Trump ups US ante on Taiwan, but China has leverage too

[elgordo38]

20 hours ago, 55Jay said:

He's still shallow on all this annoying policy stuff,

Yes the annoying important stuff. After his anointment what will he do for a encore? Pretty soon he will run out of the superlatives describing himself and his impending great deads. Its like a poker game only he cannot fold them.  

[geriatrickid]

Remember the old saying from WWII about "Loose lips sink ships"? Well,  our irascible bull in a china shop  has done it again;

 

Shares of U.S. automakers General Motors Co and Ford Motor Co skidded on Wednesday after a Chinese official warned the government could slap a penalty on an unnamed U.S. automaker for monopolistic behavior.

The warning from a senior Chinese state planning official, conveyed through the official China Daily newspaper on Wednesday, came days after U.S. President-elect Donald Trump questioned the longstanding U.S. policy of acknowledging that Taiwan is part of "one China."

Chinese officials had been investigating the pricing practices of automakers prior to Trump's comments, sources said.

http://www.reuters.com/article/us-china-autos-penalty-idUSKBN143014

 

His supporters who work at GM & Ford must be thrilled............

 

 

[mikebike]

On 12/13/2016 at 9:52 AM, williamgeorgeallen said:

just what i was going to say. americas military might is massive. their spending is more than the 6 next biggest military spenders combined. as long as america can keep printing or borrowing money to pay for it all they dont have much to worry about.

All that military might yet no real military success since WWII... I'd worry that this massively expensive military is useless at fighting in a modern insurgent conflict and that its masters are drunk on profiting from all sides.

[billd766]

On 13/12/2016 at 2:35 PM, tonbridgebrit said:

 

 

I do have a smirk on my face when those who hate China but supported Hillary Clinton, say their stuff. 

Let's get real here. It's Trump who is going to play tough with China. Trump is going to partially block the Chinese goods entering into America, and hurt China. This is something that Hillary would never do.

But Trump will do something that Obama was already preparing for, something Hillary was certain to do. Washington is going to do a "big bang" arms deal with Taiwan in the not so distant future.  This means a massive sale of modern weapons to Taiwan, generating billions of dollars. Actually, tens of billions of dollars worth. This actually angers the Hillary supporters who are anti-China.  Why ? Because it's Trump who is going to get the credit for this massive deal, a deal that generates a serious profit for America's defence contractors.

 

 

And what will the USA do if China calls back its $3 trillion?

 

What will Trump do as POTUS if China shuts down Trump industries in China?

[ilostmypassword]

6 minutes ago, billd766 said:

 

And what will the USA do if China calls back its $3 trillion?

 

What will Trump do as POTUS if China shuts down Trump industries in China?

Well, you're assuming that there won't be other buyers although clearly that much in Tbills would have to be sold at a discount. It will also mean that China is shooting itself in the foot or worse since if the purchasing power of the dollar declines, that means less buying from China. Still, you have a point. If Trump gets belligerrent with China - and especially if he starts to impose tariffs - China might well look on it as an act of economic warfare and be willing to suffer economic losses if it hurts the US.  

[tonbridgebrit]

15 hours ago, geriatrickid said:

Remember the old saying from WWII about "Loose lips sink ships"? Well,  our irascible bull in a china shop  has done it again;

 

Shares of U.S. automakers General Motors Co and Ford Motor Co skidded on Wednesday after a Chinese official warned the government could slap a penalty on an unnamed U.S. automaker for monopolistic behavior.

The warning from a senior Chinese state planning official, conveyed through the official China Daily newspaper on Wednesday, came days after U.S. President-elect Donald Trump questioned the longstanding U.S. policy of acknowledging that Taiwan is part of "one China."

Chinese officials had been investigating the pricing practices of automakers prior to Trump's comments, sources said.

http://www.reuters.com/article/us-china-autos-penalty-idUSKBN143014

 

His supporters who work at GM & Ford must be thrilled............

 

 

Geriatrickid, you're making yourself look silly.

So, you hate Trump, but you also don't like China.  You're a believer that most of the Chinese stuff entering into America is junk, and you're also convinced that China is a danger and threat to world peace.

Trump will be in charge soon, and Trump is actually carrying out concreate policies that are against China. Trump has already fired an opening shot at China by speaking with the leader of Taiwan, and Trump is going to slap 35% taxes on the Chinese goods entering into America. Trump is doing what the China-haters actually want. But the China-haters who cheered on Hillary Clinton, well, their hatred for Trump is greater than their hatred for China. If it was Hillary who was doing all this, well, people like you would be cheering these very policies.

Come on man. Anti-China policies are anti-China policies. Does it matter that much that, instead of a woman dishing them out, it's a man who is dishing them out ?

 

Edited December 15, 2016 by tonbridgebrit

[tonbridgebrit]

15 hours ago, billd766 said:

 

And what will the USA do if China calls back its $3 trillion?

 

What will Trump do as POTUS if China shuts down Trump industries in China?

The USA is in a stronger financial position than China is. It's the USA that has a massive trade deficit with China. A trade war will mean  that China's huge trade surplus will shrink considerably. China certainly does not want to see it's surplus reduced.

If China starts selling the US government bonds that they've got, well, there aren't enough buyers. China will be selling at a discount price. Also, America will respond by slapping even greater taxes on them Chinese imports.

[tonbridgebrit]

15 hours ago, craigt3365 said:

Iraq had invaded Kuwait.  They were beaten back, so yes, a resounding success.  The first Iraq war.  The second was a resounding disaster.  Though from a military success point of view, very successful.  Overall, an absolute disaster.

Craigt3365, let's try and get back to the OP.

You remember when Obama ordered American ships to sail pretty close to the Chinese-made islands in the South China Sea ?  A fair number of people thought that it would be a good idea to fire one or two missiles at one of the Chinese dots. That way, China would start dismantling those islands, China would pack it's bags and go home. Yes, the idea of firing one or two missiles. The islands were being built, concreate being poured down, sailing US ships near the construction sites was not actually stopping the construction.

And what do we see now ? Trump is starting a confrontation with China. A confrontation that will see America slap 35% taxes on the Chinese imports. Trump doesn't really care what China's response will be.

Notice that, some of those who supported firing one or two missiles at the Chinese dots are not in favour of reducing that mountain of Chinese goods being imported by America. Surely, those who supported firing one or two missiles, they knew that missile strikes are far more serious that slapping taxes onto the Chinese goods that are entering into America ?

 

[craigt3365]

2 hours ago, tonbridgebrit said:

Craigt3365, let's try and get back to the OP.

You remember when Obama ordered American ships to sail pretty close to the Chinese-made islands in the South China Sea ?  A fair number of people thought that it would be a good idea to fire one or two missiles at one of the Chinese dots. That way, China would start dismantling those islands, China would pack it's bags and go home. Yes, the idea of firing one or two missiles. The islands were being built, concreate being poured down, sailing US ships near the construction sites was not actually stopping the construction.

And what do we see now ? Trump is starting a confrontation with China. A confrontation that will see America slap 35% taxes on the Chinese imports. Trump doesn't really care what China's response will be.

Notice that, some of those who supported firing one or two missiles at the Chinese dots are not in favour of reducing that mountain of Chinese goods being imported by America. Surely, those who supported firing one or two missiles, they knew that missile strikes are far more serious that slapping taxes onto the Chinese goods that are entering into America ?

 

Not sure how the SCS is getting back to the OP? 

 

A trade war will do nothing but hurt the US, China and the global economy.  A very bad idea.  There are ways around it, but it requires delicate diplomacy.  Something Trump does not appear to have nor care about.  A reset with regards to trade is needed.  China has taken advantage of the situation.  So has the US, offering paper money for hard goods and services.  China is a tough country to deal with.  It will be interesting to see how this plays out.

 

Personally, an interesting argument is Taiwan is actually the true "owners" of mainland China.  Being kicked out in a revolution years ago.  Same could apply to Syria.  Some say Assad still is president of the entire country, others say control was lost some time ago so he's no longer the president.  Interesting arguments.

[Srikcir]

On 12/13/2016 at 6:15 AM, webfact said:

the so-called "one China" policy

Often overlooked is that this policy was coupled with a "two systems" policy.

 

While China operates under a communist political system, Taiwan is allowed to operate under a democratic system similar to the Republic of Korea. While China retains sovereignty over Taiwan, Taiwan is allowed autonomous status: democratic elections, rights and liberties not recognized in the Chinese mainland, operates its own military forces, exemption from Chinese taxes and fees, exemption from China's budgetary processes, exemption from Chinese military service, exemption from China's air and sea navigation rights, etc. All in exchange for money from trade deals with the US.

Take away the money, Taiwan loses its autonomy and Communist China (the only China recognized by the UN) can legally occupy and govern Taiwan.

[ilostmypassword]

3 hours ago, craigt3365 said:

Not sure how the SCS is getting back to the OP? 

 

A trade war will do nothing but hurt the US, China and the global economy.  A very bad idea.  There are ways around it, but it requires delicate diplomacy.  Something Trump does not appear to have nor care about.  A reset with regards to trade is needed.  China has taken advantage of the situation.  So has the US, offering paper money for hard goods and services.  China is a tough country to deal with.  It will be interesting to see how this plays out.

 

Personally, an interesting argument is Taiwan is actually the true "owners" of mainland China.  Being kicked out in a revolution years ago.  Same could apply to Syria.  Some say Assad still is president of the entire country, others say control was lost some time ago so he's no longer the president.  Interesting arguments.

You think America should be paying in gold?

[lannarebirth]

7 minutes ago, ilostmypassword said:

You think America should be paying in gold?

 

I think he is suggesting a less one sided Balance Of Trade.

 

https://www.thebalance.com/u-s-china-trade-deficit-causes-effects-and-solutions-3306277

Edited December 16, 2016 by lannarebirth

[craigt3365]

53 minutes ago, ilostmypassword said:

You think America should be paying in gold?

I've got a minor in economics.  There were some interesting arguments in school about countries accepting USD for hard goods. 

[billd766]

9 hours ago, tonbridgebrit said:

The USA is in a stronger financial position than China is. It's the USA that has a massive trade deficit with China. A trade war will mean  that China's huge trade surplus will shrink considerably. China certainly does not want to see it's surplus reduced.

If China starts selling the US government bonds that they've got, well, there aren't enough buyers. China will be selling at a discount price. Also, America will respond by slapping even greater taxes on them Chinese imports.

 

IMPO the USA cannot afford to start a trade war with anybody let alone China ho can afford to do it far more than the USA. They can take the US government down the legal roads in the US courts for years and perhaps decades if needs be.

 

They can put pressure on the USA world wide should they want to and I don't suppose that the other big markets such as the EU and Russia will step in on the US side.

 

That is without what the American people will have to say when they can't buy cheap any more and their cost of living starts to rise and salaries don't.

[ilostmypassword]

2 hours ago, craigt3365 said:

I've got a minor in economics.  There were some interesting arguments in school about countries accepting USD for hard goods. 

And how have those arguments played out in the real world? And was it only about dollars? Or currency in general?  And what would they accept for hard goods if not dollars? Barter?

[craigt3365]

12 minutes ago, ilostmypassword said:

And how have those arguments played out in the real world? And was it only about dollars? Or currency in general?  And what would they accept for hard goods if not dollars? Barter?

Understood.  It's an economic theory.  Though a highly respected one.

[ilostmypassword]

1 hour ago, craigt3365 said:

Understood.  It's an economic theory.  Though a highly respected one.

What's the name of it?

[craigt3365]

15 hours ago, ilostmypassword said:

What's the name of it?

I believe it was from the Chicago School of Economics, probably a Friedman comment.  I'd have to do so research to find the exact verbiage.  But could have also been Keynes.  It was many years ago and was a theory presented by an economist.

[ilostmypassword]

5 hours ago, craigt3365 said:

I believe it was from the Chicago School of Economics, probably a Friedman comment.  I'd have to do so research to find the exact verbiage.  But could have also been Keynes.  It was many years ago and was a theory presented by an economist.

It could certainly not have been a Friedman or a Keynes comment. Friedman was a monetarist. In fact, he said that QE would have eliminated the Great Depression in short order.  And Keynes was the guy who called gold a "barbarous relic" and semi-facetiously to have pay some workers to bury bottles filled with money and then have others dig it up and keep it for themselves. No way either of these 2 could have proposed that. I can't imagine any serious economist making that proposition.  So I guess it's possible it was the brainchild of some gold bug.

Capital controls are often exercised in times of fiscal crisis but that's exactly the opposite.

Edited December 17, 2016 by ilostmypassword

[craigt3365]

1 hour ago, ilostmypassword said:

It could certainly not have been a Friedman or a Keynes comment. Friedman was a monetarist. In fact, he said that QE would have eliminated the Great Depression in short order.  And Keynes was the guy who called gold a "barbarous relic" and semi-facetiously to have pay some workers to bury bottles filled with money and then have others dig it up and keep it for themselves. No way either of these 2 could have proposed that. I can't imagine any serious economist making that proposition.  So I guess it's possible it was the brainchild of some gold bug.

Capital controls are often exercised in times of fiscal crisis but that's exactly the opposite.

This was a long time ago.  During discussions of various economic theory.  And way beyond your or my grasp of these theories.  Sorry I brought it up...

[Usernames]

On 12/15/2016 at 11:26 AM, geriatrickid said:

Remember the old saying from WWII about "Loose lips sink ships"? Well,  our irascible bull in a china shop  has done it again;

 

Shares of U.S. automakers General Motors Co and Ford Motor Co skidded on Wednesday after a Chinese official warned the government could slap a penalty on an unnamed U.S. automaker for monopolistic behavior.

The warning from a senior Chinese state planning official, conveyed through the official China Daily newspaper on Wednesday, came days after U.S. President-elect Donald Trump questioned the longstanding U.S. policy of acknowledging that Taiwan is part of "one China."

Chinese officials had been investigating the pricing practices of automakers prior to Trump's comments, sources said.

http://www.reuters.com/article/us-china-autos-penalty-idUSKBN143014

 

His supporters who work at GM & Ford must be thrilled............

 

 

 

Probably the ones in China will be hurt, not those in America.  " GM has 11 joint ventures, two wholly owned foreign enterprises and more than 58,000 employees in China." http://media.gm.com/media/cn/en/gm/news.detail.html/content/Pages/news/cn/en/2016/November/1104_sales.html

[Usernames]

On 12/15/2016 at 0:05 PM, billd766 said:

 

And what will the USA do if China calls back its $3 trillion?

 

What will Trump do as POTUS if China shuts down Trump industries in China?

 

Better question is: what will China do if the US refuses to pay its $3 trillion or inflates it to the point of uselessness?  The person who OWES the money is the one who is in charge.

[billd766]

59 minutes ago, Usernames said:

 

Better question is: what will China do if the US refuses to pay its $3 trillion or inflates it to the point of uselessness?  The person who OWES the money is the one who is in charge.

 

IMO if the US does that they may well find that ALL their bills called in in many other countries and the USD will no longer be a world reserve currency and that their money will no longer be trusted across the world.

[Usernames]

46 minutes ago, billd766 said:

 

IMO if the US does that they may well find that ALL their bills called in in many other countries and the USD will no longer be a world reserve currency and that their money will no longer be trusted across the world.

 

Because the Euro will be the reserve currency, right?  If it still exists.

[Srikcir]

On 12/15/2016 at 0:05 PM, billd766 said:

what will the USA do if China calls back its $3 trillion?

As long as the USA meets its bond payment obligations - nothing.

China cannot call its US bond holdings due except according to the bond payment terms.

China can stop buying new US bond issues but it will risk devaluation of its foreign reserves that in turn can suppress its yuan value. 

Incidentally, Japan has now become the largest foreign owner of US treasury bonds.

[ilostmypassword]

4 hours ago, Usernames said:

 

Better question is: what will China do if the US refuses to pay its $3 trillion or inflates it to the point of uselessness?  The person who OWES the money is the one who is in charge.

.Where did you get that 3 trillion figure from. China has been selling of Treasury bonds, notes and bills for quite a while now. The last estimate I saw was about 1.24 trillion.

[Usernames]

33 minutes ago, ilostmypassword said:

.Where did you get that 3 trillion figure from. China has been selling of Treasury bonds, notes and bills for quite a while now. The last estimate I saw was about 1.24 trillion.

 

Follow the quote thread. It was a reply to a quote from another poster.

[metisdead]

Off topic posts and replies about the war in Iraq have been removed. 

[ilostmypassword]

21 minutes ago, Usernames said:

 

Follow the quote thread. It was a reply to a quote from another poster.

But you did accept it as being true.

[Srikcir]

52 minutes ago, ilostmypassword said:

.Where did you get that 3 trillion figure from. China has been selling of Treasury bonds, notes and bills for quite a while now. The last estimate I saw was about 1.24 trillion.

China now holds $1.12 trillion following behind Japan with $1.13 trillion.

Of total US debt at $19.8 trillion, total foreign holdings have fallen in the last four months to $6.04 trillion.

http://abcnews.go.com/Business/wireStory/japan-tops-china-largest-holder-us-treasury-debt-44221645