China's strategy in Korean peninsula

Anlsvrthng said:

Global rare earth market : less than 9 billion $
Global semi market : around 500 billion $ ->17% controlled by SK
Additionaly without matured semi industry it is not possile to make cutting edge military / space hardware.

US has reserves to make, and currently mining rare earth only for military applications, but nothing prevent the US (or russia, japan and so on) to increase the production dramaticaly. It needs only money to invest new mines.

However the semi industry needs accumulated knowledge.

Please, Log in or Register to view URLs content!

Please, Log in or Register to view URLs content!

Click to expand...

The US doesn't even have enough reserves to provide for BOTH military and commercial use after if China shuts down production. Plus the US has already had a hard time with "only money invest in new mines" the current and only rare earth mine in Mountain Pass, California that had file for bankruptcy and therefore looking to CHINA as a partnership to provide financial and technical help.


China has a growing semi industry to provide for their military already. Why do you think Japan or Russia can't even do a real 5th Gen fighters? Why do you think China is ahead in everyone in Supercomputer, HGV, DF-17, DF-21D and DF-26 ASBM as well as quantum technology teleportation satellite from space?

taxiya said:

Firstly, when talking about economy, one must not focus on one part of it (semi-conductor etc.) because that will blind one from seeing the whole thing. Economy is just about money, semi-conductor is one thing of many to make money. Looking at the whole economy impact, one would immediately realize that China is the nr.1 trading partner of SK, that is SK makes most of its money from China, not US. If SK is forced to choose, whom will it choose? The answer is simple.

Instead of asking "how can SK industry survive if US block something to it?", one must also ask the question (the other side of the same coin), "who is US going to sell those surplus semi-conductors to if not SK or China?" Those chips are useless until they are assembled in a phone. Divert them to iPhones made in China? That will hurt SK, but benefit China (SK's backer). Not to China either? Then who else can consume them?

The essence is that blocking its own export (chips) will equally hurt oneself. It is like "I will starve you by starving myself".

Click to expand...

Same like before: the ultimate market of the SK export is the US ( EU) , not China.

China has production capacity, US ( UK) has market.

A business needs market, not competition.

Anlsvrthng said:

Supercomputers needs nothing else just money.
Those stuffs are highly paralell processing centers, all that it needs is a big pile of CPUs and interconnection between them.
see :

Please, Log in or Register to view URLs content!

To develop semi industry needs accumulated konwledge in the full vertical supply chain.
That is hard to collect.

Click to expand...

LOL No. You're done. Disqualified. You think supercomputers is just a matter of buying a tons of computers and hooking them up to each other, which is plainly stupid. There is so much wrong with what you said, I don't even know where to start. When you say something like that, it really hurts your credibility on everything. This here is about as simple as it gets:

1.If supercomputers are just a ton of normal computers hooked up to each other, then how come Taihulight is 5 times faster than Titan but far smaller and more energy-efficient? It should be 5 times bigger and use 5 times the energy. You think a petaflop supercomputer is 1,000 times the size of a teraflop computer cus it's 1,000 of those hooked up to each other? If supercomputers are just a matter of spending money to hook computers up to each other then how come the US said it will be 2023 before they can get to exascale? What, you think they need 5 years to build all those Dells and hook them up to each other? LOL How come China said they can do exascale by 2018-2020? Cus they can build and hook up those Lenovos faster?

2. If the US doesn't want to sell semiconductors to China/Korea, it can guillotine itself as it wishes. Currently, it offers the best deals and is more than happy to sell, so it occupies a huge global share. If it doesn't want to, we can buy Dutch or somewhere else, and their global share will go wayyy up, and with all the extra money they earn, they will invest into research to develop better semiconductors. Meanwhile, the US industry will be in recession from loss of revenue; it will have to lay off skilled workers and its research will be stagnant. Eventually, the point of no return will be when the Dutch research efforts pay off and they make better semiconductors than the US. At that point, the US won't even be able to sell any more no matter how open they want to be about it and they will have butchered their own industry. They know that and they don't want that, which is why the US gladly sells, even to its competitors who use their semiconductors to make products that then out-compete American products. For America's own sake, there is no reason to believe that the US will refuse semiconductor equipment sales to South Korea, eviction or no eviction.

