Trade War with China

Status
Not open for further replies.

AssassinsMace

Lieutenant General
Please, Log in or Register to view URLs content!


Isn't this what Trump wanted? He complains about allies not paying their fair share so naturally that would mean Europe would have their own military. The EU offered Trump no tariffs on US cars exported to Europe. Trump said that wasn't enough. This is exactly what Trump is doing in regard to China. If he wanted to balance out trade between China and the US, then why not stop trading. The US doesn't need China so that should be easy. The goal is not balanced trade. Trade is being used as a hostage to get things that have nothing to do with fair trade. I read a story that Trumps wants to increase the US number of nuclear weapons while a part of his demands on China is they have to reduce its nuclear arsenal. Does anyone think this would be it for Trump? Or will the guy who break treaties and agreements and deals all the time all of the sudden have a new set of demands threatening the same things before?
 

antiterror13

Brigadier
Trump is boasting China ready to back away of made in China 2025 plan. Xi ready to relent on this to placate US.

Thats what I always suspect. The pressure will eventually will make Xi backpedal. The saving grace of this is China does not plan to mention getting rid of its government subsidies and investment for tech development which is the most important. Essentially this move gives something to Trump to brag about of winning.

In my POV, it makes No sense to blast out made in China 2025 publically. Whatever they trying to do should be done covertly. Bad advices from their advisors.

well, most politicians only think short term during their term ... Trump is included :p

Give him a sense of winning, thats what he wants to satisfy his huge EGO
 
wow
Please, Log in or Register to view URLs content!

President Trump’s
Please, Log in or Register to view URLs content!
railed against “globalist billionaires” and Wall Street executives during a forceful, hour-long speech in Washington on Friday. Peter Navarro accused US business leaders of being “unregistered foreign agents” working for Beijing trying to pressure
Please, Log in or Register to view URLs content!
into a trade deal with
Please, Log in or Register to view URLs content!
.

“When these unpaid foreign agents engage in this kind of diplomacy, so-called diplomacy, all they do is weaken this president and his negotiating position. No good can come of this,” Navarro said at the Center for Strategic and International Studies in Washington. “If there is a deal, if and when there is a deal, it will be on President Donald J. Trump’s terms, not Wall Street terms.”

The conspiracy to undermine the president outlined by Navarro is spearheaded by executives from Goldman Sachs along with unnamed “globalist elites” and a “self-appointed group of Wall Street bankers and hedge fund managers” — all of whom are “part of a Chinese government influenced operation” to pressure the Trump administration into a deal, Navarro alleged.

His comments came during a speech that veered between his attacks on Chinese trade practices and a
Please, Log in or Register to view URLs content!
about the health of the US defense industrial base. The report, helmed by the Pentagon’s head weapons buyer Ellen Lord and deputy assistant secretary for Industrial Policy Eric Chewning, identifies 300 areas where the US government needs to take action to support the supply chain.

One of the big concerns in the White House’s defense industrial base report is Chinese trade practices that might make things difficult for US defense firms.

In particular,
Please, Log in or Register to view URLs content!
for “predatory practices including state-sponsored dumping, public subsidies, and intellectual property theft are destroying commercial product lines and markets of domestic DoD suppliers.”

Navarro, a long time China hawk, praises Trump for having “the courage and wisdom to stand up to the globalist elites, to stand up to the countries of the world that are engaging in unfair trade practices.”

But if financial execs continue to attempt to take part in negotiations between the Trump administration and Beijing, he said, “there will be a stench around any deal that is consummated because it will have the imprimatur of Goldman Sachs and Wall Street.”

Navarro did not attempt to offer details about how Wall Street execs and Goldman Sachs are pressuring the White House. But his comments can be seen as pushback against former Goldman president and ex-Trump economic adviser Gary Cohn, who left the White House earlier this year after losing the fight against starting a trade war with China.

Please, Log in or Register to view URLs content!
, Cohn appeared to take a swipe at Navarro, remarking that Trump found “one economist on Amazon who thinks trade deficits matter, and he listens to him.”

Treasury Secretary Steven Mnuchin is also a Goldman alum, and he has been known to disagree with Navarro and other White House trade hawks on the benefits of tariffs.

Navarro’s use of the term “globalist,” which is regularly used by far-right agitators to refer to Jews, comes amidst a rise in ant-Semitic attacks across the country, which
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!
in part on Trump’s own fiery populist
Please, Log in or Register to view URLs content!
.

His forceful remarks occurred at the same time that Secretary of State Mike Pompeo and Defense Secretary Jim Mattis were meeting with their counterparts from Beijing, Yang Jiechi and Wei Fenghe, at the State Department. The talks were rescheduled from last month after they were postponed in the wake of a new round of US arms sales to Taiwan and a Chinese warship almost ramming an American destroyer in the
Please, Log in or Register to view URLs content!
.

While tensions in the strategic waterway appeared to dominate the talks, China’s top diplomat Yang Jiechi on Friday told reporters after the meeting that trade and economic relations between the two countries are “critical to the world economy,” adding, “ trade war, instead of leading to any solution, will only end up hurting both sides and the global economy.”
it's
Please, Log in or Register to view URLs content!
 

Icmer

Junior Member
Registered Member
For example Brazil cannot export sugar cane to the USA because of the lobby in the USA by cane growers in Florida. This means instead of using actual white sugar the Americans use HFCS (High Fructose Corn Syrup) chemically extracted from corn. Which neither tastes nor smells like the real thing and some people claim is one of the reasons for the obesity epidemic in the USA.

Also the Chinese tariffs included more than foodstuffs. It also included aircraft among other things. China is the world's largest aviation market. Check this chart:
Please, Log in or Register to view URLs content!


The Chinese basically hit the two major import categories with tariffs as retaliation that's all. They could hit cars with sanctions next if the USA continues with this nonsense.

55% of US sugar production comes from sugar beets and 45% from sugarcane. Yes, the US does produce sugarcane in 4 states. Do you seriously believe that the white sugar available at the supermarket is processed from corn? White sugar made from sugar beets is indistinguishable from that made from sugarcane.

Chinese tariffs on US aircraft aren't substantial enough to really hurt Boeing. In fact, no tariffs have been (or plan to be) levied on the large aircraft that China really needs for its commercial airlines. It's not realistic to have only Airbus, Bombardier, and Comac satisfy the huge demand of China's aviation market within the next 10-15 years.
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!


It's also unlikely that China will target US cars in a manner that would seriously hurt US carmakers. Tariffs on American cars only affect those actually manufactured in the US, and US carmakers build 99% of their cars for the Chinese market in China anyway. China can be expected to largely refrain from targeting US companies' operations in China due to its effort to create a more open investment environment. A third of the exhibitors at the Shanghai import expo were from the US.
Please, Log in or Register to view URLs content!


Even the Micron chip "ban" imposed in China only affects a small percentage of its overall sales.
Please, Log in or Register to view URLs content!


Feel free to quote this post if China begins seriously discriminating against Apple, Starbucks, and GM and cancels all orders for 737 MAX's and 787's. So far US companies have not seen their China operations significantly affected due to the trade war. This is quite remarkable considering that South Korea felt much more immediate pain from Chinese consumer boycotts and discriminatory measures ("fire safety violations" in Lotte department stores), even though the US-China trade war engenders at least as much public vitriol against the US as THAAD did against SK.
 

tidalwave

Senior Member
Registered Member
Back to technical discussion.
what's the difference between an Analog chip and Digital chip?
I guess that's more useful for one always tailgating me should answer. fundamental technical question.
it has alot of relevance to what China doing right now.

Hope that would be answered instead side tracked by useless stuffs.
 
Last edited:

manqiangrexue

Brigadier
Back to technical discussion.
what's the difference between an Analog chip and Digital chip?
I guess that's more useful for one always tailgating me should answer. fundamental technical question.
it has alot of relevance to what China doing right now.

Hope that would be answered instead side tracked by useless stuffs.
You are not the instructor and nobody here is your student. No one has desire to play Google quiz questions with you. If you have questions, research them. If you have something relevant to say, say it and if someone disagrees, you'll hear about it. Otherwise, we'll leave it alone.
 
Last edited:

tidalwave

Senior Member
Registered Member
wow, refusing to answer real technical question that has a direct relevance to current China semiconductor development issue but enjoying to engage in bickering useless stuffs.
why China has some little analog chips? that cannot be searched through google.
true color.

I am going to stick to only technical issues from now on till tailgater fully exposed.
 

gelgoog

Brigadier
Registered Member
55% of US sugar production comes from sugar beets and 45% from sugarcane. Yes, the US does produce sugarcane in 4 states. Do you seriously believe that the white sugar available at the supermarket is processed from corn? White sugar made from sugar beets is indistinguishable from that made from sugarcane.

Chinese tariffs on US aircraft aren't substantial enough to really hurt Boeing. In fact, no tariffs have been (or plan to be) levied on the large aircraft that China really needs for its commercial airlines. It's not realistic to have only Airbus, Bombardier, and Comac satisfy the huge demand of China's aviation market within the next 10-15 years.
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!


It's also unlikely that China will target US cars in a manner that would seriously hurt US carmakers. Tariffs on American cars only affect those actually manufactured in the US, and US carmakers build 99% of their cars for the Chinese market in China anyway. China can be expected to largely refrain from targeting US companies' operations in China due to its effort to create a more open investment environment.
...

Check the chart I linked to before. Cars and vehicles are the 3rd largest import item by China from the USA by dollar amount.

The Chinese already said they would cut US civilian airliner imports. Much like what happened with the soybeans once the Chinese government announces something it gets acted upon quite quickly because people know the consequences of going against the government's will. The transportation sector is even more controlled by the government than the food sector. Many (all?) of the airlines from China have state ownership.

Your first link predates the latest sanctions. The second link states that Airbus already has an assembly plant for A330s and I believe also A320s in China proper. The last link also predates the latest sanctions. The Comac 919 is supposed to compete with the A320/737 and the Comac 929 is supposed to compete with the A330/787. Also, the Chinese aviation market is quite large but the growth in short-haul routes has stagnated ever since the high-speed rail projects were done.

HFCS is used instead of white sugar in everything from soft drinks to cookies. This did not use to be true in the 1970s. Sure white sugar is available. Just to not expect it to be used in processed food products.
 
Last edited:

Icmer

Junior Member
Registered Member
Check the chart I linked to before. Cars and vehicles are the 3rd largest import item by China from the USA by dollar amount.
The vast majority of the car models affected are not from US carmakers, but rather luxury German brands. The model with the highest volume exported to China that is produced in the US is the Lincoln MKC. Ford has planned to begin producing Lincolns in China, as it only makes sense considering the brand's growth there. In addition, BMW is moving US production of its SUVs to China.
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!

The Ford brand is not doing so well right now in China, but this is largely due to their lack of innovation rather than any retaliation from authorities or unofficial consumer boycott. This is contrasted by the continued growth in luxury American marques such as Lincoln, Buick, and Cadillac.

The Chinese already said they would cut US civilian airliner imports.
A Global Times article - the original source of the widely cited Chinese "threat" against Boeing - should not be misinterpreted as an official warning from senior leaders. Western media, in their typical fashion, confused it for the famed People's Daily "anonymous op-ed from a senior leader" and lended it far more authority than it should have.

Much like what happened with the soybeans once the Chinese government announces something it gets acted upon quite quickly because people know the consequences of going against the government's will. The transportation sector is even more controlled by the government than the food sector. Many (all?) of the airlines from China have state ownership.
This is simply wrong, but there are few comprehensive English-language sources on the subject. I would advise you to research the ownership of Chinese airlines. The second largest Chinese airline is HNA, and it is for all intents and purposes a private corporation.

Your first link predates the latest sanctions. The second link states that Airbus already has an assembly plant for A330s and I believe also A320s in China proper. The last link also predates the latest sanctions. The Comac 919 is supposed to compete with the A320/737 and the Comac 929 is supposed to compete with the A330/787. Also, the Chinese aviation market is quite large but the growth in short-haul routes has stagnated ever since the high-speed rail projects were done.
"Latest sanctions"? Sounds like your own speculation, since there have been no further Chinese tariffs to date on wide-body aircraft other than the ones mentioned in those articles. It still remains unlikely that Boeing can be supplanted by alternatives for the Chinese market through at least the next decade. The effect of HSR has been to alleviate demand on the most heavily trafficked routes such as Beijing-Shanghai, but there is otherwise no evidence of an overall shrinkage in the aviation market which would decrease the demand for new aircraft.
 
Last edited:
Status
Not open for further replies.
Top