Chinese Economics Thread

[SamuraiBlue]

The French acknowledged US claims against King Geroge III because it suited its national interests. The United States of today would, also for national interest reasons, deter Taiwan from declaring independence. In both cases, national interests is king.

Why would the US NOT acknowledge it?
What conflict of interest are you talking about?
Under WTO, PRC cannot utilize the enemy state clause just because a trade nation had acknowledged a party within PRC had declared independence. You'll need more then that. Of course PRC can cut diplomatic ties with the US but I doubt PRC would go that far.

So, would Tokyo allow Okinawa independence if majority of the island vote to leave? Should the US protect the new Republic of Okinawa if Japan use force to prevent independence?

At the moment we wouldn't know since the Okinawa Independence movement is so unpopular with I believe less then 6% of the voting population of the prefecture in favor that it's not under any consideration.

Basically neither scenario has any solid fact of how each party will act and all be speculative at best. So it's meaningless to debate over it.

 

[vincent]

This will never fly in western world, as the one-sided verification system is rife for exploit.
In fact, once this system become more well understood, I am certain it will get exploited everywhere.

Use some common sense please.
Are you gonna spend the time and effort to create a jpeg generation engine that allow you to scam $11.23RMB from the merchant?

The merchant can probably verify the payment on their phones in real-time as well.

 

[Jura The idiot]

what the heck

 

[PanAsian]

Despite Washington trying to

what the heck

The Chinese version of Madame Tussauds?

 

[PanAsian]

Washington was keen on demonizing the AIIB and having Japan stay out. However the AIIB is willing to work with the World Bank taking the lead.

Please, Log in or Register to view URLs content!

Markets|Fri Apr 15, 2016 10:05am EDT
World Bank to take lead on projects with China's AIIB: Kim

The World Bank will likely take the lead on initial projects jointly financed with China's new Asian Infrastructure and Investment Bank, the head of the Washington-based multilateral lender said on Thursday.

The two institutions on Wednesday signed a framework agreement to co-finance projects, and the World Bank said they were currently discussing nearly a dozen projects in sectors that include transport, water and energy in Central Asia, South Asia and East Asia.

AIIB, which was formally launched in January, expects to approve $1.2 billion in financing this year. The World Bank said joint projects will account for a sizeable share of that amount.

World Bank President Jim Yong Kim told reporters on Thursday that such financing projects require a massive amount of up-front preparation work, and the AIIB is still building up its capabilities.

"The AIIB is only now increasing their staff. So likely, the first projects will be that we do all of that project preparation, we do all the work that requires huge amounts of staff in a large and institutional infrastructure, and then they will simply co-finance," Kim said.

He said no decisions have been made on specific projects to jointly finance with the AIIB.

He noted that under the framework agreement, the jointly financed projects will use the World Bank's policies and procedures in areas such as procurement, environment and social safeguards.

The AIIB is expected to lend $10 billion to $15 billion annually within the first five or six years of operations.

The new bank, which signals China's growing economic clout, will provide an alternative to the World Bank and other Western-dominated multilateral investment banks.

Despite opposition from Washington, U.S. allies including Australia, Britain, German, Italy, the Philippines and South Korea have agreed to join the AIIB.

(Reporting by David Lawder; Editing by Paul Simao)

I don't want the text bold but it automatically does it and I cannot unbold it, maybe another forum software issue?

 

[irischloe]

<delete to shorten the thread>

So China is basically lagging behind by at least a generation or more.

Looks like you did watched the video.....just the first ten minutes if not five.

The paying system in China is exactly what you called "mobile-third party-mobile" system, watch the movie again at 5:20,but IMO is just the fundamental function to make the payment easier.

One of the core function of those systems is to release the productivity from every people in the society by dramatically lower the barrier of providing services to public.

Can your systems allow you to operate shop with just one click like 23:50 of the movie and interact to your customer directly while picking up grandchild from school?
Can your systems provide you the real time cub distribution around you and automatically order the nearest cub for you and at the same time having a rating system to encourage good service from free lance driver by a bonus?
Or just imagine one day you can write a book, brew a beer and share with whoever interested in and get payment from them directly? That's what happening in China now.

To me, the micro-payment system in other countries only make the "payment" easy, but in China, it makes the life easy.

 

[manqiangrexue]

