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: Snowshoe who wrote (164365)10/27/2020 6:17:13 AM
From: TobagoJack  Respond to of 217734
 
Given that my cost basis is $ 1.015 without considering the premium rebate of $0.80, and my previous gains sum to $0.42/share, should I lose, only reducing overall campaign profit, and should I win, meaning should Trump win, meaning the shares are called, overall campaign gain rises to 0.80 + 0.42 per share, and we again go go go (actually must go go go the minute trump wins 3rd November 2020 as opposed to waiting for option expiration 19 feb 2021.

NAK is almost as much fun as TSLA :0) except that TSLA allows for much greater stake sizing.

Should Trump win, uncertainty of macro market removed, in that bipartisan work must happen to liquify the macro, gold bullish, and the imperative to mine Pebble becomes greater, w/ Rhenium as national security political cover, etc etc, is the logic

Maybe

All-in? no way :0)



To: Snowshoe who wrote (164365)10/27/2020 8:26:31 AM
From: TobagoJack  Read Replies (1) | Respond to of 217734
 
Something that says gold should rise as would bitcoin, at the margin

And pretty countrysides tee-ed up, as luxury of abeyance runs dry

But, yes, below are not salmon spawning grounds, and i cannot imagine cyanide and salmon go well together

However, because fiat money inflation runs, so does gold, and at some juncture, salmon is trumped as natural consequence of wastelism

In the meantime, must note, that the ‘blight’ of tailings is why we must express support for DRD, for it is in effect doing environmental remediation, by taking out the last bit of goodness and revert the sites to what was.

But campaigners continue to express concerns that chemicals could be washed into nearby rivers and harm local wildlife. Pollution from the mine could also negatively affect people’s health, they claim. And they also fear that a large heap of “tailings” – waste material extracted from the mine and left aboveground – would blight the area’s scenery.

bbc.com

Why it’s getting harder to mine gold



By Chris Baraniuk27th October 2020

The price of gold has rocketed during the pandemic, but mining it is getting more difficult. Chris Baraniuk reports on challenges and controversy at one of the UK’s biggest planned mines.

For 1,000 days, the caravan stood with banners and placards pinned to its side: “We are not afraid. This is our land. This is our home. We will die for it.” Irish flags flutter in the wind. This is the anti-gold mine protest site set up by a group of locals in County Tyrone, Northern Ireland.

With 460 million-year-old veins of gold strewn hither and thither in the rock deep underfoot, the prospect of a mine in Curraghinalt, in a remote corner of the Sperrin mountains, has been talked about for decades – but it has never yet materialised. A recent application by a mining company to extract the seams of precious metal, has brought the prospect closer still. If successful, the firm says it could bring new jobs and money to the area. But many here want to keep things the way they are.

“I devote all my time to this campaign, I just feel it’s our future,” says Fidelma O’Kane, a retired social worker and lecturer who is concerned about the potential environmental impacts of the mine.

“My main worry is that the water will be poisoned, the air will be poisoned, the land will be contaminated – and ultimately people’s health will suffer,” she adds, explaining that she would never accept a mine, of any kind, in this area.

The company hoping to extract precious metals here, Dalradian Gold, says that it has put in place a swathe of environmental safeguards, and promises several economic benefits for locals. Still, the online planning proposal for the mine has attracted tens of thousands of comments, mostly negative, and a public inquiry will now take place to decide what will happen next.



Some in the nearby settlement of Gortin have objected to the planned gold mine (Credit: Alamy)

Heralded by some as a potential boon for Northern Ireland, where jobs and investment opportunities stagnated during the 30-year period of conflict known as the Troubles, experts say Curraghinalt could become home to the largest gold mine in the UK, were it to go ahead.

The question now hovering over the rolling Sperrins is, what is more valuable: keeping the gold in the ground, or taking it out?

This query could hardly be voiced at a more pivotal moment. The price of gold rocketed during the pandemic, spurring renewed interest in excavation projects and even an illegal mining boom in parts of the Amazon rainforest. Yet gold is proving ever-more difficult to release from the ground. The technical challenges may be well known, but environmental protests and local politics are less predictable. At what point does mining gold stop being worth the effort?

You may also like:

The controversial plan to fill a mine with nuclear waste Inside the hunt for a million-dollar haul of ocean gold The gold mine at the end of the worldLast year, global gold production fell by 1%, the first decline in a decade, according to the World Gold Council, which promotes the gold industry. Some analysts argue we have reached “peak gold” – which means that the maximum rate of extraction has passed and the production of gold will continue to fall until, eventually, mining for it shall cease entirely.

