Page 8 of 34 FirstFirst 1234567891011121314151617 ... LastLast
Results 106 to 120 of 499

Thread: US Steel & Aluminum Tariffs

  1. #106
    Former Staff Senior Contributor Ironduke's Avatar
    Join Date
    02 Aug 03
    Location
    San Diego
    Posts
    11,822
    More here: https://www.cnbc.com/2018/04/07/us-f...war-fears.html

    US farmers in 'precarious position' with China as trade war fears escalate

    American farmers watched warily this week, as a tit-for-tat trade fight between the world's top two economic superpowers played out, threatening lucrative agricultural exports including soybeans.

    If China follows through on its plan to impose a 25 percent tariff on soybeans, it would make global suppliers like Brazil even more attractive to Chinese buyers. It also would encourage those suppliers to add more acres of soybeans, and then negatively impact the price American farmers can get for their crop.

    "Growing trade disputes have placed farmers and ranchers in a precarious position," Zippy Duvall, a Georgia farmer and president of the American Farm Bureau Federation said in a statement Friday. "We have bills to pay and debts we must settle, and cannot afford to lose any market, much less one as important as China's."
    What I don't want to see is the Bills winning a Super Bowl. As long as I'm alive that doesn't happen.

  2. #107
    Former Staff Senior Contributor Ironduke's Avatar
    Join Date
    02 Aug 03
    Location
    San Diego
    Posts
    11,822
    More here: https://www.bloomberg.com/view/artic...its-weaknesses

    China's Strengths in a Trade Spat Are Also Its Weaknesses

    For the first time since the Opium Wars of the 19th century, China's borders and territory are unchallenged. No conflict frays the country's edges. This stability has allowed for rapid industrialization, foreign investment and the rise of an urban Chinese middle class. Why would China jeopardize this in a trade spat with the U.S.?

    Hard-won political unity created the conditions in China for the reforms of the Deng Xiaoping era and the country's huge economic success. Those gains, in turn, make China confident and strengthen its hand in talks with the Trump administration that will ultimately come.

    The advances are also the biggest thing China has to lose. The stronger China's position, the more it has the scope -- and necessity -- to offer concessions to stave off a conflict.

    The conventional wisdom is that the U.S. has a lot to lose as President Donald Trump pressures Beijing with tariff threats and Beijing responds in kind. At the Harvard College China Forum this past weekend in Boston, speakers pointed out that China isn't entirely unassailable.

    China's current geographic security, especially in contrast to the past two tumultuous centuries, may offer a potential route out of a trade conflict that would injure both countries. After all, Beijing has a much greater strategic game to play: the Belt & Road Initiative. This trillion-dollar vision would open new connections to Asia, Europe and Africa, via railways, roads, ports and power grids.

    That sort of long-term investment is what political unity -- however it is garnered -- enables. In contrast, the U.S. looks more like a nation of divided tribes where decision making is increasingly messy.

    In particular, with almost two months until a proposed $50 billion of tariffs go into effect, American-based multinationals that anchor global supply chains can lobby to their heart's content. Keep at least one eye on Congress, which has ultimate authority over trade. Trade wars that hurt constituents are rarely loved on the Hill.

    The broadest measure of China's trade picture, the current-account surplus, is diminishing to the point of being almost negligible. It was about 1.3 percent of gross domestic product at the end of 2017. The country's economy is increasingly dominated by services, consumption and technology.

    Despite broadsides from the White House assailing China's predatory approach on technology and Beijing's defiance, their interests have already begun to align. Chinese companies overtook Japan last year as the world's second-largest filers of patents, according to the World Intellectual Property Organization. On current trends, it will overtake the U.S. within three years.

    China may then be looking for strong protection of intellectual property, according to Fred Hu, founder and chairman of Beijing-based Primavera Capital. One of Trump's central complaints about China is what the White House calls state-led efforts to coerce the transfer or even theft of intellectual property.
    What I don't want to see is the Bills winning a Super Bowl. As long as I'm alive that doesn't happen.