Look at Samurai starting trouble here trying to pry Chinese people apart. US independence 300 years ago? What do you think would have happened if the British had nukes, the US was 100 miles away, and was the size of manhattan? China's bottom line is all out nuclear war regardless of consequences if anyone intervenes in a Taiwan conflict. That's a public declaration. You think anyone wants to find out how many nukes China actually has and what DF-41 can do the hard way? Taiwan would cease to exist before it could break from China by force. Even if China were to be defeated, it would have already launched every missile it had at the US, likely leaving America in a state where Russia would finish it off easily. How kind has America been to Russia recently? You think the US wants to take that chance? Why do you think Taiwan hasn't declared independence yet? Cus they're not as smart as you? LOL They haven't because after in-depth analysis, they know it wouldn't work. You think the US cares enough about Taiwan to go to nuclear war? Let me tell you, nobody cares enough about anybody else to go to nuclear war for them. And here you are talking like you know anything, saying that China wouldn't go as far as to cut off diplomatic relations with the US in case of war over Taiwan LOL If you don't know the Chinese mentality, how China would react, or even what was publicly declared, then don't make ignorant comments. If Taiwan declares independence, the US would urge calm discussion on both sides without accepting or denying anything. China would initiate military action and the US would watch, have its navy lurk around the area, and give stern condemnation at the UN. Maybe some economic sanctions ensue if it gets ugly enough. Your analogy of the US breaking from Britain is ancient and flawed due both to distance, size of land and technological advances. A more appropriate analogy would be Chechnya attempting to succeed from Russia.

 

[Blackstone]

Why would the US NOT acknowledge it?
What conflict of interest are you talking about?
Under WTO, PRC cannot utilize the enemy state clause just because a trade nation had acknowledged a party within PRC had declared independence. You'll need more then that. Of course PRC can cut diplomatic ties with the US but I doubt PRC would go that far.

One China has been the cornerstone of US-China relations, and it's in the interests of both nations to keep things as is. I think you know that already, so what's your real reason for stirring the pot?

At the moment we wouldn't know since the Okinawa Independence movement is so unpopular with I believe less then 6% of the voting population of the prefecture in favor that it's not under any consideration.

Basically neither scenario has any solid fact of how each party will act and all be speculative at best. So it's meaningless to debate over it.

In other words, you refuse to answer the question.

 

[taxiya]

Hong Kong is joining, but it more tricky for Taiwan to join.

------------

Please, Log in or Register to view URLs content!

By Yuan-Ming Chiao, The China Post
April 10, 2016, 12:04 am TWN

TAIPEI, Taiwan -- The president of the Beijing-led Asian Infrastructure Investment Bank (AIIB) said late Friday that Taiwan's membership bid must go through the People's Republic of China's finance ministry.

The statement by AIIB leader Jin Liqun was the clearest pronouncement of China's position on Taiwan's membership in the multilateral investment bank. Jin stated that Article 3, Paragraph 3 of the bank's "Articles of Agreement" prevented Taiwan from applying since it "is not sovereign or not responsible for the conduct of its international relations." He said that like Hong Kong, a future Taiwanese bid to join the bank would have to be submitted to China's finance ministry.
........

Taiwan had previously submitted its application to become a founding member of the bank in 2015, but the bid was eventually rejected by Beijing. Taiwan's government has also stated on multiple occasions that AIIB membership is not a "domestic issue" and that the "sovereignty clause" did not apply to it. Taiwan previously planned to submit an application as an "ordinary member" in early 2016.

Last October, Taiwan's Cabinet-level Mainland Affairs Council (MAC) stated that the R.O.C. satisfied the requirements for bank membership, quoting Article 3, Paragraph 3 which states that countries who are already members of the International Bank for Reconstruction and Development or the Asian Development Bank (ADB) may be admitted as members though a majority vote of the bank's board of governors.

Under the designation of R.O.C., Taiwan was a founding member of the ADB in 1966.

Just to comment to the MAC statement.

Here is the link to the AIIB articles of Agreement,

Please, Log in or Register to view URLs content!

Here is the texts

Article 3 Membership
1. Membership in the Bank shall be open to members of the International Bank for Reconstruction and Development or the Asian Development Bank.

(a) Regional members shall be those members listed in Part A of Schedule A and other members included in the Asia region in accordance with paragraph 2 of Article 1. All other members shall be non-regional members.

(b) Founding Members shall be those members listed in Schedule A which, on or before the date specified in Article 57, shall have signed this Agreement and shall have fulfilled all other conditions of membership before the final date specified under paragraph 1 of Article 58.​

2. Members of the International Bank for Reconstruction and Development or the Asian Development Bank which do not become members in accordance with Article 58 may be admitted, under such terms and conditions as the Bank shall determine, to membership in the Bank by a Special Majority vote of the Board of Governors as provided in Article 28.

3. In the case of an applicant which is not sovereign or not responsible for the conduct of its international relations, application for membership in the Bank shall be presented or agreed by the member of the Bank responsible for its international relations.

Firstly, I think MAC of ROC misquoted the article, instead of paragraph 3, it should have been paragraph 1.

Secondly, and more importantly, paragraph 3 excludes the chance of ROC application in any way without PRC's approval as ROC is not sovereign at least in the eye of most countries in the world and among all AIIB members. paragraph 1 does give ROC a chance. The two paragraphs are not in contradiction however (therefor, no legal loophole for ROC's claim). The common practice in laws (treaties as well) is that every clause must be satisfied. ROC is qualitied for paragraph 1, but disqualified for paragraph 3, the end result is ROC disqualified. Plain logic.

 

[Blackstone]

Look at Samurai starting trouble here trying to pry Chinese people apart.

Not trying to pry people apart, but to cause trouble for entertainment.