Anlsvrthng said:

Same like before: the ultimate market of the SK export is the US ( EU) , not China.

China has production capacity, US ( UK) has market.

A business needs market, not competition.

Click to expand...

Yeah, and China is shifting to consumer-based economy. 1.4 billion consumers getting richer and richer faster than anywhere else on the planet. Perfect gearing for the future.

Equation said:

The US doesn't even have enough reserves to provide for BOTH military and commercial use after if China shuts down production. Plus the US has already had a hard time with "only money invest in new mines" the current and only rare earth mine in Mountain Pass, California that had file for bankruptcy and therefore looking to CHINA as a partnership to provide financial and technical help.

Please, Log in or Register to view URLs content!

China has a growing semi industry to provide for their military already. Why do you think Japan or Russia can't even do a real 5th Gen fighters? Why do you think China is ahead in everyone in Supercomputer, HGV, DF-17, DF-21D and DF-26 ASBM as well as quantum technology teleportation satellite from space?

Click to expand...

-Rare earth is not so important - the whole market is less than 2% of the semi market. And generaly, if a company willing to make things with 0/ negative profit it can kill the competition. South Korea makes 80 billlion $ from semis, and the whole rare earth market is less than 9 billion.One year of growth in SK semi industry more than the whole rare earth market.
-Russia started to make its military / space semi industry around 2008. At the moment the Chinese industry is on par / same area advanced than the Russian, but it is way behind the US ( european) industry.
China has morr resources, but the effectivnes to use it is quite low.

Lol, if it's just money and hooking up of computers, then just about any small country or any other rich person can build their own Taihulight which cost US$273 million or something slightly more expensive just to top the TOP500 supercomputer list.

manqiangrexue said:

1.If supercomputers are just a ton of normal computers hooked up to each other, then how come Taihulight is 5 times faster than Titan but far smaller and more energy-efficient? It should be 5 times bigger and use 5 times the energy.

Click to expand...

It is correct, all that you want is to decrease the processing unit cost . so what ?There is an amrtisation cost / running cost, and a job that has to be done.If you need x computing power then all thats take is to spend the money to get there. Now it can be X or 2X ammount. But if you say talk about a satelite processing power, then the allowance of weight/power for processing capability disapear.

manqiangrexue said:

2. If the US doesn't want to sell semiconductors to China/Korea, it can guillotine itself as it wishes. Currently, it offers the best deals and is more than happy to sell, so it occupies a huge global share. If it doesn't want to, we can buy Dutch or somewhere else, and their global share will go wayyy up, and with all the extra money they earn, they will invest into research to develop better semiconductors. Meanwhile, the US industry will be in recession from loss of revenue; it will have to lay off skilled workers and its research will be stagnant. Eventually, the point of no return will be when the Dutch research efforts pay off and they make better semiconductors than the US. At that point, the US won't even be able to sell any more no matter how open they want to be about it and they will have butchered their own industry. They know that and they don't want that, which is why the US gladly sells, even to its competitors who use their semiconductors to make products that then out-compete American products

Click to expand...

China doesn't have customers. US has customers, and key industries that needed by every one.

manqiangrexue said:

Yeah, and China is shifting to consumer-based economy. 1.4 billion consumers getting richer and richer faster than anywhere else on the planet. Perfect gearing for the future.

Click to expand...

Then China can start to work to that direction. At the moment in the past 12 years the Cinese consumption was flat. AND less than 40% of the economy.


US consumer market four times bigger than the Chinese.
[QUOTE="manqiangrexue, post: 489685, member: 10957"

Quickie said:

Lol, if it's just money and hooking up of computers, then just about any small country or any other rich person can build their own Taihulight which cost US$273 million or something slightly more expensive just to top the TOP500 supercomputer list.

Click to expand...

Yes. And after that he can use it to play video games on it : )

Anlsvrthng said:

It is correct, all that you want is to decrease the processing unit cost . so what ?There is an amrtisation cost / running cost, and a job that has to be done.If you need x computing power then all thats take is to spend the money to get there. Now it can be X or 2X ammount. But if you say talk about a satelite processing power, then the allowance of weight/power for processing capability disapear.
China doesn't have customers. US has customers, and key industries that needed by every one.

