Miscellaneous News

G

gelgoog

Lieutenant General
Registered Member
Patchwork_Chimera said:
We can see this most evidently in our attitude towards BRI. China has been successfully coupling itself to smaller economies, providing infrastructure and capital for lesser-developed nations, and broadly enhancing its global prestige in the process. Instead of acknowledging this fact and coming up with a better alternative for these nations, we decried it as "debt trap diplomacy" and "neocolonialism," making CN out to be an untrustworthy, predatory entity.
Click to expand...
China ran into the same problems Japan did in the late 1980s early 1990s. Most of their infrastructure boom had already ended and they had huge amounts of capital to invest while a lot of their construction companies were idle. So they basically started all sorts of loan schemes for infrastructure construction basically everywhere they could.

Japan also had similar plans to invest in Asia back at their peak. Japan provided most of the funding for the Asian Development Bank when it started in the late 1960s. And Japan built the HSR in Taiwan in the late 1990s. They had planned to invest in building the Kra canal in Thailand. They also planned investments into Malaysia and Indonesia at the time. When the Japanese economy imploded in the mid 1990s most of those programs were curtailed.

China went much the same route by creating the Asian Infrastructure Investment Bank and doing the BRI investment program.
 
Last edited:
FriedButter

FriedButter

Brigadier
Registered Member
Overbom said:
No. SVB assets to deposits ratio was about 1. So their assets can cover their deposits.

The problem is that it will take time to convert these assets to hard cash. And that's what's the problem here. While the regulators try and sell all these assets, all these startup companies need access to their money now (not a year/s later), otherwise they will have to close shop or go to fundraise from their investors again..
Click to expand...

I heard that apparently 3/4 of biotech IPOs were banking with SVB. If true then that already sounds like a train wreck for drug development in the short term. Rather unfortunate.
 
K

KYli

Brigadier
FDIC could still sell some of SVB's treasures at a loss to distribute tens of billions to those startups. But not sure how much of those more liquid assets are available since SVB has already sold some at huge loss to provide liquidity in the last few weeks.

Some estimates that SVB would take 15 billion realized losses by selling treasures. Most other assets are loans to venture firms which would probably sell at pennies on the dollars.

I think the bigger problem would be a blown up in Cypto and other startups and banks that got involved too deeply into such two sectors. Many Cypto companies are living in borrowing time by rolling over debts and hoping for suckers to jump back in. In the end of the day, all of these messes are due to the massive 9 trillions balance sheet of the Fed and the prolong period of zero interest rate and a few trillions dollars of multi-years debt fueled spending by both Trump and Biden administration.
 
Chevalier

Chevalier

Major
Registered Member
FriedButter said:
I heard that apparently 3/4 of biotech IPOs were banking with SVB. If true then that already sounds like a train wreck for drug development in the short term. Rather unfortunate.
Click to expand...
Time for Chinese tech and biotech companies to start poaching talent and IP. This is, after all, how a free market works right? Or are the anglos gonna cry when faced with competition?
siegecrossbow said:
Please, Log in or Register to view URLs content!
Click to expand...
you’ll see now how unstable western liberal democracies really are, absent a proper social security system. America only functions from the loot and plunder of the rest of the world, typical of feudal societies.

a good analysis by former Indian diplomat bhadrakumar
The stunning part here is the sheer brain power and intellectual resources and ‘soft power’ that China has brought into play to outwit the US. The US has at least 30 military bases in West Asia — five in Saudi Arabia alone — but it has lost the mantle of leadership. Come to think of it, Saudi Arabia, Iran and China made their landmark announcement on the very same day Xi Jinping got elected for a third term as president.

What we are seeing is a new China under the leadership of Xi Jinping trotting over the high knoll. Yet, it is adopting a self-effacing posture claiming no laurels for itself. There is no sign of the ‘Middle Kingdom syndrome,’ which the US propagandists had warned against.

On the contrary, for the world audience — especially countries like India or Vietnam, Turkey, Brazil or South Africa — China has presented a salutary example of how a democratised multipolar world can work in future — how it is possible to anchor big power diplomacy on consensual, conciliatory politics, trade and interdependence and advance a ‘win-win’ outcome.
Click to expand...
Please, Log in or Register to view URLs content!
 
Fedupwithlies

Fedupwithlies

Junior Member
Registered Member

Chinese semiconductor industry

China's goal is that by 2025, they are able to do all the 28-14nm process 100% domestically by 2025 Sir It's too late then the US had achieved their objective, the ideal scenario is by 2024 a domestic 7nm line is up and running IF NOT then they had successfully stymied Chinese AI, data servers...
www.sinodefenceforum.com

Please, Log in or Register to view URLs content!

Called it.

And of course we had a self-proclaimed analyst here absolutely sure, due to history, that they wouldn't have a rapproachment.

I just want to point out though how much this was foreshadowed.
We had so many people here so sure that China was dumping Iran for Saudi Arabia not too long ago.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Top