Trade War with China

Status
Not open for further replies.

Biscuits

Major
Registered Member
But as per above link, this isn't the case. Why would th 45th potus lie? Is he being fed lies or partial ones ? Is there truths to his claim? Why would China want any of this shoddy unfair deal ?

Because that’s what regimes built on fear and aggression do.

They must deny any weakness of the state while rallying the population against external foes, so their own behavior can go under the radar.

Wherever there is chaos, there is opportunity, especially when you made the chaos. The American people might be losing in jobs, wealth and goods, but the instigators of the trade war are still winning big. Insider trading and company bribes for exemption being the big two.

Really, there will be no band aid deal to fix the trade problem. Either China disengages and scuttles everything, or they have to stick around and by some miracle put the US economy back to the hands of it’s people.

Personally I think the former is the best path ahead. America’s internal problems is best left to their own people to solve, but China should not be guilty of aiding or allowing their internal problems to create external problems for others.
 

Franklin

Captain
The German foreign minister is in Latin America on a official visit. One of the issue's on the agenda is China. The problem here is that Chinese companies are gaining ground on their German rivals in latin America and the German government is trying to give them a helping hand. But they can't say to the latin Amaericans please stop buying Chinese buy German. So they talk about that Latin American countries have to beware of Chinese influence on their democracies.

Democracy and China top German agenda in Brazil diplomatic visit

Foreign Minister Heiko Maas will discuss human rights with Brazil's President Jair Bolsonaro before heading to Colombia, where millions of Venezuelans have fled. China also looms over the Latin America trip.

Signs are seen during a protest by indigenous people to defend indigenous land and cultural rights that they say are threatened by the right-wing government of Brazil's President Jair Bolsonaro (Reuters/N. Doce)

German Foreign Minister Heiko Maas has a clear agenda for his meeting with Brazil's populist far-right President Jair Bolsonaro on Tuesday.

"We will talk about topics like climate protection, the rain forest, the topic of human rights, minorities, homosexuals," Maas said on his arrival to Brazil on Monday. "Partners must be able to discuss such things with one another."

While the topics might appear to be standard diplomatic fare, they are being put forward to a politician known for incendiary comments against black people, women and homosexuals.

As part of the first delegation from the European Union to meet Bolsonaro since he took office in January, Maas will seek to promote liberal democratic values without causing too much controversy, analysts told DW.

Latin America is a region that Germany has "overlooked" for too long, Maas himself has said. But during his four-day trip to Brazil, Colombia and Mexico, one other country will also have a place on his discussion agenda: China.

Maas spoke with reporters in Salvador Da Bahia, Brazil after inaugurating a new network promoting women's rights

Brazil puts Latin America back on German radar

Maas began his trip to Brazil in a symbolic, if unusual manner for a foreign minister on his first visit there: He delivered a sharp rebuke against populism and nationalism in a country now governed by a right-wing populist dubbed the "Trump of the Tropics."

"We are currently experiencing dangerous setbacks," Maas said in the coastal city of Salvador da Bahia on Monday, where he inaugurated a new network to promote women's rights in the region. "Populism and nationalism are on the rise worldwide. And achievements that have been won over decades are no longer just being discussed but are sometimes even being questioned."

The 2018 election of Bolsonaro — controversial not only for his comments against minorities but also for his admiration of the military dictatorship that ruled Brazil from 1964 to 1985 — was the tipping point that shed light on Germany's political blind spots in the region, said Sabine Kurtenbach, acting director of the German Institute of Global and Area Studies' (GIGA) Latin America department.

"Latin America was not atop the agenda because it was considered on a good track toward democracy," she told DW.

"The current crisis in Venezuela and the shock waves of the election of Bolsonaro have made quite evident that you should look and pay attention to what happens in Latin America, otherwise you might find … a lot of backlash against political democracy."

Fragile national situations

During the remainder of his trip this week, Maas will attempt to stem such democratic backlash in Colombia and Mexico, Kurtenbach said.

In Colombia, the government has struggled to uphold the 2016 peace accord with the Revolutionary Armed Forces of Colombia, or FARC, a former guerrilla movement. Many ex-FARC fighters have been granted amnesty and were allotted seats in parliament, but reintegration and reconstruction efforts have been slow after five decades of war.

Meanwhile, tension in Colombia is being compounded by the crisis in neighboring Venezuela, which has caused more than 3 million Venezuelans to flee since 2014. Colombia has absorbed over 1 million of these refugees, more than any other country in the region, but many Venezuelans have struggled to find the resources they need in developing Colombia where public services are strained.

"In Colombia, refugees, together with FARC members, could destabilize democratic efforts in the country," said Thomas W. O'Donnell, a lecturer of international affairs at the Hertie School of Governance in Berlin.

Mexico, one of Germany's most important regional partners, is also at a crossroads, said O'Donnell. Its new president, Andres Manuel Lopez Obrador, has become distracted from an ambitious slate of anti-corruption and social welfare election promises by a steady flow of Central American migrants heading north to the US-Mexico border, starting off an important economic relationship with US President Donald Trump on the wrong foot.

"Obrador is trying to handle Trump in a moderate way," said O'Donnell. "It's a very delicate manner to handle, and in that way, Maas and Obrador have something in common."

China in focus

The German foreign minister's diplomatic rhetoric has been sharp on his Latin American trip thus far, but he is unlikely to push the envelope too far out of fear of undermining united European efforts in the region, said O'Donnell.

Instead, Maas is likely to focus efforts on stanching China's influence in the region.

"Although Maas talks in that direction, that's not the real policy focus," O'Donnell said, referring to the foreign minister's talk of bolstering liberal democratic values in the region. "It's really Germany against China there — the Chinese are moving into the types of exports that Germany normally specializes in."

German multinationals like Siemens and Volkswagen have been active in the region for decades, and German exports to Latin America are expected to bloom to €38 billion ($43 billion) this year, according to the German Chambers of Commerce and Industry (DIHK).

But according to O'Donnell, Germany has been "on the back foot" with the region for decades, backing out of investment opportunities and freezing free-trade deals as political crises in the region unfolded.

That opened the door to China, which has invested about €50 billion ($56 billion) in Brazil alone, the region's largest economy. Chinese fiber-optic cables and mobile networks dominate the region, and China has plans to construct a new airport in Ecuador and a transcontinental railroad connecting the Atlantic and Pacific oceans.

For Germany, this has kicked off "a full-court press to further relations with Latin America," said O'Donnell. "China has cut into traditional German exports there, so I think it's a priority because they have to find somewhere to do business in the region."

But Kurtenbach contends that it's not all economics for Germany in Latin America: When it comes to China, economic access also raises the fear of Beijing having undue influence over democratic governments.

"China is important economically, but so too is the danger of limiting the liberal political systems in the region by downplaying human rights and the rule of law," she said. "These are the German government's twin motivations."

After the foreign minister concludes his Latin America trip this week, he will welcome delegations from 30 regional countries in Berlin on May 28.

Please, Log in or Register to view URLs content!
 

localizer

Colonel
Registered Member
The German foreign minister is in Latin America on a official visit. One of the issue's on the agenda is China. The problem here is that Chinese companies are gaining ground on their German rivals in latin America and the German government is trying to give them a helping hand. But they can't say to the latin Amaericans please stop buying Chinese buy German. So they talk about that Latin American countries have to beware of Chinese influence on their democracies.



Please, Log in or Register to view URLs content!

holy crap they just voted in bolsanaro and they wanna discuss China endangering democracy?
 

Gatekeeper

Brigadier
Registered Member
They were prepared for Armageddon because they were afraid that the Soviets would bring it. It does not mean that they would prefer mutual destruction over being slowly overtaken. No country in history other than China has so far put the US in the position where it can be slowly overtaken in all categories. Japan was only an economic threat and the Soviets were only a military one. And neither was able to push the US far enough for us to find out if they really want to risk death to stay number one.

I completely understand what these people are thinking. If I was offered China 6%, USA 6% vs. China 3%, USA 0%, I'd choose the later too, no hesitation. Standard of living means nothing if you are being militarily pushed around and amongst nuclear peers, unraveling your opponent's economy is the way to defeat his military.
They were prepared for Armageddon because they were afraid that the Soviets would bring it. It does not mean that they would prefer mutual destruction over being slowly overtaken. No country in history other than China has so far put the US in the position where it can be slowly overtaken in all categories. Japan was only an economic threat and the Soviets were only a military one. And neither was able to push the US far enough for us to find out if they really want to risk death to stay number one.

I completely understand what these people are thinking. If I was offered China 6%, USA 6% vs. China 3%, USA 0%, I'd choose the later too, no hesitation. Standard of living means nothing if you are being militarily pushed around and amongst nuclear peers, unraveling your opponent's economy is the way to defeat his military.

I don't necessary disagree with what you are trying to say. But I think you have missed my point.
My point of "better dead than red" was that during the cold war, there were people in charge who really believe this, and is also willing to complete the ultimate act because they prefer being "dead than red".
Now 30 years later, there are people in the position of power who's willing to use force to retain their No. 1 position in the global order of things.
So this is the scary situation I'm alluring to, and it is very real.

With regards to the bright and intelligent students 30 years ago, (and yourself) choosing to having a lower living standards by selecting lower growth rates rather than accepting higher standards of living, but might eventually loosing the No. 1 position to a rival country. (Japan)
This mindset is illogical, but it is what it is. Now fast forward 30 years to now, and these0 same students are your Pompyo of the world and his cohorts.
Whereas 30 years ago, it was only an academic study, but now it is real, and Pompyo and his cohorts are now acting on their fears, and is doing everthing in their power to maintain US No. 1 position, at the expense of current living standards.
Hence, we see this phoney trade war!
The sad thing is, there really is no need for this. And both countried can grow rich together.
Like you said, it is the fear of being "push around" that drives the current US policy towards China.
 

manqiangrexue

Brigadier
I don't necessary disagree with what you are trying to say. But I think you have missed my point.
My point of "better dead than red" was that during the cold war, there were people in charge who really believe this, and is also willing to complete the ultimate act because they prefer being "dead than red".
Now 30 years later, there are people in the position of power who's willing to use force to retain their No. 1 position in the global order of things.
So this is the scary situation I'm alluring to, and it is very real.

With regards to the bright and intelligent students 30 years ago, (and yourself) choosing to having a lower living standards by selecting lower growth rates rather than accepting higher standards of living, but might eventually loosing the No. 1 position to a rival country. (Japan)
This mindset is illogical, but it is what it is. Now fast forward 30 years to now, and these0 same students are your Pompyo of the world and his cohorts.
Whereas 30 years ago, it was only an academic study, but now it is real, and Pompyo and his cohorts are now acting on their fears, and is doing everthing in their power to maintain US No. 1 position, at the expense of current living standards.
Hence, we see this phoney trade war!
The sad thing is, there really is no need for this. And both countried can grow rich together.
Like you said, it is the fear of being "push around" that drives the current US policy towards China.
I don't understand what you find illogical. This is not a situation where you and another random person on the planet can grow richer together or not and schadenfreude is causing one to say not. This is a situation where A and B use their powers against each other for global power and position, so for A to gain, that equals B losing and vice versa. This is a race; giving your opponent 10 meters while taking 9 is equal to losing 1 meter. Giving both you and your opponent 10 meters is a waste of time. The US is not intent on staying home and being wealthy or I would really wish it the best and not at all care about any "trade war". When the US earns money, it uses that money to build a military to subjugate others half the world away. So, to attenuate this capability is very much the same as getting richer to improve your own defenses. In other words, hindering your opponent's offense is the same as boosting your own defense so I find it perfectly rational to sacrifice Chinese GDP if it inflicts greater loss on US GDP, and that effect is compounded by the fact that American weapons are more expensive than Chinese ones for similar capability.

