Page 2 of 2 FirstFirst 12
Results 16 to 21 of 21

Thread: Trade War

  1. #16
    Join Date
    Dec 1969
    CA, USA
    Quote Originally Posted by GeneChing View Post
    As I've said in our Trade War thread:

    The rising Hate Towards China may exacerbate boycotts and the trade war. However, this will affect products across the board - not just martial arts gear.
    Unfortunately, in regards to manufacturing, companies the world over have ‘put all their eggs in one basket’ in China, and now we will (most likely) see the dire consequences of that. I realize that manufacturing in China is cheaper, but regarding martial arts uniforms alone, I would rather spend more for a quality product that’s going to last, than buy a cheap product that wears out prematurely. Then you haven’t saved any money at all, but are actually spending more in the long run, because you have to keep replacing cheap gear. There is a saying: “Buy quality and cry only once.”

    Not that that has any bearing on me anymore. Since I no longer attend classes or teach, my training “uniform” for the past several years has consisted of sweat pants (or loose-fitting cargo pants) and a T-shirt.

    The time is long overdue for US and other international companies to move manufacturing, if not all back home, then to other, alternate countries outside of China. I say this, and I am not anti-China (but I’m not getting into politics). I am anti-over-reliance on China, or any other country, on making everything we depend on and giving one country so much power.
    Last edited by Jimbo; 05-08-2020 at 12:05 PM.

  2. #17
    Join Date
    Dec 1969
    Fremont, CA, U.S.A.

    Still going...'s all still going.

    Hong Kong: China vows to retaliate after Trump ends special economic status
    4 hours ago

    Media caption"Their freedom has been taken away"

    China has vowed to retaliate after the US ended Hong Kong's preferential trade status and imposed sanctions on officials who crack down on rights.

    President Donald Trump said he was acting because China had taken away Hong Kong's freedom after it imposed a new security law.

    Beijing condemned Mr Trump's decision, saying it would impose sanctions on relevant people and entities in the US.

    US-China ties have become increasingly strained over a wide range of issues.

    Apart from Beijing's actions in Hong Kong, Mr Trump has criticised China over its handling of the coronavirus pandemic as well as its military build-up in the South China Sea, its treatment of Muslim minorities and massive trade surpluses.

    Mr Trump's decision means the end of Hong Kong's special trade status with the US, agreed in 1984 when the territory was still a British colony. Hong Kong is expected to be treated the same as mainland China, meaning its goods could be subjected to additional tariffs.

    The controversial security law - which effectively outlaws criticism of China's government - is the most sweeping change to the political landscape of Hong Kong since the UK handed back sovereignty to Beijing in 1997.

    Mr Trump also said he had signed the Hong Kong Autonomy Act, which passed unanimously in Congress earlier this month and penalises banks doing business with Chinese officials who implement the security law.

    In a strongly worded statement, China's foreign ministry described the decision as a "gross interference" in its domestic affairs and said the country would impose retaliatory sanctions to "safeguard China's legitimate interests".

    "The US attempt to obstruct the implementation of the national security law for Hong Kong will never succeed," the statement said.

    "We urge the US side to correct its mistakes, refrain from implementing the act and stop interfering in China's internal affairs in any way. China will firmly respond if the US goes ahead."

    What did President Trump say?

    Speaking in the Rose Garden on Tuesday, Mr Trump said the executive order was intended to "hold China accountable for its aggressive actions against the people" of Hong Kong.

    "No special privileges [for Hong Kong], no special economic treatment and no export of sensitive technologies," said the president, who first announced in May that his administration would begin paring back the territory's special status.

    According to a document released by the White House, any dealings in US property by anyone determined to be responsible for or complicit in "actions or policies that undermine democratic processes or institutions in Hong Kong" would be blocked.

    It also directs officials to "revoke license exceptions for exports to Hong Kong," and includes revoking special treatment for Hong Kong passport holders.

    Mr Trump said the Hong Kong Autonomy Act gave the administration "powerful new tools to hold responsible the individuals and the entities involved in extinguishing Hong Kong's freedom".

    After being questioned by a journalist, the president said he had no plans to speak to Chinese President Xi Jinping.

    Mr Trump also said his administration held China "fully responsible for concealing the [coronavirus] and unleashing it upon the world". His own response to the pandemic has been under scrutiny, as the US has 3.4 million recorded cases, the highest in the world, and more than 136,000 deaths.

