exactly, more efficient than going to WTO.
And I believe it is a deliberate response to the solar panel, not a coincidence. What I enjoy of China's act is "I do without big mouthing, I smile while kicking your ass".
Last edited:
Chinese Economics Thread
- Thread starter Norfolk
- Start date
And I believe it is a deliberate response to the solar panel, not a coincidence. What I enjoy of China's act is "I do without big mouthing, I smile while kicking your ass".Interesting thing is that, a recent report has shown that Brazil has overtaken US's soybean export to China. I myself would be willing to pay a bit higher price for respect. That is the beauty of competition and globalization. Nobody can blackmail others without paying the price.
Dissed Latin America responds to condescending Tillerson.
Peru defends China as good trade partner after U.S. warnings
LIMA (Reuters) - Peru’s trade minister defended China as a good trade partner on Tuesday, after U.S. Secretary of State Rex Tillerson warned Latin American countries against excessive reliance on economic ties with the Asian powerhouse.
Peru's Foreign Trade and Tourism Minister Eduardo Ferreyros gestures to media after Trans-Pacific Partnership (TPP) talks during APEC Summit in Danang, Vietnam, November 9, 2017. REUTERS/Kham
Eduardo Ferreyros said Peru’s 2010 trade liberalization deal with China had allowed the Andean nation of about 30 million people to post a $2.74 billion trade surplus with Beijing last year.
“China is a good trade partner,” Ferreyros told foreign media, as Tillerson met with President Pedro Pablo Kuczynski in Lima, a stop on Tillerson’s five-nation Latin American tour. “We’re happy with the results of the trade agreement.”
The remarks were the Peruvian government’s first signal since Tillerson’s warning that it does not share Washington’s concerns about growing Chinese influence in the region.
Before kicking off his trip to Latin America on Friday, Tillerson suggested that China could become a new imperial power in the region, and accused it of deploying unfair trade practices.
“I appreciate advice, no matter where it comes from. But we’re careful with all of our trade relations,” Ferreyros said, when asked about Tillerson’s remarks.
Ferreyros also praised Peru’s trade relationship with Washington, despite a trade deficit with the United States. “I‘m not afraid of trade deficits,” Ferreyros said.
Since China first overtook the United States as Peru’s biggest trade partner in 2011, thanks mostly to its appetite for Peru’s metals exports, bilateral trade has surged and diplomatic ties have tightened.
Kuczynski, a former Wall Street banker, made a point of visiting China before any other nation on his first official trip abroad as president in 2016.
Under former president Barack Obama, the United States had hoped to counter China’s rise in the fast-growing Asia-Pacific region, which includes large parts of Latin America, with the sweeping Trans-Pacific trade deal known as the TPP.
While President Donald Trump withdrew the United States from the TPP upon taking office, the 11 remaining signatories, including Peru and Japan, have struck a similar deal that they plan to sign without the United States in March.
Tillerson, who left Peru for Colombia on Tuesday, said on Monday that Trump was open to evaluating the benefits of the United States joining the so-called TPP-11 pact in the future, which Ferreyros called “a good sign.”
All countries in the Asia-Pacific region, including China, were welcome to join TPP-11, Ferreyros said. “But the deal has closed and countries that want to join obviously can’t renegotiate the whole agreement,” he added.
Reporting By Marco Aquino, Writing By Mitra Taj, Editing by Rosalba O'Brien
Peru defends China as good trade partner after U.S. warnings
LIMA (Reuters) - Peru’s trade minister defended China as a good trade partner on Tuesday, after U.S. Secretary of State Rex Tillerson warned Latin American countries against excessive reliance on economic ties with the Asian powerhouse.
Peru's Foreign Trade and Tourism Minister Eduardo Ferreyros gestures to media after Trans-Pacific Partnership (TPP) talks during APEC Summit in Danang, Vietnam, November 9, 2017. REUTERS/Kham
Eduardo Ferreyros said Peru’s 2010 trade liberalization deal with China had allowed the Andean nation of about 30 million people to post a $2.74 billion trade surplus with Beijing last year.
