Comments by "tooltalk" (@tooltalk) on "US Risks ‘Forever’ Trade War With China, Roach Says" video.

  1.  @joey3291  (continued) Foreign batteries aren’t officially banned in China, but auto executives say that since 2016 they have been warned by government officials that they must use Chinese batteries in their China-built cars, or face repercussions. That has forced them to spend millions of dollars to redesign cars to work with inferior Chinese batteries, they say. ... “We want to comply, and we have to comply,” said one executive with a foreign car maker. “There’s no other option.” So forcing local sourcing/production on foreign companies or misusing subsidies to cripple foreign competitors is a violation under China's WTO obligation that Roach should be familiar with. China's "steal, subsidize, ban foreigners, rinse, repeat" is nothing new.
    7
  2.  @joey3291  : 1. Power Play: How China-Owned Volvo Avoids Beijing’s Battery Rules Car maker is allowed to use high-end foreign technology, while rivals are squeezed into buying local, Trefor Moss, May 17, 2018 WSJ No worries, your denial doesn't matter much. As I said, China's illegal subsidies, in international lingo it's called Local Content Requirement, or LCR, is one of the two prohibited subsidies under China's WTO obligation. In this case, since China's discriminatory "purchase subsidies" were based on this practice, all of China's consumer subsidies are effectively illegal.
    5
  3.  @joey3291  : I just showed you evidence, the WSJ article which is publicly available info. You are just in denial. It's just too bad that Roach has no intellectual honesty.
    5
  4. He's a fairly well known Cee See Pee plant.
    5
  5. ​ @joey3291  repost: Sure, that's the narrative that China is trying to push -- unfortunately this is fairly well known in the industry and among trade regulators around the world, which is why the EU launched the antisubsidy probe last year. According to WSJ: ... China requires auto makers to use batteries from one of its approved suppliers if they want to be cleared to mass-produce electric cars and plug-in hybrids and to qualify for subsidies. These suppliers are all Chinese, so such global leaders as South Korea’s LG Chem Ltd and Japan’s Panasonic Corp. are excluded.
    4
  6.  @joey3291  : just for your amusement, in March, China filed a WTO complaint accusing the US of doing what China has been doing since 2015 (WT/DS623).
    4
  7. When is China going to allow foreign battery competitors to compete in China's local EV market?
    3
  8.  @DouglasW-m9z  it's time for you to stop whining about "rules" that you claim don't exist.
    3
  9.  @CanTho2022  nice try LOL. There are over 270+M cars in the US. Good luck selling EVs in places with no full electrificity, much less paved roads.
    3
  10.  @vgstb  Oh the CCP's national motto -- the century of humiliation is alive and well. LOLL
    3
  11.  @joey3291  BTW, you are not wrong that Biden's IRA which requires local sourcing/manufacturing is based on China's discriminatory, anticompetitive practices since 2016 under MIC 2025. The point is to counter China's every subsidy malpractice with equal response.
    2
  12.  @DouglasW-m9z  it's called the WTO. You might remember that China begged to join the WTO back in 1995 was rejected for good reasons.
    2
  13. ​ @lawrenceng2271  >> US wanted "rule-based order" according only to the American-devised rules. ... << Yes. China was never held at a gun point to join the WTO. China BEGGED to join the world order created by the US / EU (and to serve their own interest) after the fall of the Berlin Wall and the total collapse of China's command control economy. China promised to adhere to the rules developed by the West and to the West liberal values, however imperfect, promoted within. China makes enormous amount of money in trade surplus with the rest of the world, but China insists on cheating and lying to dominate the global market. All China had to do was to comply with the rules as defined under the WTO and get rich. Instead China now wants to become the world's hegemo destabilizing the Asia and distorting the global market in quest for domination.
    2
  14. ​ @IOomoOl  >> And to give you an example, when The Americans banned Huawei they banned it because they couldn't compete, << I actually used to work in the computer/network business and I have to say that you are mostly very wrong -- you don't know anything at all about daily security threat from China or tech behind it. Part of the problem is that it's really difficult to maintain network security not completely under your control -- and most these network devices are inherently insecure. While I have never been personally involved in any incident with Huawei, it never made sense to depend on any Chinese companies, especially those with close ties with the Chinese military for wireless network infrastructure. You need to stop stating that it is anything other than security threat clearly present in all Huawei wireless network equipments.
    2
  15.  @IOomoOl  Also, remember that the US doesn't compete in the wireless infrastructure business -- all major network players are either the Nordic (Nokia, Ericsson) or South Korean (Samsung). There is no local industry to protect, or even compete, contrary to your flawed narrative. Cisco is more of a #1 commodity network provider at this point and Qualcomm is mostly on the mobile chipset side of things where they are #1.
    2
  16. good idea! China is going to miss out on the most lucrative auto markets, the US/EU, in the world!!
    2
  17.  @lordbendtner7021  : sure, China sell more units, but less value. The avg price of a new vehicle in China $20K vs. US $50K. Even if China sells twice more cars, the US market is still greater in value.
    2
  18. You mean like China's weaponization of rare earth metal against Japan in 2010?
    2
  19. ​ @joey3291  : You don't know that China cheats all the time? The Chinese never competitive at all, so the gov't had to pull some shenanigans. According to WSJ: ... China requires auto makers to use batteries from one of its approved suppliers if they want to be cleared to mass-produce electric cars and plug-in hybrids and to qualify for subsidies. These suppliers are all Chinese, so such global leaders as South Korea’s LG Chem Ltd and Japan’s Panasonic Corp. are excluded.
    1
  20. ​ @joey3291  And also you are NOT wrong that Biden's IRA's which requires local sourcing/production is based on China's subsidy malpractice under Xi's Make-China-Great-Again 2025 (aka Made-In-China 2025). The point is to counter China's every trade violations with equal response.
    1
  21.  @joey3291  repost: And also you are NOT wrong that Biden's IRA's which requires local sourcing/production is based on China's subsidy malpractices under Xi's Make-China-Great-Again 2025 (aka Made-In-China 2025). The point is to counter China's every trade violations with equal response.
    1
  22.  @joey3291  No worries, my c0mr3de friendn. The EU's antisubsidy decision would be out in a few days, you could glean from their finding on why China is getting slapped left and right by trade regulators around the world.
    1
  23.  @DouglasW-m9z  : it's all in China's 2001 WTO Accession Protocol. Basically the same rules apply to all members especially WRT prohibited subsidies.
    1
  24. ​ @DouglasW-m9z  This is covered under China's 2001 WTO Accession Protocol which is a lot of legalese. For prohibited subsidies (in more colloquial terms): ... subsidies that require recipients to meet certain export targets, or to use domestic goods instead of imported goods. They are prohibited because they are specifically designed to distort international trade, and are therefore likely to hurt other countries’ trade. ... UNDERSTANDING THE WTO: THE AGREEMENTS Anti-dumping, subsidies, safeguards: contingencies,etc (see Subsidies and countervailing measures, Prohibited Subsidies and Actionable Subsidies).
    1
  25. ​ @DouglasW-m9z  : cEU's rules on subsidies are somewhat easiser to read and based on the WTO rules: Regulation (EU) 2022/2560 of the European Parliament and of the Council of 14 December 2022 on foreign subsidies distorting the internal market, Document 32022R2560. (19) When using the indicators to determine the existence of a distortion in the internal market, the Commission could take into account various elements such as the size of the foreign subsidy in absolute terms ... Furthermore, the characteristics of the market, and in particular the competitive conditions on the market, such as barriers to entry, should be taken into account. Foreign subsidies in markets characterised by overcapacity or leading to overcapacity by sustaining uneconomic assets or by encouraging investment in capacity expansions that would otherwise not have been built are likely to cause distortions. ...
    1
  26.  @DouglasW-m9z  repost: China's 2001 WTO Accession Protocol and other rules defined under the WTO -- which is unfortunately a lot of legalese. I personally recommend reading EU's regulation which is also based on the same WTO rules and is in more plain language (google the title): Regulation (EU) 2022/2560 of the European Parliament and of the Council of 14 December 2022 on foreign subsidies distorting the internal market, Document 32022R2560. (19) When using the indicators to determine the existence of a distortion in the internal market, the Commission could take into account various elements such as the size of the foreign subsidy in absolute terms ... Furthermore, the characteristics of the market, and in particular the competitive conditions on the market, such as barriers to entry, should be taken into account. Foreign subsidies in markets characterised by overcapacity or leading to overcapacity by sustaining uneconomic assets or by encouraging investment in capacity expansions that would otherwise not have been built are likely to cause distortions. ...
    1
  27.  @DouglasW-m9z  repost: China's 2001 WTO Accession Protocol and other rules defined under the WTO which is a lot of legalese. I recommend reading Regulation (EU) 2022/2560 of the European Parliament and of the Council of 14 December 2022 instead see Section 19 which deals with "market distortion" wrt overcapacity.
    1
  28. ​ @DouglasW-m9z  Yeah, I see that you are just another C See Peeee chill.
    1
  29.  @Sep-ty9hl  sure u don't have t9 bel8eve me. We bel8eve in the WSJ.
    1
  30.  @Sep-ty9hl  lol and u r going to say china never steals anything, amrite?
    1
  31.  @vgstb  Welcome to YouTube. new wumao graduates of 2024!
    1
  32.  @vgstb  welcome to YT, new graduates of w00ma school 2024.
    1
  33.  @Give_Peace_a_Chance123  : Do you also believe that China doesn't stop Facebook, Google, Instagram, etc, etc from competing in China? China's practice of steal, subsidize, ban foreign competition, rinse repeat is nothing new.
    1
  34.  @Give_Peace_a_Chance123  I'm pretty sure you have no idea what EV batteries are.
    1
  35.  @厉冻干粉  If you want my response, English please. And also be sure to quote my text, so I understand what you are responding to.
    1
  36.  @genelarson6849  ever heard of China's rare earth metal ban against Japan in 2010? China's also imposed "export control" on graphite supply (used in the anode materials in batteries) to protect BYD and other Chinese companies' electric bus business in markets oversea.
    1
  37.  @qwerty6789x  google translator?
    1
  38. ​ @Npc-AA  >> 100% tariff actually did no harm to Chinese EV, ... << It certainly did not raise inflation. Speaking of Korean auto companies, didn't China shadow-ban Korean auto companies after THAAD in 2017 and they lost over 90% of their sales in China in a span of a few years?
    1
  39. ​ @catsNcode  China already got plenty of free R&D. China forced all foreign battery makers to waive their IPR to access China's local EV market since 2015 under Xi's MIC 2015 to shidl all local companies IP theft -- CATL comes to mind and though SVOLT is also under probe currenty in South Korea -- and practicall banned all foreig battery competitor since 2016. But China's practice of "steal, subsidize, ban competition" rinse, repeat! is nothing new.
    1
  40.  @ibcyt  You mean CIA? NSA is a spy agent -- their agents don't reveal their ID. I guess your wumao school never taught that.
    1
  41. 50%? That's also the expected CVD (countervailing duty) to be imposed on all Chinese EVs (retroactively since March).
    1
  42.  @brasidas2011  Absolutely. China is so desperate that in March they filed a WTO complaint accusing the US (IRA) of doing what China has been doing past decade -- limiting access / subsidies to locally sourced/manufactured EVs.
    1
  43.  @Give_Peace_a_Chance123  >> They're only more expensive in US because of American taxation, ... << It's not that. The type of vehicles popular in the US is vastly different than those in Europe, Japan, or CN. The best selling in the US vehicles are large work trucks, such as Ford F-150, GM Silverado, Dodge Ram, or SUVs whereas in Japan and CN small/compact (and also much cheaper vehicles). The current existing battery techs are ok for small vehicles, but difficult for larger SUVs/trucks (more power, weight, etc). China's LFP batteries for instance are really better optimized for stationary energy storage (ESS) or small vehicles. The small vehicle segment is less than 10% of the US auto market and still shrinking.
    1
  44.  @vgstb  >> The Chinese domestic car market is growing in size (and value) and is projected to be bigger by 202 << no problem. The real estate bubble and other economic dillema are holding back big purchases in China. It's no time for conspicuous consumption, contrary to your nonsense.
    1
  45. tariff on goods/services not yet available is taxing on own people?
    1
  46.  @kimpeater1  : I think sometime next 10 years we are going to see China's birth rate dipping below South Korea's.
    1
  47. Yep, that's why I think Biden is the wrong president to lead the US today -- his neocon cabinet should have never messed with Russia.
    1
  48. someone should remind Roach that there is de-risking going on.
    1
  49.  @pgdaszzz7399  tariff on non-existing product in the US is a hidden tax on consumers? please explain.
    1
  50.  @larryc1616  what does the customs do with the tariff? Why can't we use that to subsidize competing local products that satisfy local regulation?
    1
  51.  @andrewlim7751  >> What happen if is adopted by the rest of the world but u.s.? Do you know how big is automobile industry? << The US is either the largest or second largest market in the world. Just look at what China did to dominate the EV battery business -- China banned all foreign battery makers since 2016 and forced all EV OEMs to locally made batteries by local companies only.
    1
  52.  @andrewlim7751  : Do you know why China can't just forced Apple out like China did with Samsung's smartphone busines back in 2015 (years before the Note 7 fire)? Tesla open sourced their IP in preparation of entering China's EV market and China invited Tesla in as a marketing prop, to showcase and prove China's EV legitimacy. Without Tesla, LFP wouldn't have been nearly as succuess at all.
    1
  53.  @andrewlim7751  Panasonic and LG have less than 1% of China's local battery market as a result of China's ban on foreign battery makers since 2016. Their MIC batteries are mostly for exports, not for internal sales.
    1
  54. - education is a noble thing, but nothing worth knowing can't be taught. The US already vacuums up all the best engineers and STEM all over the world. - liberals' war in Ukraine must end if Biden is serious about countering China.
    1
  55.  @davidz7858  You know what happened in the South China Sea when the US pulled out of the Phillippines. or are you going to play dumb and the US presence has nothing to do with it?
    1
  56. Absolutely, he's one of those "globalism" charlatans who promised a peaceful future with China. The war in Ukraine and Gagz must stop and focus on China.
    1
  57. The US "overcapacity" is mostly farmed to other countries. Apple iPhones are still mostly made in China (though most high-value components are made all over the world outside China), as does HP's printer/cartridge business. There is actually shortage in AI chips/nVidia and long waiting list at TSMC that fabs them. This is all part of de-coupling that many seem to ignore here.
    1
  58. how many chemical engineers know what TFP is?
    1
  59. Only if Roach can start the other 50% of the real story between US-China trade.
    1
  60. Yes, it was a huge mistake to allow China to join the WTO and all Wetern companies to move there.
    1
  61. It actually started under Clinton and China's access to the WTO in 2001, not Reagan. There was hardly any outsourcing to China prior to this.
    1