SI
SI
discoversearch

We've detected that you're using an ad content blocking browser plug-in or feature. Ads provide a critical source of revenue to the continued operation of Silicon Investor.  We ask that you disable ad blocking while on Silicon Investor in the best interests of our community.  If you are not using an ad blocker but are still receiving this message, make sure your browser's tracking protection is set to the 'standard' level.
Strategies & Market Trends : 2026 TeoTwawKi ... 2032 Darkest Interregnum -- Ignore unavailable to you. Want to Upgrade?


To: ggersh who wrote (148763)5/27/2019 7:16:48 PM
From: TobagoJack1 Recommendation

Recommended By
Arran Yuan

  Respond to of 217773
 
Take I ...

Message 32134163

April 29, 2019

America's False Narrative on China
By Stephen Roach

NEW HAVEN — In a rare moment of bipartisan agreement, America’s Republicans and Democrats are now on the same page on one key issue: Blaming China for all that ails the United States. China bashing has never had greater appeal.

This fixation on China as an existential threat to the cherished American Dream is having serious consequences. It has led to tit-for-tat tariffs, escalating security threats, warnings of a new cold war, and even whispers of a military clash between the rising power and the incumbent global hegemon.

With a trade deal apparently imminent, it’s tempting to conclude that all this will pass. That may be wishful thinking. Sino-American trust is now in tatters. The likelihood of a superficial deal won't change that. A new era of mutual suspicion, tension, and conflict is a very real possibility.

But what if the US chattering class has it all wrong and the China-bashing is more an outgrowth of domestic problems than a response to a genuine external threat? In fact, there are strong grounds to believe that an insecure US — afflicted with macroeconomic imbalances of its own making and fearful of the consequences of its own retreat from global leadership — has embraced a false narrative on China.

Consider trade. In 2018, the US had a $419 billion merchandise trade deficit with China, fully 48% of the massive overall trade gap of $879 billion. This is the lightening rod in the debate, the culprit behind what US President Donald Trump calls the “carnage” of job losses and wage pressures.

But what Trump – and most other US politicians – won’t admit is that the US ran trade deficits with 102 countries in 2018. This reflects a profound shortfall of domestic saving, owing in large part to the reckless budget deficits approved by none other than Congress and the president. Nor is there any recognition of supply-chain distortions – arising from inputs made in other countries but assembled and shipped from China – that are estimated to overstate the US-China trade imbalance by as much as 35-40%. Never mind basic macroeconomics and new efficiencies from global production platforms that benefit US consumers. Apparently, it is much easier to vilify China as the major obstacle to making America great again.

Next, consider intellectual property theft. It is now accepted “truth” that China is stealing hundreds of billions of dollars of US intellectual property each year, driving a stake into the heart of America’s innovative prowess. According to the accepted source of this claim, the so-called IP Commission, in 2017 IP theft cost the US economy between $225 and $600 billion annually.

Leaving aside the ridiculously broad range of such an estimate, the figures rest on flimsy evidence derived from dubious “proxy modeling” that attempt to value stolen trade secrets via nefarious activities such as narcotics trafficking, corruption, occupational fraud, and illicit financial flows. The Chinese piece of this alleged theft comes from US Customs and Border Patrol data, which reported $1.35 billion in seizures of total counterfeit and pirated goods back in 2015. Equally dubious models extrapolate this tiny sum into an aggregate guestimate for the US and impute 87% of the total to China (52% to the mainland and 35% to Hong Kong). And they call this evidence!

Then there is the red herring emphasized in the Section 301 report published by the US Trade Representative (USTR) in March 2018, which provides the foundational justification for tariffs levied on China: forced technology transfer between US companies and their Chinese joint venture (JV) partners. The key word is “forced,” which implies that innocent US companies that enter willingly into contractual agreements with Chinese counterparts are coerced into surrendering their proprietary technologies in order to do business in the country.

To be sure, JVs obviously entail a sharing of people, business strategies, operating platforms, and product designs. But the charge is coercion, which is inseparable from the presumption that sophisticated US multinationals are dumb enough to turn over core proprietary technologies to their Chinese partners.

This is another shocking example of soft evidence for a hard allegation. Incredibly, the USTR actually admits in the Section 301 report (on page 19) that there is no hard evidence to confirm these “implicit practices.” Like the IP Commission, the USTR relies instead on proxy surveys from trade organizations like the US-China Business Council, whose respondents complain of some discomfort with China’s treatment of their technology.

The Washington narrative also paints a picture of China as a centrally planned behemoth sitting astride massive stated-owned enterprises (SOEs) that enjoy preferential credits, unfair subsidies, and incentives tied to high-profile industrial policies such as Made in China 2025 and Artificial Intelligence 2030. Never mind a large body of evidence that underscores the low-efficiency, low-return characteristics of China’s SOEs.

Nor is there any doubt that comparable industrial policies have long been practiced by Japan, Germany, France, and even the US. In fact, in February, Trump issued an executive order announcing the establishment of an AI Initiative, complete with a framework to develop an AI action plan within 120 days. China is hardly alone in elevating innovation to a national policy priority.

Finally, there is the time-worn issue of Chinese currency manipulation — the fear that China will deliberately depress the renminbi to gain unfair competitive advantage. Yet its broad trade-weighted currency has risen over 50% in real terms since late 2004. And China’s once-outsize current-account surplus has all but vanished. Still, the currency grievances of yesteryear live on, getting prominent attention in the current negotiations. This only compounds the false narrative.

All in all, Washington has been loose with facts, analysis, and conclusions, and the American public has been far too gullible in its acceptance of this false narrative. The point is not to deny China’s role in promoting economic tensions with the US, but to stress the need for objectivity and honesty in assigning blame – especially with so much at stake in the current conflict. Sadly, fixating on scapegoats is apparently much easier than taking a long, hard look in the mirror.



To: ggersh who wrote (148763)5/27/2019 7:16:55 PM
From: TobagoJack2 Recommendations

Recommended By
Arran Yuan
arun gera

  Read Replies (2) | Respond to of 217773
 
Take II ...

edition-m.cnn.com

China is not the source of our economic problems -- corporate greed is

(CNN) — China is not an enemy. It is a nation trying to raise its living standards through education, international trade, infrastructure investment, and improved technologies. In short, it is doing what any country should do when confronted with the historical reality of being poor and far behind more powerful countries. Yet the Trump administration is now aiming to stop China's development, which could prove to be disastrous for both the United States and the entire world.


Jeffrey Sachs

China is being made a scapegoat for rising inequality in the United States. While US trade relations with China have been mutually beneficial over the years, some US workers have been left behind, notably Midwestern factory workers facing competition due to rising productivity and comparatively low (though rising) labor costs in China. Instead of blaming China for this normal phenomenon of market competition, we should be taxing the soaring corporate profits of our own multinational corporations and using the revenues to help working-class households, rebuild crumbling infrastructure, promote new job skills and invest in cutting-edge science and technology.

We should understand that China is merely trying to make up for lost time after a very long period of geopolitical setbacks and related economic failures. Here is important historical background that is useful to understand China's economic development in the past 40 years.

In 1839, Britain attacked China because it refused to allow British traders to continue providing Chinese people with addictive opium. Britain prevailed, and the humiliation of China's defeat in the First Opium War, ending in 1842, contributed in part to a mass uprising against the Qing Dynasty called the Taiping Rebellion that ended up causing more than 20 million deaths. A Second Opium War against Britain and France ultimately led to the continued erosion of China's power and internal stability.
Toward the end of the 19th century, China lost a war to the newly industrializing Japan, and was subjected to yet more one-sided demands by Europe and the United States for trade. These humiliations led to another rebellion, followed by yet another defeat, at the hands of foreign powers.
China's Qing Dynasty fell in 1911, after which China quickly succumbed to warlords, internal strife and Japan's invasion of China beginning in 1931. The end of World War II was followed by civil war, the creation of the People's Republic of China in 1949 and then the upheavals of Maoism, including millions of deaths from famine in the Great Leap Forward, which ended in the early 1960s, and the mass destabilization of the Cultural Revolution and its aftermath until 1977.
China's rapid development on a market basis therefore started only in 1978, when Deng Xiaoping came to power and launched sweeping economic reforms. While China has seen incredible growth in the past four decades, the legacy of more than a century of poverty, instability, invasion and foreign threats still looms large. Chinese leaders would like to get things right this time, and that means they are unwilling to bow to the United States or other Western powers again.

China is now the second-largest economy in the world, when GDP is measured at market prices. Yet it is a country still in the process of catching up from poverty. In 1980, according to IMF data, China's GDP per capita was a mere 2.5% of the United States, and by 2018 had reached only 15.3% of the US level. When GDP is measured in purchasing-power-parity terms, by using a common set of "international prices" to value GDP in all countries, China's income per capita in 2018 was a bit higher at 28.9% of the United States.
China has roughly followed the same development strategy as Japan, Korea, Taiwan, Hong Kong and Singapore before it. From an economic standpoint, it is not doing anything particularly unusual for a country that is playing catch up.The constant US refrain that China "steals" technologies is highly simplistic.

Countries that are lagging behind upgrade their technologies in many ways, through study, imitation, purchases, mergers, foreign investments, extensive use of off-patent knowledge and, yes, copying. And with any fast-changing technologies, there are always running battles over intellectual property. That's true even among US companies today -- this kind of competition is simply a part of the global economic system. Technology leaders know they shouldn't count on keeping their lead through protection, but through continued innovation.

The United States relentlessly adopted British technologies in the early 19th century. And when any country wants to close a technology gap, it recruits know-how from abroad. The US ballistic missile program, as it is well known, was built with the help of former Nazi rocket scientists recruited to the United States after World War II.
If China were a less populous Asian country, say like South Korea, with a little more than 50 million people, it would simply be hailed by the United States as a great development success story -- which it is. But because it is so big, China refutes America's pretensions to run the world. The United States, after all, is a mere 4.2% of the world's population, less than a fourth of China's. The truth is that neither country is in a position to dominate the world today, as technologies and know-how are spreading more quickly across the globe than ever before.

Trade with China provides the United States with low-cost consumer goods and increasingly high-quality products. It also causes job losses in sectors such as manufacturing that compete directly with China. That is how trade works. To accuse China of unfairness in this is wrong -- plenty of American companies have reaped the benefits of manufacturing in China or exporting goods there. And US consumers enjoy higher living standards as a result of China's low-cost goods. The US and China should continue to negotiate and develop improved rules for bilateral and multilateral trade instead of stoking a trade war with one-sided threats and over-the-top accusations.

The most basic lesson of trade theory, practice and policy is not to stop trade -- which would lead to falling living standards, economic crisis and conflict. Instead, we should share the benefits of economic growth so that the winners who benefit compensate the losers.

Yet under American capitalism, which has long strayed from the cooperative spirit of the New Deal era, today's winners flat-out reject sharing their winnings. As a result of this lack of sharing, American politics are fraught with conflicts over trade. Greed comprehensively dominates Washington policies.

The real battle is not with China but with America's own giant companies, many of which are raking in fortunes while failing to pay their own workers decent wages. America's business leaders and the mega-rich push for tax cuts, more monopoly power and offshoring -- anything to make a bigger profit -- while rejecting any policies to make American society fairer.

Trump is lashing out against China, ostensibly believing that it will once again bow to a Western power. It is willfully trying to crush successful companies like Huawei by changing the rules of international trade abruptly and unilaterally. China has been playing by Western rules for the past 40 years, gradually catching up the way that America's Asian allies did in the past. Now the United States is trying to pull the rug out from under China by launching a new Cold War.
Unless some greater wisdom prevails, we could spin toward conflict with China, first economically, then geopolitically and militarily, with utter disaster for all. There will be no winners in such a conflict. Yet such is the profound shallowness and corruption of US politics today that we are on such a path.

A trade war with China won't solve our economic problems. Instead we need homegrown solutions: affordable health care, better schools, modernized infrastructure, higher minimum wages and a crackdown on corporate greed. In the process, we would also learn that we have far more to gain through cooperation with China rather than reckless and unfair provocation.



To: ggersh who wrote (148763)5/27/2019 7:25:40 PM
From: TobagoJack  Read Replies (1) | Respond to of 217773
 
Take III

... let us see if folks who otherwise would disagree violent w/ Potus Trump, mandated by an d for the people, can be correct in championing his prime directive mission, overarching goals, important objectives, and whether MAGA can happen by wrench-working the fear works of civilisation building.

... let us see whether fables are correct, that the good guys win at the end

... would say whatever else the trump, he has exposed the domestic and international deep-states to sunshine, and energised the global rebellion

... as I noted often and earlier, it is way to early to judge the effects of the trump presidency, and as I had also noted, am enthusiastic, especially for 2020 revelation

... must take the bad w/ the good and make best of the situation whilst enthusiastically enjoying the ride, is the way to go go go

I do not see any opposition to trump who can deliver the same effects



To: ggersh who wrote (148763)5/27/2019 7:38:07 PM
From: TobagoJack  Read Replies (1) | Respond to of 217773
 
Take IV ...

The article below speaks of a legislation as if it is something new, whereas the truth of the matter is that it was discussed and passed a whole lot of years ago but due to opposition by global every busybody was held off from implementation, and now, open the drawer and no one can complain w/o blushing

the implementation, by championing open-source, should lead to eventual destruction of a lot of software companies of the old imperial / proprietary model

consumers can look forward to a lot of free stuff

zerohedge.com

"This Is A Major Move For China": Beijing Prepares Cyberscurity Rule In Retaliation Against US

While China is still debating whether or not to implement rare-earth quotas or use any of the other "nuclear options" it has available in response to escalating trade and tech war, the Global Times reports that a new cybersecurity rule indicates possible retaliation against the US as it could set the stage for Chinese regulators to take necessary action against US technology companies if their products and services are found to pose a threat to China's national security, the Global Times reported overnight.



Under the draft regulation, which is a direct response to rising pressure on Huawei by the US and various other nations and which was released on Friday for public comment, companies involved in key information infrastructure would face cybersecurity reviews by regulators, if they acquired internet products and services.

In what is China's response to America's Committee on Foreign Investment in the United States, or CFIUS, nearly a dozen government agencies, including the National Development and Reform Commission, the Ministry of Public Security and the Ministry of Commerce, will set up a mechanism for cybersecurity reviews and the CAC will set up an office to coordinate the efforts.

If acquisitions of products and services could cause disruption to key information infrastructure, or major losses of personal information and important data, or pose other security risks, they must be reported to the CAC's cybersecurity review office.

"This is a very major move for China to step up its efforts in protecting its cyberspace security," Xiang Ligang, director-general of the Beijing-based Information Consumption Alliance, told the Global Times on Sunday. "Establishing an effective cybersecurity review mechanism is very important for the country," he said, a hint that since the US will block Chinese acquisitions, Beijing will do the same although it's not quite clear how China - a crhonic thief of offshore technology will benefit from this.

In 2016, China adopted a cybersecurity law that paid great attention to protection of national security and privacy and offered great leeway for security officials and regulators to conduct oversight of the country's massive internet sector. The latest draft regulations are aimed at improving enforcement of those laws, Xiang said.

But the timing of the new regulation has also gained much attention and even speculation that China could retaliate against the US crackdown on Chinese tech giant Huawei by also using national security reviews.

"[The Huawei case and the new regulations are not inherently] related but I think this also gives officials a direct tool to investigate US companies if they pose cybersecurity risks," Xiang said. "If [the US] can conduct reviews of Chinese companies on the grounds of national security, so can China. That's beyond reproach."

Amid the US crackdown on Huawei, Chinese officials have repeatedly criticized what they call US officials' abuse of the national security review process to target Chinese tech companies, and they have vowed to take necessary measures to protect the legitimate rights and interests of Chinese companies. And yet, as noted above, it is unclear how China's blocking of foreign investment on the mainland - a critical cog of China's relentless directive to reverse engineer and steal every foreign technology it has access to - will benefit Beijing's aspirations to supplant the US over the next decade.