“China is a good trade partner,” Ferreyros told foreign media, as Tillerson met with President Pedro Pablo Kuczynski in Lima, a stop on Tillerson’s five-nation Latin American tour. “We’re happy with the results of the trade agreement.”
The remarks were the Peruvian government’s first signal since Tillerson’s warning that it does not share Washington’s concerns about growing Chinese influence in the region.
Before kicking off his trip to Latin America on Friday, Tillerson suggested that China could become a new imperial power in the region, and accused it of deploying unfair trade practices.
“I appreciate advice, no matter where it comes from. But we’re careful with all of our trade relations,” Ferreyros said, when asked about Tillerson’s remarks.
Ferreyros also praised Peru’s trade relationship with Washington, despite a trade deficit with the United States. “I‘m not afraid of trade deficits,” Ferreyros said.
Since China first overtook the United States as Peru’s biggest trade partner in 2011, thanks mostly to its appetite for Peru’s metals exports, bilateral trade has surged and diplomatic ties have tightened.
Kuczynski, a former Wall Street banker, made a point of visiting China before any other nation on his first official trip abroad as president in 2016.
Under former president Barack Obama, the United States had hoped to counter China’s rise in the fast-growing Asia-Pacific region, which includes large parts of Latin America, with the sweeping Trans-Pacific trade deal known as the TPP.
While President Donald Trump withdrew the United States from the TPP upon taking office, the 11 remaining signatories, including Peru and Japan, have struck a similar deal that they plan to sign without the United States in March.
Tillerson, who left Peru for Colombia on Tuesday, said on Monday that Trump was open to evaluating the benefits of the United States joining the so-called TPP-11 pact in the future, which Ferreyros called “a good sign.”
All countries in the Asia-Pacific region, including China, were welcome to join TPP-11, Ferreyros said. “But the deal has closed and countries that want to join obviously can’t renegotiate the whole agreement,” he added.
Reporting By Marco Aquino, Writing By Mitra Taj, Editing by Rosalba O'Brien
Very bold of them to take a clear stance when a better option would be to play one power against another.
manqiangrexue
Brigadier
They were probably outraged by Tillerson's suggestion that Latino countries weren't fit to make their own decisions and Trump's obvious discrimination and hatred towards Latinos.
Besides, getting economically cozy with the US only sets you up for economic blackmail and sanctions, as the US has always demonstrated. It also didn't sound like Tillerson went armed with any cards to make a counter offer and compete economically with China; it seemed he was just telling Peru to stop dealing with China cus it's making the US feel uncomfortable.
Last edited:
I don't know why you bash Christianity in almost every post, but it's a joke if you think EUROPE is all about "Judeo-Christian values". Christianity is almost completely dead in Europe. It's extremely left wing ie contrary to Christian morality; there was a survey done where the majority of French people don't think adultery is that bad. Even people who identify as Christians don't take it seriously at all and rarely go to church.
supercat
Major
The most important aspect of this article is that it offers some interesting rebuttal against Michael Pettis' claim about China's GDP growth. Michael Pettis is one of the most famous China pessimist.
China’s economic gloom merchants
By
Markedly slower growth and imminent financial crisis have been the common dual predictions for China over the past decade. China’s growth has indeed slowed from its unsustainable breakneck pace in the two decades before the 2007–08 global crisis, but since then has settled down to a steady 6–7% per year, two or three times as fast as advanced economies.
Keeping growth going through and since the downturn has, however, required a big increase in domestic credit, raising the risk of a financial crisis. Can China continue to confound the pundits?
This depends on the intertwined but distinct issues of growth and financial stability.
Let’s start with growth. Michael Pettis, a professor at Peking University, has been perhaps the most vocal and persistent pessimist. In 2012, when China’s growth had already slowed to around its current pace, magazine that China’s annual GDP growth this decade would “barely break 3%”. The decade is not quite over yet, but it’s looking like a clear win for The Economist.
