China's strategy in Korean peninsula

T

taxiya

Brigadier
Registered Member
Anlsvrthng said:
Ok, so whatever think anyone about the FUTURE of China,US or SK at the moment SK is dependent on the US technology and markets to prosper, like China.

It can change in the future, and of course it doesn't means that any party won't willing to take even extreme level of economycal hardship to reach a strategical goal.

But, the current SK/US relations making any trialt o get rid fo the US a very hard and expensive adventure, and the US has many means to kill this idea.


And sadly many of the comments about future prospect of Chinese semi industry, trade flow and deficit, efficeincy and so on require way more talk than the patience fo the moderators to delete the best part of this topics.
Click to expand...

Why do you fixate on a FALSE claim? Here is the latest trading figures of SK (2017 Dec. 1) from world bank which is more reliable than yourself.
SK export 156 BUSD to China (mainland + HK) vs. 67 BUSD to US. That is much more than double.
SK import 87 BUSD from China vs. 43 BUSD from US. Still double.
Now, based on that hard facts, how could you say SK is more dependent on US for market?

Please, Log in or Register to view URLs content!

upload_2018-1-6_21-57-0.png
 
T

taxiya

Brigadier
Registered Member
Anlsvrthng said:
Ok, so whatever think anyone about the FUTURE of China,US or SK at the moment SK is dependent on the US technology and markets to prosper, like China.

It can change in the future, and of course it doesn't means that any party won't willing to take even extreme level of economycal hardship to reach a strategical goal.

But, the current SK/US relations making any trialt o get rid fo the US a very hard and expensive adventure, and the US has many means to kill this idea.


And sadly many of the comments about future prospect of Chinese semi industry, trade flow and deficit, efficeincy and so on require way more talk than the patience fo the moderators to delete the best part of this topics.
Click to expand...
That statement is both right and wrong because nothing is happening over night, this is the part you are right. But things are happening as we speak, (trading volume for one), this is where you get it wrong. You are wrong (IMO) because you interprets others claim of gradual changing trend to immediate change of SK. Others may be wrong of you as to interpret your "no sudden change" as "never change".

If I am right in saying that and if you agree with it, I don't see much to argue about.
 
A

Anlsvrthng

Captain
Registered Member
taxiya said:
Why do you fixate on a FALSE claim? Here is the latest trading figures of SK (2017 Dec. 1) from world bank which is more reliable than yourself.
SK export 156 BUSD to China (mainland + HK) vs. 67 BUSD to US. That is much more than double.
SK import 87 BUSD from China vs. 43 BUSD from US. Still double.
Now, based on that hard facts, how could you say SK is more dependent on US for market?
View attachment 44618
Click to expand...

I have a funny story , I had to go throught the customer return process of a company, to see the resource requirements of it.

When I standed boringly to see what the guys are doing I spot that the service guys send back the removed parts from the engine in the AM packaging of the new part.


The AM box said that the spare part was manufactured in the Netherlands, however the most significant process in Netherlands was the re-packaging of the parts, put it into a box made in netherlands, and include few sims next to the 100 pounds worth part : D

China similar, SK supply parts for final assy, but the final customer of the product is not Chinese.
And don't forget, the balanced trade doesn't matter from GDP standpoint, but the trade surplus increase the GDP and the employment.


So, if say US doesn't want to import iphones then the samsung can't supply rams and nands to the final assy fo the flextronics in China.
 
A

Anlsvrthng

Captain
Registered Member
taxiya said:
That statement is both right and wrong because nothing is happening over night, this is the part you are right. But things are happening as we speak, (trading volume for one), this is where you get it wrong. You are wrong (IMO) because you interprets others claim of gradual changing trend to immediate change of SK. Others may be wrong of you as to interpret your "no sudden change" as "never change".

If I am right in saying that and if you agree with it, I don't see much to argue about.
Click to expand...
Agree, the current situation will change.

SK/Japan/Taiwan will find itself in the shoes of Mexico/Ukraine/Kuba/Georgie, recognising that the big neighbour is the most important to keep happy, not a country that is hard to find on the map.

China military will be stronger year by year, and even if China will be less succesfull economically than the SU was with central planning it will be more powerfull and wealthy than the US , simply because the population size.
 
T

taxiya

Brigadier
Registered Member
Anlsvrthng said:
I have a funny story , I had to go throught the customer return process of a company, to see the resource requirements of it.

When I standed boringly to see what the guys are doing I spot that the service guys send back the removed parts from the engine in the AM packaging of the new part.


The AM box said that the spare part was manufactured in the Netherlands, however the most significant process in Netherlands was the re-packaging of the parts, put it into a box made in netherlands, and include few sims next to the 100 pounds worth part : D

China similar, SK supply parts for final assy, but the final customer of the product is not Chinese.
And don't forget, the balanced trade doesn't matter from GDP standpoint, but the trade surplus increase the GDP and the employment.


So, if say US doesn't want to import iphones then the samsung can't supply rams and nands to the final assy fo the flextronics in China.
Click to expand...

I think I understand your point. However, we should NOT let a specific sector of the whole trade/economy to blind us of the full picture because that will distort the reality. Your example of Samsung may be valid, but the trade between SK and China is far more than smart phones reflected by the total volume. US may not be in the loop for most of that volume.

US may be feeding SK with components who then turn into something sold to China, whatever it is, the trade is a chain. If US cut its end, US has to find somebody else to consume that volume (through SK), who can replace SK in that position? Not many. The only possible one in second line after SK is China or Japan, the switch won't be easy. All I am and probably others were trying to say is that "it is as difficult for the US itself as for others in the receiving end".

I will stop here as it is drifting away.
 
T

taxiya

Brigadier
Registered Member
Anlsvrthng said:
Agree, the current situation will change.

SK/Japan/Taiwan will find itself in the shoes of Mexico/Ukraine/Kuba/Georgie, recognising that the big neighbour is the most important to keep happy, not a country that is hard to find on the map.

China military will be stronger year by year, and even if China will be less succesfull economically than the SU was with central planning it will be more powerfull and wealthy than the US , simply because the population size.
Click to expand...
It will change (only) gradually. My estimation to a visible change of positions of the involved parties was more than 5 years from now as I have said multiple times in this thread. I think on this timing you and I may agree more than we disagree on the details of how the changes will play out such as eviction and swapping trade suppliers etc.
 
A

Anlsvrthng

Captain
Registered Member
taxiya said:
It will change (only) gradually. My estimation to a visible change of positions of the involved parties was more than 5 years from now as I have said multiple times in this thread. I think on this timing you and I may agree more than we disagree on the details of how the changes will play out such as eviction and swapping trade suppliers etc.
Click to expand...
I think the world without US trade deficit won't be similar to the world that we are living in now.

If the US deficit decline then the international trade volume will decline as well,and changing quite fast.
It will be like in the 60s.

The US empire built on the US trade deficit. That chain SK/Taiwan/Japan to the US.
 
F

Flying_Fortress

New Member
Registered Member
The Chinese Middle Class in the first tier cities are already eclipsing the U.S. Middle Class.

Eventually the U.S. is going to have to throw down the
Gauntlet when China refuses to play ball on a multitude of issue's. After that it's game over for China when it gets attacked on all sides.
 
AssassinsMace

AssassinsMace

Lieutenant General
According to many China is the most evil country on earth. One has to wonder how come China's so-called day of reckoning hasn't already happened. Maybe because the consequences are too dire?
 
Last edited:
T

taxiya

Brigadier
Registered Member
I admit that I am as guilty as everybody else, but let's not turn this thread to a "tech, economy, trade" thread, shall we?:)
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Top