Comments by "D W" (@DW-op7ly) on "Is China's 40-year experiment with the West over? | DW Business" video.

  1. 11
  2. 6
  3. 5
  4. 4
  5. 4
  6. 4
  7. 3
  8. 3
  9. 2
  10. 2
  11. 2
  12. 2
  13. 1
  14. 1
  15. 1
  16. 1
  17. 1
  18. Divesting to where, the companies that did leave China during the trade war only 5% went back to the USA The majority went to SE Asia and the majority of those companies to Vietnam Back in the 1980s tasked to start researching China for the investment banking firm I worked for I stumbled upon the fact Chinese people and their companies were already leaving China. And going to these SE Asian countries. To the point thaw days ethnic Chinese and their companies economically dominate these economies. And these Countries are dependent on the Chinese economy When I warned about this and CCP China at the time people didn’t believe called me a communist against capitalism as the western world wanted free trade, globalization, open markets These days folks thinking they can run off to countries like Vietnam have no idea what they are talking about 👇 Ethnic Chinese dominate PH economy by Solita Collas - Monsod on Jun 25, 2012 Truly, a picture is worth a thousand words. The pictures of the top 15 Filipino billionaires (in US dollars, mind you) in Friday’s issue of the Inquirer brought home with crystal clarity the domination of the Philippine economy by ethnic Chinese. This is, of course, not a unique situation, as it seems to be the case in all of Southeast Asia Philippine Daily Inquirer 👇 Vietnam posts record 2022 trade surplus with U.S. as China deficit rises * Vietnam's trade surplus with the United States widened to $94.9 billion last year, the highest level on record, * Meanwhile, a trade deficit with China, which is the largest supplier of materials and equipment to Vietnam's labour-intensive manufacturing sector, widened to a record $60.2 billion in 2022 from $54.0 billion a year earlier, Zawya
    1
  19. 1
  20. Timeline of the South China Sea dispute * It has been claimed by the People's Republic of China on the argument that since 200 BCE Chinese fishermen have used the Spratly islands * Naval forces of the Liu Song dynasty (420–479 CE) patrolled the Paracel and Spratly islands.[5] In the Tang dynasty (618–907 CE), the islands were placed under the administration and authority of the Qiongzhou Prefecture (now Hainan Province).[5] The Chinese administration of the South China Sea continued into the Song dynasty (960–1279 CE).[5] * Archaeologists have found Chinese made potteries porcelains and other historical relics from the Southern dynasties (420–589 CE), the Sui dynasty (581–619 CE), the Tang dynasty, the Song dynasty, the Yuan dynasty (1271–1368 CE), the Ming dynasty (1368–1644 CE) and later eras up to modern times on the South China Sea islands.[5] 1876 – China makes its earliest documented claim to the Paracel Islands[citation needed] 1883 – When the Spratlys and Paracels were surveyed by Germany in 1883, China issued protests. 1887 – In the 19th century, Europeans found that Chinese fishermen from Hainan annually visited the Spratly islands for part of the year, while in 1877 it was the British who launched the first modern legal claims to the Spratlys 1902 – China sends naval forces on inspection tours of the Paracel Islands to preempt French claims.[28] Scholar François-Xavier Bonnet argued that per Chinese records, these expeditions never occurred and were backdated during the 1970s.[29][30] 1907 – China sends another naval force, this time to plan for resource exploitation.[28] 1911 – The newly formed Republic of China, successor state to the Qing dynasty, moves administration of the Paracel Islands to Hainan,[28] which would not become a separate Chinese province until 1988. 1946 – The R.O.C. established garrisons on both Woody (now Yongxing / 永兴) Island in the Paracels and Taiping Island in the Spratlys. France protested. The French tried but failed to dislodge Chinese nationalist troops from Yongxing Island/Woody Island (the only habitable island in the Paracels), but were able to establish a small camp on Pattle (now Shanhu / 珊瑚) Island in the southwestern part of the archipelago.[37][38][39] The Republic of China drew up The Southern China Sea Islands Location Map, marking the national boundaries in the sea with 11 lines, two of which were later removed, showing the U-shaped claim on the entire South China Sea, and showing the Spratly and Paracels in Chinese territory, in 1947.[28] The Americans reminded the Philippines at its independence in 1946 that the Spratlys was not Philippine territory, both to not anger Chiang Kai-shek in China and because the Spratlys were not part of the Philippines per the 1898 treaty Spain signed with America.[38] 1950 – After the Chinese nationalists were driven from Hainan by the People's Liberation Army (PLA), they withdrew their garrisons in both the Paracels and Spratlys to Taiwan. 1969 – A UN sponsored research team discovers oil under the sea floor of the island group. 1970 – China occupies Amphitrite Group of the Paracel Islands * In 1596, the Spanish Colonial Government declared that each island in the Kalayaan Islands, now known as the Spratly Islands, had Barangay or Barrio status. 1971 – Philippines announces claim to islands adjacent to its territory in the Spratlys, which they named Kalayaan, which was formally incorporated into Palawan Province in 1972. The Philippines President Marcos announced the claims after Taiwanese troops attacked and shot at a Philippine fishing boat on Itu Aba.[ Wikipedia
    1
  21. 1
  22. 1
  23. 1
  24. 1
  25. 1
