Trade War with China

What I can get from the joint declaration is that the deal is vague enough for any interpretation giving both sides a reason to deescalate and diffuse the bomb, for the "war" to fade away from sight. It is a good deal so long as the punitive and retaliate measures are gone.

Let's wait to the end of June (20th of June? as the deadline) to see what is going to happen.

manqiangrexue said:

What the hell is this? That's so abstract it sounds like a poem LOL

Click to expand...

That is the good part, the art of diplomacy, being vague for everyone's satisfaction.

plawolf said:

I would lol if the Trump administration rolled back or even scrapped the current US high tech export restrictions against China in order to achieve a trade deficit reduction.

That is pretty much the only scenario under which China might increase purchases of US manufactured goods enough to make any significant difference to the trade deficit without tarrifs or quotas or similar government intervention aka a trade war.

Click to expand...

I won't be surprised if Trump actually does something in that direction. Those restrictions are made decades ago, lots of things are nothing sensitive anymore, removing some of them should be easy. Secondly, the list of restricted things are made my administrations, it is up to them to produce a report or evaluation to determine the lists. So the administration has the freedom, if the commerce and defense departments say ok, congressmen may be happy to let go for profit of their voting bases.

by 新华
Angela Merkel to visit China from May 24th to 25th, in dialog of bilateral relationship, economy situation and trade.

Everybody is busy in the "trade war". Actually, I believe that leaving any major players out of the picture of "US trade war with China" will be dangerously missing the point.

I believe that the two issues on the agenda is Iran deal and the trade.

I was just watching CNN and some guy being interviewed from the former Clinton Administration was upset because China buying more from the US just means it comes at the cost of American allies such as if China buys more soybeans from the US, it just means China buys less from one of America's allies. Don't believe the US is the protector of capitalist market principles when it always has been whatever benefits the US the most, they're for. This Clinton stooge wants to expand the US's umbrella and engineer how much China should buy from the US and all its allies defying the laws of supply and demand. They created their own form of elitist communist tribute system where everyone not an official US ally has to pay tribute to all of them. Also this guy brought how TPP would've handled China. How? Here's the simple fact. How can TPP reign in China when it's not a member of TPP? Are they going pressure China by banding together and not buy anything from China when most of its membership has China as their number one customer? China will just not buy from them and it'll hurt them more. And I wouldn't be surprised if they cry "foul" where they think China is suppose to keep buying from them while they don't buy from China. That's where they always complain about China using economics as a weapon to which they're hypocritically doing themselves. They know what they're doing because it's actually designed to make people stop thinking for themselves so they just blindly obey. To which why they're not telling the truth about TPP.

The problem is China is too big. Trump can slap tariffs on allies because they're textbook dependent on the US. They think China is too dependent on the US. Yeah just as much as how the US has to rollback its trade threats against China because the US will suffer itself if implemented. So it ain't some small sacrifice on the US economy like they want to believe if they have to hold back from their own threats. And the US is the big fish. Like I said before, this "trade war" might be the US's Google moment where all other corporations learned from Google's mistake on trying to take on China by not daring to take on China. I'm sure the rest of the world is watching how the US can't do much against China meaning every other country can't do anything against China. And like corporations, other countries' greed has priority over any principles. So don't count on TPP members to hold up a ban even if one was ever agreed upon. And the most amazing thing is the only way they can stop China is through war and not without suffering severe consequences to themselves.

AssassinsMace said:

I was just watching CNN and some guy being interviewed from the former Clinton Administration was upset because China buying more from the US just means it comes at the cost of American allies such as if China buys more soybeans from the US, it just means China buys less from one of America's allies. Don't believe the US is the protector of capitalist market principles when it always has been whatever benefits the US the most, they're for. This Clinton stooge wants to expand the US's umbrella and engineer how much China should buy from the US and all its allies defying the laws of supply and demand. They created their own form of elitist communist tribute system where everyone not an official US ally has to pay tribute to all of them. Also this guy brought how TPP would've handled China. How? Here's the simple fact. How can TPP reign in China when it's not a member of TPP? Are they going pressure China by banding together and not buy anything from China when most of its membership has China as their number one customer? China will just not buy from them and it'll hurt them more. And I wouldn't be surprised if they cry "foul" where they think China is suppose to keep buying from them while they don't buy from China. That's where they always complain about China using economics as a weapon to which they're hypocritically doing themselves. They know what they're doing because it's actually designed to make people stop thinking for themselves so they just blindly obey. To which why they're not telling the truth about TPP.

The problem is China is too big. Trump can slap tariffs on allies because they're textbook dependent on the US. They think China is too dependent on the US. Yeah just as much as how the US has to rollback its trade threats against China because the US will suffer itself if implemented. So it ain't some small sacrifice on the US economy like they want to believe if they have to hold back from their own threats. And the US is the big fish. Like I said before, this "trade war" might be the US's Google moment where all other corporations learned from Google's mistake on trying to take on China by not daring to take on China. I'm sure the rest of the world is watching how the US can't do much against China meaning every other country can't do anything against China. And like corporations, other countries' greed has priority over any principles. So don't count on TPP members to hold up a ban even if one was ever agreed upon. And the most amazing thing is the only way they can stop China is through war and not without suffering severe consequences to themselves.

Click to expand...

Hehe, I was thinking the same thing. Now we just need to watch. Few recent developments have hinted someone else is already nervous.

1. Japan is floating the idea of restarting negotiation of China-Japan FTA.
2. Australia was warming up their tone towards China ---> beef, milk (Agriculture products).

I would also suggest to pay attention to GCC for gas and oil, another scarification of the outcome of US/China deal, the energy.

China would not feel uncomfortable to sacrifice these countries for the pleasure of US, after all they are not friendly in the past years. This scarification could actually convince them to build FTA with China that will help them to regain their share on the Chinese market. If Australia and Japan pick up FTA with China, TPP (CTPP) is essentially dead from China's perspective.

Buying more US energy and agriculture products are two of the things written down. The buyers are SOEs meaning Chinese government can actually dictate if it want to. I'd suggest China do as said. It would serve as a lesson to some "I gave you the chance to come aboard, but you refused, so here you are, hang and dry by your friend."

During the U.S. presidential election, if someone says he "suspends" his campaign, that means he drops out permanently. Hopefully, here "suspension" implies the permanent end of trade war.

ok we dont know the full detail yet, but sound like Trump want China purchase more agriculture and energy, but does that mean China has to purchase more expansive goods compare to other competitor in order to lower the trade deficit.

supercat said:

During the U.S. presidential election, if someone says he "suspends" his campaign, that means he drops out permanently. Hopefully, here "suspension" implies the permanent end of trade war.

Click to expand...

Sadly not. America fired the first shot, and in doing so, broken the fundamental unspoken covenant that was the bedrock of Sino-American relations.

For decades, China has made a deliberate effort of couple the economies of America and China, and make the two interdependent to the point of symbolises.

China has always thought that as a way to keep China safe from American predations, because America would hurt itself as much as China in any trade or open war. That as much as American politicians might talk though and make populist sound bites during elections, when they chips are down, they would make the right choices out of sensible self and national interest.

What Trump has shown is that America is actually capable of a dangerous level of brinksmanship and irrationally. That it is prepared to shot itself in the foot just to spite and hurt China.

No one wants to be tied at the hip to a raving madman, and now that China is strong enough to start standing up to America, I expect a period of just as deliberate and determined effort by China to decouple itself from America economically.

That means China is going to redouble its effects to achieve technological parity and independence, as well as diversifying its imports and exports to hedge against future US extortions.

I would also not be surprised to see the Chinese quietly but steadily sell of its US treasury bonds.

All of that is going to add to trade frictions, not lessen them. And as the two economies decouple, one of the most important safety mechanisms preventing conflict between the two great powers will be lost. Making future trade and real wars far more likely.

If there is to be a destructive trade or even real war between China and America, history (if anyone survives to record it that is) will mark this as the first turning point leading up to it.

now I read
Int'l community welcomes outcome of China-U.S. trade talks
Xinhua| 2018-05-20 22:59:13

Please, Log in or Register to view URLs content!

On Saturday, China and the United States issued a joint statement, vowing not to launch a trade war against each other. The international community welcomed this consensus reached by the world's two largest economies.

Ning Yixi, professor of finance at the University of Houston-Victoria in the U.S. state of Texas, said U.S. enterprises will benefit from China's huge market, which will create more jobs for the United States.

Meanwhile, products and services provided to the Chinese market will become better and more diversified, which will not only benefit customers, but be conducive to creating an environment for competition, said Ning.

Ning also said that China's economic development has entered a new phase of transformation after 40 years of reform and opening-up, and some of China's industries and enterprises have been showing their competitiveness in the international market.

At this moment, expanding imports from the United States as well as from other countries can help build a better business environment and promote the competitiveness of China's national industries, said Ning.

Former president of the Chinese American Semiconductor Professional Association Lei Junzhao said China and the United States have reached an important consensus, and the joint statement is a good beginning as it will provide opportunities for the two countries to cooperate and will benefit enterprises and customers of both sides.

Bloomberg said in an article published on Sunday that trade cooperation will be enhanced in such areas as energy, agriculture, health care, high-tech products and finance.

The Wall Street Journal quoted Larry Kudlow, director of the National Economic Council, as saying in a Friday interview with White House reporters that Liu He, the Chinese vice premier and head of the Chinese delegation, impressed Washington officials. The vice premier is "a smart guy, a market guy," Kudlow said.

The agreement reached by China and the United States to abandon a trade war is not only in the interest of the two nations, but also of the whole world. Today, China's economic development has become fully integrated into the process of global economic development and the two are inseparable, said Dmitry Abzalov, head of the Russian Center for Strategic Communications.

Swai Visavanant, senior researcher from Thailand at Chulalongkorn University's China Study Center, said he welcomed the joint statement on the China-U.S. trade talks, which would likely create a favorable atmosphere in global trade.

Click to expand...