If you are at risk of losing a bet, . . Unlike many others, he doesn’t dispute China’s GDP data as such. Instead, he notes that this only records “national output”. He says that much of this output growth has been wasted on unproductive investment, which should be written off. Pettis says that in market economies this happens, reducing GDP growth through lower profits.
This, however, exaggerates the difference between Chinese and Western GDP. China is hardly alone in unproductive investment and tardy recognition of poor investment. And if we for poor assets, consistency requires that we revalue assets whose price has risen: housing booms would produce spectacular growth in GDP.
In practice, the imperfect answer is that good projects boost GDP over time through higher output and stronger profits, while bad projects erode GDP. Pettis’s argument is only one more reason why GDP is an imperfect measure of living standards. That acknowledged, it’s hard to offer a much better measure. It’s harder still to see how his estimate of current (corrected) growth of 1–2% could reflect China’s reality.
Pessimism about China’s financial sector probably peaked more than two years ago, with of an imminent and massive financial collapse, resulting in a long recession. Although he’s a smart and innovative economist, this was a miscall.
Since then, has levelled out, but the more comprehensive “total social financing”, including non-bank intermediation and government debt, is 250% of GDP and still rising. This is , but is high for a developing economy and has grown much too fast.
Thus remains pessimistic: “International experience suggests that China’s credit growth is on a dangerous trajectory, with increasing risks of a disruptive adjustment and/or a marked growth slowdown”.
But China’s credit situation is different from other countries. It has little external debt, big foreign exchange reserves, and capital controls, so won’t have a crisis like the 1997 Asian crisis. The main overextended borrowers are state-owned enterprises (SOEs) which have mainly borrowed from state-owned banks, so the situation’s “in-house”, and hence easier to restructure. Government debt is modest, allowing fiscal space to soften a crisis. Unlike the 1997 Asian and 2008 global crises, Chinese authorities know in advance that there is a problem and are taking action. China could (and probably will) have a period of painful adjustment as policy stabilises the high debt levels, but a major meltdown seems unlikely.
What does all this mean for policy? The thrust of the Pettis’s argument is that China is saving too much. His answer is to encourage consumption. This makes sense and shouldn’t be too hard: most governments have to wrestle with the opposite and more intractable problem of keeping the public happy while restraining consumption.
Pettis is surely too pessimistic about investment opportunities, recalling China’s . One of the characteristics of heavy infrastructure is that it is sensible to build excess capacity initially: think of the Sydney Harbour Bridge, which reached capacity thirty years after construction. New Yorkers wish the had been built ahead of demand when it was first proposed in 1919.
China has an opportunity to restrain credit without harming growth by limiting SOE borrowing, which was responsible for 60% of the rise in corporate debt from 2008 to 2016. The SOEs produce only 15–20% of industrial output. The special focus should be on the “zombie” SOEs, which account for nearly 15% of corporate debt. The often-mentioned rise in the ratio of credit-to-growth should be read as a positive rather than a negative: cutting back credit growth shouldn’t damage growth much.
Of course, restructuring SOEs and reining in local governments present vexed political challenges. The IMF’s suggestion that China should accept lower growth rates in order to limit debt growth seems to be mistaken logic. If a key reform is to restructure SOEs, slower growth will make this more painful, and therefore less likely. Fiscal expansion could soften the restructure. China should be able to maintain the 6–7% growth of recent years as it deepens capital and moves towards the technological frontier.
At some stage, probably a decade or more away, China will run into the same growth-constraining factors that slowed Japan and South Korea. But not yet.
Equation
Lieutenant General
Ever heard of the Crusade, colonialism, slavery, and today's regime change policies? It's the not the Christian people that I have a problem with, it's some of the elite establishments and institutions that's trying to rule the world through "God and Christ the Savior" that has caused a lot of historical wars, atrocities, and major human right violations.
Jura The idiot
General