However, demand for the stuff shows no sign of slowing down.

“It’s kind of a perfect storm,” says Matt Miller, vice president of equity research at CFRA Research, an investment analysis company. “Or, a better way to say it is, the fundamentals for gold may never be stronger than they are now.”

According to CFRA, about half of the world’s gold, excluding that still buried in the ground, is used in jewellery. As for the other half, one quarter is held by central banks and a final quarter is owned by private investors or used in industry.

Miller is among those who believe we have reached peak gold. The price of a single ounce of the glittering yellow metal breached $2,000 (£1,550) this summer and still rests comfortably above $1,900 (£1,470). Twenty years ago, the same ounce would sell for less than a quarter of that amount. The latest surge, following the emergence of Covid-19, has been linked to weakening currencies, including the US dollar. Governments are borrowing huge sums to pay for their pandemic response plans and printing money to fill the gap, say analysts, which means that the value of currency has become more volatile. Gold on the other hand is viewed as a stable asset, of which there are finite amounts, meaning that investors deem it trustworthy.



Questions and protests from some in the local Gortin community have led to a public inquiry (Credit: Alamy)

But Covid-19 has also caused disruption to gold mining operations themselves and supply is not likely to bounce up to meet rising demand any time soon. As such, the gold mining industry is actually sitting on the makings of a “major crisis”, argues Miller.

“My view is that gold demand will continue to trend upwards,” he says. “More and more of that is going to come from the recycling, which basically means that gold is trading hands.”

He predicts that recycling old jewellery, coins or even the seemingly miniscule amounts of gold in the circuit boards of electronic devices, will become an increasingly significant source of the metal in the future. CFRA’s data suggests that around 30% of the world’s gold supply in the past 20 years was actually recycled, not mined. Refineries that recycle “scrap” gold – old jewellery, coins and bars – do use toxic chemicals and energy in their processes, but some environmental impacts may be much lower than mining. One recent study of gold refineries in Germany found that, kilogram for kilogram, the production of 99.99% pure gold via recycling was 300 times less carbon intensive than mining it from underground or open pit mines.

This means that obtaining one kilogram of recycled gold would produce 53kg of CO2 equivalent – but to mine a kilogram of the same material would cause 16 tonnes of CO2 equivalent to be emitted. Recycling scrap gold from electronics fell in between the two but was still better than mining – at one tonne of CO2 equivalent for every kilogram of gold turned out.

Like any large-scale industrial operation, gold mining can also have local effects on the environment. Public opposition to gold mines in some parts of the world has become a barrier to gold production, says Miller. Such resistance does not only exist in Tyrone. Take the Pascua-Lama mine in Chile, for instance. After years of protests from local activists on environmental grounds, the project was halted by regulators.



Gold is in high demand, but supply from mines is dwindling (Credit: Charles O'Rear/Getty Images)

But where gold mines have become established, they can become giant operations. The world’s largest produce many tonnes of gold annually and the biggest of them all, Nevada Gold Mine in the US, churns out more than 100 tonnes every year. Even smaller gold mines can support the livelihoods of many people within the communities that bloom around them. Take the city of Val d’Or (Valley of Gold) in Quebec, Canada. There’s been a town there ever since gold was discovered in 1923. Various other metals including copper and lead are now also extracted in the area and a surplus of mining jobs has attracted people to Val d’Or in recent years. The town’s ice hockey team, the Foreurs, even has a mascot with a hard hat named “Dynamit” – a reference to the dynamite used to blast away rock in mining.

Political barriers

As for Curraghinalt, it was bloodshed that kept the gold in the ground for many years. During the Troubles, several political and sectarian groups in Northern Ireland turned to violence, carrying out shootings and bombings, for example. So when one company eyed the potential for a mine at Curraghinalt in the 1980s, it struggled to obtain a permit for explosives, given the security risks of keeping them on-site at the time.

But a decade later, Curraghinalt seemed to promise a more hopeful future, remembers Adrian Boyce, professor of applied geology at Scottish Universities Environmental Research Centre. Around the time of the Good Friday Agreement (the political accord signed in April 1998 that helped bring an end to the Troubles), Boyce and colleagues took part in an initiative to study the geology of Curraghinalt and assess its commercial potential.

“It was really a fresh hope for the people of Northern Ireland and that’s the impact that I saw for it,” he recalls. “At a time when, you know, not a lot of people were investing in Northern Ireland.”

He mentions the Omagh bombing, in which a group calling itself the Real IRA detonated a car bomb on a Saturday afternoon in August 1998, killing 29 people, including a woman who was pregnant with twins. Omagh is a 20-minute drive from Curraghinalt. In the minds of some, the economic opportunities of a brand new gold mine offered Northern Ireland a chance to escape the horrors of the past – and still offers the local area economic hope for the future.



After protestors objected to Dalradian's proposed use of cyanide, the company dropped that plan (Credit: Alamy)

Back in the 1990s, it was the price of gold that ultimately stymied the mine’s prospects, says Boyce. But that is no barrier now. And, he says, the size of the mine – Dalradian estimates it could produce 130,000 ounces (4 tonnes) annually for 20 years or more – makes it unique in the UK.

“For gold, Curraghinalt is far and away the biggest gold mine that’s ever been found in the UK,” says Boyce. “It dwarfs everything else.”

Yet the story of Curraghinalt speaks to the challenges of industrial gold mining in 2020, especially when operating near existing communities in an area of natural beauty. The mine is situated in a fairly remote part of Northern Ireland surrounded by farms and wilderness. Omagh, for instance, has a population of fewer than 20,000 people.

Since 2009, Dalradian has been excavating samples from below ground at its site in Curraghinalt while promoting plans for the mine to locals. The proposals include building an underground mine, rather than an open pit-style project, and extracting ore that would be processed partly in Tyrone, partly overseas.

Following fierce opposition, in 2019 Dalradian dropped its plan to use cyanide at the site. In some gold mining operations, solutions containing cyanide are used to dissolve gold from ore mined out of the ground so that the metal can be extracted and collected. Dalradian also says it has reduced water usage by 30% and gas emissions by 25% as part of its aim to become Europe’s first carbon neutral mine.

But campaigners continue to express concerns that chemicals could be washed into nearby rivers and harm local wildlife. Pollution from the mine could also negatively affect people’s health, they claim. And they also fear that a large heap of “tailings” – waste material extracted from the mine and left aboveground – would blight the area’s scenery.

BBC Future had arranged to tour Dalradian’s site in Tyrone but the company cancelled the visit two days before it was due to take place without explanation.

In a statement, a spokesman for Dalradian said: “This is a safe and environmentally responsible project which will emulate the successes of other modern mines in Europe.”

The company says it has listened to the community, offering tours and changing its mining processes when concerns were raised.

“People can also be assured that the project is being scrutinised by an independent, robust planning process and that it has been designed to meet exacting standards. We’ve held around 100 meetings with regulators so far and the local Public Health Agency has made no objection to the project on public health grounds."

And regarding the tailings: “The dry stack will have an average thickness of 17m (56 feet), will be replanted during operations, is located in a natural hollow and will be blended into the local landscape.”



Human activity in the Sperrins dates back thousands of years (Credit: Alamy)

In a recent application for permission to discharge materials including heavy metals into a nearby stream, Dalradian also mentioned corrosive substances such as sulphuric acid and sodium hydroxide. On this point, the spokesman said, “Although it’s not expected that they will be used routinely, as they will be stored on-site they must be listed in the discharge consent.”

A treatment plant would be used for water management, he added, and noted that the mine offered a “massive opportunity” at a time when Northern Ireland’s economy faced uncertainty over Brexit.

While campaigners like O’Kane say they will not accept the mine under any circumstances, there are certainly some who would. It is difficult to get a sense of exactly how many in Tyrone are for or against. The Northern Ireland Department for Infrastructure planning portal contains more than 41,000 public comments about Dalradian’s proposals, more than 90% of which are objections. When asked by BBC Future why many of these responses appeared to be duplicates, the department said it believed the figures were an “accurate summary” of representations received.

Duplicates can arise for a number of reasons, a spokesman said: “They can relate to individuals making a representation on more than one occasion given there has been various amendments to the proposal.”

With a public inquiry now looming over the plans, it’s up to the authorities to investigate and represent the interests of local people before coming to a decision about whether the works ought to go ahead, suggests Boyce. “Let the politicians do what politicians are paid to do,” he adds.

In recent years, across the Irish Sea in Scotland, local objections were raised over plans for a different mine, at Cononish, in Loch Lomond National Park. Boyce notes that environmental concerns were voiced there, too, but ultimately the project gained support and was granted planning permission. The first gold from the mine could be produced as early as November.

A mine at Curraghinalt that proved to be productive would certainly attract interest from investors, argues Chris Mancini, a research analyst at Gabelli Gold Fund, which invests in gold. And he argues that it would be safe, environmentally speaking.