  3. #108
    Patron
    Join Date
    30 Jul 08
    Posts
    294
    Quote Originally Posted by DOR View Post
    The reverse engineered 707 example is on page 86 (third page of the pdf file), first paragraph. Not exactly as I remembered it
    https://www.princeton.edu/~ota/disk2/1987/8729/8729.PDF


    When I think of reverse engineering an aircraft I immediately think of the Soviet copy of the B29 ,the TU-4. The Soviets broke 1 of 3 B29s down to its individual component parts in order to duplicate it. China didn't do the same to a functioning 707, instead they got their hands on a crashed aircraft. If you look closely at the Y-10 and 707 there are numerous differences between the two the most obvious is the Y-10s distinct 'Antonov' nose. The Y-10 is based on the 707 but is not a reverse engineered copy.

    Glad you posted that PDF, it's an interesting read.

  4. #109
    Patron
    Join Date
    30 Jul 08
    Posts
    294
    Quote Originally Posted by hboGYT View Post
    Gun Boat, how do you know though. I know my brain has been conditioned to be credulous to information that suggest Chinese products are poorly regulated. That is my default position, but I don't actually have any facts to back it up. Do you?
    A business associate of mine opened up a manufacturing facility in China about 5 years ago. His company deal in tap ware and plumbing fittings at a fairly high volume. His production costs in China are 1/10 of what they would be in Australia. It's that bad.

  5. #110
    Senior Contributor DOR's Avatar
    Join Date
    08 Mar 11
    Location
    London
    Posts
    2,884

    Trumprotectionsim

    Fun items on the US hit-list:

    surgical catgut; deicing antifreeze; aircraft tires; and a slew of marine, aircraft, turbojet, reaction, hydraulic, hydrojet, pneumatic and turbine engines and parts.

    180 kinds of iron, steel, zinc, tin aluminum and other metals including iron or steel, nuts.

    88 chemicals, vaccines and drugs.

    nuclear reactors; Uranium depleted in U235; and X-ray tubes.

    dishwashers and clothes dryers; cash registers and chainsaws; non-recording cassette players and TVs incorporating VCRs (oh, how 1983!).

    golf carts and dirigibles.

    lasers, aircraft (or space) autopilots, artillery weapons (including both howitzers and mortars); rocket launchers; military rifles (yay!); bombs, grenades, torpedoes, mines, missiles and air combat ground flying simulators (we buy those from China?).

    and just about anything made by John Deere (sorry, farmers).
    Trust me?
    I'm an economist!

  6. #111
    Regular
    Join Date
    07 Jan 08
    Posts
    144
    Quote Originally Posted by Gun Boat View Post
    A business associate of mine opened up a manufacturing facility in China about 5 years ago. His company deal in tap ware and plumbing fittings at a fairly high volume. His production costs in China are 1/10 of what they would be in Australia. It's that bad.
    The evidence being anecdotal aside, that suggests it is cheap. How do you know it is due to poor regulations?

  7. #112
    Senior Contributor
    Join Date
    05 Sep 06
    Posts
    4,343
    Quote Originally Posted by DOR View Post
    and just about anything made by John Deere (sorry, farmers).
    John Deere only has subcompanies with factories in China, their product flows are mostly from Germany and India into the US (offhand about one-sixth of their revenue through such import).

  8. #113
    Senior Contributor DOR's Avatar
    Join Date
    08 Mar 11
    Location
    London
    Posts
    2,884
    Quote Originally Posted by kato View Post
    John Deere only has subcompanies with factories in China, their product flows are mostly from Germany and India into the US (offhand about one-sixth of their revenue through such import).
    So, the idiot is deliberately hitting Deere & Co?
    Trust me?
    I'm an economist!

  9. #114
    Senior Contributor DOR's Avatar
    Join Date
    08 Mar 11
    Location
    London
    Posts
    2,884

    China Targets American Farmers With Sorghum Surcharges

    Importers will be made to pay deposits worth 178.6% of the value of U.S. shipments of the grain
    Wall St Journal
    https://www.wsj.com/articles/china-t...ges-1523952633

    Today’s winner is . . . Nebraska!

    China imposes import duties on US sorghum (it’s a grain), and 39 of the 63 most sorghum dependent counties are in the Cornhusker State. The home of Kool-Aid, which voted 60:34 for The Trumpet’s protectionist policies, harvested 135,000 acres of sorghum last year worth $37 million. That’s peanuts compared to the state’s $2.95 billion soybean crop, which was also on the Chinese hit list.
    Trust me?
    I'm an economist!

  10. #115
    Patron
    Join Date
    30 Jul 08
    Posts
    294
    Quote Originally Posted by hboGYT View Post
    The evidence being anecdotal aside, that suggests it is cheap. How do you know it is due to poor regulations?
    Because China has poor regulation.

  11. #116
    Former Staff Senior Contributor Ironduke's Avatar
    Join Date
    02 Aug 03
    Location
    San Diego
    Posts
    11,822
    Quote Originally Posted by hboGYT View Post
    The evidence being anecdotal aside, that suggests it is cheap. How do you know it is due to poor regulations?
    Compliance with environmental regulations in Western countries is very expensive. China's paid for their industrialization the same we did 50 or 100 years ago. Severe ecological damage. In large parts of China, you breathe anything, touch anything, drink anything, swim in anything, you get cancer or some neurodegenerative disease.

    China's probably going to end up being a quadrillion-dollar Superfund site.
    Last edited by Ironduke; 18 Apr 18, at 02:13.
    What I don't want to see is the Bills winning a Super Bowl. As long as I'm alive that doesn't happen.

  12. #117
    Former Staff Senior Contributor Ironduke's Avatar
    Join Date
    02 Aug 03
    Location
    San Diego
    Posts
    11,822
    Qualcomm May Be Collateral Damage in a U.S.-China Trade War

    WASHINGTON — A looming trade war between the United States and China has put Qualcomm, one of America’s largest technology companies, squarely in the middle of the battlefield.

    A major supplier in both China and the United States, the San Diego-based chip maker has long managed to play the trading relationship between the world’s two largest economies to its advantage. But an escalating trade battle over which country will dominate the technologies of the future is now threatening Qualcomm’s business and its growth.

    On Monday, Qualcomm lost the ability to export semiconductors to one of its biggest customers after the United States banned Chinese telecom equipment maker ZTE Corporation from purchasing American technology for seven years.

    In China, Qualcomm’s plan to acquire NXP Semiconductors, a critical part of its growth strategy, has been stalled by a prolonged antitrust review, a move critics see as Chinese retaliation for President Trump’s aggressive trade moves. On Thursday, Chinese officials said that Qualcomm will have to make more concessions to compensate for the market power it would enjoy after completing the deal, without providing details.
    https://www.nytimes.com/2018/04/18/u...trade-war.html
    What I don't want to see is the Bills winning a Super Bowl. As long as I'm alive that doesn't happen.

  13. #118
    Former Staff Senior Contributor Ironduke's Avatar
    Join Date
    02 Aug 03
    Location
    San Diego
    Posts
    11,822
    More here: https://www.bloomberg.com/news/artic...ade-war-threat

    U.S. Hints at China Truce as World Warns of Trade-War Threat

    U.S. Treasury Secretary Steven Mnuchin said he’s considering a trip to China amid a trade dispute with Beijing that finance chiefs warn could derail the global economic upswing.

    Mnuchin said he’s “cautiously optimistic” of reaching an agreement with China that bridges their differences over trade.

    “A trip is under consideration,” Mnuchin told reporters on Saturday in Washington at the IMF’s spring meetings. “I’m not going to make a comment on timing, nor do I have anything confirmed.”

    China’s Ministry of Commerce said Sunday it is aware that the U.S. is considering a visit to Beijing to negotiate economic and trade issues and welcomes such a move.

    A visit by the U.S. Treasury secretary to China could signal a breakthrough in the spat between the world’s two-biggest economies, whose threats to slap tariffs on each other have rattled markets and raised fears of a trade war. It would come at a sensitive time for the region’s geopolitics, with negotiations under way on a planned meeting between President Donald Trump and North Korean leader Kim Jong-Un.

    Mnuchin’s remarks came as finance ministers and central bankers at the IMF meetings gave their latest economic assessments, often citing trade as a threat looming over the strongest upswing in seven years.

