Trade War with China

Air Force Brat said:

Its patently obvious that China is "Squeezing Canada", by threatening to kill a Canadian citizen tried and convicted of drug smuggling in a Chinese court, and sentenced to 15 years! sounds about right, drugs are a serious problem in all of our countries....

Now comes China, trying the case once again, with no new evidence, and finding the defendant is guilty and sentencing him to death!

this is more than disturbing, its obvious what China is doing, and will further reinforce international perceptions about China!

Click to expand...

Over 200kg, Brat, actually 222, which is close to 500 pounds of meth that this Canadian sought to bring into China to poison Chinese people with as he steals their money. He should have sold all that where he's from and left if for his own people. This crime is so severe he deserves to be executed, whatever he reincarnates into should be found, and that animal should be executed too and then the body sealed away by a curse in a tomb buried in the Gobi Desert for some unwary archaeologist to unearth some thousand years later and embark on a mystical journey to seal it back in its place before it destroys the world. That's how serious a crime it is to try to carry over 200kg of meth into China. Giving him 15 years while executing Chinese people for carrying amounts that fit into a handbag is quite frankly racism.

I love how the Canadian China sentence to death has drug arrests records in Canada and now because he's white he should get away with drug crimes in China where anyone else would be sentence to death quickly. I read an Chinese official charged Canada was trying to force its white supremacist beliefs on China. Maybe he was re-sentenced because China realized they were giving Westerners unequal treatment under the law where anyone one else would've been sentenced to death.

Look at how Americans think US soldiers raping and murdering women and children in South Korea and Japan is being overblown by citizens in those countries. Americans see those lives as worthless so the citizens of those countries should see it the same. Another reason why they want the world to embrace their values. These are allies and look at the disrespect. There's an agreement between the US and these countries where if US soldiers commit crimes in these countries they get special treatment namely the worst sentence they get is getting out of the country. The only time when justice is applied is if the crime gets public attention so they have to show the public justice is at work. There was one case in South Korea where an American soldier was serial raping South Korean women. When he was finally caught it turns out he was the son of a US Admiral. No trial happened and the worst punishment he got was he shipped back home.

Back during the Seoul Summer Olympics, an American swimmer who just won gold stole an ancient Korean mask from his hotel. Soon after he was caught at the airport trying to smuggle the mask out. The vast majority of countries of the world have harsh laws against stealing antiquities and many of them have the death penalty for it.

How about the child molester, Gary Glitter? Caught in Vietnam molesting children so when he was about to be released from prison after serving his sentence, the British government for whom he was a citizen of tried to convince Gary Glitter not to move back to Great Britain but to Hong Kong instead. Then Gary Glitter could get the full support of Western human rights organization claiming he was falsely charge for child molestation by the Chinese government when he gets arrested there.

Or look at Otto Warmbier who came back a vegetable after going to North Korea. North Korea's reputation is not a secret. He went to North Korea ignoring warnings not to go onto center floors in his hotel and he steals a propaganda poster so he can show off back at home how courageous and daring he was stealing from the North Koreans.

How about how there's a Western international child sex tourism industry where their citizens converse experiences and organize group tours to poor countries where they can exploit and have sex with children. No Western countries directly addresses it because that would be an admission that it was happening. Someone in the US introduced a law against American citizens participating but was never passed and thus rejected into becoming law.

Look at all these people trying act as if they obey the laws in other countries and respect the people in them. No, they don't. They think other countries' justice system cannot be trusted, where they get to hide behind their own prejudices and laws slanted to serve them first.

Equation said:

Over 200kg, Brat, actually 222, which is close to 500 pounds of meth that this Canadian sought to bring into China to poison Chinese people with as he steals their money. He should have sold all that where he's from and left if for his own people. This crime is so severe he deserves to be executed, whatever he reincarnates into should be found, and that animal should be executed too and then the body sealed away by a curse in a tomb buried in the Gobi Desert for some unwary archaeologist to unearth some thousand years later and embark on a mystical journey to seal it back in its place before it destroys the world. That's how serious a crime it is to try to carry over 200kg of meth into China. Giving him 15 years while executing Chinese people for carrying amounts that fit into a handbag is quite frankly racism.

Click to expand...

The guy was actually trying to smuggle meth to Australia, so China has actually done Australia a massive favour by stopping those drugs from ending up on Australian streets.

What is not widely reported in the western media is that this was a retrial requested by Schellenberg himself against his original 15 year sentence.

You have to really be interested in this case to find these key facts omitted in more general and mainstream reporting.



Let that sink in for a moment and then look at all the absurd claims by his lawyer that is endlessly repeated in all the mainstream western reporting about how ‘unfair’ the death sentence was since ‘no new evidence was presented’.

If there was nothing new to present, why did he and his client launch an appeal and ask for this very re-trial in the first place?

Also, just how moronic is his lawyer to agree to an appeal with ‘no new evidence’, against a sentence which was positively scandalously light by Chinese drug law standards (the death penalty comes into play with possession of even a pound of illegal drugs, never mind 500), and in the current political climate?

Anyone even remotely familiar with Chinese drug laws would not have been surprised in the least to see the death penalty handed down for a drug case involving so much ‘product’.

Rather than China going out of its way looking for Canadians to apply the screws to, as is all but explicitly claimed by the western media, the facts are that Schellenberg wasn’t smart enough to quit while he was ahead and pretty much served himself up on a platter.

Was this death sentence politically motivated? Almost certainly. Just as the arrest of Huawei’s CFO was blatantly politically motivated in the first place.

The key difference is that while the arrest of Meng is in deep legal murky waters as she was arrested in Canada having broken no Canadian or international laws; in Schellenberg’s case, all China’s judges had to do was apply Chinese law as it would have been originally had Schellenberg been a Chinese citizen.

Personally I think China is seeing a trend developing, with America getting its allies to gang up on China, the recent arrest of another Huawei employee in Poland stands out as a example.

So China is starting to play hardball to demonstrate the very real costs to those governments stupid enough to think messing with China to curry favour with the Americans does not carry consequences.

Cold War 2.0 is on, and if people are too proud or dense to remember, they will learn the key lessons of the first Cold War first hand - the big boys don’t fight each other directly, they spank each other’s cat paws and minions.

If you are not a superpower, picking sides and taking direct action against a superpower is just sheer idiocy.

That’s why Vietnam and the Philippines got in line so quickly after China showed them it was not playing around in the SCS, when they realised what kind of game they were really playing in.

Air Force Brat said:

Its patently obvious that China is "Squeezing Canada", by threatening to kill a Canadian citizen tried and convicted of drug smuggling in a Chinese court, and sentenced to 15 years! sounds about right, drugs are a serious problem in all of our countries....

Now comes China, trying the case once again, with no new evidence, and finding the defendant is guilty and sentencing him to death!

this is more than disturbing, its obvious what China is doing, and will further reinforce international perceptions about China!

Click to expand...

Oh dear. Brat.

Your view on this is so out there. I don't know where to begin!

I have been lurking here for a while. And I think is about time I finally contribute to this excellent forum.

First, I think it's great that we've different views, (and yours included), on this forum.

But, what you're saying appear to say China's judicial system has nothing to do with justice, and its all politically motivated. Yet, somehow you do not think the same of the arrest of Meng!

Somehow a man from Canada (who was convicted criminal in canada)! Getting a death sentence is "chinese killing a canadian" (emotional words). And it is politically motivated and therefore "reinforced international perception on china"!

Yet, when the good old USA wanted to arrest a foreign national on charges based on US law that US set for itself, but expect the rest of the world to follow and comply. And if they don't, they can be arrested without proof via third party!

If you think that's ok. Them It seems like you care more about US unilateral policy then on international efforts in fighting drug traffickers!

Exactly it is clear case of applying domestic law to international setting And what happened to the principle of innocent until proven guilty in the court If any one can arrest some one just on on the suspicion or wrong doing. So much for the idea that China is hurting in trade war and the fallacy of debt bomb

Tech war rumors cloud sound Chinese fundamentals
Trump is likely to strike trade deal with China, despite apparent efforts by the intellegence community to sabotage a truce with attacks against Huawei

By JANUARY 18, 2019 5:23 AM (UTC+8)ession,

US equities jumped on a report from The Wall Street Journal that Treasury Secretary Steven Mnuchin proposed to roll back tariffs on Chinese imports “as a way to calm markets and give Beijing an incentive to make deeper concessions in a trade battle that has rattled global economies.”

The Dow Jones Industrial Average rose 250 points on the news, and retraced downward after a Treasury official dismissed the report.



Diverging Administration views have leaked into the newspaper over the past 24 hours, including a report yesterday that federal prosecutors planned a criminal investigation against Huawei for allegedly stealing trade secrets of “Tappy” – a smartphone testing robot – from T-mobile, and a rumor that Germany was looking for ways to keep Huawei out of its 5G rollout.

There is a fine line between reality-show theater and real disagreements inside the Administration. The trouble isn’t so much the opposition of “free traders” like Mnuchin and economic adviser Lawrence Kudlow against “hard liners” like US Trade Representative Robert Lighthizer and trade adviser Peter Navarro.

The Administration’s potshots at Huawei, including the arrest last month of its chief financial officer in Vancouver and the arrest last week of a Polish Huawei executive for alleged espionage, suggest a provenance in the US intelligence community. Some media commentary Thursday morning claimed that the Huawei business would .

All of the press reports should be viewed as self-serving interventions by parts of the US government advancing divergent agendas. The Wall Street Journal claims that “Germany is exploring ways to ban the use of Huawei Technologies Co. products in the country’s telecommunications infrastructure” is suspect.

The US government asked Germany to keep Huawei out, and the German telecommunications security office politely responded that it had no proof of wrongdoing. At US insistence, the Germans will go through the motions of examining Huawei’s behavior, which in Journalese turns into “exploring ways” to kick Huawei out of Germany.

The report was crafted in such a way as to make confirmation or denial impossible. But the Bund Deutscher Industrie, the country’s main manufacturing association, declared that no company should be excluded from doing business without proof; it may be assumed that the association communicated what the German government thinks.

It’s hard to trade stocks when the financial press reads like a bad spy novel; that is the fault both of the spies, who should circulate disinformation more artfully, and the Wall Street Journal, which should know better than to publish dodgy leaks.

I continue to believe that Chinese market fundamentals are good (see my ). President Trump clearly is inclined to strike a deal with China, as he demonstrated by intervening to settle the ZTE problem a year ago, and again in his Dec. 1 Buenos Aires summit with Chinese President Xi Jinping.

Ultimately what matters to the president is politics, and shrinking world trade and sagging stock markets won’t help his re-election campaign. Other elements in the government, especially in the national security establishment, want a confrontation over Huawei. The reins of government are slack in the president’s hands, but I expect his instincts to prevail.

Investors should stay focused on fundamentals. The China debt bomb story was always bogus, based on a basic misunderstanding of China’s financial system. China and the US have the same debt-to-GDP ratio (but China has twice the growth). American debt is concentrated in the federal government, whose debt is about 110% of GDP not counting unfunded liabilities. China’s government debt is tiny, but its corporate debt is big. That’s just an accounting convention, though: Chinese government banks lend to Chinese state-owned companies to build infrastructure. China has the same level of debt as the US relative to GDP, but it got something for the money.



The chart shows who owes China’s corporate debt. The 30 companies shown in the chart together account for 62% of the nonfinancial company debt of the Shenzhen300 stock index. The bars show the cumulative share. Shanghai Pudong Development, the main Shanghai port operator, has 18% of the total debt. Add China State Construction Engineering, and together they owe 21% of the total, and so forth. Of the 30 top debtors only two are not infrastructure companies (SAIC Motor and BOE Technology).

The revenues created by infrastructure don’t necessarily flow to the providers of infrastructure. That’s a matter of internal pricing. The profitability of the infrastructure companies may or may not reflect their economic contribution. That depends on transfer pricing among government entities—the state-owned banks who lend to the state-owned companies.

China used the SOE balance sheet to build some of the world’s best infrastructure, raising the ratio of net debt to EBITDA from about zero to over 6 times in 2014. It is gradually declining and forecast
to fall back to a manageable 4X EBITDA by 2020.



Must-reads from across Asia - directly to your

Gatekeeper said:

Oh dear. Brat.

Your view on this is so out there. I don't know where to begin!

I have been lurking here for a while. And I think is about time I finally contribute to this excellent forum.

First, I think it's great that we've different views, (and yours included), on this forum.

But, what you're saying appear to say China's judicial system has nothing to do with justice, and its all politically motivated. Yet, somehow you do not think the same of the arrest of Meng!

Somehow a man from Canada (who was convicted criminal in canada)! Getting a death sentence is "chinese killing a canadian" (emotional words). And it is politically motivated and therefore "reinforced international perception on china"!

