Comments by "guydreamr" (@guydreamr) on "Is China Heading Towards Stagnation Like Japan? @visualeconomiken" video.

  1. Except that what is being repeated is now coming to pass, on multiple fronts as the video indicated.
    12
  2.  @TheMrakic  Downturns in the property market, and higher tariffs from the West are blocking electric vehicle and solar panel exports, as the video said. Also youth unemployment is now so high that the Chinese govt stopped publishing the statistics, and the stock market has turned downward. Sounds to me like the go-go days are yesteryear in the Middle Kingdom.
    10
  3.  @bradowen8862  China is more dependent, however - it's currently running one of the largest trade surpluses on planet earth with the US. As far as cheap goods goes, that can be sourced from Vietnam and Mexico.
    7
  4. China is still reliant on Western markets and technology however, so whether it obeys or not it's still vulnerable.
    7
  5. Russia itself is awash with cheap energy, and its economy is a basket case. When was the last time you saw "made in Russia" on anything you purchased?
    5
  6.  @CountingStars333  About the only thing they make, and Ukraine has amply demonstrated that the quality of Russian weaponry is questionable at best.
    4
  7.  @weiwei8072  People like you seem to have a short understanding of the data. The Obama tariffs were actually quite effective in stemming direct solar panels from China, however what China then did was to start sourcing production to countries like Thailand and Mexico instead. So the tariffs were effective, but to restore their effectiveness all the US need do is target the production coming from those countries that have their ultimate source as coming from China. That's from Columbia University, "Q&A | Solar Tariffs and the US Energy Transition." Your statement that "every US solar firm went bankrupt" is flat-out false. "Not every solar panel firm in the United States has gone bankrupt. In fact, the U.S. solar industry has been growing and evolving. There are still many active and thriving solar panel manufacturers in the country." That's from Energy, "The State of the Solar Industry" & "Quarterly Solar Industry Update" respectively, as well as Thomas, "Top Solar Panel Manufacturers in the U.S." People like you need to stop making statements unsupported by the facts, full-stop. Your statement that the total amount of trade that China does with ASEAN exceeds the amount that it does with the US is correct as far as it goes, but not by much and is ultimately a straw man's argument. In 2022 the total amount of trade with ASEAN was 722 billion, whereas trade with the US was 690 billion, which is near parity. However, what you've left out is that ASEAN is a bloc of no less than 10 different countries, where the US is a single country. Thus, country for country China does indeed do the most amount of trade with the US and thus the US is in the single greatest position to wield the most influence and affect China the most should America decide to impose tariffs. People like you need to stop comparing apples to oranges (entire country blocs to single countries) and start comparing apples to apples instead (single country to single country).
    1
  8.  @weiwei8072  People like you seem to have an inadequate understanding of the data. The Obama tariffs were actually quite effective in stemming direct solar panels from China, however what China then did was to start sourcing production to countries like Thailand and Mexico instead. So the tariffs were effective, but to restore their effectiveness all the US need do is target the production coming from those countries that have their ultimate source as coming from China. That's from Columbia University, "Q&A | Solar Tariffs and the US Energy Transition." Your statement that "every US solar firm went bankrupt" is totally inaccurate. "Not every solar panel firm in the United States has gone bankrupt. In fact, the U.S. solar industry has been growing and evolving. There are still many active and thriving solar panel manufacturers in the country." That's from Energy, "The State of the Solar Industry" & "Quarterly Solar Industry Update" respectively, as well as Thomas, "Top Solar Panel Manufacturers in the U.S." People like you need to stop making statements unsupported by the facts. Your statement that the total amount of trade that China does with ASEAN exceeds the amount that it does with the US is correct as far as it goes, but not by much and is ultimately a straw man's argument. In 2022 the total amount of trade with ASEAN was 722 billion, whereas trade with the US was 690 billion, which is near parity. However, what you've left out is that ASEAN is a bloc of no less than 10 different countries, where the US is a single country. Thus, country for country China does indeed do the most amount of trade with the US and thus the US is in the single greatest position to wield the most influence and affect China the most should America decide to impose tariffs. People like you need to stop comparing apples to oranges (entire country blocs to single countries) and start comparing apples to apples instead (single country to single country).
    1
  9.  @weiwei8072  People like you seem to have an inadequate understanding of the data. The Obama tariffs were actually quite effective in stemming direct solar panels from China, however what China then did was to start sourcing production to countries like Thailand and Mexico instead. So the tariffs were effective, but to restore their effectiveness all the US need do is target the production coming from those countries that have their ultimate source as coming from China. That's from Columbia University, "Q&A | Solar Tariffs and the US Energy Transition." Your statement that "every US solar firm went bankrupt" is inaccurate. "Not every solar panel firm in the United States has gone bankrupt. In fact, the U.S. solar industry has been growing and evolving. There are still many active and thriving solar panel manufacturers in the country." That's from Energy, "The State of the Solar Industry" & "Quarterly Solar Industry Update" respectively, as well as Thomas, "Top Solar Panel Manufacturers in the U.S." People like you need to start making statements that are better supported by the facts. Your statement that the total amount of trade that China does with ASEAN exceeds the amount that it does with the US is correct as far as it goes, but not by much and is ultimately a straw man's argument. In 2022 the total amount of trade with ASEAN was 722 billion, whereas trade with the US was 690 billion, which is near parity. However, what you've left out is that ASEAN is a bloc of no less than 10 different countries, where the US is a single country. Thus, country for country China does indeed do the most amount of trade with the US and thus the US is in the single greatest position to wield the most influence and affect China the most should America decide to impose tariffs. People like you need to stop comparing apples to oranges (entire country blocs to single countries) and start comparing apples to apples instead (single country to single country).
    1
  10.  @weiwei8072  People like you need to have a more adequate understanding of the data. The Obama tariffs were actually quite effective in stemming direct solar panels from China, however what China then did was to pivot and start sourcing production to countries like Thailand and Mexico instead. Thus the tariffs were effective, but to restore their effectiveness all the US need do is likewise pivot and target the production coming from those countries ultimately coming from China. That's from Columbia University, "Q&A | Solar Tariffs and the US Energy Transition." Your statement that "every US solar firm went bankrupt" is inaccurate. "Not every solar panel firm in the United States has gone bankrupt. In fact, the U.S. solar industry has been growing and evolving. There are still many active and thriving solar panel manufacturers in the country." That's from Energy, "The State of the Solar Industry" & "Quarterly Solar Industry Update" respectively, as well as Thomas, "Top Solar Panel Manufacturers in the U.S." Someone needs to start making statements that are better supported by the facts. Your statement that the total amount of trade that China does with ASEAN exceeds the amount that it does with the US is correct as far as it goes, but not by much and is ultimately a straw man's argument. In 2022 the total amount of trade with ASEAN was 722 billion, whereas trade with the US was 690 billion, which is near parity. However, what you've left out is that ASEAN is a bloc of no less than 10 different countries, where the US is a single country. Thus, country for country China does indeed do the most amount of trade with the US and thus the US is in the single greatest position to wield the most influence and affect China the most should America decide to impose tariffs. Rather than comparing apples to oranges (entire country blocs to single countries), someone also needs to compare apples to apples instead (single country to single country).
    1
  11.  @weiwei8072  Some people need to have a more adequate understanding of the data. The Obama tariffs were actually quite effective in stemming direct solar panels from China, however what China then did was to pivot and start sourcing production to countries like Thailand and Mexico instead. Thus the tariffs were effective, but to restore their effectiveness all the US need do is likewise pivot and target the production coming from those countries ultimately coming from China. That's from Columbia University, "Q&A | Solar Tariffs and the US Energy Transition." The statement that "every US solar firm went bankrupt" is inaccurate. "Not every solar panel firm in the United States has gone bankrupt. In fact, the U.S. solar industry has been growing and evolving. There are still many active and thriving solar panel manufacturers in the country." That's from Energy, "The State of the Solar Industry" & "Quarterly Solar Industry Update" respectively, as well as Thomas, "Top Solar Panel Manufacturers in the U.S." Someone needs to start making statements that are better supported by the facts. Your statement that the total amount of trade that China does with ASEAN exceeds the amount that it does with the US is correct as far as it goes, but not by much and is ultimately a straw man's argument. In 2022 the total amount of trade with ASEAN was 722 billion, whereas trade with the US was 690 billion, which is near parity. However, what you've left out is that ASEAN is a bloc of no less than 10 different countries, where the US is a single country. Thus, country for country China does indeed do the most amount of trade with the US and thus the US is in the single greatest position to wield the most influence and affect China the most should America decide to impose tariffs. Rather than comparing apples to oranges (entire country blocs to single countries), someone also needs to compare apples to apples instead (single country to single country).
    1
  12.  @weiwei8072  Some people need to have a more adequate understanding of the data. The Obama tariffs were actually quite effective in stemming direct solar panels from China, however what China then did was to pivot and start sourcing production to countries like Thailand and Mexico instead. Thus the tariffs were effective, but to restore their effectiveness all the US need do is likewise pivot and place quotas on the production coming from those countries which are controlled by China. That's from Columbia University, "Q&A | Solar Tariffs and the US Energy Transition." The statement that "every US solar firm went bankrupt" is inaccurate. "Not every solar panel firm in the United States has gone bankrupt. In fact, the U.S. solar industry has been growing and evolving. There are still many active and thriving solar panel manufacturers in the country." That's from Energy, "The State of the Solar Industry" & "Quarterly Solar Industry Update" respectively, as well as Thomas, "Top Solar Panel Manufacturers in the U.S." Someone needs to start making statements that are better supported by the facts. Your statement that the total amount of trade that China does with ASEAN exceeds the amount that it does with the US is correct as far as it goes, but not by much and is ultimately a straw man's argument. In 2022 the total amount of trade with ASEAN was 722 billion, whereas trade with the US was 690 billion, which is near parity. However, what you've left out is that ASEAN is a bloc of no less than 10 different countries, where the US is a single country. Thus, country for country China does indeed do the most amount of trade with the US and thus the US is in the single greatest position to wield the most influence and affect China the most should America decide to impose tariffs. Rather than comparing apples to oranges (entire country blocs to single countries), someone also needs to compare apples to apples instead (single country to single country).
    1
  13.  @weiwei8072  Some people need to have a more adequate understanding of the data. The Obama tariffs were actually quite effective in stemming direct solar panels from China, however what China then did was to pivot and start sourcing production to countries like Thailand and Mexico instead. Thus the tariffs were effective, but to restore their effectiveness all the US need do is likewise pivot and place quotas on the production coming from those countries which are controlled by China. That's from Columbia University, "Q&A | Solar Tariffs and the US Energy Transition." The statement that "every US solar firm went bankrupt" is incorrect. "Not every solar panel firm in the United States has gone bankrupt. In fact, the U.S. solar industry has been growing and evolving. There are still many active and thriving solar panel manufacturers in the country." That's from Energy, "The State of the Solar Industry" & "Quarterly Solar Industry Update" respectively, as well as Thomas, "Top Solar Panel Manufacturers in the U.S." Someone needs to start making statements that are better supported by the facts. Your statement that the total amount of trade that China does with ASEAN exceeds the amount that it does with the US is correct as far as it goes, but not by much and is ultimately a straw man's argument. In 2022 the total amount of trade with ASEAN was 722 billion, whereas trade with the US was 690 billion, which is near parity. However, what you've left out is that ASEAN is a bloc of no less than 10 different countries, where the US is a single country. Thus, country for country China does indeed do the most amount of trade with the US and thus the US is in the single greatest position to wield the most influence and affect China the most should America decide to take action. Rather than comparing apples to oranges (entire country blocs to single countries), someone needs to compare apples to apples instead (single country to single country).
    1
  14.  @weiwei8072  Some people need to have a more adequate understanding of the data. The Obama tariffs were actually quite effective in stemming direct solar panels from China, however what China then did was to pivot and start sourcing production to countries like Thailand and Mexico instead. Thus the tariffs were effective, but to restore their effectiveness all the US need do is likewise pivot and place quotas on the production coming from those countries which are controlled by China. That's from Columbia University, "Q&A | Solar Tariffs and the US Energy Transition." The statement that "every US solar firm went bankrupt" is incorrect. "Not every solar panel firm in the United States has gone bankrupt. In fact, the U.S. solar industry has been growing and evolving. There are still many active and thriving solar panel manufacturers in the country." That's from Energy, "The State of the Solar Industry" & "Quarterly Solar Industry Update" respectively, as well as Thomas, "Top Solar Panel Manufacturers in the U.S." Someone needs to start making statements that are better supported by the facts. The statement that the total amount of trade that China does with ASEAN exceeds the amount that it does with the US is correct as far as it goes, but not by much and is ultimately a straw man's argument. In 2022 the total amount of trade with ASEAN was 722 billion, whereas trade with the US was 690 billion, which is near parity. However, what the statement leaves out is that ASEAN is a bloc of no less than 10 different countries, where the US is a single country. Thus, country for country China does indeed do the most amount of trade with the US and thus the US is in the single greatest position to wield the most influence and affect China the most should America decide to take action. Rather than comparing apples to oranges (entire country blocs to single countries), someone needs to compare apples to apples instead (single country to single country).
    1
  15.  @weiwei8072  Some people need to have a more adequate understanding of the data. The Obama tariffs were actually quite effective in stemming direct solar panels from China, however what China then did was to pivot and start sourcing production to countries like Thailand and Mexico instead. Thus the tariffs were effective, but to restore their effectiveness all the US need do is likewise pivot and place quotas on the production coming from those countries which are controlled by China. That's from Columbia University, "Q&A | Solar Tariffs and the US Energy Transition." The statement that "every US solar firm went bankrupt" is incorrect. "Not every solar panel firm in the United States has gone bankrupt. In fact, the U.S. solar industry has been growing and evolving. There are still many active and thriving solar panel manufacturers in the country." That's from Energy, "The State of the Solar Industry" & "Quarterly Solar Industry Update" respectively, as well as Thomas, "Top Solar Panel Manufacturers in the U.S." Someone needs to start making statements that are better supported by the facts. The statement that the total amount of trade that China does with ASEAN exceeds the amount that it does with the US is correct as far as it goes, but not by much and is ultimately a straw man's argument. In 2022 the total amount of trade with ASEAN was 722 billion, whereas trade with the US was 690 billion, which is near parity. However, what the statement leaves out is that ASEAN is a bloc of no less than 10 different countries, where the US is a single country. Thus, country for country China does indeed do the most amount of trade with the US and thus the US is in the single greatest position to wield the most influence and affect China the most should America decide to respond. Rather than comparing apples to oranges (entire country blocs to single countries), someone needs to compare apples to apples instead (single country to single country).
    1
  16.  @weiwei8072  People like you seem to have a short understanding of the data. The Obama tariffs were actually quite effective in stemming direct solar panels from China, however what China then did was to start sourcing production to countries like Thailand and Mexico instead. So the tariffs were effective, but to restore their effectiveness all the US need do is target the production coming from those countries that have their ultimate source as coming from China. That's from Columbia University, "Q&A | Solar Tariffs and the US Energy Transition." Your statement that "every US solar firm went bankrupt" is flat-out false. Querying "has every US solar panel firm gone bankrupt?" returned the following: "No, not every solar panel firm in the United States has gone bankrupt. In fact, the U.S. solar industry has been growing and evolving. There are still many active and thriving solar panel manufacturers in the country." That's from energygov, "The State of the Solar Industry" & "Quarterly Solar Industry Update" respectively, as well as Thomas, "Top Solar Panel Manufacturers in the U.S." People like you need to stop making statements unsupported by the facts, full-stop. Your statement that the total amount of trade that China does with ASEAN exceeds the amount that it does with the US is correct as far as it goes, but not by much and is ultimately a straw man's argument. In 2022 the total amount of trade with ASEAN was 722 billion, whereas trade with the US was 690 billion, which is near parity. However, what you've left out is that ASEAN is a bloc of no less than 10 different countries, where the US is a single country. Thus, country for country China does indeed do the most amount of trade with the US and thus the US is in the greatest position to wield the most influence and affect China the most should America decide to impose tariffs. People like you need to stop comparing apples to oranges (entire country blocs to single countries) and start comparing apples to apples instead (single country to single country).
