China accuses U.S. officials of misleading public on trade war

By Michael Martina and Ben Blanchard

 

Farmer Dave Walton holds soybeans in Wilton, Iowa, U.S. May 22, 2019. REUTERS/Kia Johnson

 

BEIJING (Reuters) - China on Friday accused U.S. officials of lying to the public about their trade war, as rising tensions between the world's two largest economies kept financial markets in a state of unease.

 

Talks to end the trade dispute collapsed earlier this month, with the two sides in a stalemate over U.S. demands that China change its policies to address a number of key U.S. grievances, including theft of intellectual property and subsidies for state enterprises.

 

Washington has slapped higher tariffs on $200 billion in Chinese goods, prompting Beijing to retaliate, and effectively banned U.S. firms from doing business with Huawei Technologies Co Ltd, the world's largest telecom network gear maker.

 

"Domestically in the United States there are more and more doubts about the trade war the U.S. side has provoked with China, the market turmoil caused by the technology war and blocked industrial cooperation," Chinese Foreign Ministry spokesman Lu Kang said.

 

U.S. officials "fabricate lies to try to mislead the American people, and now they are trying to incite ideological opposition," he said, when asked about U.S. Secretary of State Mike Pompeo's recent criticism of Huawei.

 

In an interview with CNBC on Thursday, Pompeo said Huawei was connected to the Chinese government, dismissing Huawei chief executive Ren Zhengfei's assertions that his company would never share user secrets.

 

"The company is deeply tied not only to China but to the Chinese Communist Party. And that connectivity, the existence of those connections puts American information that crosses those networks at risk," Pompeo said.

 

Huawei has repeatedly denied it is controlled by the Chinese government, military or intelligence services.

 

Pompeo said he believed more American companies would cut ties with the tech giant, while the United States has been rallying its allies to persuade them not to use Huawei for their 5G networks.

 

U.S. President Donald Trump said on Thursday that U.S. complaints against Huawei might be resolved within the framework of a U.S.-China trade deal, while at the same time calling the Chinese company "very dangerous."

 

Lu said he did not know what Trump was talking about.

 

"Frankly, I'm actually not sure what the specific meaning of the U.S. leader, the U.S. side, saying this is," he said.

 

World equity markets rebounded on Friday from heavy selling in the previous day's session. The U.S. dollar was trading lower against a basket of currencies and prices of safe-haven U.S. government debt fell.

 

NO TALKS SCHEDULED

 

With no further talks between Washington and Beijing scheduled, investors are nervously eyeing the prospect of an escalation in the tit-for-tat tariffs the two countries have slapped on each other's products.

 

The seeds of the current impasse were sowed when Chinese officials sought major changes to the draft text of a deal that the Trump administration says had been largely agreed.

 

Trump, who has embraced protectionism as part of an "America First" agenda, has threatened to slap tariffs of up to 25% on an additional list of Chinese imports worth about $300 billion.

 

Meanwhile, China's move to impose higher tariffs on a revised $60 billion list of U.S. goods is set to go into effect on June 1.

 

Financial markets fear the trade war could badly damage global supply lines and prompt a further slowdown of the world economy. Economists say the tariffs will curb growth in the United States and China, two of the more solid economies.

 

China can maintain healthy, sustainable economic growth even as it suffers some impact from the trade friction, a senior official from China's state planner told state television on Friday.

 

"China's healthy, steady and sustainable growth can be maintained in the medium- and long-term," said Ning Jizhe, vice chairman of the National Development and Reform Commission.

 

The Trump administration says it is monitoring any possible impact of tariffs on U.S. consumers. It also announced this week a new aid package of about $15 billion to help U.S. farmers, exceeding the up to $12 billion that was rolled out last year.

 

American farmers, a key Trump constituency, have been among the hardest hit in the trade war. Soybeans are the most valuable U.S. farm export, and shipments to China dropped to a 16-year low in 2018.

 

-- © Copyright Reuters 2019-05-25

Follow Thaivisa on LINE for breaking Thailand news and visa info

 

 

Huawei is just a pawn here.

 

Of course they are lying, they're lying about everything.

"misleading the public"

is that a crime, a misdemeanor, or bad behavior?

None of the above: it's a privilege of governments

Edited May 25, 20197 yr by klauskunkel

Talks to end the trade dispute collapsed earlier this month, with the two sides in a stalemate over U.S. demands that China change its policies to address a number of key U.S. grievances, including theft of intellectual property and subsidies for state enterprises.

 

And the united States has never done this? And the USA does not subsidise industry to the detriment of its competitors. looks and awful lot like the pot calling the kettle black here.

GM and Chrsler gor substantial US Government bail outs, Farmers have always got and are now getting larger subsidies.

If China was a western European Country and not Asia would the USA attitude be different.

Seems here also some racism in the targeting?