And once again, choosing to sacrifice a piece of your wealth to inflict greater economic damage on a rival aggressor's wealth does NOT equate to choosing death in battle over slow, peaceful defeat. Although my stance on the GDP is clear, I would rather China continue to work for as many decades as needed to grow stronger than the US than go to nuclear war when it encounters difficulties with its plan to do so.
 
Last edited:

Gatekeeper

Brigadier
Registered Member
I don't understand much at this point. esp When Trump claims that China is infact footing the bills. How? Afaik, much of the companies that sell to the America are american companies or american allies's companies who uses China as their final assembly place and source less critical yet important components from. ( Correct me if i'm wrong here .There are bound to be some Chinese origin stuff in TV, Playstation, Alexa speakers, roomba, Cars etc)
So aren't the companies the ones who'd be paying the taxes ? ( who'd later shift the burden to the consumers with less discounts,offers, benefits or price cuts) ? Trump insists that Chinese state pays 21/25 of taxes of 10% of 250 billion worth goods. That translates about 21*0.1*10 = 21 billion. ( I round it to 25 Billion, why not ?)

Is this true? Does the chinese state actually contribute 25 billion as a payment to allow American companies/ American ally companies to maintain their assembly plants in China ? I can't seem to get a good idea about all this.
Please, Log in or Register to view URLs content!


But as per above link, this isn't the case. Why would th 45th potus lie? Is he being fed lies or partial ones ? Is there truths to his claim? Why would China want any of this shoddy unfair deal ? A lot many american MSM
claims the trade war to end with Trump actually losing unknowingly.

Please don't buy the "China is footing the bill crap"!
He's lying through his teeth. It just not possible.
Tariff is a tax, and like all tax are applied and controlled by any soverign country within their borders. Another word they CAN NOT apply it on another soverign nation. So it is the importing nation's own comsumers paying the price through higher prices. Period!
 

manqiangrexue

Brigadier
I think it was a mistake to react this way. Liu He should have gone to the negotiation table with firm demands knowing that Trump has only put pressure on himself with that statement by setting himself up for a possible superficial victory if he ends up signing next week. Trump would gloat that he successfully used negotiation tactics to pressure the Chinese into a deal while his team was actually the one who was pressured by the dangling prospect of seeming triumphant. Liu He is under no such pressure from Chinese citizens because they all know he's dealing with a lunatic. Liu could have entered next week's talks with such an advantage but threatening to cancel talks misses that chance. Trump only knows how to respond to threats by upping the ante without even thinking about what he's saying because he's too worried about being perceived as weak to care about actual content (not that he's likely to understand all the actual content) of any agreement. By threatening Trump you walk into a deadlock but by using his own pressure against him and dangling the prospect of seeming victorious to the people, you can get Trump to concede the real meat of the agreement. I hope the CCP though it out better than I did and has a better plan...

Please, Log in or Register to view URLs content!

China Considers Canceling Trade Talks With U.S., WSJ Says
Please, Log in or Register to view URLs content!

Brendan Scott
Please, Log in or Register to view URLs content!
•May 5, 2019
 

Hendrik_2000

Lieutenant General
I don't think that is correct You don't negotiate under duress There is such thing as dignity and self respect . Specially for China who was humiliated under unequal treaty for hundred of year .Resulting in May movement that provide the background for the founding of CCP

So you have to look it in the context of history So I would understand if they decline to come next week
Why negotiate with bully it is futile
 

tidalwave

Senior Member
Registered Member
LOL, didn't I said many many times walk away awhile back before all this. What do you know??
I can forsee this miles miles away.

If US really needs China goods then there wouldn't so much negotiation.

China just has to accept the fact that its goods aren't really crucially needed.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Top