Miscellaneous News
- Thread starter bd popeye
- Start date
Having good information, and the right information, telling us what the facts are, is important, as coolgod knows. Recent headlines, about news that is already a few months old.
It’s U.S. vs. China in an Increasingly Divided World Economy
By Jason Douglas and Tom Fairless
Nov. 3, 2023 12:01 am ET
China passed a significant milestone last fall: For the first time since its economic opening more than four decades ago, it traded more with developing countries than the U.S., Europe and Japan combined. It was one of the clearest signs yet that China and the West are going in different directions as tensions increase over trade, technology, security and other thorny issues.
China "does not react proportionally", well, does it even need to react proportionally in order to inflict recession on its enemy?
GDP isn't a good measure of actual market size, as its distorted (especially in US' case) by the selling of essential services and other paper agreements. Furthermore, there is no prospect of economic mobilization within the EU. If they can't even match Russia in an arms race, there is 0 chance they can actualize their economic potential and compete with China.
China is already "rich" in the sense that it has higher median wealth than Europe, and it has as much middle/upper class as the whole US population inside it. That's why despite declaring full economical war, US can't make a dent into the Chinese economy, it is extremely difficult to "punch upwards" towards a bigger and more stable economy.
US didn't need to be proportional against the USSR either, because USSR was a smaller economy with nothing going for it but it's military. It simply waited them out while letting them waste themselves on proxy wars.
I actually agree with you but for opposite reason. China is in a much better economical position than EU, who has no future. Nevertheless, China must keep EU market because deindustrialization of EU presents a huge vacuum for China to fill.
Even if China will get banned, China should still pursue as much market share as they can. The more share they get, the more awkward to kick China out, and they more damage EU will take to kick China out. The more damage EU takes, the less they can help US working against China.
I agree with your idea, unfortunately it doesn't seem like the CPC likes it. The CPC official rhetoric is that China prefers a multipolar world, i.e., a strong europe as a pole, even though it is obvious to everyone that Europe is on the path of irreversible decline. One of these days China will have to acknowledge the world is bipolar again, not unipolar, not multipolar.
EU literally cannot afford protectionism vs China. See Huawei situation. Once cut off Huawei, there is no replacement. Protectionism assumes local industry can meet the demand so foriegn competition gets less priority. The same cannot work if locals cannot do it at all. See battery tech for EV.
So the key problem is not protectionism but politics. Some politician may want to ban Chinese product regardless of economic suicide.
If EU dont kick China out, Chinese investment will revigorate EU economy by boosting them through joint ventures not unlike how Europe boosted China back then. It is not like China is sucking their blood away. I am just saying should they be malicious, they take greater damage. Joint venture means kicking China their own industry lose their half of investments too.
Seriously, that is a win? a very low hanging fruit when you consider the loses the USA has taken economic wise and in terms of how quickly the USA is becoming mired in a crisis not only in Ukraine but Israel as well with Blinken basically casing a massive scene and projecting the image of a moron on the world stage that is now requiring William burns to go and solve yet another mess. Seriously though, how is it a win when in the end, it could easily be taken away again when Biden decides to call XI a dictator yet again
Yes, with the caveat that US would need to prove it can actually present a response justifying threat in anything other than military first.
What average Chinese people see is just increasing wages and decreased costs, while new technologies are actualized all around them. Once in awhile, US might blow back companies like Huawei from their market, but those are drops in the bucket compared to the whole economy.
Why should China change up its strategy and take on more risks when every day widens the gap in the status quo?
When/if US shows signs of being able to flip the trend around, China should push them with everything at once, to achieve a shock effect and tackle them down.
Their high nominal GDP reflects the fact that the world is run by the rules set by the westerners. If the west collectively decide to hide behind the high walls of their nice little gardens (say hi to Borrell the gardener), their money will no longer have the same buying power. Why would we the barbarians take their money if we are not allowed to buy from them?
It'll be a good thing for the Chinese brands. If the US and Europeans have to resort to protectionism to defend their own home base, how can they even win in competition with Chinese in the wilderness of global south?
I say leave them alone in the gardens where they can enjoy their own expensive, delicate products.
You have to be aware that strategically, China is on the offense. It has been taking share of wealth and market away from the developed countries. China has forced the west to take defensive positions.
This statement does not make sense at all. If China can unite the global south and create a new world, the return will be huge.
You do not speak for China. Tiktok does not represent China. Just like Musk and his Tesla playing nice in China doesn't mean the US is kowtowing.
Last edited: