GTX0 Announcements | RoadmapFeedbackHelp | SandboxNewest Posts | Replies | Hottest
NIFE UpdatesRoadmapRequests | HelpDiscuss Game Worlds


Politics & Religion


World events, politics and whatever (especially whatever)
WARNING: Posts may contain offensive content and red wine
09/11/2001 WE REMEMBER

"Fear is the foundation of most governments." - John Adams

"My family is more important than my party." - Zell Miller


From CNBC:

China immediately slapped retaliatory tariffs on U.S. imports on Friday after the U.S. imposed duties on $34 billion worth of Chinese products, signaling the start of a full-blown trade war between the world’s two largest economies.

President Donald Trump’s administration imposed the promised tariffs at midnight Washington time. That prompted Beijing to respond in kind with levies on U.S. imports.

China's Foreign Ministry did not provide any immediate detail on the implementation or scale of these charges, but the Communist Party newspaper People's Daily said they were imposed on a $34 billion list of goods issued last month that included soybeans, pork and electric vehicles.

Chinese state news agency Xinhua reported the country's tariff rate on U.S. goods, at 25 percent, was equal to Washington's rate on Chinese imports.

A spokesperson at China’s Ministry of Commerce said Friday that while the Asian giant had refused to "fire the first shot," it was being forced to respond after the U.S. had "launched the largest trade war in economic history."

“This act is typical trade bullying,” the spokesperson said. “It seriously jeopardizes the global industrial chain, … hinders the pace of global economic recovery, triggers global market turmoil and will affect more innocent multinational companies, general companies and consumers.”

China's Ministry of Commerce also said it would look to report the U.S. to the World Trade Organization on Friday, accusing Washington of breaching international trade laws.

China's soy meal futures plunged over 2 percent during Friday afternoon trade in Asia before recovering most of its losses, amid market confusion over whether Beijing had actually implemented tariffs on soybeans and other U.S. goods.

The absence of an immediate official statement specifically clarifying China's response to U.S. tariffs did little to alleviate a sense of ambiguity among market participants.

The prospect of a tit-for-tat trade war is widely expected to make soy meal more expensive, supporting soy meal futures, particularly over the coming months when the U.S. is projected to become China's primary soybean supplier.

The Trump administration initiated the dispute in April, announcing the tariffs and accusing China of using "unfair" tactics to build a large trade surplus with the U.S. and expropriating American technology.

The White House has also pressed Congress to tighten rules on Chinese investment in U.S. technology.

Nonetheless, despite the urging of business groups and lawmakers to negotiate a truce, there was little sign Friday that the two sides would reach a compromise anytime soon.

Beijing and Washington have held several rounds of high-level talks since early May, but the Trump administration has since said it is considering expanding the list of targeted Chinese imports. Trump said Thursday that another $16 billion of tariffs are expected to go into effect in two weeks, before ratcheting up the stakes to warn that measures totaling $500 billion in Chinese goods could soon come into force.

External observers have widely criticized this approach, saying such protectionist rhetoric undermines free trade policies that have shaped the global exchange of goods in recent decades.

settingsOptions
There are 24 Replies

I just hope I can still go to Panda Express and get their Beijing beef with fried rice.

Posted July 6th by Brandy
Brandy

No need to worry. It's our beef that will be tariffed going into China, I don't know if we import much food from them except something like tea.

Enjoy your sugar-syrup fried meat and rice.

Posted July 6th by Agis
Agis
 

The capitalist in me thinks tariff is a bad word, but the world kind of needs China's trajectory to superpower status disrupted, and probably stopped altogether, for the time being st least.

Posted July 6th by Dr. Doom
Dr. Doom
 

If you truly wanted to stop China's super power transformation you would be up in arms with the nonsense the trump admin has been pulling in the global stage.

Posted July 6th by S.o.h.
S.o.h.
 

Starting a trade war with the country that supplies all the cheap labour to make our toys and shoes? Is he stupid?

Posted July 6th by I killed Mufasa
I killed Mufasa
long live the king

Is there any serious justification for Chinese tariffs being so high to begin with? Many people blame Trump for this trade war, but he is really challenging a global order that benefits China disproportionately when it is no longer in any dire need for thst kind of advantage. Should the world not be pressuring China to lower it's tariffs?

Posted July 6th by Dr. Doom
Dr. Doom
 

The capitalist in me thinks tariff is a bad word, but the world kind of needs China's trajectory to superpower status disrupted, and probably stopped altogether, for the time being st least.

To an extent, I agree with you. China's economic rise since the 90's has done a lot of good, but it's given the Chinese government the ability to crush dissent at home and pressure governments abroad into respecting its national interests.

If you truly wanted to stop China's super power transformation you would be up in arms with the nonsense the trump admin has been pulling in the global stage.

Can you be more specific with what you mean?

Is there any serious justification for Chinese tariffs being so high to begin with? Many people blame Trump for this trade war, but he is really challenging a global order that benefits China disproportionately when it is no longer in any dire need for thst kind of advantage. Should the world not be pressuring China to lower it's tariffs?

Chinese tariffs are not as extraordinarily high as you might think, and certainly, since joining the WTO, the Chinese market has opened up a lot over time and tariffs have come down a lot as well.

This issues actually goes beyond just tariffs though, and even more than our trade deficit. Chinese IP thefts, forced technology transfers from businesses who want to set up in China, and China's "Made in China 2025" policy to dominate in critical high-tech sectors are wrapped up in it. So it's critically important.

Your last point, shouldn't the world pressure China, I would definitely agree. China's biggest fear is that the US will successfully be able to unite most of the world against China and coordinate pressure effectively.

But, that's not what's happening. Trump is launching trade wars against our allies simultaneously, which is just plain stupid, no matter how you cut it. China is already trying to bring the rest of the world to its side and against America on that issue, and it'll be interesting to see how that works out.

Posted July 7th by Agis
Agis
 

Personally it's good to see Trump finally hitting this set of campaign promises. It's probably going to be a wait-and-see kind of thing but with any luck it's the first set of changes needed to curb globalization and bring american manufacturing back home.

Posted July 7th by Xhin
Xhin
 

Wow, there are still people who think this is to "bring our jobs back home"?

I got bad news for you son, it's not gonna happen. That work is gonna keep going to low-income developing countries.

Posted July 7th by Agis
Agis
 

Wow, there are still people who think this is to "bring our jobs back home"?


Does this really surprise you? These people would rather bitch and moan for their jobs to come back than to retrain and work in growing industries.

I got bad news for you son, it's not gonna happen. That work is gonna keep going to low-income developing countries.


They will be going to African countries soon enough.

Posted July 8th by S.O.H.
S.O.H.
 

What is "soon enough"?

Like, in this century? That's a big maybe. They have a lot of infrastructural and geographical problems that are not easy to overcome.

Right now the hot place is Southeast Asia, which is where the US really needs to engage in order to counter China and reap the advantages of its development.

Posted July 8th by Agis
Agis
 

Definitely within this century. I'd say by 2050 at the earliest.

And I disagree. Africa is the Hot bed that we need to develop. We lost the battle for south east asia in the mid 90s when the philipines (our little mini clone mind you) told us to fuck off and suck it. Its an important region sure but getting a head start in Africa is far more important now.



Posted July 8th by S.o.h.
S.o.h.
 

African countries *can become* the hot bed that we need to engage in, but that's not going to come without deep water ports, efficient governance, education, or railroads or roads inland.

And you're wrong about Southeast Asia.

The Philippines no longer wanted an American military presence, but China's recent actions in the South China Sea have reversed that. It's only under Duterte that this has (perhaps only for the time being) changed.

There are in fact many countries in Southeast Asia that have benefited greatly from China's economic rise and investment, but which don't like it's militarization of the SCS and are wary of being caught in Chinese-financed debt trap projects. That's why many countries in SEA welcome the US both militarily and economically.

Posted July 8th by Agis
Agis
 

African countries *can become* the hot bed that we need to engage in, but that's not going to come without deep water ports, efficient governance, education, or railroads or roads inland


and between us and China we are the only ones capable of making sure those things come to fruition. Even the U.S. military understands that at this point. Why do you think Africom has been so dam active there.


And you're wrong about Southeast Asia.


not really. Theres a reason why south east Asian countries fought so dam hard to kick out U.S. influence in the decades following world war 2. It took the dropping of two nuclear bombs to get one of those countries to fully play ball with us.


this is still the case today. While true there are south east Asian countries which want the U.S. there to keep China in check I am willing to be that if it came down to it those countries would move to support China in a heart beat.



like I said it is a losing battle. The best thing to do is to focus all our efforts in Africa. Especially now that China more or less has the head start in the region.


Edited July 8th by S.o.h.
S.o.h.
 

When you say that America is the only one that can bring things like infrastructure, Education, and effective governance into fruition, are you referencing the article I posted before that criticized America's foreign policy in Africa? Because if you know that China is currently the main force for development, finance, and economic development in Africa and Eurasia, then you would understand that America is in no position to meet any of those needs at the moment. China currently has the political will, interest, and economic position to meet these development needs in Africa.

not really. Theres a reason why south east Asian countries fought so dam hard to kick out U.S. influence in the decades following world war 2. It took the dropping of two nuclear bombs to get one of those countries to fully play ball with us.

Japan isn't part of Southeast Asia, and we didn't drop bombs on them "in the decades following world war 2". You continue to be confused about the whole concept of Southeast Asia in general.

While true there are south east Asian countries which want the U.S. there to keep China in check I am willing to be that if it came down to it those countries would move to support China in a heart beat.

I assume you mean war? That's impossible to predict. It all depends on how it all goes down.

But you're not thinking about it in the right way. Being engaged in Southeast Asia isn't about building a coalition of countries to fight China in a war. It's about finding mutual interests and combating mutual threats. With China's rise, there is inevitably both threat and opportunity for SEA and the US, and it is in their best interest to balance between both powers rather than be dominated by either one.

Posted July 8th by Agis
Agis
 

When you say that America is the only one that can bring things like infrastructure, Education, and effective governance into fruition, are you referencing the article I posted before that criticized America's foreign policy in Africa? Because if you know that China is currently the main force for development, finance, and economic development in Africa and Eurasia, then you would understand that America is in no position to meet any of those needs at the moment. China currently has the political will, interest, and economic position to meet these development needs in Africa


yes and no. What I am saying is that the the U.S. should be playing catch up in Africa. If they don't they will lose that battle as well. Africa is the future south east asia while important is no longer the future.


Japan isn't part of Southeast Asia, and we didn't drop bombs on them "in the decades following world war 2". You continue to be confused about the whole concept of Southeast Asia in general

while it was my mistake that I didn't differentiate Japan or even Korea as an north east Asian nation instead of a south east Asian my point still stands. These countries choose to run their own affairs around their own way of life. They will never truly follow the American way. We've seen their resistance towards western nations through out the greater regions history.

also the case in Vietnam pretty much highlights what I'm trying to say. South east Asian countries will fight tooth and nail to ensure an outside power does not become too influential.

assume you mean war? That's impossible to predict. It all depends on how it all goes down.

I mean in general. The moment the U.S. crosses any influential boundaries those countries will rescind what ever support they have given us. Granted something drastic has to happen for that to occur.



But you're not thinking about it in the right way. Being engaged in Southeast Asia isn't about building a coalition of countries to fight China in a war. It's about finding mutual interests and combating mutual threats. With China's rise, there is inevitably both threat and opportunity for SEA and the US, and it is in their best interest to balance between both powers rather than be dominated by either one.


my way of thinking is fine. I am just having trouble getring my point of across. While that is all good and all I still view it as a waste of time. Mostly because if China gets too powerful those nations will find a way to resist which imo would help us far more in the long run.

like I said we need to be jumping on board the African wagon. Failing to do so will solidify our global standing as Chinas number 2.


Edited July 8th by S.o.h.
S.o.h.
 

We should definitely be engaged with Africa, but to ignore all of Southeast Asia just so we can focus on development in Africa is just plain silly. You don't have to make the decision between the two regions to start with, and currently Southeast Asia is growing and there's a strong desire for American presence whether you want to recognize that or not.

While you're right that SEA nations won't "follow the American way" (whatever that means), neither will the countries of Africa or really any ally or partner. The fact is, that shouldn't be the requirement for building relations and finding mutual areas of interest and concern.

also the case in Vietnam pretty much highlights what I'm trying to say. South east Asian countries will fight tooth and nail to ensure an outside power does not become too influential.

Vietnam didn't fight against us because we were becoming "too influential". It's because we were supporting French colonial efforts, then stuck around to prop up a regime against communist North Vietnam. Of course the Vietnamese would resist, and neighboring countries would support them against US imperialism.

But the threat to Vietnam and the rest of Southeast Asia is not American imperialism. It's Chinese militarization of the SCS and growing influence in Southeast Asian affairs. After the US left Vietnam, after all, you had the Chinese invade Vietnam and fight to a standstill there. That was around the 17th time in history that China invaded Vietnam, and that fact isn't lost on them. Massive anti-Chinese protests happen when news of further Chinese encroachment happens.

And that's pretty much the same for the rest of the countries of Southeast Asia. They certainly don't want to be dominated by any great power, but the most direct threat is always going to be from China, which is geographically close and will want to become the hegemonic power of Asia, to the detriment of our allies and our interests there.

Mostly because if China gets too powerful those nations will find a way to resist which imo would help us far more in the long run.

That way to resist is finding other options, and balancing competing powers like the US and China. That will ultimately serve them better and create a better strategic dynamic between America and China.

Posted July 10th by Agis
Agis
 

Its a waste of time and resources

Posted July 10th by S.o.h.
S.o.h.
 

Look dude, I appreciate your interest in China and Asia, and I know you've studied some of the history behind Asia before, but there's a lot of economic, geopolitical, and diplomatic factors at work here that you need to understand a bit better.

If you read more about the South China Sea issue and the different stakes China, the US, ASEAN, Japan, Australia, and even India has in this area of the world, you can start to understand the geopolitical knot that it is.

You've just graduated with your BA, so now you have a lot more time to do your own independent reading and research about these issues, if you want.

Edited July 10th by Agis
Agis
 

Switzerland is slapping tarrifs on the U.S. now.

Trump is alienating every country now on America's behalf. Everything will be more expensive because of him. Dumbass has no idea what he's doing

Posted July 10th by ShadowFox08
ShadowFox08

I was drunk when I wrote that. But a part of me stands with what drunk me said. We need to be focusing the majority of our time and resources in Africa. We can pay some attention to SEA sure but if you believe that's the area that will tip the scales of global conquest or influence you are horribly misguided. At this point China has a head start on both areas. Of the two Africa is far more important to secure.

I get it you love SEA and all that. But it is not worth our efforts in the grand scheme of things.

If you wanna toss up some literature or resources to prove me wrong please do so. Ill read through them and give you my interpretation. But right now the consensus is that Africa is the place where we need to be.

Posted July 10th by S.o.h.
S.o.h.
 

I don't love Southeast Asia. You don't have to love something to acknowledge its importance and learn about it, which is why I study China. But the US's future in Asia is via Southeast Asia. It would be extremely unfortunate for those countries and our allies in Northeast Asia if we didn't engage with them diplomatically and economically.

If you wanna toss up some literature or resources to prove me wrong please do so. Ill read through them and give you my interpretation. But right now the consensus is that Africa is the place where we need to be.

lol "the consensus". Bro you're way out on the fringe of thought about Asia and Southeast Asia. No one who understands Asia thinks the way you do.

I understand you're taking a position so you can engage with the topic, and it's hard not to discuss without arguing in this forum, but there are better ways to go about it.

I'd be happy to suggest some articles to you, though. I don't have any on hand, so I'd have to do a little searching, reading, and make a choice about what you'd find interesting. So I really hope you read them with an open mind, not so you can refute them for some silly argument. Do you want articles that talk about SEA's economic potential, geopolitical importance, the south china sea issue, or something else?

Posted July 11th by Agis
Agis
 

For all the lip service the left gives to the working class, I think this is a great example of their out of touchness.

Giant unbalanced trade deficit? No problem. Being a doormat for others is good.

Working class jobs being outsourced? It's ok, make no effort to stop that.

China has these giant tarrifs on our products but Ho Chi Agis thinks a response would be inciteful.

Posted Saturday by #85
#85

Bernie was against NAFTA and TPP.

Also, in general you should probably more clearly distinguish the corporate Wall Street left (pro TPP) from the grassroots working man left (anti TPP). Just like how the neocon right is different from the Tea Party right. It is unhelpful to just be like “the left is X” or “the right is Y”. Everyone does it, myself included, but it usually does nothing but generate hostility and misrepresent large swaths of people. I would say it’s best to at least try and stick to the issues directly rather than the labels.

Posted Saturday by pacman
pacman
 
Reply to: Sino-US trade war begins today

Enter your message here


Site Rules | Complaints Process | Register Complaint Facebook Page
GTX0 © 2009-2017 Xhin GameTalk © 1999-2008 lives on