exported to the United States has provided American households with more product choices, while reducing their cost of living and raising their purchasing power.

This is especially true of the low- and middle-income groups. A US-China Business Council study found that in 2015, China-US trade saved each American household an average of 850 US dollars.

China's huge and fast-growing market has also provided great opportunities for American companies. According to the "2017 US State Exports to China" report published by the US-China Business Council, each American farmer exported an average of more than 10,000 US dollars' worth of goods to China in 2017.

According to China's Ministry of Commerce, General Motors has 10 joint venture projects in China, where its production accounts for 40 percent of its global total. And Qualcomm's chip sales and patent license fees from the China market accounted for 57 percent of its total revenue.

The American trade deficit with China is not a case of the United States losing out. It is the result of factors including the economic structure of the two countries, and the global industrial division of labor. The United States has always maintained a large surplus with China in the industries where it has advantages, such as automobiles, airplanes, agricultural products, and the service sector.

For example, China imported 13.1 billion US dollars' worth of automobiles from the United States, while exporting 1.4 billion US dollars' worth in the other direction.

And according to the "White Paper on China-US Economic and Trade Frictions and China's Position," released by China's government on Monday, 57 percent of soybeans, 25 percent of Boeing aircraft, 20 percent of cars, 14 percent of integrated circuits, and 17 percent of cotton exported from the United States went to China in 2017.

Something that the American side has been quiet about during this dispute is the trade in services. The United States had a service trade surplus of over 54 billion US dollars to China in 2017. According to the US Department of Commerce, up to 2016 the number of tourists from China visiting the United States increased 13 years in a row and has had double-digit growth for 12 of those years.

The United States is the largest destination for China's students studying abroad, a market of approximately 420,000 customers contributing around 18 billion US dollars to the American economy in 2017. And China's payments of license fees for the use of American intellectual property increased from 3.46 to 7.2 billion US dollars from 2011 to 2017.

As for the trade imbalance between China and the United States in terms of goods, there are opportunities to narrow the gap. One way to do this would be for the American government to relax its restrictions on exports of high-tech products for the civilian market. According to an analysis done in the United States, if these restrictions were relaxed, the trade deficit could be reduced by about 35 percent.

The American claim that it is losing out on its trade with China doesn't stand up to scrutiny. The United States has a surplus of interest, as it benefits from its dominant position relative to China in the global industrial and value chains. The sooner the United States accepts that it is a beneficiary of this bilateral trading relationship, the sooner it will hopefully take genuine steps toward resolving this ongoing dispute.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Top