Find me a twenty something that is not cynical.
China needs to upgrade their brand image as a whole. We all know how much smear Chinese products get from the Western media
Trade War with China
- Thread starter Ultra
- Start date
- Status
Find me a twenty something that is not cynical.
China needs to upgrade their brand image as a whole. We all know how much smear Chinese products get from the Western media
Hendrik_2000
Lieutenant General
Now here is the guy. China is not Japan Lightizer is dreaming if he think he can black mail China
He lead the negotiation that led Japan to appreciate yen by 100% and end the Japanese miracle and they still stuck in low growth decade after Plaza accord II
Xi has strong words for Trump: 'In our culture, we punch back' — report
Getty Images
China's President Xi Jinping
Chinese President said last week that he will not hesitate to retaliate against the U.S. on trade, Monday, citing sources.
“In the West you have the notion that if somebody hits you on the left cheek, you turn the other cheek,” Xi said in the report, according to people briefed on his remarks. “In our culture, we punch back.”
Trade tensions between the U.S. and China have escalated in the last several weeks with the Trump administration's planned tariffs on $50 billion worth of Chinese imports and Beijing's announcement of counter-duties. Last Monday, President said he asked the U.S. trade representative to identify an additional $200 billion worth of Chinese goods for a 10 percent tariff.
Xi was speaking Thursday to the Global CEO Council, a China-organized group of roughly 20 chief executives from mostly Western multinational companies such as Goldman Sachs and Volkswagen, the Journal said. The council has previously met with Premier Li Keqiang instead of Xi, the report said.
“China is not going to yield to outside pressure and eat the bitter fruit,” an unnamed senior official said in the Journal report. “That’s the negotiation principle set by President Xi.”
.
He lead the negotiation that led Japan to appreciate yen by 100% and end the Japanese miracle and they still stuck in low growth decade after Plaza accord II
Xi has strong words for Trump: 'In our culture, we punch back' — report
- Chinese President Xi Jinping said last week he will not hesitate to retaliate against the U.S. on trade, The Wall Street Journal reported Monday, citing sources.
- Xi was speaking Thursday to the Global CEO Council, a China-organized group of roughly 20 chief executives from mostly Western multinational companies such as Goldman Sachs and Volkswagen, the Journal said.
Getty Images
China's President Xi Jinping
Chinese President said last week that he will not hesitate to retaliate against the U.S. on trade, Monday, citing sources.
“In the West you have the notion that if somebody hits you on the left cheek, you turn the other cheek,” Xi said in the report, according to people briefed on his remarks. “In our culture, we punch back.”
Trade tensions between the U.S. and China have escalated in the last several weeks with the Trump administration's planned tariffs on $50 billion worth of Chinese imports and Beijing's announcement of counter-duties. Last Monday, President said he asked the U.S. trade representative to identify an additional $200 billion worth of Chinese goods for a 10 percent tariff.
Xi was speaking Thursday to the Global CEO Council, a China-organized group of roughly 20 chief executives from mostly Western multinational companies such as Goldman Sachs and Volkswagen, the Journal said. The council has previously met with Premier Li Keqiang instead of Xi, the report said.
“China is not going to yield to outside pressure and eat the bitter fruit,” an unnamed senior official said in the Journal report. “That’s the negotiation principle set by President Xi.”
.
Last edited:
Hendrik_2000
Lieutenant General
China quest for independent semiconductor lack just one thing manpower. But with increasing Xenophobic WH with plan to restrict Chinese scientist access to graduate school More and more highly qualified Chinese scientist and engineer are returning to China
They just never learn the Qin Xueshen incident 60 years ago Via emperror
Is that enough to entice Chinese scientists to return home?
How China is winning the war with the US for scientific hearts and minds
Anson Au says the Trump administration’s anti-Chinese and anti-science biases are producing policies and a working environment that are pushing away talent in research and development, and it is China that will benefit
PUBLISHED : Sunday, 24 June, 2018, 4:16pm
UPDATED : Sunday, 24 June, 2018, 4:35pm
Anson Au
Xenophobia and racial discrimination have taken centre stage in the US amid a whirlwind of political decisions made by the Trump administration. And, as trade tensions between China and the US escalate, a proxy war of sorts between the two contesting rivals is already being fought elsewhere: in academia.
Citing fears of “intellectual property theft”, US authorities have announced plans to limit Chinese graduate students in certain fields to one-year visas. In the past, five-year visas could be obtained that would typically cover the time taken to earn a PhD; a one-year visa, by contrast, is hardly enough even for a master’s degree.
But this is nothing new. In fact, it only highlights the long-standing problem of discrimination against Asians in academia.
In a recent social experiment, professors in Germany were sent hundreds of identical requests for doctoral supervision from Chinese-sounding names purporting to be from several universities, including Pennsylvania State University and the National University of Singapore. US-based candidates were three times as likely to receive additional information in responses, and twice as likely to be given a warm, excited response or addressed by their first name.
In the US, this discrimination has taken on political overtones.
Earlier this year, it was reported that the White House had begun discussing measures to actively bar Chinese people from being a part of “sensitive” research at American institutions over fears of leaking intellectual secrets. More than discrimination, US-based Chinese academics have also been the target of claims of espionage.
In 2015, the case of esteemed physicist Xi Xiaoxing at Temple University went viral in academic circles for how he was forcibly arrested at gunpoint on suspicion of providing sensitive technology to China. The charges were later dismissed by US prosecutors, but no compensation was offered for the irreparable damage done to his reputation, or for the legal costs he incurred in the process.
Around the same time, government hydrologist Sherry Chen was also accused of leaking information to Chinese authorities. Despite the charges being dropped, Chen still doesn’t have her job back three years later.
Anti-Chinese discrimination will harm US innovation, on which America’s scientific enterprise relies, and hasten China’s own development in science and technology, pushing it to leapfrog America sooner. Here’s how.
First, the vast majority of American academia is staffed by foreigners. A recent report from the National Foundation for American Policy, a non-profit organisation that studies trade and immigration issues, found that between 50 per cent and 80 per cent of students in STEM fields (science, technology, engineering and mathematics) at the graduate level in America are foreigners. This means a critical part of the financial as well as intellectual capital for American universities depends on foreigners.
Notably, Chinese comprise the largest group of foreign students in the US.
The high foreigner-local ratio echoes what US physicist Michio Kaku has argued for years about American science education: it regularly performs at the level of Third World countries and “has the worst education system known to science”. In his view, without immigrants coming to America for education and research, the US scientific establishment and tech economy would collapse, and we could “forget about Google. Forget about Silicon Valley. There would be no Silicon Valley”.
If foreigners feel unwelcome in the US, they will take their intellectual capital elsewhere.
In recent years, a growing number of Chinese students have become “sea turtles”, people who return home after studying abroad. Where graduates were more likely to stay in America for post-graduate studies five years ago, many are now choosing to go home. Some Chinese graduates have even turned down lucrative, “American-dream” careers on Wall Street or Silicon Valley, opting instead for careers in prominent Chinese cities like Shenzhen, Shanghai and Beijing.
Even tenured scientists in the US are going back to China as the Chinese government dedicates itself to funding scientific research, as part of its attempt to spur domestic innovation.
And Chinese researchers are making serious advances. Just last year, quantum physicist Pan Jianwei and his team at the University of Science and Technology in Hefei made headlines by setting a world record in quantum teleportation, or the sending of quantum information from one place to another, paving the way for the development of unbreakable quantum communication networks.
This and others results affirm predictions that Chinese investment in research and development will surpass the US as the world’s largest investor as early as next year.
Meanwhile, the US is shooting itself in the foot not just by turning away talent; the government is also cutting funding for many science programmes, including those at the Department of Health and Human Sciences. Perhaps this is unsurprising, given President Donald Trump’s disdain for scientific facts like climate change.
