China

User Forum Topic
Submitted by FlyerInHi on October 12, 2018 - 5:12pm

Just watched an interesting lecture by Kai Fu Lee on Chinese innovation and Artificiial Intelligence.
Very interesting talk about the future.

https://youtu.be/bh0TXtB0NxU

Submitted by FlyerInHi on January 30, 2019 - 2:55am.

Myriad wrote:

I question whether other countries would be able to replicate due to factors such as demographics, education, geography, etc.

Look how Argentina welcomed Xi Jinping with a band at the airport and a state visit at the G20 meeting. Trump didn't get it. But the red haired fat woman on Fox News still reported how the Air Force One landing in the dark was amazing and impressive, oh so patriotic to see the Beast too. Trump had no red carpet, nothing.

And after Trump flew back, Argentina and China were signing deals after deals. Did the American media report it? Yes, very lightly which leaves the American people so dumb and uninformed.

Look how China woos countries and honors their leaders with state visits in Beijing. China treats all countries with the same semblance of respect. Just look on YouTube to see how China welcomes all leaders the same way they welcome Donald Trump or Theresa May to Beijing.

All the while, we are retreating diplomatically. And we treat small countries as the shitholes that they are. When did we give the leader of Gabon, or some other shithole leader a full state visit in Washington?

Myriad wrote:

But it's not China threatening dominance that we are worried about China. It a change in the status quo of international commons, a return to mercantilism/state competition, and impact to democracy/personal rights.

Really? We are the ones withdrawing from the status quo by leaving international institutions that we built, leaving empty space for China to fill.

Myriad wrote:

The problem with SOEs (US, China, wherever) is that the prevent private companies from doing the job more efficiently. Because they are backed by the state, they can get favorable financial terms, which can cause distortions in the funding market (you see that in China now when the SOEs are too big relative to the private market). We accept the existence of SOE where it's not easy for multiple private companies to compete - but we really would be better off if Amtrak had competition.
Outside the country is different - yes, countries can back certain businesses to work projects. The US does that too, just not companies like Caltrans. We have Bechtel and others that did that in the past - Or Boeing, Google, MSFT, Intel, etc now. The US economy has long moved away from large public works, while China's economy is in this phase.

Public transit in the US is often funded by via government and run like a government department. NYC's system has been underfunded for 40+ years - it'll take a long time to fix. But transit by itself is unable to pay for major capital projects without other sources of funds. You could wait for the government, but you could also follow the HK model
https://www.theatlantic.com/china/archiv...

Long post of irrelevant stuff.
If you are so sure that SOEs are bad and inefficient. Then why not let China fail on its own?

If you're so sure the China's economic model results in misallocations, then let them knock themselves out.

Myriad wrote:

I have no problem with that and understand probably won't materially change the trade deficit. However, it'll create a vast inefficiency to trade with China directly.
The problem I have with China is that they had a chance to just work with the existing global trade/commons system to increase economic benefit. But now we have to deal with the BS territorial ambitions in SE and East Asia. If you go back 10 years, we didn't have the military buildup going on in Asia. There wasn't even an aircraft carrier assigned to the Pacific for a while. Now we have every country in Asia increasing their military.

Also all the crap that China does in HK, Australia, and here - but I guess we've been allowing that to happen in our society.

But what is China's end goal here? Do they really want global great power competition?

Is China not allowed to have power ambitions just like we do? At the workplace, is the Chinese engineer not allowed to aspire to become CEO?

The military build-up by China is thanks to the growing size of their economy and what that affords them to buy. Strategically, they need to build their military before their ageing demographics makes it much harder. Do you expect them to not plan?

If we trade less with China, trade more with Vietnam (Philippines, or other countries), but if Vietnam buys telecom, infrastructure and tech from China (because Chinese stuff is best and cheapest for Vietnam's stage of development), then China will become even better at building higher value tech, and that will help their military. TPP was designed to counter that by giving Vietnam preferential access to the US market, but with Trump departing TPP, Vietnam is now just like any WTO country. Why is the US not building high speed rail, seaports, etc.. for Vietnam on credit?

On territorial disputes, we already said that don't have a dog in the race. The countries in the regions need to work it out among them themselves. And so far all is quiet so let them work it out.

If we want regional countries to counter China, why did we waste their time, a decade in negotiations? All to force them to join RCEP. Notice the absence of the USA.

Myriad wrote:

We can make life a lot more difficult for China. We could also steal technology from China and hand it to our designated state champions. We can spend significant % of GDP on international development too.

So why don't we? Especially the international development part. China is completing a bridge for Panama; we should build them 2 beautiful bridges as Trump would say. Panama will love us more.

If you want to woo a beautiful girl, you need to buy her gifts. If you only just prance around flexing your muscles but buy her nothing, she may go with the other guy even though you're more handsome.

Why do you think Panama ditched recognition of Taiwan for China over US protests?

Myriad wrote:

We could call BS on the one country, two systems and recognize Taiwan independence. Spheres of influence in Africa - that can happen too. But heh this time, I doubt the Belgians will go back to the Congo and Italy to Ethiopia ;)

One-country, two systems is a British/Western concept that China agreed to with the return of Hong Kong. If you call BS on it, then Hong Kong is just like any other city in China.

Recognize Taiwan's independence? The US made a commitment to the One-China policy in 1971.
Sure, we could "refudiate" the One-China police but then we lose credibility and nobody would trust us ever again. BTW, Taiwan never declared independence and they have their own internal politics to work out as they still claim to represent all of China.

In Africa, want people to love us? Do better than China.
BTW, China worked really hard over the last few decades to win over Africa. Africans countries now vote with China at the UN.

China built so much infrastructure for Africa. Where was the USA?

In summary, don't bitch about China. Do better than China and show the world that our ideas result in more concrete material wealth that people can see and use. Talk is cheap.

Submitted by FlyerInHi on January 31, 2019 - 7:31pm.

Weijian Shan talks about China.

65% of Qualcomm’s sales are in China. We, San Diegans, better not want a trade war.

https://youtu.be/TeGKEiODCjA

Submitted by Myriad on February 1, 2019 - 8:18pm.

FlyerInHi wrote:

Really? We are the ones withdrawing from the status quo by leaving international institutions that we built, leaving empty space for China to fill.

Agree with that. The US has some pretty shitty foreign policy. The last time we had a coherent policy was probably back in the Cold War.

FlyerInHi wrote:

If you're so sure the China's economic model results in misallocations, then let them knock themselves out.

Right, the system won't be a collapse. Just private companies in China suffer. We'll see if it's a contributor to the middle income trap. [/quote]

FlyerInHi wrote:

The military build-up by China is thanks to the growing size of their economy and what that affords them to buy. Strategically, they need to build their military before their ageing demographics makes it much harder. Do you expect them to not plan?
If we trade less with China, trade more with Vietnam (Philippines, or other countries), but if Vietnam buys telecom, infrastructure and tech from China (because Chinese stuff is best and cheapest for Vietnam's stage of development), then China will become even better at building higher value tech, and that will help their military. TPP was designed to counter that by giving Vietnam preferential access to the US market, but with Trump departing TPP, Vietnam is now just like any WTO country. Why is the US not building high speed rail, seaports, etc.. for Vietnam on credit?

Nothing wrong with each country building up their own miltiary. I have no issue with that. Japan, Korea, India all have large militaries.
Agree on TPP - that goes back to the crap foreign poliicies of the US.

FlyerInHi wrote:

On territorial disputes, we already said that don't have a dog in the race. The countries in the regions need to work it out among them themselves. And so far all is quiet so let them work it out.

We only have a stake in that the freedom of access to air and oceans is allowed beyond the 12 mile limit for recognized territories. It is not all quiet in the region - which is why everyone is building their military up. If China didn't create an ADIZ over the South China Sea and built "miltiary" facilities islands in contested areas, we probably wouldn't be headed to a Cold War. Plenty of stories of China fisheries vessels blocking other countries from free access to what would be considered areas outside their EEZ.

FlyerInHi wrote:
One-country, two systems is a British/Western concept that China agreed to with the return of Hong Kong. If you call BS on it, then Hong Kong is just like any other city in China.

That's right, HK is just another city in China now. Which is why Taiwan is calling BS on the One-country, two systems (China uses that term when referring to Taiwan sometimes).

FlyerInHi wrote:
Recognize Taiwan's independence? The US made a commitment to the One-China policy in 1971.
Sure, we could "refudiate" the One-China police but then we lose credibility and nobody would trust us ever again. BTW, Taiwan never declared independence and they have their own internal politics to work out as they still claim to represent all of China.

It's not an impossibilty - certainly isn't going to happen soon. But let's say the US and China get into a full Cold War where everything is segregated. Anything could be on the table at that point.
I'm Chinese, I do know their's a lots of internal issues in Taiwan regarding independence. Lot of the reasons have to do with the economy, trade with China, and that the Taiwanese have huge investments in China. After all, Foxconn is Taiwanese.

FlyerInHi wrote:
In summary, don't bitch about China. Do better than China and show the world that our ideas result in more concrete material wealth that people can see and use. Talk is cheap.

Agree with that. The US has some really shitty incoherent foreign policy for the past 3 decades. The real failure of leadership in both the US & China is that we are now heading towards a world that will be less open, more divergent, and segregated. Sure some countries are going to benefit from great power competition, but most will not. We're at a point where travel & investment is beginning to restricted between US & China/Russia depending on what company/industry you are in. I don't believe China is going to collapse or crash - the reality is that when the all the corporate and soverign debt becomes a problem in the next crisis, the US & China will be equally affected.

Submitted by FlyerInHi on February 2, 2019 - 4:19pm.

Myriad wrote:
FlyerInHi wrote:

If you're so sure the China's economic model results in misallocations, then let them knock themselves out.

