Trump issues tough response to China's treatment of Hong Kong

[JensenZ]

5 minutes ago, Logosone said:

You understand that currencies are traded in pairs? So if the USD/JPY goes up the dollar goes up but the Yen does not.

 

There's actually a lot more reason for the USD to devalue because the US is competing with China, who has devalued their currency. Indeed the White house considered this maneouvre for a while, they did that before, but for now decided against it. However, to help an ailing economy a devaluation of the currency is a tried and tested remedy.

 

Traders vary widely in their disparate view of the currencies, some go short, some go long, yes overall the biggest players decide, but they do so based on the way the real economies are doing or are perceived to be doing in the future.

Read my reply again. I specifically mentioned FX trading and even FX pairs, so no education in this area is required. I trade them myself.

 

As I said, it's the sentiment of trader's that dictates where the price goes. Major economic events do create ripples in the price, but the USD will remain steady.

 

 

Edited July 18, 2020 by JensenZ

[Logosone]

5 hours ago, cantata said:

First of all, do you think that supply chains can pop up by magic? All those chinese engineers and production specialists can also be produced in Vietnam, Thailand  virtually instantly?. And Vietnam is already experiencing shortages of workers to supply factories that have moved there. There just isn't enough population in those nations to supply the difference.

Who said instantly? It's already happening though. There's plenty of population in Indonesia.

[cantata]

15 minutes ago, Logosone said:

Because things are much cheaper in China, because people are a lot poorer and have a lot lower disposable income per person, 4000 dollars per person, 6000 if you take out the rural contingent. So basically companies would rather sell in the US and EU.

 

Okay for German luxury cars, absolutely, the world beating Mercedes Maybach GLS was only introduced in China at first, sure, the wealthy Chinese pay silly money for German cars. Okay that's true.  Yes the Chinese car market is important. You have a very rich top segment, but the breadth of the Chinese market is very thinly spread with purchasing power.

What are you on about? 

"New car sales in Europe, the biggest market for flagship German cars besides China, plummeted 76% in April, with sales in Germany, among the largest single car markets, crashing more than 61%."

https://www.dw.com/en/china-offers-hope-for-german-cars-after-stimulus-snub/a-53683919

Did you notice that China is a bigger market for German autos than is Europe? And those sales are all Maybachs? So you think that those auto companies place their hopes in Europe? They're doing a damned convincing job of pretending otherwise.

 

It seems you still don't get it about PPP. If you can purchase comparable goods for 29 cents or some multiple thereof in your country as can 1 dollar or an identical multiple thereof in the united states, then you aren't 12 or 13 times poorer but rather about 2.5 times poorer. And if there are 831 million of you vs. 325 million in the US...the aggregate purchase power of your cohort is actually slightly greater than that of the entire citizenry of the USA.  

  

Edited July 18, 2020 by cantata

[Logosone]

2 minutes ago, cantata said:

What are you on about? 

"New car sales in Europe, the biggest market for flagship German cars besides China, plummeted 76% in April, with sales in Germany, among the largest single car markets, crashing more than 61%."

https://www.dw.com/en/china-offers-hope-for-german-cars-after-stimulus-snub/a-53683919

Did you notice that China is a bigger market for German autos than is Europe? And those sales are all Maybachs? So you think that those auto companies place their hopes in Europe? They're doing a damned convincing job of pretending otherwise.

 

It seems you still don't get it about PPP. If you can purchase comparable goods for 29 cents or some multiple thereof in your country as can 1 dollar or an identical multiple thereof in the united states, then you aren't 12 or 13 times poorer but rather about 2.5 times poorer. And if there are 831 million of you vs. 325 million in the US...the aggregate purchase power of your cohort is actually slightly greater than that of the entire citizenry of the USA.  

  

Chinese have 6000 USD disposable income per person.

 

That's without the rural poor.

 

It's not a lot.

 

Poor market.

[stevenl]

3 minutes ago, Logosone said:

<snip>

Poor market.

Worldwide the major companies all disagree with you.

[cantata]

19 minutes ago, Logosone said:

Chinese have 6000 USD disposable income per person.

 

That's without the rural poor.

 

It's not a lot.

 

Poor market.

And yet they manage to be the largest foreign market for the German Auto Industry. Nice the way you just ignore that fact that your claim about the Chinese market for German cars was false.

ANd the way you stick to nominal income figures. There's a reason economists came up with PPP.

Edited July 18, 2020 by cantata

[cantata]

28 minutes ago, Logosone said:

Who said instantly? It's already happening though. There's plenty of population in Indonesia.

So how much weight does a threat like the one you propose really carry if it's going to be invoked some time in the indefinite future?

[Damual Travesty]

22 hours ago, Sambotte said:

And they know they can not win a military war, nor USA attack them so. Not in their plan at all i think.

They know better :

“The supreme art of war is to subdue the enemy without fighting.”
― Sun Tzu, The Art of War

Quote that to the people of the Free Country of Taiwan

[Logosone]

4 hours ago, stevenl said:

Worldwide the major companies all disagree with you.

No they don't. Very few of the world's major companies have their main market in China.

 

Only very few industries see China as their main market. Few ignore the Chinese but with a disposable income of 4000USD they're not high on the list generally. Mercedes are an exception, not the rule.

[Logosone]

I never disagreed about Mercedes, but cars are the exception, not the rule.

Edited July 18, 2020 by Logosone

[stevenl]

8 hours ago, Logosone said:

No they don't. Very few of the world's major companies have their main market in China.

 

Only very few industries see China as their main market. Few ignore the Chinese but with a disposable income of 4000USD they're not high on the list generally. Mercedes are an exception, not the rule.

I recall a discussion a few months ago with you about China. You're in that respect living in the past 

Based on ppp, what you still don't seem to understand, China's GDP has overtaken that of the USA.

Edited July 19, 2020 by stevenl

[cantata]

9 hours ago, Logosone said:

I never disagreed about Mercedes, but cars are the exception, not the rule.

Nonsense. In 2019 China imported more from abroad than did the EU.

https://www.statista.com/statistics/263646/import-of-goods-to-china/

https://www.statista.com/statistics/253584/import-of-goods-to-the-eu/

Edited July 19, 2020 by cantata

[Jim1000]

Strange that , last year when there was literally blood on the streets of Hong Kong , not a  squeak from the 

Trump administration . 

What changed ?

[rvaviator]

41 minutes ago, Jim1000 said:

Strange that , last year when there was literally blood on the streets of Hong Kong , not a  squeak from the 

Trump administration . 

What changed ?

C-19, US internal handling of the C-19 issue, getting closer to T election ... ?

[Morch]

On 7/16/2020 at 8:20 PM, Damual Travesty said:

Decades of carefully constructed leverage to counter-balance China? Counter balance against what? The last administrations of the United States Democrat and Republican alike have been asleep at the wheel as Chinese power rises. As the Australian prime minister has said we are in a moment in time that feels like the 1930's as fascist power was on the rise.  China is claiming the South China sea, nearly all of it. Has already built military installations including airstrips, military barracks, missile installation on built up sand bar Islands in contested waters by multiple nations.  They threatened trade sanctions and insulted Australian merely for asking for an independent enquiry into the Chinese CCP Laboratory Bat Corona Virus. They have given their President authority to be President for life, they have announced in their five year plans, that they intend to have a fighting force capable of winning war in multiple simultaneous theatres. RIGHT NOW: The USA needs to to solidify into a solid National will to face this threat. Most likely this will require zero interest loans to Australia for the purpose of building their Navy, and tighter military unity with Australia, Japan, South Korea, and tightening up alliances with South East Asia Nations like the Philippines. This is no time for pretending that its not a time to be tough on China. The 3rd Aircraft carrier about to hit the water, and the succeeding battle groups will only come faster. Sooner then we think Taiwan will be in a situation where they will be forced to declare absolute forever independence from China, and as soon as China has 4 carriers in the water at the same time they will attempt to take Taiwan. Japan Southern Islands are also at risk, as the Nationalism of China runs deep.  The future is going to no longer be one of international free trade - with China at the forefront, I expect soon enough that things are going to break down into trading blocks. Again, a solid national will in the USA is needed to fight this threat and coordinate tightly with allies. Australia needs massive new ships - Destroyers, Guided Missile Frigates, and submarines to defend their coast and trade, and the USA likewise needs to build up the Navy. This isn't time for silly snark!

 

While I think you exaggerate some with regard to the PRC's emerging military prowess, there's no denial that they are investing big time on that front. But even so, and even with the USA military resources being more thinly spread, it will take some time for the PRC to close the hardware and tech gaps. Then there's the personnel and experience gaps, which I doubt they'll be able to deal with anytime soon. For all of the PRC's belligerent posing, it's armed forces aren't battle tested much. Similarly, the command structure is such that initiative is not exactly encouraged. This, IMO, represents a major vulnerability, which would be hard to address given the nature of the their regime.

 

Regardless of the above, it is true that the USA interests would be better served by better coordination and support with/to/from allies and potential allies. That said, the current POTUS is many things - but being a reliable partner/ally is not among them. When it comes to working with other countries, I think what's still on is despite Trump being POTUS, not thanks to it. Another term might see the remnants of such cooperation efforts dissolve away. Loans on generous terms for allies....? Kinda doubt that's gonna happen under Trump, and what with the Corona effect on the economy.

[Morch]

On 7/16/2020 at 3:25 PM, Eric Loh said:

The One Country 2 Systems is indeed an unique political arrangement. China could have just took over Hong Kong when the lease expired in 1997. I think better sense prevailed with the Chinese government to avoid a panic and a brain drain and also capital flights. 90s China GDP was only a fraction of what it is today and Hong Kong was very important for her economic contribution and also the ports for the South China provinces and well developed financial infrastructure. Economic situation has changed much since then and China had time to prepare for a Hong Kong replacement. 
 

Things would have remained status quo if not for the resurgence of pro democracy elements that started with the Umbrella Movement for political and social changes. The Basic Law has not changed but the National Security Law was added to prevent secession, subversion, terrorism and collusion with foreign forces. Most countries have such laws. China need cohesion and fear threats of widening protests in the mainland. 
 

You highlighted a good point of huge gap in income inequality which was one of the demand of the Umbrella Movement protest by mostly young people. China must do something about this increasing income divide. 
 

I think China would not do anything that dramatic to de-peg as Hong Kong is a good source for US dollar and also they fear capital flights that may have contagion effect on the China economy. They will

continue to absorb US pressure and wait for an opportune time to react. That’s always their strategy. 
 

 

 

 

"the National Security Law was added to prevent secession, subversion, terrorism and collusion with foreign forces. Most countries have such laws. China need cohesion and fear threats of widening protests in the mainland."

 

You repeat this talking point on most recent topics dealing with HK. Many, if most countries have laws meant to address similar issues. In most Western countries, at least, such laws do not cover quite the same legal territory, nor are they vague to a degree allowing governments to do quite as they please. So it's not really same same.

 

As for the PRC "need cohesion and fears threats of widening protests in the mainland", that's both true and cute. To which degree is it acceptable for a government to suppress criticism and dissent on these grounds?   

 

[Morch]

On 7/18/2020 at 6:39 AM, tonbridgebrit said:

So you would be proud to have your children in the navy, but they are prevented from joining ?  Look, if people join the navy and America fights a war against China, then, all lives lost are a waste.

You're lucky that your children are prevented from joining.

 

I bet there were people trying to spread the same notions before and during WWII as well. Don't recall you ever having raising similar issues with Chinese people and their armed forces. The "concern" only comes up with reference to challenging the PRC, not vice versa. Funny dat.

[Logosone]

On 7/19/2020 at 7:15 AM, stevenl said:

I recall a discussion a few months ago with you about China. You're in that respect living in the past 

Based on ppp, what you still don't seem to understand, China's GDP has overtaken that of the USA.

You may want to tell the Chinese government, who've just released their figures for personal disposable income for 2019:

 

In 2019, the per capita disposable income of Chinese residents was 30,733 yuan, that's 4400 US$. (Compare with 45,578US$ in the US).

 

That's the total, what they actually spent on consumer goods was lower still, 21,559, some 3000 US$.

 

The Chinese are still very poor on average. Very large, but very poor market.

 

 

Edited July 21, 2020 by Logosone

[stevenl]

7 minutes ago, Logosone said:

You may want to tell the Chinese government, who've just released their figures for personal disposable income for 2019:

 

In 2019, the per capita disposable income of Chinese residents was 30,733 yuan, that's 4400 US$. (Compare with 45,578US$ in the US).

 

That's the total, what they actually spent on consumer goods was lower still, 21,559, some 3000 US$.

 

The Chinese are still very poor on average. Very large, but very poor market.

 

 

As I said, based on ppp China has the highest GDP, surpassing USA. https://www.investopedia.com/insights/worlds-top-economies/

[Logosone]

On 7/19/2020 at 7:53 AM, cantata said:

Nonsense. In 2019 China imported more from abroad than did the EU.

https://www.statista.com/statistics/263646/import-of-goods-to-china/

https://www.statista.com/statistics/253584/import-of-goods-to-the-eu/

Lol, well obviously China has 3 times the population of the EU.

 

And of course that statistic includes commodities like ores, copper, slag, ash, electrical machinery equipment, which are mostly used in production for, you guessed it, export.

 

Once you refine for actual consumer goods the EU imports considerably more per capita.

[stevenl]

20 minutes ago, Logosone said:

Lol, well obviously China has 3 times the population of the EU.

 

And of course that statistic includes commodities like ores, copper, slag, ash, electrical machinery equipment, which are mostly used in production for, you guessed it, export.

 

Once you refine for actual consumer goods the EU imports considerably more per capita.

I state GDP based on ppp is higher in China than anywhere else. You come with a reply, I show you the link, and again you come with deflections.

You're out of your depth.

[Logosone]

37 minutes ago, stevenl said:

I state GDP based on ppp is higher in China than anywhere else. You come with a reply, I show you the link, and again you come with deflections.

You're out of your depth.

Your ad hominem attacks merely show you've lost the argument. 

 

With a personal disposable income of  4400 US$ (Compare with 45,578US$ in the US) the Chinese market clearly does not compare in quality to the US and EU.

 

Not to mention the in-built barriers in China that make business a nightmare compared to the US or EU.

 

If the Chinese market was really worth it a company with the resources of Amazon would not leave it so easily. But they did.

[stevenl]

49 minutes ago, Logosone said:

Your ad hominem attacks merely show you've lost the argument. 

 

With a personal disposable income of  4400 US$ (Compare with 45,578US$ in the US) the Chinese market clearly does not compare in quality to the US and EU.

 

Not to mention the in-built barriers in China that make business a nightmare compared to the US or EU.

 

If the Chinese market was really worth it a company with the resources of Amazon would not leave it so easily. But they did.

I give up., there is no point in having a discussion with someone who does not understand and is unwilling to see that.