8 minutes ago, Kiwiken said:

Talks to end the trade dispute collapsed earlier this month, with the two sides in a stalemate over U.S. demands that China change its policies to address a number of key U.S. grievances, including theft of intellectual property and subsidies for state enterprises.

 

And the united States has never done this? And the USA does not subsidise industry to the detriment of its competitors. looks and awful lot like the pot calling the kettle black here.

GM and Chrsler gor substantial US Government bail outs, Farmers have always got and are now getting larger subsidies.

If China was a western European Country and not Asia would the USA attitude be different.

Seems here also some racism in the targeting?

Wait for it, European cars will be on the radar soon, especially German cars, Trump doesn't like competition. Stop selling crap and maybe you could export more. The big stick China has is rare earth, stop exporting that and the western high tech industry can bury itself.

53 minutes ago, Kiwiken said:

GM and Chrsler gor substantial US Government bail outs

A common misconception. The US sold T-bills to purchase company stock that provided capital investment stimulus. The companies recovered, stock value increased substantially and the US actually made money from its investment when it cashed out its stock ownership.

7 hours ago, rooster59 said:

China on Friday accused U.S. officials of lying to the public about their trade war

Something 300 million Americans already know and experience at least once a day.

"Trade wars are good."

 

"Trade wars are easy to win."

 

So said the stable genius.

 

Taking tariff revenue and giving it to farmers hurt by tariffs seems so, well trumpian.

 

 

3 hours ago, klauskunkel said:

"misleading the public"

is that a crime, a misdemeanor, or bad behavior?

None of the above: it's a privilege of governments

You forgot the word "bad" before governments... and a compliant infotainment media instead of journalism.

and the Chinese never mislead their people? lol..

1 hour ago, Srikcir said:

A common misconception. The US sold T-bills to purchase company stock that provided capital investment stimulus. The companies recovered, stock value increased substantially and the US actually made money from its investment when it cashed out its stock ownership.

Which was a BAILOUT because no private capital/equity firms would take the risk.

6 minutes ago, from the home of CC said:

and the Chinese never mislead their people? lol..

But, but, they are bad too... why shouldn't we wallow in the muck also?

8 minutes ago, mikebike said:

Which was a BAILOUT because no private capital/equity firms would take the risk.

It was more like a loan since private banking which caused the crash could not and would not be able to handle  such a thing.

 

Trump is right to go after the Chinese as they are the greatest threat to America from any foreign power.  They refuse to allow any US Company to set up china without an agreement that there must be technology transfer and what they cannot get via agreement- they steal it.  They have manipulated their currency for decades,

Their goal is to find natural resources and food to continue to feed its huge population and keep the Communist Party in charge. 

They buy up industry everywhere; establish a foothold and spy on the local government and transfer wealth back to China

 

While I totally dislike Trump- he is right to challenge the Chinese both economically and militarily- Someone, has to tell and show the Chinese that they are not going to get everything

their way anymore.

 

The mistake that Trump has made is that he has not established a firm relationship and sought out markets for American farmers and other industries to replace the Chinese markets and he still allows the Chinese Government to purchase American debt.

 

The way to force the Chinese  to bend is to hurt them economically; cut off their investment opportunities and box them in by expanding the US military presence in the Pacific.

 

 

 

 

4 minutes ago, Thaidream said:

It was more like a loan since private banking which caused the crash could not and would not be able to handle  such a thing.

 

Trump is right to go after the Chinese as they are the greatest threat to America from any foreign power.  They refuse to allow any US Company to set up china without an agreement that there must be technology transfer and what they cannot get via agreement- they steal it.  They have manipulated their currency for decades,

Their goal is to find natural resources and food to continue to feed its huge population and keep the Communist Party in charge. 

They buy up industry everywhere; establish a foothold and spy on the local government and transfer wealth back to China

 

While I totally dislike Trump- he is right to challenge the Chinese both economically and militarily- Someone, has to tell and show the Chinese that they are not going to get everything

their way anymore.

 

The mistake that Trump has made is that he has not established a firm relationship and sought out markets for American farmers and other industries to replace the Chinese markets and he still allows the Chinese Government to purchase American debt.

 

The way to force the Chinese  to bend is to hurt them economically; cut off their investment opportunities and box them in by expanding the US military presence in the Pacific.

 

 

 

 

So you are peed off at the Chinese because they have been doing what you now want the USA to do?

Look, trade wars always end badly for all involved. And today we are a global economy so all are involved.

 

Now its all a game of exerting influence non-militarily. That means info wars, cyber wars, trade wars, currency wars, and intellectual property wars. All the players are getting better at these things every day so an actual armed conflict MAY be delayed for quite some time. Or not.

 

The Chinese have always played the long game and have never denied their goal of total global domination. They pursue this goal in all places, with all things, and in every way. Barring an internal revolution and uprising of their brutally repressed citizens and given the platitude and incoherent response by other major powers, they will almost certainly succeed in their focus.

China has already colonized many third world countries and when they have gathered sufficient economic  and military strength they will begin naked invasion of other Asian countries. The Belt & Road is more properly termed a straight jacket.

 

China does not represent freedom, privacy, or choice and its global control can only bring the Orwellian end game that is so easy to visualize now.

 

So, without response of some kind from western powers the outcome is inevitable. Western powers must ally with European and Asian countries to draw strict boundaries of influence and resist the creeping territorial expansion that China depends so heavily on. China must find fertile land for its burgeoning populace and create new markets for its goods. Without these in play China will eventually implode IF its people's ever finally demand control of their own lives.

 

While virtually all governments now are embracing ever more repressive control over their citizens lives and fortunes, they must rely on subterfuge, and depend on acceptance, ignorance, complacency, and sloth from their citizens at this point in time. Soon their control will be so deeply and broadly accomplished that compliance of citizenry can be required without any justification or explanation from their governments.

 

Indeed, a significant fraction of western populations have already embraced the loss of their liberties and privacy in what they foolishly  believe is an exchange for protection from harm.

 

In the end, as history has generously established multiple times and places, governments will serve the people only when the people demand them to do so, and demonstrate this with risk to their own lives and livelihood.

 

Humans are at an inflection point in history like none ever seen or been possible before.

 

Though the American president is a ham-fisted moron and a loathsome human being, his instincts regarding China's ambitions are correct. If nothing else, his is a call to other countries to wake up to the threat that China poses and seek ways that it can resisted in their own individual ways.

 

Oh yeah, and if Americans would pull their heads out of their phones, learn about the rest of the world, and quit buying plastic crap from China that would help too.

 

Full Disclosure: I am an American citizen and I fear greatly for my country's present and future.

 

A common misconception. The US sold T-bills to purchase company stock that provided capital investment stimulus. The companies recovered, stock value increased substantially and the US actually made money from its investment when it cashed out its stock ownership.

Ridiculous.

GM was forced into bankruptcy to bailout the UAW.

Upon bankruptcy the stock became worthless, effectively cheating all the bond and shareholders.

New stock was issued in 2010 at $33.00 a share and it’s at $35.12 today, hardly a substantial increase.

On the other hand Ford was not bailed out, but borrowed money (some from taxpayers) renegotiated their contacts and went from about $1 a share to $9.83 today. Their shareholders did not lose everything and the taxpayers lost nothing.

Had the government allowed Rick Wagoner take GM through the process, their results would likely have been similar to Fords.

Taxpayers lost over $10B and bond holders lost almost $30B on the GM/UAW bailout.

Which was a BAILOUT because no private capital/equity firms would take the risk.

You are correct, it was a bailout, but it was also a takeover. The government reorganized GM’s management and liquidated the company. To be clear, GM’s bond holders would have much preferred to lose 50% than 100%, and would have negotiated in bankruptcy had the liquidation not been forced.

No matter what Thailand will gain from this trade war or they will at least try to tell that fairytale to the ignorant public 

The Chinese Communist Party, a body so paranoid that it completely controls information in a country with 25% of the world's population, and secretly imprisons those who try to tell any other story than the party line.

 

How can this entity accuse anybody of misleading the public? They are the world's most serious serial offender bar none.

trade war /trade deal ... trade war - trade deal
Trump twitter and his Wall Street friends earn billions on speculations ?

5 hours ago, RocketDog said:

Look, trade wars always end badly for all involved. And today we are a global economy so all are involved.

 

Now its all a game of exerting influence non-militarily. That means info wars, cyber wars, trade wars, currency wars, and intellectual property wars. All the players are getting better at these things every day so an actual armed conflict MAY be delayed for quite some time. Or not.

 

The Chinese have always played the long game and have never denied their goal of total global domination. They pursue this goal in all places, with all things, and in every way. Barring an internal revolution and uprising of their brutally repressed citizens and given the platitude and incoherent response by other major powers, they will almost certainly succeed in their focus.

China has already colonized many third world countries and when they have gathered sufficient economic  and military strength they will begin naked invasion of other Asian countries. The Belt & Road is more properly termed a straight jacket.

 

China does not represent freedom, privacy, or choice and its global control can only bring the Orwellian end game that is so easy to visualize now.

 

So, without response of some kind from western powers the outcome is inevitable. Western powers must ally with European and Asian countries to draw strict boundaries of influence and resist the creeping territorial expansion that China depends so heavily on. China must find fertile land for its burgeoning populace and create new markets for its goods. Without these in play China will eventually implode IF its people's ever finally demand control of their own lives.

 

While virtually all governments now are embracing ever more repressive control over their citizens lives and fortunes, they must rely on subterfuge, and depend on acceptance, ignorance, complacency, and sloth from their citizens at this point in time. Soon their control will be so deeply and broadly accomplished that compliance of citizenry can be required without any justification or explanation from their governments.