Scientists are leaving for other countries, seeking to continue their work away from the looming shadow of the Trump administration’s anti-science agenda. We only need recall how France successfully lured 13 US climate scientists to Paris to carry out their research in 2017 to realise how bleak the picture is becoming in the US.
China is now picking up where the US left off. Its robust science programme that is now generating unprecedented results is in sharp contrast to the budget cuts and systemic racial discrimination in the US. In short, China has proved itself the place to go to for science, and the US, the place to leave.
Anson Au is a scholar and writer whose work covers culture, health, and politics. He is currently a visiting scholar at the Seoul National University Asia Centre and at Yonsei University, as well as a PhD student in sociology at the University of Toronto
They just never learn the Qin Xueshen incident 60 years ago Via emperror
Is that enough to entice Chinese scientists to return home?
How China is winning the war with the US for scientific hearts and minds
Anson Au says the Trump administration’s anti-Chinese and anti-science biases are producing policies and a working environment that are pushing away talent in research and development, and it is China that will benefit
PUBLISHED : Sunday, 24 June, 2018, 4:16pm
UPDATED : Sunday, 24 June, 2018, 4:35pm
Anson Au
Xenophobia and racial discrimination have taken centre stage in the US amid a whirlwind of political decisions made by the Trump administration. And, as trade tensions between China and the US escalate, a proxy war of sorts between the two contesting rivals is already being fought elsewhere: in academia.
Citing fears of “intellectual property theft”, US authorities have announced plans to limit Chinese graduate students in certain fields to one-year visas. In the past, five-year visas could be obtained that would typically cover the time taken to earn a PhD; a one-year visa, by contrast, is hardly enough even for a master’s degree.
But this is nothing new. In fact, it only highlights the long-standing problem of discrimination against Asians in academia.
In a recent social experiment, professors in Germany were sent hundreds of identical requests for doctoral supervision from Chinese-sounding names purporting to be from several universities, including Pennsylvania State University and the National University of Singapore. US-based candidates were three times as likely to receive additional information in responses, and twice as likely to be given a warm, excited response or addressed by their first name.
In the US, this discrimination has taken on political overtones.
Earlier this year, it was reported that the White House had begun discussing measures to actively bar Chinese people from being a part of “sensitive” research at American institutions over fears of leaking intellectual secrets. More than discrimination, US-based Chinese academics have also been the target of claims of espionage.
In 2015, the case of esteemed physicist Xi Xiaoxing at Temple University went viral in academic circles for how he was forcibly arrested at gunpoint on suspicion of providing sensitive technology to China. The charges were later dismissed by US prosecutors, but no compensation was offered for the irreparable damage done to his reputation, or for the legal costs he incurred in the process.
Around the same time, government hydrologist Sherry Chen was also accused of leaking information to Chinese authorities. Despite the charges being dropped, Chen still doesn’t have her job back three years later.
Anti-Chinese discrimination will harm US innovation, on which America’s scientific enterprise relies, and hasten China’s own development in science and technology, pushing it to leapfrog America sooner. Here’s how.
First, the vast majority of American academia is staffed by foreigners. A recent report from the National Foundation for American Policy, a non-profit organisation that studies trade and immigration issues, found that between 50 per cent and 80 per cent of students in STEM fields (science, technology, engineering and mathematics) at the graduate level in America are foreigners. This means a critical part of the financial as well as intellectual capital for American universities depends on foreigners.
Notably, Chinese comprise the largest group of foreign students in the US.
The high foreigner-local ratio echoes what US physicist Michio Kaku has argued for years about American science education: it regularly performs at the level of Third World countries and “has the worst education system known to science”. In his view, without immigrants coming to America for education and research, the US scientific establishment and tech economy would collapse, and we could “forget about Google. Forget about Silicon Valley. There would be no Silicon Valley”.
If foreigners feel unwelcome in the US, they will take their intellectual capital elsewhere.
