Trade War with China

canniBUS said:

Mainstream economists say the trade war is about fair trade.

Click to expand...

I'm sorry, but as much as I agree with the body of your post. I must take issue with the above quote.

I'm a economist, but I think you would find it hard to find any economists is saying the trade war is about fair trade.

It is Trump and his administration that is saying this. But even they know deep fown is not anout fair trade, it is for the consumption of the MAGA audience. In reality, it is about stopping China catching US while Trump is president (don't forget he said it himself)!

Gatekeeper said:

I particularly like the use of "phantom shares". Would like to know the source.

Click to expand...

It's actually very simple, Huawei employees still need to use their own money to purchase the "stock" and enjoy the dividend. However you don't have the ownership of the "stock" nor the right to vote on the board, and you could not sell or transfer them to others as well. And finally, when you leave the company Huawei will buy back the "stock" from you.

manqiangrexue said:

There is nothing in the conclusion that definitively pins Huawei's ownership to the Chinese government and resorting to denial does not change that fact. Everything is, "...if... then maybe..." There is no conclusive evidence at all. It's just like America's "evidence" against Huawei spying is all, "if.. then they could..." Basically the whole paper is about how the authors imagine a government-owned Huawei would be set up.

And by the way, there's nothing wrong at all with an SOE.

Click to expand...

So when the UK own ONE "Golden share" of a bank, and other formally nationised industries, which in effect gives the UK government control. But somehow, that's ok. But how dare those fiendish Chinese do likewise!

Tam said:

Google was not banned from China. They took themselves out of China. They even operated in China for years. But they refused to comply with regulations of censorship, that is their corporate decision. That's actually Brin's decision and he had a big fight with Eric Schmidt over it. So they relocated themselves to Hong Kong but Google still kept all sorts of developmental labs in China even today.

I am quite interested with Huawei's ownership structure. I actually think its revolutionary and disruptive, leads to higher productivity, compared to the US model, where its at the expense of the workers in favor of CEO pay.

Click to expand...

You know the "Truth" is a inconveient to people who have closed minds

US consumers will ultimately pay the tariffs, not China. Fundementally not too different than the border wall. I disagree with the POTUS on this one. 99% of Americans do not even have the faintest idea on how global economics and trading works. I believe Trump's protectionist actions and anti-china agendas while politically expedient for him in the short term will hurt the American economy in the long run.

Phead128 said:

There is no proof of forced IP tech transfer. It's based on "anonymized" complaints to White House, good luck getting Chinese govt to accept that accusations without hard concrete evidence.

China will just vehemently deny it and say "anonymous" complaint is not hard evidence.

Click to expand...

As we have said in this forum many times before by a number of different posters.

I'll repeat it here.

Theres no such thing as "forced transfer of tech"! It is invented by Trump and his people to label China as the bad guy!

All firms no matter where they are from would be "forced" to give up their tech UNWILLINGLY.

After all, they can just walk away from the deal if another firm insist you give up your tech.

A foreign firm gives it up willingly because there's a chance of bigger profit from given it up!

So it is NEVER forced!

Cypher said:

It's actually very simple, Huawei employees still need to use their own money to purchase the "stock" and enjoy the dividend. However you don't have the ownership of the "stock" nor the right to vote on the board, and you could not sell or transfer them to others as well. And finally, when you leave the company Huawei will buy back the "stock" from you.

Click to expand...

I know how stock work. Also they are different classes of stock, some give you voting rights, and some done. Some also requires you to resell back to the company. And all these are happening now in the west finanicial system.

The point was he was accusing China of wrong doing, when these different types of shares are available financial instrument s in the US and the west! So how come is alright for the west and not for China!

The issue was he accused Hauwei of "phantom" shares. By its defination, if its "phantom" how does he or anyone else know its there!

Isn't it ironic that the west accused China of being a opaque and oppressively closed society. With secretes and oppresive police everywhere. Yet somehow, they the west in the comfort of their armchair can find out so much about one firm in such a oppressed and closely monitored police state! The irony is too much!

Gatekeeper said:

As we have said in this forum many times before by a number of different posters.

I'll repeat it here.

Theres no such thing as "forced transfer of tech"! It is invented by Trump and his people to label China as the bad guy!

All firms no matter where they are from would be "forced" to give up their tech UNWILLINGLY.

After all, they can just walk away from the deal if another firm insist you give up your tech.

A foreign firm gives it up willingly because there's a chance of bigger profit from given it up!

So it is NEVER forced!

Click to expand...

The tech transfers were part of the agreement with those foreign companies for access to the Chinese market.

It's like when you sign a contract to buy a house, then after you move in, you start claiming that the seller forced you to give him money.

Gatekeeper said:

I know how stock work. Also they are different classes of stock, some give you voting rights, and some done. Some also requires you to resell back to the company. And all these are happening now in the west finanicial system.

The point was he was accusing China of wrong doing, when these different types of shares are available financial instrument s in the US and the west! So how come is alright for the west and not for China!

The issue was he accused Hauwei of "phantom" shares. By its defination, if its "phantom" how does he or anyone else know its there!

Isn't it ironic that the west accused China of being a opaque and oppressively closed society. With secretes and oppresive police everywhere. Yet somehow, they the west in the comfort of their armchair can find out so much about one firm in such a oppressed and closely monitored police state! The irony is too much!

Click to expand...

Oh sorry, I misunderstood the "phantom" shares you mentioned.
Yeah, I'm pretty sure this system is not invented by Huawei so I don't know that the accusation is...

Cypher said:

Oh sorry, I misunderstood the "phantom" shares you mentioned.
Yeah, I'm pretty sure this system is not invented by Huawei so I don't know that the accusation is...

Click to expand...

Exactly, if you don't undetstand the accusation, then he is just copy and paste or worse made them up to put on here to put weight on his arguments!