But it won’t do for some. For Fidelma O’Kane and her fellow campaigners, the mine has become anathema – a threat to the very character of the place where they live.

“The area is a beautiful area, it’s designated an Area of Outstanding Natural Beauty,” insists O’Kane. “We don’t want it industrialised with heavy industry.

“The clean, green image of our country would be gone forever.”

Whatever happens next at Curraghinalt, there’s no doubt that Dalradian’s efforts have sparked many discussions locally about what people would be willing to accept. It’s the sort of debate that could well become more common if the price of gold remains high and companies seek out small but nonetheless lucrative gold deposits in places that may have little or no tradition of gold mining.

Then again, if we really have reached peak gold, the rush might not last very long.

--

Join one million Future fans by liking us on Facebook, or follow us on Twitter or Instagram.

If you liked this story, sign up for the weekly bbc.com features newsletter, called “The Essential List”. A handpicked selection of stories from BBC Future, Culture, Worklife, and Travel, delivered to your inbox every Friday.



To: Snowshoe who wrote (164365)10/27/2020 11:55:58 PM
From: TobagoJack1 Recommendation

Recommended By
marcher

  Read Replies (2) | Respond to of 217734
 
I will go out on limb and conclude Amazon is evil, but for the fact it is certainly convenient

If I were Barak, would organise crowd-funding and take a go at Amazon jugular

bloomberg.com

After Going All-In on Amazon, a Merchant Says He Lost Everything

Barak Govani says he was kicked off the site after being falsely accused of selling fakes. Accounts like his prompted a House panel to accuse Amazon of mistreating its merchants.

Spencer Soper
27 October 2020, 18:00 GMT+8



Barak Govani received a total of 11 emails from Amazon each giving him different dates at which time his inventory would be destroyed if he hadn’t removed it.

Photographer: Maggie Shannon/Bloomberg

Barak Govani made a big bet on Amazon.com Inc. earlier this year that he now regrets. He shuttered his New York Speed clothing store on Los Angeles’s storied Melrose Avenue, packed up $1.5 million in inventory and shipped it to Amazon warehouses around the country, putting his fate in the hands of a company that has routinely presented itself to the world as a friend of small business.

Today, the 41-year-old retail veteran is broke and couch surfs between his mother’s home and his sister’s place. Govani hopes to start anew by getting Amazon to pay him for inventory the company destroyed after suggesting his products could be fake—an accusation Govani strenuously denies. His lawyer in September sent a demand for $800,000—along with invoices to verify his merchandise came directly from fashion brands—and they’re waiting for Amazon’s response.

“All my life, I’d wake up at 5:30 a.m. and work 40, 50, 60 hours each week,” Govani said. “That inventory was everything I had. Amazon ruined my life, and I did nothing wrong.”

Amazon has become the world’s largest e-commerce company in large part thanks to the millions of third-party merchants who have chosen to set up shop on its sprawling marketplace. Small- and medium-size businesses are responsible for more than half of the goods the company sells to customers around the world—moving 3.4 billion products alone in the year ending May 31. The average small business has annual sales of $160,000 on Amazon, up about 60% from the previous year.

In blogs and press releases, Amazon highlights the success of these merchants as a win-win—for them and itself. Lost in the public-relations glare are merchants like Govani.

Stories like his have swirled for years in online merchant forums and conferences. Amazon can suspend sellers at any time for any reason, cutting off their livelihoods and freezing their money for weeks or months. The merchants must navigate a largely automated, guilty-until-proven-innocent process where Amazon serves as judge and jury. Their emails and calls can go unanswered, or Amazon’s replies are incomprehensible, making sellers suspect they’re at the mercy of algorithms with little human oversight.

Recourse is limited because when merchants set up shop on Amazon, they waive their right to a day in court by agreeing to binding arbitration to resolve any disputes. Amazon doesn’t negotiate terms with merchants. The boiler plate agreement is take-it-or-leave-it, a telling reminder of who has the upper hand in the relationship.

How Amazon treats third-party sellers is at the heart of a recent House Judiciary Committee report concluding that big technology companies often abuse their power over smaller partners. The committee’s recommendations include providing adequate recourse to sellers and eliminating forced arbitration clauses from contracts that deprives them from filing a lawsuit.

“Because of the severe financial repercussions associated with suspension or delisting, many Amazon third-party sellers live in fear of the company,” the report states. “This is because Amazon’s internal dispute resolution system is characterized by uncertainty, unresponsiveness and opaque decision-making processes.”

In an emailed statement, an Amazon spokeswoman said the company works hard to ensure products sold on its site are authentic and provides a fair dispute resolution process.

‘Inauthentic’ ProductsGovani has been selling clothes for more than 20 years, mostly brands like Hugo Boss, Calvin Klein and Lucky. About a decade ago, he began supplementing his store sales by putting merchandise on web marketplaces including Amazon and EBay Inc. Amazon emerged as the most effective partner, accounting for more than 90% of his online sales.

Initially, Govani stored, packed and shipped all the orders himself, paying the company a commission on each sale. Amazon representatives suggested he try Fulfillment by Amazon, a service that handles that for additional fees. Govani decided to send all of his inventory to Amazon, becoming one of 450,000 businesses to try the service in the year ending May 31.



Barak Govani in front of his shuttered clothing store on Los Angeles’s storied Melrose Avenue.

Photographer: Maggie Shannon/Bloomberg

Govani’s problems began soon afterward. In April, Amazon emailed him to say his account was being reviewed based on four customer complaints over “inauthentic” products.

“In order to ensure that customers can shop with confidence on Amazon, we take ‘inauthentic’ complaints seriously,” the message said. “The sale of counterfeit products on Amazon is strictly prohibited.”

One complainant from San Rafael, California, was unhappy with the fit of a $125 Lucky Moto jacket and said she was “wondering if this was a fake.” Govani refunded her money and explained that jackets made with different materials fit differently.

Another shopper was upset that his Calvin Klein underpants arrived in a damaged carton. “Box is pretty much broken, the item is a knock off,” the shopper said in a product review. It’s not clear why Amazon characterized the other two complaints—about apparel wrapped in tissue paper and shipped in envelopes—as “inauthentic.”

Govani appealed the suspension and submitted invoices from the brands to Amazon. His invoices were more than a year old because that’s when he had purchased the inventory, but Amazon wanted invoices from the previous 365 days. Govani was notified that his inventory would be destroyed if he didn’t reclaim it by mid-July. Merchants must pay Amazon additional fees for inventory removal.

Hoping to have his account reinstated and continue selling on the site, Govani put off the decision. He was equal parts encouraged and confused by subsequent messages from Amazon saying his inventory was scheduled to be destroyed later in July and then in early August then in late August. He received a total of 11 emails from Amazon each giving him different dates at which time his inventory would be destroyed if he hadn’t removed it. He sought clarity from Amazon about the conflicting dates. When he tried to submit an inventory removal order through Amazon’s web portal, it wouldn’t let him.

The spokeswoman said Amazon repeatedly asked Govani to provide evidence that the products sold were authentic but that the invoices he sent were either illegible or didn’t match the records of the brand owners. “After being unable to resolve the matter following several appeals as part of our dispute resolution process, we informed this seller six separate times that they needed to remove their inventory from our store by specific dates or it would be destroyed,” she said. “The seller failed to request to remove their inventory by the dates provided.”

Emailing BezosAt the end of July, Govani sent a panicked email to Chief Executive Officer Jeff Bezos—the world’s wealthiest man—with the subject line: “URGENT: Invalid Disposal of $1.5 Million Worth of Inventory.” He exchanged emails with an Amazon representative named “Brigitte M.,” who promised to investigate.

“I haven’t been able to sleep for months now and I still do not know what Amazon is going to do that will determine my future,” Govani said in a final plea to Brigitte M. on July 31. “Amazon is in possession of my entire life’s hard work, closing my seller account with no valid reason that I understand and disposing of it! All of that without proper communication with me, not responding within a timely manner, responding without answering my questions or addressing the actual issue, being vague.”

Brigitte M. gave her final response on Aug. 3, reiterating that there was nothing else she could do. “I understand that you are disappointed with our previous response and we regret this inconvenience,” she wrote. “I’m sorry for any disappointment caused and appreciate your understanding. We won’t be able to comment further on this matter.”

Amazon has been more aggressive in using algorithms to knock suspected counterfeits off the site, and consultants say Govani’s experience is common. Chris McCabe, a former Amazonian who now helps merchants navigate the appeal process, says suspensions based on complaints about inauthentic products are rising and often lodged by rival merchants looking to sabotage a competitor.

“Numerous sellers find themselves appealing this endlessly only to hear that their invoices aren’t acceptable or their suppliers aren’t verifiable, but without any indication as to why,” said McCabe, who testified before the House panel. “Or they receive no reply.”

If Amazon declines to reimburse Govani for his inventory, his next step is binding arbitration, which the House panel said gives Amazon the upper hand in disputes. From 2014 to 2019, only 163 Amazon merchants initiated arbitration proceedings against the company because “sellers are generally aware that the process is unfair and unlikely to result in a meaningful remedy,” the report states.

“Arbitration functions as a way for Amazon to keep disputes within its control, with the scales tipped heavily in its favor,” the report’s authors wrote. “As such, Amazon can withhold payments from sellers, suspend their accounts without cause, and engage in other abusive behavior without facing any legal consequences for its actions.”

Govani’s attorney Mario Simonyan, who has represented other Amazon sellers in similar disputes, suspects the company will make a low-ball offer, forcing Govani to decide if he wants to pay for arbitration, which can cost tens of thousands of dollars.

Govani said he is eager to start a new business in an entirely new field—possibly construction—even though he spent his career in retail.

“I don’t want to go back to online retail even though it’s the only thing I’m good at,” Govani said. “I’m so scared to sell on Amazon. This has been traumatizing.”

Before it's here, it's on the Bloomberg Terminal.
LEARN MORE



To: Snowshoe who wrote (164365)10/28/2020 5:43:06 AM
From: TobagoJack  Respond to of 217734
 
This is one way that might or might not work, depending on what, if anything, Team China has on Hunter

bloomberg.com

This Is What Biden’s Said on Major U.S. Flashpoints With China



Joe Biden

Photographer: Drew Angerer/Getty ImagesMany questions remain unanswered on Huawei, TikTok and trade

While Joe Biden has spent much of the campaign criticizing U.S. President Donald Trump’s policies toward China, his own platform sounds more like a change of tactics than a strategy overhaul.

The former vice president -- a long-time member of a foreign policy establishment that advocated engagement with Beijing -- has shifted along with the rest of Washington toward a more confrontational tone during Trump’s term, denouncing Xi Jinping as a “thug.” Still, the Democratic nominee has faced few questions about how he would handle China more effectively than his Republican opponent.

What Biden has said so far points to a more multilateral approach that places greater emphasis on alliances and human rights and is less reliant on tariffs and arms sales. Here’s where he stands on some of the biggest flash points between the world’s two largest economies:

Trade, TariffsBiden has mocked Trump’s January trade deal with Xi as “hollow” and blamed the president’s tariffs for accelerating the decline in American manufacturing. But he hasn’t committed to either scrapping the pact or withdrawing the tariffs -- two key sources of leverage over China for the next administration.

“I will use tariffs when they are needed, but the difference between me and Trump is that I will have a strategy -- a plan -- to use those tariffs to win, not just to fake toughness.” -- Biden, in statement to United Steelworkers in May

Biden has pitched a $400 billion “ Buy American” plan to direct government purchases toward domestically made goods. He has also pledged to “unite the economic might of democracies around the world to counter abusive economic practices” -- something China’s critics in places like Brussels and Tokyo complained wasn’t possible under Trump’s “America First” policies.

A major question is whether Biden will seek to rejoin the Pacific trade pact many China hawks viewed as the best way to counter Beijing’s economic might before Trump withdrew from it as one of his first official actions. Biden supported the deal -- now known as the Comprehensive and Progressive Agreement for Trans-Pacific Partnership -- as part of former President Barack Obama’s administration, but said during a Democratic primary debate last year that he would insist on renegotiating “pieces” of the pact.

TikTok, HuaweiBiden has similarly promised a more global approach to countering the influence of Chinese technology companies such as Huawei Technologies Co. and TikTok-owner ByteDance Ltd. He acknowledged “genuine concern” about how TikTok handles data from its some 100 million American users, while faulting Trump for trying to make money off a deal to secure U.S. control over the social media network’s local business.

“God only knows what they’re doing with information they’re picking up off of here. So as president, I will go into it very deeply I’ll get the cyber-experts in with me to give me what is the best solution to deal with it.” -- Biden, during campaign stop in Duluth, Minnesota, in September

Biden said in February that he supported a ban on using Huawei equipment in the U.S., although he’s said little about whether he would continue the Trump administration’s “ Clean Network” program to convince allies to swear off Huawei products in critical communications networks. He has said he would work with“fellow democracies” to develop global rules on cybertheft, data privacy and artificial intelligence.

The former vice president pledged greater focus on issues such as intellectual property theft that took a back seat to agricultural purchases in Trump’s “phase one” trade deal. He has promised new sanctions against Chinese firms that steal U.S. technology and threatened to cut them off from accessing the U.S. market and financial system.

Rights, SanctionsAlthough the Trump administration has brought increased attention to China’s human rights practices, those efforts have often been undercut by reports of the president’s praise for Xi’s hard-line approach. Biden has vowed a more consistent message from the White House.

“I will put values back at the center of our foreign policy, including how we approach the U.S.-China relationship.” -- Biden, in a campaign statement in August

He has vowed to “fully enforce” the Hong Kong Human Rights and Democracy Act signed by Trump last year and meet with exiled Tibetan leader, the Dalai Lama, if elected. Biden has labeled China’s mass detention and re-education program for the Xinjiang region’s predominately Muslim Uighur minority as “genocide” and called for an international effort to make a united stand against the campaign.

The Democratic nominee said he would convene a “ Summit for Democracy” to reach new commitments to fight corruption and authoritarianism and advance human rights. That would include pressing technology companies to make pledges to “ensure their algorithms and platforms are not empowering the surveillance state, facilitating repression in China and elsewhere.”

Defense, TaiwanAs vice president, Biden was an advocate for Obama’s “pivot” to Asia. However, he’s unlikely to replace Trump’s “Indo-Pacific Strategy,” which focuses on drawing India into a broader coalition of democracies to help offset China’s regional weight.

Rather, Biden might seek to play down the military component of U.S. engagement in Asia, which under Trump has prioritized arms sales. The party platform approved during Democratic National Convention called for countering China “without resorting to self-defeating, unilateral tariff wars or falling into the trap of a new Cold War.”

“Democrats are committed to the Taiwan Relations Act and will continue to support a peaceful resolution of cross-strait issues consistent with the wishes and best interests of the people of Taiwan,” Democratic Party, in platform released in August

It’s unclear how Biden would approach Taiwan, whose president, Tsai Ing-wen, has received unprecedented support from Washington as Trump ramped up his attacks on China. While Tsai’s ruling Democratic Progressive Party has more in common with Biden’s left-leaning coalition on trade, environmental and social issues, the presidential contender has for decades advocated the “strategic ambiguity” sought to minimize the risk of a direct conflict with China over Taiwan.

— With assistance by Karen Leigh, and Colum Murphy

Sent from my iPhone



To: Snowshoe who wrote (164365)10/28/2020 5:50:23 AM
From: TobagoJack  Respond to of 217734
 
This is another way that might achieve stated objective of decoupling, but unclear what happens to Nasdaq should decoupling happens

A theory looking for an experiment, and a bubble search for a pin

(Dated article when there were more REE in the inventory pipeline the source of which starts in Yunnan and Guizhou provinces under command of Xi Jinping)
bloomberg.com

Trump’s 2016 China-Bashing Playbook Risks Flopping Against Biden

Jenny Leonard11 September 2020, 08:00 GMT+8
President says decoupling possible; record doesn’t back that

President Donald Trump is reviving his 2016 campaign playbook on attacking China, but running as the incumbent means defending a record of only limited success in rewriting the economic relationship with Beijing.

Much of what the Trump team has laid out in recent weeks sounds like campaign promises made four years ago: Stopping outsourcing and bringing manufacturing jobs back to the U.S., ending dependence on China for crucial inputs and supporting companies that make things in America.

“I have taken the toughest-ever action to stand up to China’s rampant theft of Michigan jobs,” Trump said in a tweet late Thursday. “Sleepy Joe Biden has vowed to remove those Tariffs and allow China to resume its pillaging. Joe Biden’s Agenda is Made in China, my agenda is Made in the USA!”

Yet, despite hundreds of billions of dollars in tariffs that the U.S. levied against China, sanctions imposed on Chinese officials and actions to restrict the Asian nation’s technology companies, the vast majority of American firms have no plans to pack up shop in China and come back to the U.S.

Read More:
Biden Offshore Tax Plan Unlikely to Renew Rust Belt Factories The Great Decoupling? What’s Next for U.S.-China Rift: QuickTake U.S. Businesses in China Not Heeding Trump’s Call to Return Home Dollar’s Dominance Gives U.S. Upper Hand in China Fight TikTok, Hong Kong and More U.S.-China Flashpoints: QuickTake

“There hasn’t been any kind of transformational shift on the part of multinational corporations away from China sourcing,” said Scott Paul, president of the Alliance for American Manufacturing, a non-partisan partnership formed by U.S. manufacturers and the United Steelworkers. “Is 3M still making respirators in China as well as the United States? Yes, they are. Does Apple have any plans to divest from China? Not that I’m aware of.”

Only about 4% of the more than 200 U.S. manufacturers surveyed by the American Chamber of Commerce in Shanghai said they will shift any production to the U.S., a report showed Wednesday. More than 75% said they don’t intend to move production out of China, while 14% said they will shift some operations to other countries.

In a separate U.S.-China Business Council survey, 87% of the more than 100 canvassed American companies said they have no plans to shift production out of the Asian nation, citing long-term confidence in that market.

‘Rampant’ CheatingWhile Trump’s campaign hasn’t offered much detail on how he would bring back jobs from China in a second term, it cites other actions -- such as tariffs on more than $300 billion of the country’s products -- as successes in dealing with what it terms “China’s rampant trade cheating.”

”The president has finally stood up to the Chinese Communist Party, the first American leader to do so,” Steve Cortes, a senior adviser to Trump’s campaign, said on a call with reporters Wednesday.

One area of limited success has been the partial trade agreement signed in January. In return for some U.S. tariff reprieve, Beijing committed to revamp its intellectual-property protections and to buy some $200 billion in additional U.S. exports over two years. While China is unlikely to reach the targets this year -- partially because the coronavirus pandemic upended demand and supply chains -- it has made record purchases of American beef and corn, and has reiterated its commitment to the agreement.

Even as Trump has continued to push American companies to stop investing in China, his so-called phase one deal opened up new opportunities for U.S. financial services and insurance firms that want to do business in the country.

‘Magic Bullet’Some experts cast doubt on Trump’s ability to move jobs to the U.S. given the track record of his first term.

“He had four years to make this happen,” said Wendy Cutler, vice president of the Asia Society Policy Institute and an acting deputy U.S. Trade Representative in the Obama administration. “There are no easy fixes. He broke the mold by using tariffs, thinking that would be the magic bullet.”

Still, Trump has continued to dial up the rhetoric as he tried to paint Democratic presidential nominee Joe Biden’s record as too cozy to Beijing.

“If Biden wins, China wins, because China will own this country,” he said during Labor Day remarks. Trump has also sought to shift blame for the virus, which has killed more than 189,000 Americans, to Beijing, regularly calling it the “China Virus.”



Meanwhile, Biden this week unveiled his plan to punish multinational corporations that outsource and said Trump broke his promise by failing to address the issue during his first term.

“Donald Trump makes a lot of promises. He promised that he alone could stop the offshoring in jobs,” Biden said outside a United Auto Workers union hall in Warren, Michigan, on Wednesday. “He’s hoping we just have poor memories.”

Biden’s plan to curb corporate offshoring and to renew domestic manufacturing may block companies from parking profits in tax havens, but may not do enough to make shuttered factories hum again. It uses a carrot-and-stick approach that raises taxes on a corporation’s foreign profits but rewards companies with tax incentives for moving jobs and investment back to the U.S.

If elected, Biden will review the Trump administration’s trade policy, he said in May, calling the incumbent’s approach to tariffs “shortsighted and destructive.”

Opinion PollsRecent opinion polls showed the two candidates are now tied on voters’ trust to handle the economy.

On Trump’s handling of China, 57% of respondents in a Gallup poll disapproved, compared with 40% who were in favor.

The president was on track to deliver an overall reduction in the merchandise-trade deficit with China until the pandemic hit that performance. Also, total trade between the two nations was steadily declining as tariffs took effect. And while employment in manufacturing climbed to a 12-year high in November last year, the pandemic has seen more than 700,000 jobs on factory floors disappear.

“When you look at the promises Trump made on transforming trade flows and boosting manufacturing jobs, he’ll have a hard time defending his own record,” Paul said.

— With assistance by Reade Pickert, Misyrlena Egkolfopoulou, and Vince Golle

Catch Up

2020 Election Updates:
Follow the Latest Developments

Sent from my iPhone



To: Snowshoe who wrote (164365)11/12/2020 10:38:57 PM
From: TobagoJack  Read Replies (1) | Respond to of 217734
 
Re <<Good luck with your trade! ;)>>



Looks like am on path to beat my last engagement w/ NAK when I extracted 48% within 60 days Message 32991982

The reengagement at 0.21 per share, if goings continue might score 400%, and allowing more bitcoins, which in turn would lead eventually to more gold Message 33003360

Bought NAK at 1.015 per share, and
Received rebates by way of short calls @ 0.40 per share
Received bonus wager credit by way of short puts @ 0.40 per share
So the net net plucking net of re-engagement was 0.21 per share


On an otherwise hokum day for gold, for NAK to go up on some volume, it is almost as if rhenium is looking good :0) or that the ballot count in Pa or wherever looking promising :0))

finance.yahoo.com