    1
  17.  @weiwei8072  Some people need to review the data a little more carefully. The Obama tariffs were actually quite effective in stemming direct solar panels from China, however what China then did was to pivot and start sourcing production to countries like Thailand and Mexico instead. Thus the tariffs were effective, but to restore their effectiveness all the US need do is likewise pivot and place quotas on the production coming from those countries which are controlled by China. That's from Columbia University, "Q&A | Solar Tariffs and the US Energy Transition." The statement that "every US solar firm went bankrupt" is incorrect. "Not every solar panel firm in the United States has gone bankrupt. In fact, the U.S. solar industry has been growing and evolving. There are still many active and thriving solar panel manufacturers in the country." That's from Energy, "The State of the Solar Industry" & "Quarterly Solar Industry Update" respectively, as well as Thomas, "Top Solar Panel Manufacturers in the U.S." Someone needs to start making statements that are better supported by the facts. The statement that the total amount of trade that China does with ASEAN exceeds the amount that it does with the US is correct as far as it goes, but not by much and is ultimately a straw man's argument. In 2022 the total amount of trade with ASEAN was 722 billion, whereas trade with the US was 690 billion, which is near parity. However, ASEAN is a bloc of no less than 10 different countries, where the US is a single country. Thus, country for country China does indeed do the most amount of trade with the US. Rather than comparing apples to oranges (entire country blocs to single countries), someone needs to compare apples to apples instead (single country to single country).
    1
  18.  @weiwei8072  Some people need to review the data a little more carefully. The Obama tariffs were actually quite effective in stemming direct solar panels from China, however what China then did was to pivot and start sourcing production to countries like Thailand and Mexico instead. Thus the tariffs were effective, but to restore their effectiveness all the US need do is likewise pivot and place quotas on the production coming from those countries which are controlled by China. That's from Columbia University, "Q&A | Solar Tariffs and the US Energy Transition." The statement that "every US solar firm went bankrupt" is incorrect. "Not every solar panel firm in the United States has gone bankrupt. In fact, the U.S. solar industry has been growing and evolving. There are still many active and thriving solar panel manufacturers in the country." That's from Energy, "The State of the Solar Industry" & "Quarterly Solar Industry Update" respectively, as well as Thomas, "Top Solar Panel Manufacturers in the U.S." The statement that the total amount of trade that China does with ASEAN exceeds the amount that it does with the US is correct as far as it goes, but not by much and is ultimately a straw man's argument. In 2022 the total amount of trade with ASEAN was 722 billion, whereas trade with the US was 690 billion, which is near parity. However, ASEAN is a bloc of no less than 10 different countries, where the US is a single country. Thus, country for country China does indeed do the most amount of trade with the US. Rather than comparing apples to oranges (entire country blocs to single countries), someone needs to compare apples to apples instead (single country to single country).
    1
  19.  @weiwei8072  Some people need to review the data a little more carefully. The Obama tariffs were actually quite effective in stemming direct solar panels from China, however what China then did was to pivot and start sourcing production to countries like Thailand and Mexico instead. Thus the tariffs were effective, but to restore their effectiveness all the US need do is likewise pivot and place quotas on the production coming from those countries which are controlled by China. That's from Columbia University, "Q&A | Solar Tariffs and the US Energy Transition." The statement that "every US solar firm went bankrupt" is unsupported by the facts. "Not every solar panel firm in the United States has gone bankrupt. In fact, the U.S. solar industry has been growing and evolving. There are still many active and thriving solar panel manufacturers in the country." That's from Energy, "The State of the Solar Industry" & "Quarterly Solar Industry Update" respectively, as well as Thomas, "Top Solar Panel Manufacturers in the U.S." The statement that the total amount of trade that China does with ASEAN exceeds the amount that it does with the US is correct as far as it goes, but not by much and is ultimately a straw man's argument. In 2022 the total amount of trade with ASEAN was 722 billion, whereas trade with the US was 690 billion, which is near parity. However, ASEAN is a bloc of no less than 10 different countries, where the US is a single country. Thus, country for country China does indeed do the most amount of trade with the US. Rather than comparing apples to oranges (entire country blocs to single countries), someone needs to compare apples to apples instead (single country to single country).
    1
  20.  @weiwei8072  Some people need to review the data a little more carefully. The Obama tariffs were actually quite effective in stemming direct solar panels from China, however what China then did was to pivot and start sourcing production to countries like Thailand and Mexico instead. Thus the tariffs were effective, but to restore their effectiveness all the US need do is likewise pivot and place quotas on the production coming from those countries which are controlled by China. That's from Columbia University, "Q&A | Solar Tariffs and the US Energy Transition." The statement that "every US solar firm went bankrupt" is unsupported by the facts. "Not every solar panel firm in the United States has gone bankrupt. In fact, the U.S. solar industry has been growing and evolving. There are still many active and thriving solar panel manufacturers in the country." That's from Energy, "The State of the Solar Industry" & "Quarterly Solar Industry Update" respectively, as well as Thomas, "Top Solar Panel Manufacturers in the U.S."
    1
  21.  @weiwei8072  Some people need to review the data a little more carefully. The Obama tariffs were actually quite effective in stemming direct solar panels from China, however what China then did was to pivot and start sourcing production to countries like Thailand and Mexico instead. Thus the tariffs were effective, but to restore their effectiveness all the US need do is likewise pivot and place quotas on the production coming from those countries which are controlled by China. That's from Columbia University, "Q&A | Solar Tariffs and the US Energy Transition." The statement that the total amount of trade that China does with ASEAN exceeds the amount that it does with the US is correct as far as it goes, but not by much and is ultimately a straw man's argument. In 2022 the total amount of trade with ASEAN was 722 billion, whereas trade with the US was 690 billion, which is near parity. However, ASEAN is a bloc of no less than 10 different countries, where the US is a single country. Thus, country for country China does indeed do the most amount of trade with the US. Rather than comparing apples to oranges (entire country blocs to single countries), someone needs to compare apples to apples instead (single country to single country).
    1
  22.  @weiwei8072  The statement that "every US solar firm went bankrupt" is unsupported by the facts. "Not every solar panel firm in the United States has gone bankrupt. In fact, the U.S. solar industry has been growing and evolving. There are still many active and thriving solar panel manufacturers in the country." That's from Energy, "The State of the Solar Industry" & "Quarterly Solar Industry Update" respectively, as well as Thomas, "Top Solar Panel Manufacturers in the U.S." The statement that the total amount of trade that China does with ASEAN exceeds the amount that it does with the US is correct as far as it goes, but not by much and is ultimately a straw man's argument. In 2022 the total amount of trade with ASEAN was 722 billion, whereas trade with the US was 690 billion, which is near parity. However, ASEAN is a bloc of no less than 10 different countries, where the US is a single country. Thus, country for country China does indeed do the most amount of trade with the US. Rather than comparing apples to oranges (entire country blocs to single countries), someone needs to compare apples to apples instead (single country to single country).
    1
  23.  @weiwei8072  Some people need to review the data a little more carefully. The Obama tariffs were actually quite effective in stemming direct solar panels from China, however what China then did was to pivot and start sourcing production to countries like Thailand and Mexico instead. Thus the tariffs were effective, but to restore their effectiveness all the US need do is likewise pivot and place quotas on the production coming from those countries which are controlled by China. That's from Columbia University, "Q&A | Solar Tariffs and the US Energy Transition."
    1
  24. Except that China is heavily dependent on imports for food as well, similar to Japan.
    1
  25.  @weiwei8072  Some people need to have a more adequate understanding of the data. The Obama tariffs were actually quite effective in stemming direct solar panels from China, however what China then did was to pivot and start sourcing production to countries like Thailand and Mexico instead. Thus the tariffs were effective, but to restore their effectiveness all the US need do is likewise pivot and place quotas on the production coming from those countries which are controlled by China. That's from Columbia University, "Q&A | Solar Tariffs and the US Energy Transition." The statement that "every US solar firm went bankrupt" is incorrect. "Not every solar panel firm in the United States has gone bankrupt. In fact, the U.S. solar industry has been growing and evolving. There are still many active and thriving solar panel manufacturers in the country." That's from Energy, "The State of the Solar Industry" & "Quarterly Solar Industry Update" respectively, as well as Thomas, "Top Solar Panel Manufacturers in the U.S." Someone needs to start making statements that are better supported by the facts. The statement that the total amount of trade that China does with ASEAN exceeds the amount that it does with the US is correct as far as it goes, but not by much and is ultimately a straw man's argument. In 2022 the total amount of trade with ASEAN was 722 billion, whereas trade with the US was 690 billion, which is near parity. However, what the statement leaves out is that ASEAN is a bloc of no less than 10 different countries, where the US is a single country. Thus, country for country China does indeed do the most amount of trade with the US. Rather than comparing apples to oranges (entire country blocs to single countries), someone needs to compare apples to apples instead (single country to single country).
    1