 

Indeed, a significant fraction of western populations have already embraced the loss of their liberties and privacy in what they foolishly  believe is an exchange for protection from harm.

 

In the end, as history has generously established multiple times and places, governments will serve the people only when the people demand them to do so, and demonstrate this with risk to their own lives and livelihood.

 

Humans are at an inflection point in history like none ever seen or been possible before.

 

Though the American president is a ham-fisted moron and a loathsome human being, his instincts regarding China's ambitions are correct. If nothing else, his is a call to other countries to wake up to the threat that China poses and seek ways that it can resisted in their own individual ways.

 

Oh yeah, and if Americans would pull their heads out of their phones, learn about the rest of the world, and quit buying plastic crap from China that would help too.

 

Full Disclosure: I am an American citizen and I fear greatly for my country's present and future.

 

Your first two paragraphs were very good, the rest not so much.

Edited May 26, 20197 yr by stevenl

Your first two paragraphs were very good, the rest not so much.

What I wrote is just my opinion. It's not intended as a professional piece or to persuade anybody.

Take it or leave it.

Up to you.

Opinions are like certain body parts:
Everybody has one.

Sent from my SM-G930V using Thailand Forum - Thaivisa mobile app

Off-topic post and reply removed.  

 

16 hours ago, mogandave said:

 

Ridiculous.

GM was forced into bankruptcy to bailout the UAW.

Upon bankruptcy the stock became worthless, effectively cheating all the bond and shareholders.

New stock was issued in 2010 at $33.00 a share and it’s at $35.12 today, hardly a substantial increase.

On the other hand Ford was not bailed out, but borrowed money (some from taxpayers) renegotiated their contacts and went from about $1 a share to $9.83 today. Their shareholders did not lose everything and the taxpayers lost nothing.

Had the government allowed Rick Wagoner take GM through the process, their results would likely have been similar to Fords.

Taxpayers lost over $10B and bond holders lost almost $30B on the GM/UAW bailout.

 

"Had the government allowed Rick Wagoner take GM through the process, their results would likely have been similar to Fords."

Untrue. GM was in far worse financial shape than Ford when the recession hit. 
 

"Had the government allowed Rick Wagoner take GM through the process, their results would likely have been similar to Fords."
Untrue. GM was in far worse financial shape than Ford when the recession hit. 
 

I don’t doubt that, my position is that the government taking over a private company effectively cheating the stock and bond holders was inappropriate.

Had GM been allowed to renegotiate their contracts they would be a much stronger company today, yet here they are (apparently) back on the ropes, and there’ll likely be another bone-headed bailout in time fo the next election.

Meanwhile, Ford is up ten-fold to GM’s measly 6% over the same time period, and I don’t think Ford is particularly strong or well managed.

13 minutes ago, mogandave said:

 

I don’t doubt that, my position is that the government taking over a private company effectively cheating the stock and bond holders was inappropriate.

Had GM been allowed to renegotiate their contracts they would be a much stronger company today, yet here they are (apparently) back on the ropes, and there’ll likely be another bone-headed bailout in time fo the next election.

Meanwhile, Ford is up ten-fold to GM’s measly 6% over the same time period, and I don’t think Ford is particularly strong or well managed.

 

No. GM would be extinct today. 

No. GM would be extinct today. 

Well, you certainly make a strong argument.

36 minutes ago, mogandave said:

 

Well, you certainly make a strong argument.

 

First off, no worse than yours. GM had liabilities twice the value of its assets.

For another it was GM and Chrysler that got bailed out by the government. Ford didn't need the TARP bailout. What it did need was the services that in ordinary times banks would provide. And that's what the government did for Ford. BEcause Ford was a basically healthy company. 

First off, no worse than yours. GM had liabilities twice the value of its assets.
For another it was GM and Chrysler that got bailed out by the government. Ford didn't need the TARP bailout. What it did need was the services that in ordinary times banks would provide. And that's what the government did for Ford. BEcause Ford was a basically healthy company. 

Fair enough.

I am not arguing Ford was as strapped as GM and Chrysler, but Ford did go in hat-in-hand with GM and Chrysler for the bailout, they just were not willing to accept the terms.

My beef is not with the bailout, but with the heavy-handed way the government ousted the upper management and installed their people.

On 5/26/2019 at 3:08 PM, Briggsy said:

The Chinese Communist Party, a body so paranoid that it completely controls information in a country with 25% of the world's population, and secretly imprisons those who try to tell any other story than the party line.

 

How can this entity accuse anybody of misleading the public? They are the world's most serious serial offender bar none.

You do understand the difference between a govt which was set up to centrally control all aspects of life and, indeed the population, from its inception and one that claims to be a representative democracy, right?