What's new

Beijing to take 'measures' if market economy rights are denied

Killery and Trump both are either serving or part of the oligarchy. Pick your poison.

Trump had no support from the oligarchy. Trump won purely based on people's support. Brexit was similar.

Whether Trump succumbs to the temptations of the oligarchy or not, we are yet to see.
 
.
Trump had no support from the oligarchy. Trump won purely based on people's support. Brexit was similar.

Whether Trump succumbs to the temptations of the oligarchy or not, we are yet to see.

Hey brainwashed expert of US politics, tell that to the profs at Princeton University. They might call you to become the new prof. for politics.

Secondly, the US is a republic, not a democracy.

Don't tell me you are smarter than Plato! :lol:
http://gaplauche.com/blog/2011/04/13/the-cycle-of-decline-of-regimes-in-platos-republic/

2830qq.jpg
 
. . . . .
I didn't expect anything less from an ignorant Indian. :enjoy:

What are you, some second generation Chinese-German mix?

If you are actually following 'real' news, then you would know that it's all simply regular, ol' politics. Oligarchy, psy-ops, media... those are just excuses. None of those matter during an election. People watch the candidates, nothing else. I wouldn't expect the simple folk to understand. So I would recommend going out and voting once you turn 18.
 
.
Both are flawed. US exports to China is smaller, but the US exports are high tech like Boeing or cooperation with large banks and financial companies, which China cannot simply replace. If you stop importing Boeing jets, then you buy Airbus jets at a higher price, not good for the Chinese airline industry at all, and not good for China overall.

As for using companies like Apple, they will simply switch their export base by manufacturing American destined goods in other countries which are more friendly with the US. For example, Apple wants to setup a production unit in India also. So if China plays games with Apple in China, Apple will move to India.

And a lot of the Chinese trade with all other countries is dependent on foreign companies in China. For example, Korea exports ICs to China, but people don't mention that the ICs are sold to Korean companies manufacturing in China, meaning Samsung-Korea is exporting to Samsung-China to make a Samsung phone which is then sold worldwide. If you put up barriers, then Samsung-China will switch production to another country and Samsung-Korea will then export to, say, Samsung-Vietnam instead. The Chinese will then buy a Samsung phone at a higher markup because of the barrier. Or, of course, the better option is Samsung will keep its Chinese operations only to service Chinese customers. That will mean China will lose the entire global market of Samsung because China decided to put up trade barriers in retaliation to Korea putting up barriers on Chinese steel imports.

So in this scenario, Korea lost nothing. The steel related barrier is still in place boosting their steel industry and Samsung's business has merely moved from China to another country. But China lost its steel exports as well as global Samsung exports (just an example), while the continued import of Samsung-Korea's ICs for the Chinese market will increase trade deficit.

You see what's happening? It's the same with the US or EU. They will simply switch to other countries because China-EU/US trade is in the low cost or low tech sector. There's nothing special manufactured in China that is unique to China and is in demand globally.

There's another problem. Even if you are importing something, it creates jobs in your country. So if India is importing Chinese goods, there are people marketing and selling those goods in India, basically the manufacturing sector of one country gives rise to a service sector in another. So if you get into some sort of retaliation to protect jobs in one sector, you will risk killing jobs in another sector. Otoh, US and EU will be far less worried about this because their service industry will simply switch to another manufacturer for supplies. People will easily buy an alternative to a low cost good if it comes in cheaper from elsewhere.

So if the US raises trade barriers against Chinese steel, I think China will do its utmost to maintain trade in other sectors. And looking at the frequency of the Chinese threats, which has been every few days since Trump was elected, I think China has little to no leverage in this matter. Ultimately, China still has to follow WTO rules or even other countries will start breaking them, all to China's detriment.
Nonsense.

Trade don't work that way. It certainly don't work the way you want it to work. Countries don't just move operation to another country without factoring the cost, production capability, and quality. Do you want to know why Samsung move operation to Vietnam instead of India? It has nothing to do with Vietnam ability to make those in world standard quality because the Samsung battery trouble in VN is a testament to that. It has a lot of do with Vietnam close proximity to China supply chain. Basically, VN imports from China suppliers, assembly them in Vietnam, put a Samsung brand on top it.

Whether the US can successfully a put a trade barrier on trade needs to ask whether the American people are going to be happy with rising inflation. I'm going to tell you right now there is going to be a civil war in this country if people livelihood take a dramatic turn for the worse. Life is getting harder for American household. House is impossible to buy nowadays for a single person.

And before you try to talk about trade, make sure you research properly and learn what China exports as a percentage to the world.

  1. Electronic equipment: US$600.3 billion (26.3% of total exports)
  2. Machines, engines, pumps: $364.5 billion (16%)
  3. Furniture, lighting, signs: $98.7 billion (4.3%)
  4. Knit or crochet clothing: $83.8 billion (3.7%)
  5. Clothing (not knit or crochet): $78.5 billion (3.4%)
  6. Medical, technical equipment: $73.8 billion (3.2%)
  7. Plastics: $65.8 billion (2.9%)
  8. Vehicles: $62.7 billion (2.7%)
  9. Iron or steel products: $60.6 billion (2.7%)
  10. Footwear: $53.6 billion (2.3%)
 
.
Nonsense.

Trade don't work that way. It certainly don't work the way you want it to work. Countries don't just move operation to another country without factoring the cost, production capability, and quality. Do you want to know why Samsung move operation to Vietnam instead of India? It has nothing to do with Vietnam ability to make those in world standard quality because the Samsung battery trouble in VN is a testament to that. It has a lot of do with Vietnam close proximity to China supply chain. Basically, VN imports from China suppliers, assembly them in Vietnam, put a Samsung brand on top it.

The tariffs will equalize the costs. Quality depends on how much you invest, which again goes back to the tariff because tariffs increase costs for either the customer or the company. And you talk as though China already had quality production from the beginning. Every country has a company capable of providing high quality stuff depending on investment. And you forget that automation removes the need for more labour, so quality is going to be the same.

And companies are diversifying.
http://www.technobuffalo.com/2016/0...-in-india-thanks-to-10-billion-foxconn-plant/

So in case of a trade war, the companies will move elsewhere.

Whether the US can successfully a put a trade barrier on trade needs to ask whether the American people are going to be happy with rising inflation. I'm going to tell you right now there is going to be a civil war in this country if people livelihood take a dramatic turn for the worse. Life is getting harder for American household. House is impossible to buy nowadays for a single person.

The West is suffering from falling inflation. The low and negative lending rates are supposed to increase inflation.

The US has a $336B deficit with China. If they manage to bring back even a quarter of that to the US, there will be enough jobs available for all in their market.

They are already doing that. So is India and many other countries. Particularly the steel industry.
http://www.telegraph.co.uk/business/2016/10/07/eu-slaps-steep-tariffs-on-cheap-chinese-steel/

https://www.bloomberg.com/news/arti...l-tariffs-as-mills-decry-record-china-exports

http://www.chinapost.com.tw/taiwan/business/2016/07/23/473124/US-raises.htm

http://www.telegraph.co.uk/business...-to-cut-steel-production-or-be-frozen-out-of/
Juncker tells China to cut steel production or be frozen out of global trade club

So the govts are ending steel imports in favour of protecting jobs in their countries. They are doing this even though companies that rely on cheaper, subsidized Chinese steel will now have to rely on more expensive homemade steel, hitting their margins.

And before you try to talk about trade, make sure you research properly and learn what China exports as a percentage to the world.

  1. Electronic equipment: US$600.3 billion (26.3% of total exports)
  2. Machines, engines, pumps: $364.5 billion (16%)
  3. Furniture, lighting, signs: $98.7 billion (4.3%)
  4. Knit or crochet clothing: $83.8 billion (3.7%)
  5. Clothing (not knit or crochet): $78.5 billion (3.4%)
  6. Medical, technical equipment: $73.8 billion (3.2%)
  7. Plastics: $65.8 billion (2.9%)
  8. Vehicles: $62.7 billion (2.7%)
  9. Iron or steel products: $60.6 billion (2.7%)
  10. Footwear: $53.6 billion (2.3%)

This data doesn't mean anything. It's too vague.

You need the suppliers, companies etc. Electronic equipment may be 600B, but how much of that is done by state owned Chinese companies, private companies, how much by foreign companies? You need that sort of data. You basically need data which indicates what kind of jobs can potentially leave China.

If Trump sticks a 35 or 45% tariff on one type of good, then even Chinese companies will move manufacturing to the US. You adjust to the market, not force the market to adjust to you.


I know. You were trying to end the discussion, so I helped you out. At least I was right about that. Cheers.
 
. .
China's WTO entry benefits world
2016-12-11 09:12 | Xinhua | Editor: Feng Shuang

Since entering the World Trade Organization (WTO) 15 years ago, China has witnessed robust economic growth, and an increasingly prosperous China has created significant opportunities for countries around the world.

China joined the WTO as its 143rd member on Dec. 11, 2001. Since then, the country has grown into the world's second-largest economy and largest trading country, while millions of Chinese have been lifted out of poverty.

Changes for the Chinese include buying cheaper cars, enjoying international products and traveling more.

"China's WTO entry has brought benefits not only to the country's people, but also for the rest of the world," said Lei Da, economics professor at Renmin University of China.

China has long been vital in helping shore up world economic growth, especially in the aftermath of the 2008 financial crisis. Despite slower growth in recent years, China's economy still contributes 25 percent of the world's growth.

As the vast Chinese market has grown, countries as diverse as Zambia, Australia, Brazil and the United States have seen their exports to China soar.

It is clear that China's strong demand for imports has been a major stabilizing factor amid a sluggish world economy.

China's imports have surged from 243.55 billion U.S. dollars to 1.68 trillion dollars in 15 years, an average annual growth of 10.3 percent.

For many developing countries, no matter in Asia, Africa or Latin America, the Chinese market has been vital in ensuring growth and development stay on track.

China has also been ready to help poorer partners develop. As the world's second biggest investor, the country's outbound direct investment rose for a 13th straight year in 2015, reaching a record high of 145.67 billion dollars.

Dubbed the factory of the world, China manufactures everything from toys and shoes to bullet trains and industrial robots.

From 2001 to 2016, thanks to imported goods from China, consumers around the world saved billions of dollars. Quality yet inexpensive Chinese products contributed to an increase in consumer purchasing power and helped reduce worldwide poverty.

Companies that opened operations in China have profited. Foreign-invested industrial enterprises reported combined profits of about 15 trillion yuan (around 2.2 trillion U.S. dollars) over the past 15 years.

Despite a tepid global recovery, the continuous growth of foreign investment in China shows that investors are upbeat about the country's business climate.

Looking ahead, China will remain a center of trade and other global activity, playing a leading role in global governance.

As China plans to be more proactive in opening up to the outside world, its stable growth will produce more benefits for the world.
 
.
H
China is more dependent on other's markets, than others are on China's.



They are interconnected, but it is no doubting the fact that China needs US markets more than the other way round. Just look at the trade figures to understand.



You should perhaps develop some ability to reason and associated logical faculties.

That China is more dependent on US markets is so clearly represented in trade figures, that it is astounding that you can't recognize that.

By the choice of the wordings, the prominence of the usage of naysayer's language(on china) and india-praising rhetoric, I 99% sure that the posts were done indian posters without even looking at the posters flag(i cant see them on my mobile phone)

Sure enough, the same few names pop up when i checked it out.

Jai Hind!

Lol!
 
. .
Incorrect. America is a democracy. So the American govt listens to its people, not its businesses. If a move can create more votes, the govt will make that move.

Why do you think Trump won even though he did not have support of the businesses, media or celebrities?

Come on mate...you are too much importance to the Gov of Amerika....It is not so rosy where US always listen to people..Rather, i feel, business man are more powerful that the people itself.

@Shotgunner51 can you please warn or ban the Indian randomradio troll for derailing this and other FE threads

Why??? He has raised some valid question with some figures about his assumption?? He may be right or wrong but what is the point of reporting it?? I mean you should not be so rigid to not to listen alternate views.
 
.
Come on mate...you are too much importance to the Gov of Amerika....It is not so rosy where US always listen to people..Rather, i feel, business man are more powerful that the people itself.

That sort of thinking put Trump in power. :)

The thing is even this so-called 'oligarchy' is split. For example, Trump is supported by the powerful fossil fuel cartels, raw materials industry etc, while Clinton was supported by Wall Street honchos, tech giants etc. So when one claims America is an oligarchy, then who controls the country, the fossil fuel or the service industry giants?

Read this.
http://reason.com/blog/2016/05/14/no-the-us-is-not-an-oligarchy

Lobbying and vested interest are always powerful, and not just in democratic countries, it is even more powerful in countries like China where power rests in only a few hands, the real oligarchs, but ultimately, it is the people that make or break the govt in democracies. Obama's crew learnt that the hard way.
 
.

Latest posts

Pakistan Defence Latest Posts

Back
Top Bottom