  26. China trade surplus with the world was 823 billion in 2023 279 billion of it was with you Americans What most people don’t get? Is it is US multinationals making the lion share of those profits inflating the trade deficit between China to the USA Where Chinese companies trade with their Belt and Road country partners US Multinationals using illegal labour from South East Asia. Or more and more automation in their wholly owned factories in China These are the same companies who got those trump tax cuts you for sure cheered about Same companies based in China who derived 392 billion in sales in Chinese domestic markets in 2018 when trump started his trade war Same companies whose high flying stocks are in your 401k/Pensions Why didn’t China pull the nuclear option and boot these companies you might ask? They don’t believe in a zero sum game type of thinking I can show you in the trade vvar how they didn’t pull out their big trade we a pons In fact when the USA was raising tariffs on countries China was lowering them on Countries instead of the USA of course For example China dominates the production of the world’s essential ingredients that go into the world’s pharmaceutical drugs. China stops exporting and Americans lose access to Alzheimer’s, Diabetes, Heart Disease, Cancer Drugs etc etc etc etc 👇 Trump’s ‘trade war’ with China won’t be so easy to win Having learned these value chain lessons, Beijing has worked hard to bring more of the high-value-adding parts of value chains into China, and to build hi-tech industries in which it can establish a globally competitive position. China has successfully done this in areas like high-speed trains (CRRC), digital telecoms networks (Huawei), drones (DJI) and hi-tech batteries (BYD). Trump’s team is not wrong to be worried about China’s competitive emergence here, and to target these new-tech sectors in the latest trade war sortie.But here’s the problem: China exports almost none of these new-tech products to the US, making US tariff threats meaningless. Rather, they go to developing economy markets – many embraced by the Belt and Road initiative – where China has succeeded in building a hi-tech, high-value brand reputation. As Trump’s team will quickly learn, the challenge of finding China’s pain points is bigger than expected: for a decade China’s priority has been to base growth on the domestic consumer economy and reduce reliance on the low-value-adding export processing industries (many of which are US- or Hong Kong-owned and concentrated in the Pearl River Delta) SCMP
    1
  27. 1
  28. 1
  29. 1
  30. 1
  31. 1
  32. 1
  33. 1
  34. 1
  35. 1
  36. 1
  37. 1
  38. 1
  39. 1
  40. 1
  41. people like you probably can’t make a distinction between the two types of debt because the US Government/US FED has had no problems taking internal Agency Debt which is private Debt and not back by the US Government and then turning into External Sovereign Debt Since we know from 2017 to Q3 of 2019 the FEDs bright idea was to allow 50 to 60 billion of the Agency Debt and US Treasury Debt it soaped up during QE to slowly mature each month, off the FEDs balance sheet. Where the US Treasury would issue new corresponding debt for the public to buy. It ended during Q3 of 2019 Because that selling ended up freezing up the repo market Just like when it happened in 2008/2009 during the subprime crisis Thus the FED balance sheet went from 4.5 trillion to about 3.8 trillion. Last I checked its was back over 8 trillion. As the US FED had to buy back US Treasury Debt 👇 As politicians call for taxpayer bailouts and a government takeover of troubled mortgage lenders Freddie Mac and Fannie Mae, FreedomWorks would like to point out that a bailout is a transfer of possibly hundreds of billions of U.S. tax dollars to sophisticated investors and governments overseas. The top five foreign holders of Freddie and Fannie long-term debt are China, Japan, the Cayman Islands, Luxembourg, and Belgium. In total foreign investors hold over $1.3 trillion in these agency bonds, according to the U.S. Treasury’s most recent “Report on Foreign Portfolio Holdings of U.S. Securities.” FreedomWorks President Matt Kibbe commented, “The prospectus for every GSE bond clearly states that it is not backed by the United States government. That’s why investors holding agency bonds already receive a significant risk premium over Treasuries.” “A bailout at this stage would be the worst possible outcome for American taxpayers and mortgage holders, who have been paying a risk premium to these foreign investors. It would change the rules of the game retroactively and would directly subsidize the risks taken by sophisticated foreign investors.” “A bailout of GSE bondholders would be perhaps the greatest taxpayer rip-off in American history. It is bad economics and you can be sure it is terrible politics.” FreedomWorks
    1
  42. 1
  43. 1
  44. 1
  45. 1
  46. 1
  47. 1
  48. 1
  49. 1
  50. 1
  51. 1
  52. 1
  53. 1
  54. 1
  55. 1
  56. 1
  57. 1
  58. 1
  59. 1
  60. 1
  61. 1
  62. A nation of outlaws A century ago, that wasn't China -- it was us One hundred and fifty years ago, even America's closest trade partners were despairing about our cheating ways. Charles Dickens, who visited in 1842, was, like many Britons, stunned by the economic ambition of our nation's inhabitants, and appalled by what they would do for the sake of profit. When he first stepped off the boat in Boston, he found the city's bookstores rife with pirated copies of his novels, along with those of his countrymen. Dickens would later deliver lectures decrying the practice, and wrote home in outrage: "my blood so boiled as I thought of the monstrous injustice." In the United States of the early 19th century, capitalism as we know it today was still very much in its infancy. Most people still lived on small farms, and despite the persistent myth that America was the land of laissez-faire, there were plenty of laws on the books aimed at keeping tight reins on the market economy. But as commerce became more complex, and stretched over greater distances, this patchwork system of local and state-level regulations was gradually overwhelmed by a new generation of wheeler-dealer entrepreneurs. Taking a page from the British, who had pioneered many ingenious methods of adulteration a generation or two earlier, American manufacturers, distributors, and vendors of food began tampering with their products en masse -- bulking out supplies with cheap filler, using dangerous additives to mask spoilage or to give foodstuffs a more appealing color. Boston Globe
    1
  63. 1
  64. 1
  65. 1
  66. 1
  67. 1
  68. 1