In recent years, a growing number of Chinese students have become “sea turtles”, people who return home after studying abroad. Where graduates were more likely to stay in America for post-graduate studies five years ago, many are now choosing to go home. Some Chinese graduates have even turned down lucrative, “American-dream” careers on Wall Street or Silicon Valley, opting instead for careers in prominent Chinese cities like Shenzhen, Shanghai and Beijing.
Even tenured scientists in the US are going back to China as the Chinese government dedicates itself to funding scientific research, as part of its attempt to spur domestic innovation.
And Chinese researchers are making serious advances. Just last year, quantum physicist Pan Jianwei and his team at the University of Science and Technology in Hefei made headlines by setting a world record in quantum teleportation, or the sending of quantum information from one place to another, paving the way for the development of unbreakable quantum communication networks.
This and others results affirm predictions that Chinese investment in research and development will surpass the US as the world’s largest investor as early as next year.
Meanwhile, the US is shooting itself in the foot not just by turning away talent; the government is also cutting funding for many science programmes, including those at the Department of Health and Human Sciences. Perhaps this is unsurprising, given President Donald Trump’s disdain for scientific facts like climate change.
Scientists are leaving for other countries, seeking to continue their work away from the looming shadow of the Trump administration’s anti-science agenda. We only need recall how France successfully lured 13 US climate scientists to Paris to carry out their research in 2017 to realise how bleak the picture is becoming in the US.
China is now picking up where the US left off. Its robust science programme that is now generating unprecedented results is in sharp contrast to the budget cuts and systemic racial discrimination in the US. In short, China has proved itself the place to go to for science, and the US, the place to leave.
Anson Au is a scholar and writer whose work covers culture, health, and politics. He is currently a visiting scholar at the Seoul National University Asia Centre and at Yonsei University, as well as a PhD student in sociology at the University of Toronto
Last edited:
Jura The idiot
General
The Chinese stock market has a much weaker link to China's real economy than its US counterpart has with the US economy. China still by far has a heavily regulated and underdeveloped financial market with lots and lots of factors affecting the market rather than say, market forces itself.
In 2015 the Chinese stock market crushed to half from a high of close to 5000 points, but nothing really happened in the real economy. A better measure of Chinese economic activity and healthiness is housing prices. As long as that is relatively stable (meaning not too hot or too cold), and it is right now, there's much nothing to fear.
This shows one major problem with Western analysis of the Chinese economy. They always see China through their own lens, their own understanding of how the economy works, how the society works, etc etc. But that's almost never even close to a full picture.
In 2015 the Chinese stock market crushed to half from a high of close to 5000 points, but nothing really happened in the real economy. A better measure of Chinese economic activity and healthiness is housing prices. As long as that is relatively stable (meaning not too hot or too cold), and it is right now, there's much nothing to fear.
This shows one major problem with Western analysis of the Chinese economy. They always see China through their own lens, their own understanding of how the economy works, how the society works, etc etc. But that's almost never even close to a full picture.
Equation
Lieutenant General
ZTE fines, stock market drops, soy bean issues, all these are small peanuts in the big picture. I think we've all forgotten this: only 6-12 months ago, it was almost a forgone conclusion the global economic climate would develop into the US and EU teaming up to try to put economic pressures on China to suffocate the Made in China 2025 initiative. To what degree that would have been effective is unknown to anyone by now but it would have created a much more difficult challenge to China than the situation today to say the least. Now, amazingly, it is China and the EU teaming up against American tariffs and economic aggression/ arrogance. This dramatic change in favor of China would have been possible under literally no other US president than Trump, the man whose opening move in a gang fight is to attack every other member on his own team. This is truly beyond dreams... definitely an election-hack worthy president. Great purchase, would buy again LOL
plawolf
Lieutenant General
Western stock markets are overwhelmingly controlled by big players like banks and hedge funds. Indeed, there are massive deterrents to small (think hundreds of millions as a benchmark of small) players as they will literally be playing on an uneven playing field against the major players who get better rates and returns on the same trades.
The Chinese stock market is overwhelmingly made up of your amateur day traders.
The western system is more ‘professional’, and maybe a better indicator for the economy because those major firms take so many more factors into consideration than an individual could ever hope to manage to even get information on, never mind systematically analyse and assess as top of the range analysists and software would.
The downside is that the western market tends to group think since everyone is basically making decisions on the same information using the same methods and software. So it’s only natural they will come to the same conclusions. That helps to create and magnify the big boom and bust swings typical of western financial markets.
Also, there is additional danger that any bad behaviour or flaw in the models and/or data gets repeated across the industry as a matter of cause, so when western markets go wrong, they go wrong in spectacular fashion. Look back to 2008 as the last case study.
Western financial markets also have a parasitic impact on the real economy by sucking out all the best talent to effectively read tea leaves rather than actually add to advancement of the sicences and technology.
Good financial services can help to more efficiently direct investment to the best companies, but there comes a point of diminishing returns, and the western system has gone so far beyond that, that line is now a dot to them.
Most of the ‘value’ western financial services create are paper only. They only have value because the financial service sector collectively say so. And people are bribed to go along with the promise of solid returns on their savings.
This matters in the context of trade and real wars because when that happens, you will be amazed to how quickly all that paper value created out of thin air could again disappear back into thin air. Because in times of crisis, people loose their trust and want something tangible that they can hold and touch. Although we will be looking at worst case scenario and possible escalation to real wars if things got so bad. So I would be happy for this to be a purely theoretical point and not to be proved right on this one.
The Chinese stock market is overwhelmingly made up of your amateur day traders.
The western system is more ‘professional’, and maybe a better indicator for the economy because those major firms take so many more factors into consideration than an individual could ever hope to manage to even get information on, never mind systematically analyse and assess as top of the range analysists and software would.
The downside is that the western market tends to group think since everyone is basically making decisions on the same information using the same methods and software. So it’s only natural they will come to the same conclusions. That helps to create and magnify the big boom and bust swings typical of western financial markets.
Also, there is additional danger that any bad behaviour or flaw in the models and/or data gets repeated across the industry as a matter of cause, so when western markets go wrong, they go wrong in spectacular fashion. Look back to 2008 as the last case study.
Western financial markets also have a parasitic impact on the real economy by sucking out all the best talent to effectively read tea leaves rather than actually add to advancement of the sicences and technology.
Good financial services can help to more efficiently direct investment to the best companies, but there comes a point of diminishing returns, and the western system has gone so far beyond that, that line is now a dot to them.
Most of the ‘value’ western financial services create are paper only. They only have value because the financial service sector collectively say so. And people are bribed to go along with the promise of solid returns on their savings.
This matters in the context of trade and real wars because when that happens, you will be amazed to how quickly all that paper value created out of thin air could again disappear back into thin air. Because in times of crisis, people loose their trust and want something tangible that they can hold and touch. Although we will be looking at worst case scenario and possible escalation to real wars if things got so bad. So I would be happy for this to be a purely theoretical point and not to be proved right on this one.
Trade wars are easy to win? A trade war with China would be very different.
My personal opinion is that US companies that are producing and selling in China should not be 'punished' in the trade war, and should be regarded as allies and friends. The exception to that are US companies that are backing the Republican Party.
Harley Davidson is moving some production out of the US, as Trump lashes back at Harley Davidson.
How this trade war will backfire in China's favor.
My personal opinion is that US companies that are producing and selling in China should not be 'punished' in the trade war, and should be regarded as allies and friends. The exception to that are US companies that are backing the Republican Party.
Harley Davidson is moving some production out of the US, as Trump lashes back at Harley Davidson.
How this trade war will backfire in China's favor.
Last edited:
Skywatcher
Captain
That's what I've been trying to tell people here, until I'm blue in the face.
- Status