    The president's policy address digressed into a lengthy political attack on his Democratic presidential challenger, Joe Biden, ranging from trade and immigration to policing and climate change.

    Perception is reality

    It was not a matter of if, but when. Scrapping Hong Kong's special status will mean companies based there will now have to evaluate what this means for them.

    Hong Kong is a re-exporting hub, which means that goods that go through Hong Kong to the US but have come from somewhere else - like China for instance - have avoided the tariffs the US has slapped on China.

    Now that Hong Kong's special status is gone - mainland Chinese companies may look for another place to send their goods - which would see Hong Kong's port and logistics businesses suffer.

    And how much of an impact will this have on American and multinational companies using Hong Kong as a regional hub? Well, as one business consultant told me - the structural reasons for why a company would use Hong Kong as a hub are still there - low tax rates, good geographic location, convertibility of currency.

    But perception is reality - and if the perception is that doing business in Hong Kong has become so much more onerous - why not decamp to mainland China or Singapore instead?

    What is going on with US-China relations?

    With Mr Trump facing an uphill battle for re-election this November, he and Mr Biden have accused each other of being weak on China.

    On Monday, the administration condemned China's military build-up in the South China Sea, accusing it of bullying neighbours.

    Last Friday, Mr Trump told reporters on Air Force One that a "phase two" trade deal with China was in doubt because of its handling of coronavirus, which he called the "plague".

    The US also officially withdrew last week from the World Health Organization, which Mr Trump had accused of being beholden to China.

    Last week, too, the Trump administration announced sanctions against Chinese politicians who it says are responsible for human rights violations against Muslim minorities in Xinjiang.
    Gene Ching
    Author of Shaolin Trips
    Support our forum by getting your gear at MartialArtSmart

  3. #18
    Join Date
    Dec 1969
    Fremont, CA, U.S.A.

    Wider deficit

    Economy / China Economy
    US trade deficit with China wider than May 2016, when Donald Trump accused China of ‘greatest theft in history
    The US trade deficit with China was 9.15 per cent wider in July 2020 than May 2016, when President Donald Trump accused China of ‘raping’ the US on trade
    After narrowing in the early months of the year due to coronavirus shutdowns, the deficit has recovered in recent months

    Finbarr Bermingham
    Published: 10:25am, 4 Sep, 2020

    US President Donald Trump has vowed on the campaign trail to eradicate a yawning trade deficit with China that he claimed showed the inequities in the global trading system. Photo: Bloomberg

    The United States’ trade deficit with China has crept back up close to pre-coronavirus levels after narrowing when the outbreak battered the Chinese economy.
    The deficit with China – the gap between the amount the US buys from China and what it sells – was US$31.62 billion in July, just 3.46 per cent lower than US$32.8 billion in July 2019, data released by the US Census Bureau on Thursday showed.
    But the rate at which it has grown in recent months will rattle US President Donald Trump, who vowed on the campaign trail in 2016 to eradicate the yawning gap that he claimed showed the inequities in the global trading system.
    In quarterly terms, the deficit climbed 36.8 per cent from the first three months of the year to the second, even if it is markedly lower in year-to-date terms than it was last year, due to a shutdown of China’s export engine in the early months of the year, when it was the first to be hit by the coronavirus pandemic.
    But perhaps most tellingly, the US trade deficit with China was 4.36 per cent wider last month than it was in July 2016, when Trump was on the campaign trail raging against it. Last month’s deficit was 9.15 per cent wider than May 2016, a month when Trump accused China of “raping” the US on trade.
    “Do not forget. We’re like the piggy bank that is being robbed. We have the cards. We have a lot of power with China,” Trump said at the time, during a campaign rally in Fort Wayne, Indiana. “Because we cannot continue to allow China to rape our country. And that is what they’re doing. It’s the greatest theft in the history of the world.”
    That rhetoric has not entirely subsided in the intervening four years, with tensions between the US and China now at their highest level for 40 years. Trade is seen as the one sticking plaster holding the relationship together, but even that is stuttering along, rather than powering home.
    Reuters agricultural columnist Karen Braun reported that US exports of soybeans to China between January and July 2020 were the lowest since 2004, and while August’s volumes have bounced back with an 18 per cent rise year on year, they are the lowest since 2008 if last year was excluded.
    Enormous purchases of American agricultural products in recent weeks have not stopped China from being well short of meeting its obligations under the phase one trade deal, which remains electorally important for Trump, given that key exporting states such as Iowa, Nebraska and Minnesota are considered in play in November’s poll.
    The overall US trade deficit jumped to its highest level in 12 years in July, as imports soared and exports grew by a smaller margin.
    US imports from Taiwan also jumped to record levels in July, helping to add to the overall trade deficit.
    Economists have said that prioritising the reduction in the trade deficit is a fool’s errand, since the economic profile of the consumption-driven US means it will naturally buy more goods from cheaper, lower-end manufacturing hubs.
    Everyone recognises that the overall direction of the economy is grim
    Christine McDaniel
    The fact that it narrowed by 32 per cent from a year earlier in the first quarter was not a cause to celebrate, critics said, because it represented a collapse in consumption in the US and a collapse in manufacturing in China due to the coronavirus.
    “Needless to say, everyone recognises that the overall direction of the economy is grim. But this is what reducing the trade deficit looks like: relative to our exports, we import less. Today, we are importing less because Americans are consuming less during an economic shut down,” wrote Christine McDaniel, a senior research fellow with the Mercatus Center at George Mason University, in April.
    On Monday, China will release its official trade data for August, which is expected to show continued recovery in the export-led economy.

    Finbarr Bermingham

    Finbarr Bermingham has been reporting on Asian trade since 2014. Prior to this, he covered global trade and economics in London. He joined the Post in 2018, before which he was Asia Editor at Global Trade Review and Trade Correspondent for the International Business Times

    trade war
    Gene Ching
    Author of Shaolin Trips
    Support our forum by getting your gear at MartialArtSmart

  4. #19
    A little impatience will spoil great plans.

  5. #20
    Join Date
    Dec 1969
    Fremont, CA, U.S.A.

    $300 b

    The martial arts industry is way too small to be suing the government but it is being impacted in the same manner as these major companies. This will trickle down to us as consumers soon enough.

    Some 3,500 U.S. companies sue over Trump-imposed Chinese tariffs
    By David Shepardson

    3 MIN READ

    WASHINGTON (Reuters) - About 3,500 U.S. companies, including Tesla Inc TSLA.O, Ford Motor Co F.N, Target Corp TGT.N, Walgreen Co WBA.O and Home Depot HD.N have sued the Trump administration in the last two weeks over the imposition of tariffs on more than $300 billion (Ł235.35 billion) in Chinese-made goods.

    FILE PHOTO: A U.S. dollar banknote featuring American founding father Benjamin Franklin and a China's yuan banknote featuring late Chinese chairman Mao Zedong are seen among U.S. and Chinese flags in this illustration picture taken May 20, 2019. REUTERS/Jason Lee/Illustration

    The suits, filed in the U.S. Court of International Trade, named U.S. Trade Representative Robert Lighthizer and the Customs and Border Protection agency and challenge what they call the unlawful escalation of the U.S. trade war with China through the imposition of a third and fourth round of tariffs.

    The legal challenges from a wide variety of companies argue the Trump administration failed to impose tariffs within a required 12-month period and did not comply with administrative procedures.

    The companies challenge the administration's "unbounded and unlimited trade war impacting billions of dollars in goods imported from the People's Republic of China by importers in the United States," according to a suit filed by auto parts manufacturer Dana Corp DAN.N.

    The suits challenge tariffs in two separate groups known as List 3 and List 4A.” List 3 includes 25% tariffs on about $200 billion in imports, while List 4A included 7.5% tariffs on $120 billion in goods.

    One suit argues the administration cannot expand tariffs to other Chinese imports “for reasons untethered to the unfair intellectual property policies and practices it originally investigated.”

    Companies filing suit include heavy truck manufacturer Volvo Group North America VOLVb.ST, U.S. auto parts retailer Pep Boys, clothing company Ralph Lauren, Sysco Corp SYY.N, guitar manufacturer Gibson Brands, Lenovo's 0992.HK U.S. unit, Dole Packaged Foods, a unit of Itochu Corp 8001.T and golf equipment manufacturer Callaway Golf Co.

    Home Depot’s suit noted it faces tariffs on bamboo flooring, cordless drills and many other Chinese-made products. Walgreen, a unit of the Walgreen Boots Alliance, said it is paying higher tariffs on products like “seasonal novelties; party, first aid, and office supplies; and household essentials.”

    Lighthizer’s office did not immediately respond to requests for comment.

    On Sept. 15, the World Trade Organization found the United States breached global trading rules by imposing multibillion-dollar tariffs in Trump’s trade war with China.

    The Trump administration says tariffs on Chinese goods were justified because China was stealing intellectual property and forcing U.S. companies to transfer technology for access to China’s markets.

    Reporting by David Shepardson; Editing by Tom Brown
    Gene Ching
    Author of Shaolin Trips
    Support our forum by getting your gear at MartialArtSmart

  6. #21
    Join Date
    Dec 1969
    Fremont, CA, U.S.A.

    not even close

    not even surprising
    Oct 2, 2020,12:00pm EDT
    China Is Not Even Close To Meeting Phase One Trade Deal Agreements

    Kenneth Rapoza
    Senior Contributor
    I write about business and investing in emerging markets.

    China no where near importing as much as it said it might during phase one trade deal. Pandemic to ... [+] GETTY
    Blame it on the pandemic. Or maybe (depending on whom you ask) it’s just China being China. But the “super great” phase one trade deal that President Trump got done last year is nowhere near the commitments China made in terms of imports.

    Not for manufactured goods. Not for agriculture commodities. And not for Energy exports, either. China, as of July 2020, is not even half way there on any of these three items.

    China imports of manufactured goods was supposed to come in at around $75 billion. It’s around $25 billion as of July. Agriculture imports were supposed to reach around $35 billion. That’s around $9 billion as of July, though like oil and gas exports, this has a lot to do with declining commodity prices for things like soybeans and crude oil. Energy exports to China were targeted for around $25 billion and they are just around $5 billion as of July.

    In the first seven months of the year, the value of energy exports only reached 13.6% of the target.

    With roughly five months left in the year, even if China doubled it, they wouldn’t make it.

    Recommended For You

    Stimulus Update: After Lackluster Jobs Report And Trump’s Covid-19 Bombshell, Pelosi Signals A Deal Is Still Possible
    Airlines Could See More Relief Ahead Of Stimulus Deal, Pelosi Says
    Xilinx Stock Overpriced At $104?
    Lori Ann LaRocco pointed this out yesterday. The author of “Trade War: Containers Don’t Lie”, published last year, says that China commitments don’t equate to real numbers. “Exports do not count until they are on a ship traveling to its destination. Commitments are a commitment, not an official transaction,” LaRocco says.

    Next week, the U.S. Census Bureau will release its trade data for the month of August. The deficit with China is seen being a record breaker of close to $80 billion as many companies stopped importing March through May and started picking up again slowly in June due to factory closures in the U.S. as well as in China.

    The speaker took the stage in front of an audience of marketing professionals and pulled up a slide that made the audience break out in laughter: “WTF is Blockchain.”

    Like “artificial intelligence” and “machine learning” before, “blockchain” is both a buzzword and a black box for many corporate officers, who are being asked to evaluate projects based on a hot concept they are still struggling to grasp. A Deloitte study found that 39% of executives at large companies had little or no knowledge of blockchain.

    Holiday 2017 wrapped up blockchain with a bow, and 2018 looks like a promising inflection point for the technology, thanks to increased concern over data security that peaked with the news of huge breaches at Yahoo and Equifax, among others. Retailers—which are particularly vulnerable during high-traffic holiday periods—have been experimenting with blockchain applications for controlling inventory since last year at this time, both to expedite shipments to stores and to prevent “shrinkage” of goods along the way.

    Merchants are also now leveraging the technology in their loyalty programs, to avoid common holiday scams such as return fraud and to protect customer data and avoid breaches. New blockchain-based loyalty programs, such as Loyyal and Blockpoint, launched in time for the holiday season.

    “The more those things keep happening, consumers won’t want something new—they will force something new,” said Dustin Engel, general manager of the Advance Media Team, Analytics and Data Science at ad agency PMG.

    “This is the year of hype. Everybody is learning about it [blockchain] and nobody knows what to do,” said Pavel Cherkashin, co-founder & CEO Of Blockchain Programmatic Corp., a media-buying platform that launched Dec. 1. “Next year will be the year you will see the real business applications around multiple verticals.”

    Right now, companies ranging from technology giants Samsung and IBM to garage-based startups are applying blockchain to a variety of uses, most notably launching cryptocurrencies to compete with Bitcoin in the payments arena. The Deloitte study found that 42% of respondents with knowledge of blockchain think it will disrupt their industries, while 55% think they will lose competitiveness if they don’t adopt it.

    “We have a big bet on it,” said Babs Rangaiah, executive partner at IBM iX.

    “This is going to be a massive shift as it relates to transactions.” He noted that IBM CEO Ginny Rommety has said that blockchain will revolutionize payments the same way the Internet revolutionized communications.

    Knowledge Gap

    The knowledge gap regarding blockchain does open the possibility of overhyping the technology. Many people are using the term for uses it wasn’t meant for or to make things intentionally convoluted.

    Simply put, blockchain is a ledger shared among a group, and only members of that group can make changes by agreement. Each separate point in the transaction is a block in the chain that can’t be changed without changing the other blocks, which provides the first layer of security.

    Palo Alto Networks’ CSO Rick Howard explained: “The blockchain process seems convoluted but there is a purpose. To prevent fraud, the complex math problem that the system generates is dependent on the data from the previous block. The math problem for that block is based on the block before it—and on and on to the beginning. If a Bitcoin practitioner wanted to secretly subvert the values in the transaction chain without anybody knowing it…he or she would have to solve all the math problems from the block they want to change up to the current block in the time it takes the miners to solve the current math problem. I know that sounds like a lot of computer mumbo jumbo, but trust me, there is not enough computational power in the universe to accomplish this feat.”

    Updates are distributed across the network and encrypted, so there is no central point of attack, providing the next security layer. Entities on the blockchain can remain anonymous, but everyone in the chain sees the transaction progress, which provides a third security layer.

    “You can see where a technology such as blockchain might be useful in all kinds of areas where people and corporations and governments have to officially transact with each other,” explained Howard. “Venture capitalists are pouring money into startups that are trying to build decentralized cloud storage systems, smart contracts, voting systems, and loyalty programs, to name a few.”

    Blockchain is a valuable tool in the security toolbox, “but it is really only one tool,” said Saito. “The distributed ledger really helps create a redundancy to assure that the integrity of the entire system is not usurped by a few bad actors, but the ‘distributed-ness’ of this will maintain that consistency,” he explained. The blockchain could be modified to add authentication and authorization features that make it more secure, but its underlying feature is integrity, the ability to maintain data unmodified.

    “Blockchain solves the problem that if you have no central authority keeping everybody honest and knowing who everybody is, how do you trust the other side of the transaction when you are most likely transacting with people whom you don’t know if you can trust?” said Howard.

    The ability to simplify trust relationships and validate transactions efficiently reduces the cost and complexity of counterparty trades and reduces personnel overhead needed to maintain, audit, and provide compliance of those ledgers, said Garry Coldwells, senior manager, major accounts, at Palo Alto Networks. Additionally, “the cost of establishing and maintaining blockchains is remarkably low compared with the current model.”

    Still Some Hurdles

    Some of the obstacles to adoption remain, namely knowledge and reputation hurdles, which will have to be addressed this year. For one, in the public’s consciousness, blockchain is thought to be synonymous with Bitcoin and the other cryptocurrencies it enables and that still carry a whiff of their extra-legal origins. A study released last summer by YouGov found that one-third of Americans had never heard of Bitcoin and 29% thought cryptocurrencies are illegal.

    “Cryptocurrency remains a black box and is commonly viewed as a ‘dark net’ entity fraught with risk and thievery” among laypeople, said Coldwells. This lack of regulation does give some pause. Coldwells noted most of the calls for regulation come from established securities houses that stand to lose revenue to cryptocurrencies. But several recent frauds in the market have led to growing talk of regulation, a contradiction to the decentralized blockchain ideal, he said.

    Experts also warn about assuming blockchain is completely hacker-proof. “No doubt, someone will be working to crack it, but that happens,” said IBM’s Rangaiah.

    Any such misgivings, however, most likely won’t stop development of blockchain: “Your best research is probably going to be in your own company. Because, right now, someone in your company is looking at a blockchain solution,” said PMG’s Engel. “You can walk down to your IT department and say ‘Blockchain!’ and people will pop out of the woodwork.”
    Gene Ching
    Author of Shaolin Trips
    Support our forum by getting your gear at MartialArtSmart

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts