Geithner signals tougher stance on China

N&P: Discuss governments, nations, politics and recent related news here.

Moderators: Alyrium Denryle, Edi, K. A. Pital

User avatar
ray245
Emperor's Hand
Posts: 7956
Joined: 2005-06-10 11:30pm

Geithner signals tougher stance on China

Post by ray245 »


WASHINGTON – Treasury Secretary-designate Timothy Geithner says President Barack Obama believes China is "manipulating" its currency, a declaration that American manufacturers have long sought in their efforts to combat America's soaring trade deficit with China.

However, Geithner also suggested that now might not be the right time to brand China as a currency manipulator under U.S. trade law, a designation that would trigger negotiations between the two countries and could result in U.S. economic sanctions against China.

"President Obama — backed by the conclusions of a broad range of economists — believes that China is manipulating its currency," Geithner wrote in answer to questions submitted to him by members of the Senate Finance Committee.

"President Obama has pledged as president to use aggressively all the diplomatic avenues open to him to seek change in China's currency," Geithner said.

He noted that while in the Senate, Obama sponsored legislation along with other senators that would overhaul the process for determining what countries are manipulating their currency to gain trade advantages in competition with the United States. That legislation would have authorized a new enforcement process "so countries like China cannot continue to get a free pass for undermining fair trade principles," Geithner said.

Geithner's comments raise the possibility that the Obama administration will take a tougher line with China than former President George W. Bush did. The previous administration refused to cite China as a currency manipulator in a report that Congress requires the Treasury Department to prepare twice a year.

Instead, former Treasury Secretary Henry Paulson insisted that the best way to get China to revalue its currency was through diplomatic engagement. Paulson began the Strategic Economic Dialogue, high-level discussions that have been held twice a year starting in late 2006.

During this process, China did allow the value of its currency to rise by 21 percent. But American manufacturers say that the Chinese yuan is still significantly undervalued, making Chinese goods cheaper for U.S. consumers and American products more expensive in China.

If Paulson had labeled China as a currency manipulator, that designation would have launched negotiations between the two countries and if that process had failed, the United States could have imposed trade sanctions on Chinese imports.

While Geithner did state that Obama believes China is manipulating its currency, he said the new administration would consider a number of factors in deciding how to proceed.

"The question is how and when to broach the subject in order to do more good than harm," Geithner wrote. "The new economic team will force an integrated strategy on how best to achieve currency realignment in the current economic environment."

In response to another question on China's currency, Geithner noted that China's economy is slowing at present as a result of the global downturn which has cut into China's ability to export.

"Because China accounts for such a large fraction of the world economy, a further slowdown in China would lead to a substantial fall in world growth and demand for U.S. exports and delay recovery from the crisis," Geithner said. "Therefore, the immediate goal should be for us to convince China to adopt a more aggressive stimulus package as we do our part to try to pass a stimulus package here at home."

Under U.S. trade law, the first currency report that the new administration must submit to Congress will be due in April although past administrations have often missed the deadlines.

Frank Vargo, vice president for international affairs at the National Association of Manufacturers, said Friday that the new administration's acknowledgement that China was engaging in currency manipulation represented an important change but that it needed to be followed with actions that will get China to resume allowing its currency to rise in value.

Vargo said China's currency appreciation came to a halt last summer as China became more worried about what a slowing world economy was doing to its exports.

"The National Association of Manufacturers has long thought it was necessary for the U.S. government to tell the Chinese government that we know they are manipulating their currency. The previous administration always dodged that," Vargo said. "Until you acknowledge the problem, you can't go ahead and get a good solution."

In response to another question on China, Geithner did not commit specifically to continuing the current Strategic Economic Dialogue talks but he said the administration wanted a "deep engagement" with China.

Geithner's nomination to be treasury secretary was approved by the Finance Committee on an 18-5 vote on Thursday despite unhappiness on the part of many senators over mistakes Geithner made on his tax returns earlier in the decade.

The full Senate is expected to take up Geithner's nomination on Monday and he is expected to win approval at that time with supporters saying that the current economic crisis requires quick approval of someone with Geithner's qualifications.

Geithner is currently head of the New York Federal Reserve Bank. In that post, he was a key participant in the financial rescue decisions made by the Bush administration and Federal Reserve Chairman Ben Bernanke.
http://news.yahoo.com/s/ap/20090123/ap_ ... hner_china

I have to ask, is increasing the value of their currency at a breakneck speed going to cause chaos in the Chinese economic system?
Humans are such funny creatures. We are selfish about selflessness, yet we can love something so much that we can hate something.
User avatar
The Duchess of Zeon
Gözde
Posts: 14566
Joined: 2002-09-18 01:06am
Location: Exiled in the Pale of Settlement.

Re: Geithner signals tougher stance on China

Post by The Duchess of Zeon »

Yes. It would also kick the global economy further down the hole. That's why they're not going to immediately proceed... Hopefully. For all that this should have come years ago (and in doing so triggered a milder recession we could have actually recovered from), we can't wisely do it now.
The threshold for inclusion in Wikipedia is verifiability, not truth. -- Wikipedia's No Original Research policy page.

In 1966 the Soviets find something on the dark side of the Moon. In 2104 they come back. -- Red Banner / White Star, a nBSG continuation story. Updated to Chapter 4.0 -- 14 January 2013.
User avatar
bobalot
Jedi Council Member
Posts: 1733
Joined: 2008-05-21 06:42am
Location: Sydney, Australia
Contact:

Re: Geithner signals tougher stance on China

Post by bobalot »

Now is not the best time, but what they say is basically true. China does manipulate its currency.
"This statement, in its utterly clueless hubristic stupidity, cannot be improved upon. I merely quote it in admiration of its perfection." - Garibaldi

"Problem is, while the Germans have had many mea culpas and quite painfully dealt with their history, the South is still hellbent on painting themselves as the real victims. It gives them a special place in the history of assholes" - Covenant

"Over three million died fighting for the emperor, but when the war was over he pretended it was not his responsibility. What kind of man does that?'' - Saburo Sakai

Join SDN on Discord
User avatar
J
Kaye Elle Emenopey
Posts: 5837
Joined: 2002-12-14 02:23pm

Re: Geithner signals tougher stance on China

Post by J »

That China is a currency manipulator is one of the worst kept secrets in the world, ranking up there with Israel's nuclear weapons. The article is mostly fluff except for this:
In response to another question on China's currency, Geithner noted that China's economy is slowing at present as a result of the global downturn which has cut into China's ability to export.

"Because China accounts for such a large fraction of the world economy, a further slowdown in China would lead to a substantial fall in world growth and demand for U.S. exports and delay recovery from the crisis," Geithner said. "Therefore, the immediate goal should be for us to convince China to adopt a more aggressive stimulus package as we do our part to try to pass a stimulus package here at home."
The bolded part is the biggie, essentially, Geithner wants China to pass a stimulus package and screw itself worse than the US is going to be screwed by its own stimulus package. In other words, both countries are playing Russian Roulette and he wants China to shoot itself first with a bigger gun. The US is screwed, but they want China & everyone else to be more screwed. The question becomes is China stupid enough to play along, and if or when they will use the nuclear option and dump their US Treasuries? It's a very interesting game of chicken, if China feels that everyone else is screwed more than they are if they choose to dump their USD holdings, they might just go ahead and do it. There are already some rumblings from Chinese officials who want the purchase of US Treasuries to stop, I don't know how high up or influential these people are so this could mean nothing or it could be a subtle hint to the US to cut it out, or else.

With regards to the proposed stimulus plan for the US, I grabbed the following off Reuters earlier this week but I can't find the link anymore.
HIGHWAYS, RAIL, TRANSPORTATION
.. $30 billion for highway construction.
.. $31 billion to modernize federal and other public
infrastructure with investments that lead to long-term energy
cost savings.
.. $19 billion for clean water, flood control, and
environmental restoration investments.
.. $10 billion for transit and rail to reduce traffic
congestion and gas consumption.

.. $3 billion for airport improvement projects to improve
safety and reduce congestion.
.. $1.1 billion to improve speed, capacity of intercity
passenger rail service.

.. $6 billion to buy buses and equipment for public
transportation.
.. $2 billion to modernize existing transit systems.
.. $1 billion for grants for new commuter rail projects.

STATES, EDUCATION
.. $79 billion in state fiscal relief to prevent cuts to key
services.
.. $39 billion to local school districts, public colleges
and universities distributed through existing state and federal
formulas.
.. $15.6 billion to increase Pell grants for college
students.
.. $6 billion for higher education modernization.

ENERGY
.. $11 billion for research and development, pilot projects,
and federal matching funds to modernize electricity grid.
.. $8 billion for loans for renewable energy power
generation and transmission projects.
.. $6.7 billion for renovations and repairs to federal
buildings.
.. $2 billion for the Advanced Battery Loan Guarantee and
Grants Program, to support U.S. manufacturers of advanced
vehicle batteries.
$2.4 billion for carbon capture and sequestration
technology demonstration projects.