Yet, when the good old USA wanted to arrest a foreign national on charges based on US law that US set for itself, but expect the rest of the world to follow and comply. And if they don't, they can be arrested without proof via third party!

If you think that's ok. Them It seems like you care more about US unilateral policy then on international efforts in fighting drug traffickers!

Click to expand...

that's what we call "double standard".

Investors should stay focused on fundamentals. The China debt bomb story was always bogus, based on a basic misunderstanding of China’s financial system. China and the US have the same debt-to-GDP ratio (but China has twice the growth). American debt is concentrated in the federal government, whose debt is about 110% of GDP not counting unfunded liabilities. China’s government debt is tiny, but its corporate debt is big. That’s just an accounting convention, though: Chinese government banks lend to Chinese state-owned companies to build infrastructure. China has the same level of debt as the US relative to GDP, but it got something for the money.

Click to expand...

US corporate debt is also big.






While US household debt is 76% of GDP.

plawolf said:

The guy was actually trying to smuggle meth to Australia, so China has actually done Australia a massive favour by stopping those drugs from ending up on Australian streets.

What is not widely reported in the western media is that this was a retrial requested by Schellenberg himself against his original 15 year sentence.

You have to really be interested in this case to find these key facts omitted in more general and mainstream reporting.

Please, Log in or Register to view URLs content!

Let that sink in for a moment and then look at all the absurd claims by his lawyer that is endlessly repeated in all the mainstream western reporting about how ‘unfair’ the death sentence was since ‘no new evidence was presented’.

If there was nothing new to present, why did he and his client launch an appeal and ask for this very re-trial in the first place?

Also, just how moronic is his lawyer to agree to an appeal with ‘no new evidence’, against a sentence which was positively scandalously light by Chinese drug law standards (the death penalty comes into play with possession of even a pound of illegal drugs, never mind 500), and in the current political climate?

Anyone even remotely familiar with Chinese drug laws would not have been surprised in the least to see the death penalty handed down for a drug case involving so much ‘product’.

Rather than China going out of its way looking for Canadians to apply the screws to, as is all but explicitly claimed by the western media, the facts are that Schellenberg wasn’t smart enough to quit while he was ahead and pretty much served himself up on a platter.

Was this death sentence politically motivated? Almost certainly. Just as the arrest of Huawei’s CFO was blatantly politically motivated in the first place.

The key difference is that while the arrest of Meng is in deep legal murky waters as she was arrested in Canada having broken no Canadian or international laws; in Schellenberg’s case, all China’s judges had to do was apply Chinese law as it would have been originally had Schellenberg been a Chinese citizen.

Personally I think China is seeing a trend developing, with America getting its allies to gang up on China, the recent arrest of another Huawei employee in Poland stands out as a example.

So China is starting to play hardball to demonstrate the very real costs to those governments stupid enough to think messing with China to curry favour with the Americans does not carry consequences.

Cold War 2.0 is on, and if people are too proud or dense to remember, they will learn the key lessons of the first Cold War first hand - the big boys don’t fight each other directly, they spank each other’s cat paws and minions.

If you are not a superpower, picking sides and taking direct action against a superpower is just sheer idiocy.

That’s why Vietnam and the Philippines got in line so quickly after China showed them it was not playing around in the SCS, when they realised what kind of game they were really playing in.

Click to expand...

Wow, didn't know the person requested a re-trial. I did not read the news much lately and only skim through some and watch some news broadcast. None of the news, not even Hong Kong news mentioned about this

Among the Chinese corporations, which one has the biggest debt?

It should be China Railway Corp., which, at the end of 2017, had about 5 trillion yuan corporate debts (about $900 bn, but the debt is internal and in RMB so dollar is irrelevant here).

()

CRC's revenue in 2017 was about 1 trillion yuan, profit 60.7 billion yuan, or about $9 billion. So compared to the profit, the debt is pretty large.

CRC's debt has increased quite substantially in the last decade. The debts are mostly from very low-interest loans from Chinese state-owned banks. So what does China get for such a large corporate debt? Well, it's built the world's largest high-speed railway network, which stands at around 25,000 kilometers, about 60% of the world's total.

So these debts are exchanged for high-quality assets, which will serve China at least for the next 50 years.

SteelBird said:

that's what we call "double standard".

Click to expand...

Tells you a lot about his character and his moral and religious upbringing.