Then China can start to work to that direction. At the moment in the past 12 years the Cinese consumption was flat. AND less than 40% of the economy.

Please, Log in or Register to view URLs content!

US consumer market four times bigger than the Chinese.
[QUOTE="manqiangrexue, post: 489685, member: 10957"

Click to expand...

If you need X computing power, you spend X and if you need 2X, then you spend 2X in the sense that you can buy one or 2 supercomputers. But if you need 10,000X, do you buy 10,000 of the same supercomputers at 10,000X? No, you innovate and create a new machine that does 10,000X for 3X the cost. You can write all the stuff about jobs needing to be done and running cost to try to confuse and obfuscate but the fact is, you wrote that supercomputers were just a bunch of regular computers hooked up linearly and you were so wrong.

This is the first time in my life I've heard someone say that China doesn't have consumers LOL. I don't know how to argue against someone who says 2 is larger than 3. Maybe you just do some research on all the desperate companies willing to give up their tech to Chinese rivals for a chance to enter the Chinese market and you can finish this argument using your learned future self against your current self. The US has key industries wanted by everyone but needed by no one. At any time, if the US doesn't want to sell, a rival will gladly take their global stake and run them out of business.

That chart you showed reflects that Chinese GDP has been growing faster than consumption. It does NOT show that Chinese consumption is flat. In the last 12 years, they have been growing about the same rate, which averages to some ~9% annual growth. 39% of 2004 is wayyy less than 39% of 2016.

So far, I've learned that:
1. You ramble about random things like litography (lithography?) and clean rooms.
2. You don't know what supercomputers are.
3. You don't know that China is a huge market.
4. You can't read charts.

Keep it up. Let's see how many we can get.

Ok, lets go back to the topic and summarise it.

Best part ofthe SK economy depends on the US as export market, or technological enabler.
The SK semiconductor industry four times bigger than the Chinese , and the US semi industry three times bigger than the SK and 12 times bigger than the Chinese.

Just to put it into perspective.
South Korea runing trade surpluss, and <<suprise,suprise>> China running trade surpluss as well, so the Chinese economy by definition can't replace the US ,considering that the USA running half of the trade deficit of the world, and UK + Australia+ Canada the quarter of the world trade deficit.

Actually the SK trade deficit is around the 5% of th SK economy, means trade barriers by the US practically devastating the economy / level of living there.



We can analyse the same topic from general trade, mayor industries ( semi/automotive/consumer electronics) or any other standpoint, but the reality is in China the consumers representing only 40% of the economy, the rest is investemnt &eexport , in the US it is 70 % . It boiling down a rought 2.5-3 difference .

Practically the US block ( including UK/Ca/Au) chainng these countries to themself by trade.

Anlsvrthng said:

Ok, lets go back to the topic and summarise it.

Best part ofthe SK economy depends on the US as export market, or technological enabler.
The SK semiconductor industry four times bigger than the Chinese , and the US semi industry three times bigger than the SK and 12 times bigger than the Chinese.

Just to put it into perspective.
South Korea runing trade surpluss, and <<suprise,suprise>> China running trade surpluss as well, so the Chinese economy by definition can't replace the US ,considering that the USA running half of the trade deficit of the world, and UK + Australia+ Canada the quarter of the world trade deficit.

Actually the SK trade deficit is around the 5% of th SK economy, means trade barriers by the US practically devastating the economy / level of living there.

Please, Log in or Register to view URLs content!

We can analyse the same topic from general trade, mayor industries ( semi/automotive/consumer electronics) or any other standpoint, but the reality is in China the consumers representing only 40% of the economy, the rest is investemnt &eexport , in the US it is 70 % . It boiling down a rought 2.5-3 difference .

Practically the US block ( including UK/Ca/Au) chainng these countries to themself by trade.

Please, Log in or Register to view URLs content!

Please, Log in or Register to view URLs content!

Click to expand...

Just to put things into perspective,

1.South Korea's main export market is China. South Korea's main import market is China. In both categories, China is double the value of the US.
2. The US does not hold any key technology that cannot be purchased elsewhere.