    Global growth has strengthened and is increasingly broad based, the IMF’s main advisory committee said Saturday. However, it noted that “rising financial vulnerabilities, increasing trade and geopolitical tensions, and historically high global debt threaten global growth prospects.”
    China Meeting

    IMF First Deputy Managing Director David Lipton summed up the main takeaway he heard from officials at the meetings this week as “time’s are good but it’s getting risky.”

    Mnuchin said he met with Yi Gang, governor of the People’s Bank of China, at the IMF gathering this week. The discussions focused on issues related to the Chinese central bank, not trade, said the secretary. Mnuchin said they also discussed China’s planned further opening of some markets, a move that U.S. has encouraged and “appreciated.”

    “China will vigorously push forward the reform and opening-up of the financial sector, significantly relax market access restrictions, create a more attractive investment environment, strengthen the protection of intellectual properties and actively expand imports,” Yi said in a statement on Saturday. China has announced plans to gradually remove foreign ownership caps for limits for car-, ship- and aircraft-makers.
    Sanctions Help

    Mnuchin said China has been “very helpful” in supporting U.S. sanctions against North Korea, and he welcomed Kim’s suspension of nuclear weapons testing that was announced the day earlier.

    “We are going to continue the sanctions” and a “maximum pressure” campaign until North Korea abandons its nuclear-weapons program in a verifiable way, he said.

    Mnuchin indicated he’s involved in a “dialogue” with the Chinese government to resolve the trade dispute. “We’re cautiously optimistic to see if we can try to reach an agreement,” he said.

    Tensions have been escalating as Trump accuses China of unfair trade and presses for a reduction in the the U.S.’s $375 billion trade deficit with the Asian nation. The president is threatening to impose tariffs on as much as $150 billion on Chinese imports to punish the nation for alleged intellectual property theft. If the U.S. follows through, China has vowed to impose retaliatory tariffs on everything from American airplanes to soybeans.
    What I don't want to see is the Bills winning a Super Bowl. As long as I'm alive that doesn't happen.

  14. #119
    Senior Contributor DOR's Avatar
    Join Date
    08 Mar 11
    Location
    London
    Posts
    2,884
    Something sparked an interest in historic food prices (hours worked for a loaf of bread or something like that), and that led to the USDA database, which led to the impact of Chinese demand for American soybeans.

    In 2005/06, China for the first time became a net importer of soybeans.
    Over the previous 30 years, 1975-2004, the average price received by US farmers for soybeans was just under $6 a bushel.
    In 2006-07, farmers planted more soybeans.
    In 2007-8, it has averaged $10.68/bu, a 79% increase.

    More, the fluctuation in prices from year to year was smaller.
    And, not only were the lowest prices during each period lower relative to the average in 2007-18, the highest prices were higher, too.
    Trust me?
    I'm an economist!

  15. #120
    Regular
    Join Date
    07 Jan 08
    Posts
    144
    The US is now demanding that China drops its challenges at WTO. It seems Trump is not interested in fair trade.

    And here I was thinking, lest my biases cloud my judgement, I'll wait and see if China complains at the WTO.
    Last edited by hboGYT; 07 May 18, at 11:05.

Thread Information

Users Browsing this Thread

There are currently 15 users browsing this thread. (0 members and 15 guests)

Similar Threads

  1. Review: Man of Steel
    By gunnut in forum Movie & TV Room
    Replies: 8
    Last Post: 12 Jul 13,, 11:15
  2. This Guy Has Balls of Steel
    By Bigfella in forum World Affairs Board Pub
    Replies: 34
    Last Post: 07 Jul 09,, 02:37
  3. Mexico slaps tariffs on U.S. goods in truck feud
    By Donnie in forum International Economy
    Replies: 15
    Last Post: 18 Mar 09,, 20:46
  4. U.S airforce using transparent aluminum?
    By canoe in forum Military Aviation
    Replies: 1
    Last Post: 21 Oct 05,, 04:58
  5. EU scores steel victory over US
    By Ironduke in forum International Economy
    Replies: 12
    Last Post: 11 Nov 03,, 21:15

Share this thread with friends:

Share this thread with friends:

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •