To address its own and country biggest weakness, Huawei must advance its chip manufacturing.

Status
Not open for further replies.

Faithlock

New Member
Registered Member
By the way, I hope this is the start of a new strategy. That is China is starting to fight back.

Please, Log in or Register to view URLs content!


China’s retaliation against new Trump tariffs will send U.S. hog farmers into a tailspin


Hogs are raised on the farm of Ted Fox near Osage, Iowa. (Scott Olson/Getty Images)


By
Please, Log in or Register to view URLs content!


May 17 at 7:00 AM

Chinese buyers canceled a major order for American pork, the U.S. Department of Agriculture said Thursday, heightening fears that the U.S.-China trade dispute was set to inflict even more pain on American farmers who have taken a series of hits in Trump’s trade wars.

As of April 18 there were export commitments of American pork to China of 150,000 metric tons, only 50,000 of which had been shipped, leaving others in the balance.

The uncertainty is unsettling farmers like Randy Spronk who raises 250,000 pigs a year at his farm in Pipestone County, Minn., and sells to giant food processing companies like JBS, Tyson and Hormel.

The U.S. withdrawal from the Trans-Pacific Partnership Agreement in 2017 cost American farmers market share in Japan. Spronk says 20 percent tariffs in Mexico have cost hog farmers an additional $12 per animal and that an earlier round of Chinese retaliatory tariffs cost $8 per animal.

“American pork is a $6.4 billion export market, but we’ve been hit more than any other sector,” Spronk says. “Our highest value markets are the ones that are impacted by these tariffs. We got side swiped. The additive effects of these tariffs come out of my back pocket.”

Hog farmers saw a small financial uptick in March, attributed to the prospect of selling into China after that country’s pig industry was decimated by African swine fever.

That seems unlikely to happen now. The latest escalation of tariffs means that American pork will not be economically competitive in China.

Still, Joe Brusuelas, chief economist at RSM, thinks pork is an important negotiating tool with China.

“If the administration is serious about seeking a deal, that is clearly the path of least resistance,” he said. “Because of African swine fever and their own domestic situation, China doesn’t really have a choice and they will have to fulfill their needs by global supply.”

With the imminent release of the U.S. Department of Agriculture’s new trade relief program for farmers and ranchers, a battle has begun among agricultural sectors about who should get what, how much and in what form, and exactly who has suffered the worst losses due to trade disputes.

President Trump has promised at least $15 billion, a number he says corresponds to Chinese purchases of American agricultural products. This is on top of $12 billion distributed as relief to farmers last year to offset losses associated with Chinese retaliatory duties.

With that $12 billion, there were winners (soy) and losers (corn and wheat), specialty crops that were singled out for assistance (cherries and almonds) and other parts of the American food system that received no aid at all despite discernible losses due to tariffs (the seafood industry).

Spronk’s hogs have been part of the export market for years. Japan has historically been No. 1 by price and volume, buying high-value loins; Mexico is No. 2 by price, buying mostly hams. China has been the No. 3 export country, using up organs, feet and other lower-value cuts; Korea is in fourth place, prizing shoulder cuts, and Canada represents the fifth market by volume.

What Spronk wants to see is the removal of tariffs from Mexican and Canadian steel and aluminum (and thus retaliatory tariffs from Mexico), free trade agreements with Japan and China, and the ratification of the United States-Mexico-Canada Agreement.

“I don’t want the check from the government, I want to take pride in what I do. I want to compete,” he said.

Even within his own industry, there is dissent on what relief should look like.

Nick Giordano, vice president and counsel for the National Pork Producers Council, says the pork industry will ask the USDA to purchase pork for food aid. He says food banks and noncommercial channels represent a win for consumers and those in need without driving down pork prices with a glut on the market.

Senator Charles E. Grassley (R-Iowa) and others have indicated that purchasing farmers’ excess for international food relief would be subject to World Trade Organization violations.

“Unless the food is used for humanitarian reasons we’d be subject to WTO violation,” Grassley told The Washington Post early this week. “If (President Trump) buys up $15 billion and he can’t ship it overseas because he doesn’t want to violate the WTO . . . then it’s a depressant on the market because people know that the government holds so much grain.”

“Trump has opened the door to helping needy people outside the U.S.,” Giordano says, “And that’s the door we want to walk through. Most of our producers are going to say, ‘So what if there’s a WTO issue? We’ve got a five-alarm fire on our hands.' I defy anybody to look my producers in the eye and tell them the government shouldn’t work with them on pork as food aid.”

Although pork is just one of many sectors of American agriculture that have been injured by the trade wars, it is likely the hardest hit of the animal agriculture categories. The U.S. accounts for a relatively small share of beef and poultry sold into China because of other non-tariff barriers.

But there’s one American protein that has been welcomed with open arms in recent years in China: Maine lobster.

In the early 1990s there were 30 to 40 million pounds caught annually; by 2011 that number had grown to 100 million pounds. Producers like Tom Adams of Maine Coast, a lobster wholesaler, had to find new customers who weren’t going to drive down the domestic price.

“We started shipping to China in 2013 and it was our fastest growth area. Asia accounted for 40 percent of our sales in 2016 and 2017, and China accounted for half of that, $10 million a year in revenue from China.”

He had three weeks’ notice about the last round of retaliatory Chinese tariffs, which went into effect July 6, 2018. He had to make a fast pivot to find additional domestic sales, and he says the Canadian lobster industry has swooped in to sell to China.

“We were already at a trade disadvantage in the E.U. with Canada. In 2018 we had 35 percent of our market affected negatively by a trade agreement or trade war.”

Of the upcoming trade relief program, Adams isn’t hopeful.

“Grains play a much bigger role in our economy, but it bothers us as seafood industry members that we’ve never really been represented. We fall under agriculture but not in these relief programs. Our net income has been affected much like soy. These tariffs have affected by employees, my family and my industry.”
 

manqiangrexue

Brigadier
Really, Chinese government defended ZTE's legal rights internationally? If that is the case, why does ZTE ends up with an American compliance officer in ZTE office monitoring and approving every major decision ZTE management makes.
Obviously because ZTE smuggled American parts to Iran and a ZTE officer carried that data with him to the US and was caught. If ZTE breaks a contract with the US, the US has every right to enforce penalties on it by withholding American technology. (Don't get me wrong; I'm all for breaking American rules and contracts but you can't get caught and then cry that your rights were violated and that now your government must do an inordinate amount of work to save you from the consequences you knew you would incur.) ZTE's rights were not violated and China has nothing to defend. China bargained for ZTE to stay in business like daddy had to come bail out his kid.
Do you honest believe ZTE, Fujian Jinhua, and Huawei will be the last Chinese companies that US will target? Have the government shifted its responsibility so much that it is now up to every successful Chinese companies to go up against the number 1 super power?
No, ZTE and Huawei will not be the last Chinese companies to be deprived to American technology and that's not the Chinese government's responsibility to defend against. The bottom line is American technology is not a guarantee; run afoul of America and risk losing it! So for these companies and for China to be a rival to the US, they should have been prepared to lose access to this. America has every right to withhold access like I have every right to stop selling things to my neighbor that he uses to kick my ass with.
Why is it not a common sense that no electronic companies can go up against the number 1 super power?
What the hell does "go up against" mean? They're not waging war. The US isn't sending people to sabotage their facilities and assassinate their engineers. If that were true then it would be the Chinese government's role to "go up against" a rival country. But the US is simply saying that you can't do business with my companies anymore and there's not a damn thing that any government can do about it! It's America's fundamental right to not do business with you!
It is not like China is like Laos or Cambodia. China is the second strongest country. Xi has many advantages Trump doesn't have.

What advantages did China have over USA? Well, maybe we can review what many of the posters (by the way, I am not directing at you, manqiangrexue) here said 2 years ago when the trade war first started. All the reasons the posters listed here 2 years ago and still valid now. Why are most of the posters changed their tune when it become clear Xi won't fight back?
You've avoided answering this question two times and the last time, it was in bold. It will be bolded again this third time. What specifically would you have had China's government do differently for ZTE?

What you're doing, blaming the Chinese government for an American action without so much as recourse for what you would have them do differently is exactly the kind of dissent and disunity that Trump's administration would love to see between the Chinese government and its people. Give the Chinese government 100% support (even if they made a mistake, be a team player and don't play the blame game) so they can focus on external threats rather than internal dissent is the kind of attitude and unity that the US government fears.
 
Last edited:

Shaolian

Junior Member
Registered Member
What you're doing, blaming the Chinese government for an American action without so much as recourse for what you would have them do differently is exactly the kind of dissent and disunity that Trump's administration would love to see between the Chinese government and its people. Give the Chinese government 100% support (even if they made a mistake, be a team player and don't play the blame game) so they can focus on external threats rather than internal dissent is the kind of attitude and unity that the US government fears.

Exactly, this is the kind of mindless blaming/cursing that I see a lot of Hong Kong people do to their Motherland, especially those in the media. Mostly it's done with glee as well. I consider this as slave mentality.
 

gelgoog

Brigadier
Registered Member
Well they better speed up the 7nm Fab construction a storm is brewing. they have 1 year to come up with a plan Depending on TSMC is not realistic
It is Deja Vu again the pacific war was precipitate by oil embargo forcing Japan to invade SEA
...

I do not know about that. The founder of TSMC is fairly antagonistic towards the PRC. But TSMC has factories in China. The one they have at Nanjing, for example, was inaugurated on October 31st last year. It uses 300mm wafers and can manufacture chips at 16 nm. Even if, for whatever reason, Huawei can't manufacture at 7 nm in Taiwan, which I doubt will happen, Huawei can at least still manufacture their older designs. That would mean they would be using 2 year old designs but at least it is better than nothing.

This is one reason why I think Trump's efforts will fail to kill China's semiconductor growth. He started this way too late. Just look at the date that factory started operations for example. China has splurged huge amounts of money bringing chip factories to China and most investments became operational last year. Plus Trump is being quite blunt and clumsy with his sanctions.

Also, Huawei can simply spin-off HiSilicon as its own independent company. Then it wouldn't be under sanctions anymore. Even if Huawei themselves couldn't use the leading edge chips, HiSilicon could sell the designs to companies like Oppo. Which aren't being sanctioned. This would also help kill Qualcomm in the Chinese handset manufacturer market. Only reason the other Chinese companies use Qualcomm instead of HiSilicon's chips is because they simply aren't allowed to buy them. So it would kill two birds with one stone. If the US then sanctioned Oppo in addition to Huawei then it would make their dirty game obvious to anyone.

Last time the US imposed ITAR on satellites to try to stop China it made European satellite manufacturers develop their own fully indigenous and vertical technology they could resell to other countries without getting in the US's dirty game. That nearly killed the US satellite technology sector. I think Trump is just repeating that mistake again.
Please, Log in or Register to view URLs content!


Had he done this the minute he was elected it might have actually worked. Now I think it is way too late.
 
Last edited:

CMP

Senior Member
Registered Member
U.S. used oil embargo on Japan to trigger a military retaliation leading to U.S. war against Japan. U.S. will try to use technology embargo on China to trigger military action against Taiwan (to maintain supply chains from Taiwanese companies) leading to U.S. war intervention.
 

chlosy

Junior Member
Registered Member
Is this reasonable?
Let Trump know, 2 weeks from now, if it becomes apparent that the USA aims to kill off Huawei by denying American parts, that banning sales to any top 5 Chinese company (in any sector, eg telecoms) means those parts cannot be sold tovthe top 20 companies of that sector
Would that catch his attention?
The buyer must hold some power too.
 

manqiangrexue

Brigadier
U.S. used oil embargo on Japan to trigger a military retaliation leading to U.S. war against Japan. U.S. will try to use technology embargo on China to trigger military action against Taiwan (to maintain supply chains from Taiwanese companies) leading to U.S. war intervention.
I don't think so. Trump doesn't want to mess with even Venezuela or Iran, not to mention a nuclear-armed China. If he wanted to trigger a Chinese invasion of the ROC, it would be as simple as telling Cai to declare formal independence. China automatically fights.
 

Faithlock

New Member
Registered Member
Obviously because ZTE smuggled American parts to Iran and a ZTE officer carried that data with him to the US and was caught. If ZTE breaks a contract with the US, the US has every right to enforce penalties on it by withholding American technology. (Don't get me wrong; I'm all for breaking American rules and contracts but you can't get caught and then cry that your rights were violated and that now your government must do an inordinate amount of work to save you from the consequences you knew you would incur.) ZTE's rights were not violated and China has nothing to defend. China bargained for ZTE to stay in business like daddy had to come bail out his kid.

What? I can't believe my eyes. Are you really defending America?


No, ZTE and Huawei will not be the last Chinese companies to be deprived to American technology and that's not the Chinese government's responsibility to defend against. The bottom line is American technology is not a guarantee; run afoul of America and risk losing it! So for these companies and for China to be a rival to the US, they should have been prepared to lose access to this. America has every right to withhold access like I have every right to stop selling things to my neighbor that he uses to kick my ass with.

I am sorry. This is very difficult for me to read. You are defending America again.


What the hell does "go up against" mean? They're not waging war. The US isn't sending people to sabotage their facilities and assassinate their engineers. If that were true then it would be the Chinese government's role to "go up against" a rival country. But the US is simply saying that you can't do business with my companies anymore and there's not a damn thing that any government can do about it! It's America's fundamental right to not do business with you!

You are defending America again.

You've avoided answering this question two times and the last time, it was in bold. It will be bolded again this third time. What specifically would you have had China's government do differently for ZTE?

There are a lot of things China can do to counter attack. There are many advantages that Xi has over Trump. China is rich and America is a debtor nation. Xi can spend money while Trump has to get Congress approval (for big money anyway). Xi has all the time in the world while Trump has either 1 or 5 years. There are hundreds of things China can do that can cause America pain.

What you're doing, blaming the Chinese government for an American action without so much as recourse for what you would have them do differently is exactly the kind of dissent and disunity that Trump's administration would love to see between the Chinese government and its people.
Give the Chinese government 100% support (even if they made a mistake, be a team player and don't play the blame game) so they can focus on external threats rather than internal dissent is the kind of attitude and unity that the US government fears.
This is the only good point in this tread. This is also the reason I bite my tongue for 1 and 1/2 years. But after 1.5 years and you saw the train is heading in the wrong direction, maybe it is time to tell the government "Hey, maybe it is time to change direction"
 

Faithlock

New Member
Registered Member
U.S. used oil embargo on Japan to trigger a military retaliation leading to U.S. war against Japan. U.S. will try to use technology embargo on China to trigger military action against Taiwan (to maintain supply chains from Taiwanese companies) leading to U.S. war intervention.

I don't think Trump wants that. Trump is an isolationist in heart. But he is surrounded by Neo Cons who want to re-live the glory days for the Cold War and Ronald Reagan.

I have no doubt guys like John Bolton want to create a crisis so that US can completely destroy China's navy before it is too late.

Trump is easily influenced by people close to him as long as they kiss his ass. He also like to gamble. Couple that with the Taiwan Independent President of Taiwan "Province", who is wildly disliked in the poll, and need a crisis badly to have any chance of winning the election next year.

There is a distinct possibility of Taiwan proclaiming TI.

Some times I wonder maybe that is the reason why Xi is so hesitant to fight back.
 

s002wjh

Junior Member
What? I can't believe my eyes. Are you really defending America?




I am sorry. This is very difficult for me to read. You are defending America again.




You are defending America again.



There are a lot of things China can do to counter attack. There are many advantages that Xi has over Trump. China is rich and America is a debtor nation. Xi can spend money while Trump has to get Congress approval (for big money anyway). Xi has all the time in the world while Trump has either 1 or 5 years. There are hundreds of things China can do that can cause America pain.



This is the only good point in this tread. This is also the reason I bite my tongue for 1 and 1/2 years. But after 1.5 years and you saw the train is heading in the wrong direction, maybe it is time to tell the government "Hey, maybe it is time to change direction"
he is not defending america he is telling the truth. US law can decide who to sell their products. for example if US found some company selling products to iran which include US parts, they can ban that company. They are the producer and owner of those product, they can sell who ever they want, thats the reality. Just like if i have some product you want, but i dont want sell to you, there is nothing you can do.

America are in debt but as long US $$ are the reserve currency, people gonna buy it. US can just print $$$, its helicopter money.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Top