Right, the system won't be a collapse. Just private companies in China suffer. We'll see if it's a contributor to the middle income trap.

Yes, that's why SOEs are a public good... sort of the social safety net of China.

In USA we have welfare.

China is worried about social unrest due to 4th industrial revolution disruptions. SOEs are a way to keep people employed.

BTW, China's SOEs are pretty efficient compared to Caltrans or Amtrak, even the Army Corps of Engineers. The Chinese innovate and build stuff all over the world. I don't see us doing it.

But yeah, China knows they need to reform. They are taking a wait and see approach.

As far as the US model for a poor country in Asia, that was the Philippines. After WWII, the PI was the richest country in Asia. And now?

And if the goal is to keep China poor so that they cannot build their military, they why would you want to "force" them to reform and become more efficient. Let them stay inefficient, and then you have no need for containment.

Myriad wrote:

We only have a stake in that the freedom of access to air and oceans is allowed beyond the 12 mile limit for recognized territories. It is not all quiet in the region - which is why everyone is building their military up. If China didn't create an ADIZ over the South China Sea and built "miltiary" facilities islands in contested areas, we probably wouldn't be headed to a Cold War. Plenty of stories of China fisheries vessels blocking other countries from free access to what would be considered areas outside their EEZ.

freedom of navigation is just a pretext for the USA to send warships. Has any cargo ship been prevented from sailing?

The fishing skirmishes are none of our business. Remember the row with Japan when China suspended rare earth shipments to Japan? It's now water under the bridge and, in October of last year, Shinzo Abe went on a state visit to China.

The small Asia countries don't trust the USA anymore since we wasted their time with TPP. Since that happened, they deepened ties with China.

Be careful what you wish for. I am sure the Chinese will have ships 12 miles from our coasts in the future. If we set the example, others will follow it when they can.

For long term stability, the US needs to show restraint in order to expect the same from others in the future.

Myriad wrote:

their's a lots of internal issues in Taiwan regarding independence. Lot of the reasons have to do with the economy, trade with China, and that the Taiwanese have huge investments in China. After all, Foxconn is Taiwanese.

Actually when the US recognized the PRC, we hedge our bets. At the time, all the small countries still recognized Taiwan. So the US, if we needed to, could to the UN and flip back to ROC under the guise of international law.

But little by little, especially while we were busy in the middle east, China, one by one, won over African and Latin American countries. China now has strong support at the UN.

So now, if the US wanted to recognize Taiwan's independence (if Taiwan declares it), or ROC as the legitimate representative of all of China, we would lose a vote at the UN and veto by Russia and China on the Security Council. And we would be isolated. Taiwan independence is not a realistic prospect.

Myriad wrote:

Agree with that. The US has some really shitty incoherent foreign policy for the past 3 decades. The real failure of leadership in both the US & China is that we are now heading towards a world that will be less open, more divergent, and segregated. Sure some countries are going to benefit from great power competition, but most will not. We're at a point where travel & investment is beginning to restricted between US & China/Russia depending on what company/industry you are in. I don't believe China is going to collapse or crash - the reality is that when the all the corporate and soverign debt becomes a problem in the next crisis, the US & China will be equally affected.

In my opinion, we have a divergent world because the US, in choosing expediency, failed to work hard in building alliance. We are withdrawing from international institutions we built.

The US uses the US Dollar not just an economic instrument of trade but also as an economic bludgeon. So instead of relying on the international systems, countries are working out currency swaps and alternative system. France, Britain and Germany (our allies) develop a new system to trade with Iran to circumvent out sanctions.

by using the USD as a political tool, we are accelerating the eventual demise of the USD as a reserve currency. We will suffer decades in the future.

Submitted by FlyerInHi on February 2, 2019 - 4:25pm.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=iP11XeIV1ZA

Look at the new city Singapore and China are building. I'm impressed. Sim city or what?

As someone who loves real estate, I'm amazed much wealth is created. I'd rather own a condo in Singapore-China Knowledge city than in a house in Jacksonville, Fl. So almost instantly, many Chinese will have more housing equity than established Americans who worked for decades.

Submitted by FlyerInHi on February 8, 2019 - 7:33pm.

Australia had 27 years without a recession. Thanks to China. Natural resources, Chinese investments and immigration.

https://youtu.be/EhQ1xb7_bdw

Submitted by The-Shoveler on February 11, 2019 - 5:23pm.

OK the real challenge,

Who will put the first Human on Mar's?

We are already rolling all over that planet.

Submitted by FlyerInHi on February 14, 2019 - 2:13pm.

Myriad, Parag Kanna has a new book about the "Asian System" as he calls it.
He talks about his views with Ian Bremmer.

I think the US will lose the trade war because where we sanction China, Europe, Japan and Korea will fill the gaps with technology the Chinese lack. And with US tariffs, Chinese companies will just move production to other Asian countries.

https://youtu.be/PwJV4zS_FC0

Comment viewing options

Select your preferred way to display the comments and click "Save settings" to activate your changes.