Voice of America: China Fears Trump's Choice for Trade Post May Cause Serious Friction
BEIJING — President-elect Donald Trump's selection of China critic Peter Navarro as the head of a new White House position focusing on trade is being seen by many in China as confirmation that the Republican leader is determined to implement his election promises to impose trade restrictions on Chinese goods.
Navarro is a business professor at the University of California-Irvine who has been a fierce critic of China's trade and economic policies through books such as "Death by China: Confronting the Dragon — A Global Call to Action," which was also made into a documentary film.
Read more ....
WNU Editor: The appointment of Peter Navarro to head the White House's National Trade Council is raising alarm bells in Beijing .... Trump's newest advisor Navarro makes all the tough talk about China look serious. What's my take .... these worries are justifiable. In turn .... China is signaling that they want to cooperate with President-Elect Trump .... China Says It Will Cooperate With Trump but Warns on Taiwan (NYT) .... but expect this upcoming visit to strain these relations .... Taiwan's president to visit US despite objections from China (The Guardian).
Update: US-China trade dispute – 'Stakes higher for Beijing' (DW).
19 comments:
Opponents of Trump advocate trde deficits until doomsday.
But of course they do.
The also advocate government deficit spend into oblivion, because those chuckleheads think they can print money with no ill effect.
"de experts: Boeing Co. aircraft and U.S. farm exports from Midwestern Republican states. Canceled Boeing orders would hurt U.S. shareholders, labor unions and the U.S. trade deficit, prompting pressure on the new administration, said Derek Scissors, an economist at data provider China Beige Book International. As of last month, China is awaiting delivery of 292 Boeing jets."
https://www.google.ca/amp/www.wsj.com/amp/articles/china-weighs-response-to-new-u-s-trade-foe-1482401351?client=safari
Wall Street's gonna do fine, Main Street's gonna get gutted.
Considering how difficult it is to find products not made in China. I don't think there will be any sudden large sudden actions.
What is the solution? Doing nothing? Trump is a negotiator, not a warrior, and he did that all his life. He knows he has to ask 100 for having 10. The negotiation just begins.
China could stop buying U.S. agricultural products. Is there enough of a world market to make up the deficit?
I don't think China can make up any deficit itself.
The Boeing orders are temporary. China makes planes, large planes. The way it is going every continent will make its own large equipment. The only thing transported will be ideas, people, agricultural produce and some metals.
China will become self sufficient in aircraft manufacture.
The question you have to answer is how many years worth of deficits is a 3.2 billion dollars worth? If Boeing completes the contract in 11 years, it is wash. If it is longer than 11 years the U.S. loses.
300 billion dollar deficits might doom the U.S. before a decade is out. China is trying to unseat the U.s. as a reserve currency. If it does, the 300 billion dollar deficits and trade debt might really fuck America. I am sure Jay will still be laughing his ass off.
China run's an annual $260 billion plus trade surplus with the US, and the US isn't even China's largest trade partner.
While the US buy's "everything" from processed food to high tech from China, China's chief imports from the US are semiconductors and other electrical components, scrap metal and grains, which they can buy from anywhere.
64% of US Service jobs in the US are utterly reliant on Chinese imports.
It's a bad idea to pick a fight with not only one of your biggest "Bankers", but also one of your most important "suppliers",
With out a plan first.
Keynesian Economics says that first you use direct and indirect subsidies, ( you know, like China's high speed rail, etc) to make an economic sector competitive with China, ( which means robots), then you bring in import restrictions and tariffs. ( the Chinese Model".
Neoliberal economics says you find a cheaper or cost comparable offshore supplier, then write a Free Trade Agreement with them first.
A carefully though out and implemented economic plan, with direct and indirect subsidies, over the course of a decade, could put the US in a position to win a limited trade war with China,
But it's not going to "bring jobs back", except for robots,
And while China has been "building up" as a "State" for 30 years, the US has been "tearing down" and offshoring for those same 30 years.
Further reading,
"
But Trump is entering uncharted waters. The danger is in thinking that talking tough to China will produce positive results. It won’t. From Beijing’s perspective, international trade takes a second seat to internal politics. Chinese President Xi Jinping’s top priority is to maintain political stability. He cannot lose face in his relations with a new administration in Washington and hope to retain power at home. He especially cannot deal with an American president who the Chinese feel fails to show proper respect for China itself. And, now that China has emerged as the world’s second most powerful economy, he really doesn’t have to.
A trade war would be problematic, but it would not be a disaster for China, mainly because the U.S. needs China more than vice versa. Twenty years ago, the situation might have been different. China was dramatically underdeveloped, and it wanted access to Western technology and manufacturing techniques. China has most of what it needs now, and what it doesn’t have it can easily obtain from vendors outside the U.S. While the American market looked enticing a few decades ago, it is relatively mature, and today the newer emerging market countries have become much more interesting to Beijing."
http://fortune.com/2016/12/22/donald-trump-china-trade-war/
"China spends more on economic infrastructure annually than North America and Western Europe combined," according to the report published on Wednesday."
https://www.bloomberg.com/news/articles/2016-06-15/china-spends-more-on-infrastructure-than-the-u-s-and-europe-combined
And of course:
"WASHINGTON, DC–Mere days from assuming the presidency and closing the door on eight years of Bill Clinton, president-elect George W. Bush assured the nation in a televised address Tuesday that "our long national nightmare of peace and prosperity is finally over."
http://www.theonion.com/article/bush-our-long-national-nightmare-of-peace-and-pros-464
China has systematically flooded U.S. markets with illegally subsidized products; wiped-out over 50,000 American factories; caused 25 million Americans to be unable to find a decent job; and left the U.S. more than $3 trillion dollars in debt all thanks to the world’s largest totalitarian nation....
In the pat here and elsewhere, I've likened a trade war between the United States and China to a fight whereby both parties in the fight get hurt. The problem is America can't hurt China without hurting itself worse.
The analogy I've used assuming the fight is to the finish China ends up with a broken leg and a broken arm while the US ends up with a broken neck. I've seen nothing here or elsewhere to change this now from when I first determined this a few years ago. If anything, the situation for America has gotten worse relative to China.
A broken leg and a broken arm is quite bad!! The pyric nature of China's inevitable victory here probably hoes a long way toward explaining why China has not pushed this issue to the extent they could have or could.
While Mr. Trump is brilliant, I'm not sure "the deal maker" has ever negotiated from a position of weakness as he would be with China. Furthermore I had assumed the campaign rhetoric would be toned down post election.
An example is the negotians that ended Cold War 1. While tge rhetoric was heated, ehen it came time to negotiate the parties were respectful to one another. Instead we've only seen a ratcheting up of the rhetoric!!
After the US government and especially POTUS Elect Trump were thoroughly humiliated by the Chinese on the stealing of the drone, one would think this would give them pause. Clearly the trade agreements with China need to be renegotiated. This seems a misguided approach being taken by America's POTUS Elect. We can only pray he somehow knows what he is doing.
B Poster,
You are too damn defeatist or a propagandist.
A broken arm and a broken leg is just as good as a broken neck.
Show me a tiger, lion, bear or wolf with 2 broken legs and I will show you a victim. The circling wolves will also pull it down.
You do not have to have a chance of victory to be victorious. All you have to do is pull the other guy down enough pegs that he becomes vulnerable.
With a broken arm and a broken leg, Vietnam Russia, Korea, India etc devour China or leave it a rump state.
What would China look like without Tibet, Manchuria and Xinjiang province?
Would it have those rare earth metal, oil and other resources in abundance?
The Vietnamese what Fujian or Kwangtsu back. It is their homeland. Don't expect them to give up South Vietnam to the Cham/Kmer people.
Aizino,
By "propagandist" if you mean do I work for an enemy of America or do is support an enemy the answer to that would be a resounding NO. As a young man, I wanted nothing more than to serve in the Armed Forces of the United States of America and to defend my country and its people. Unfortunately my eyesight is quite poor. As such, this dream could not be realized. Suffice it to say there is NOTHING more important to me than the defense of America and the advancement of its security and economic interests.
Am I a "defeatist?" The term "realist" would very accurately describe my position. Part of prevailing in any military conflict is knowing yourself and knowing your enemy.
Your analogy is largely accurate with regards to the broken arm and broken neck. In the wild, either way you're dead!! As such, it would probably be a good idea for both sides to avoid this. Will the leaders of both countries play a high stakes game of "chicken" to the point that both countries are wrecked?
Also, what I failed to mention in the previous post that I meant to is the broken neck for the US is a virtual certainty in such a fight. China has a chance to prevail with only a few major bumps and bruises. The broken leg and arm is the absolute worst case scenario for China whereas the broken neck for America is all but guaranteed. As stated, not wanting to take the risk is very likely why China has not pushed this further.
Clearly the current trade agreements need to be renegotiated. Very respectfully, the current policy seems misguided. A number articles have been written explaining this. Hay links to a few of the them. I've been patiently pointing out for years.
A better way forward would probably be to 1.)eliminate all ambiguity towards Taiwan recognizing it as a break away Chinese province and cutting off all military support to it. 2.)Recognize China's position on the South China Sea. 3.)In exchange for these concessions, we can probably get the trade agreements renegotiated.
Additionally the US dollar will probably lose its role as world reserve currency sooner rather than later. The main question for us is will this be a "soft landing" or a "hard landing." Naturally we want a "soft landing." In order to achieve this, the assistance and goodwill of major powers such as Russia and China will be extremely helpful and very likely vital.
This may not look pretty but realism often times isn't. At least by pursuing realistic policies good outcomes are possible. Ignoring reality seldom ends well.
At this point, it seems all we can really do is pray that somehow Mr. Trump and his team know what they are doing here and that I and other commentators are missing something. If there is a silver lining, I don't think anyone realistically expected the United States could prevail Cold War 1. Perhaps history will repeat.
A better way forward is for China to cut Vietnam in for 1/3rd of the Paracel Islands and to recognize Scarborough reef as Filipino.
A better way forward is to say Taiwan is a sovereign nation. It maybe nice if it joined China based on history, ethnic grounds or synergy, but they may never join China. Get over it.
Aizino,
Vietnam and China can decide on this issue along with the Philippines. We are still heavily dependent on "made in China." For the time being those shippong lanes need to be kept open. Vietnam and The Phillipines need to understand that if their actions do anything to mess this up, there will be a price to pay.
They may just get what they want. They will likely need to offer China something valuable in return for such a concession.
Tawain may never join China. Frankly it doesn't concern me. If it eere to concern me, I actually would hope they never do join China. What does concern me is the numerous areas where we need Chinese cooperation.
Tawain has maintained its relative independence by 1.)building up a military posture that would make tge inevitable Chinese victory pyric enough that China is reluctant to the attack and 2.)trading with China whereby they provide things of value that China may not want to risk losing.
It's intersting to consider the historic and ethnic grounds. This is essentially a power struggle between China and Tawain. There's no reason for us to be involved in this doubly so when we consider the power China has over us.
It appears to me Tawainese leaders are trying and succeeding at the United Ststes, it's leaders, and it's military as pawns in their power struggle against China. At a minimum, US leaders need to make it clear tbat neither they nor our people will be used as pawns in the pkwer struggles of others.
"Vietnam and The Phillipines need to understand that if their actions do anything to mess this up, there will be a price to pay."
But not China
Can you propagandize more?
The US neoliberal (Chicago School) economic models not only welcomed this, but enabled it and funded it.
LMAO.
Aizino,
At this point, the US needs Chinese cooperation more than China needs cooperation from the US. Any "price" the US might try to exact on China will cost the US far more than it costs China. After humiliating the Americans and POTUS Elect on the drone incident I'm pretty sure the Chinese can't wait for more.
Jay,
I'm not sure what is so funny. As stated previously most Americans worship you Canadians having no hope of ever measuring up to your Canadian manifest magnificence while wishing it were possible while having no hope you'd ever accept us. It has generally been assumed the country we all aspire to be like would support us. If this isn't the case America is even more trouble than I thought.
Post a Comment