HEALTH CARE
.. $87 billion to states, increasing through the end of FY
2010 the share of Medicaid costs the Federal government
reimburses all states by 4.8 percent, with extra relief tied to
rates of unemployment
.. $30.3 billion to extend health insurance coverage to
unemployed beyond 18 months provided under current law.
.. $3 billion to fight preventable chronic diseases, the
leading cause of deaths in the United States, and infectious
diseases.
.. $3.75 billion for new construction of hospitals and
ambulatory surgical centers.
.. $4.1 billion to provide for preventative care and to
evaluate the most effective healthcare treatments.

BROADBAND, TECHNOLOGY
.. $6 billion to expand broadband Internet access for
businesses in rural underserved areas.
.. $20 billion for health information technology to prevent
medical mistakes, provide better care to patients and introduce
cost-saving efficiencies.
.. $400 million for the Social Security Administration to
replace its computer center.
.. $245 million for the Farm Service Agency to upgrade its
IT to handle workload increases.
.. $276 million for the State Department to upgrade its
technology platforms to meet stricter security needs.

HOUSING
.. $4.2 billion to help communities buy, rehabilitate
foreclosed, vacant properties to create affordable housing.
.. $1.5 billion to help local communities build and
rehabilitate low-income housing using green technologies.
.. $5 billion for public housing repair and modernization,
including critical safety repairs.
.. $6.2 billion to help low-income families reduce their
energy costs by weatherizing their homes.

UNEMPLOYMENT BENEFITS
.. $27 billion to continue the unemployment benefits
program, providing up to 33 weeks of extended benefits through
Dec 31, 2009.
.. $4 billion for job training including formula grants for
adult, dislocated worker, and youth services.

ENVIRONMENT
.. $800 million to clean up hazardous and toxic waste sites
that threaten health and the environment.

WATER RESOURCES
.. $4.5 billion for environmental restoration, flood
protection, hydropower, and navigation infrastructure.
.. $6 billion for loans to help communities upgrade
wastewater treatment systems.
.. $2 billion for loans for drinking water infrastructure.

MISCELLANEOUS
.. $10 billion for science facilities, research, and
instrumentation.
.. $3.1 billion for projects on federal lands such as
visitor facilities, trail restoration, preservation of historic
buildings, rehabilitation of abandoned mines and oil fields.
.. $2.1 billion in repairs to military facilities.
.. $1.2 billion for new construction and $154 million for
renovations to improve military housing.
.. $650 million for extending a coupon program to help
Americans convert the TV sets to receive digital transmission.
.. $430 million for new direct lending and loan guarantee
authorities for small businesses to make loans more attractive
to lenders and free up capital.
.. $100 million for rural business grants and loans to
guarantee $2 billion in loans for rural businesses.
Note the bolded sections. $11 billion total on rail transportation, this is barely enough to cover a major city nevermind an entire country. And under energy there's absolutely no funding for nuclear. I mean yes it'll create some jobs but it doesn't do anything meaningful in terms of energy independance and putting the US on the path towards a sustainable energy infrastructure. It's not a forward looking plan, there should be a massive investment (at least half a trillion) in rail, nuclear, power grids, and research. There isn't.

This stimulus plan, like all other before it will fail. The hope (for the US) is that everyone else will fail worse, and that I think, is what they're trying to setup.
This post is a 100% natural organic product.
The slight variations in spelling and grammar enhance its individual character and beauty and in no way are to be considered flaws or defects


I'm not sure why people choose 'To Love is to Bury' as their wedding song...It's about a murder-suicide
- Margo Timmins


When it becomes serious, you have to lie
- Jean-Claude Juncker
User avatar
Kane Starkiller
Jedi Council Member
Posts: 1510
Joined: 2005-01-21 01:39pm

Re: Geithner signals tougher stance on China

Post by Kane Starkiller »

I have a question. People often talk about "dumping" US Treasuries. What does that mean exactly? Dump them where? Into the Pacific? As I understand it all they can do is sell them and all that does is change ownership.
But if the forces of evil should rise again, to cast a shadow on the heart of the city.
Call me. -Batman
User avatar
Admiral Valdemar
Outside Context Problem
Posts: 31572
Joined: 2002-07-04 07:17pm
Location: UK

Re: Geithner signals tougher stance on China

Post by Admiral Valdemar »

China is screwed whether it stimulate or not. Their latest figures show a huge loss of GDP growth. It is well established that by population growth alone and those moving from the rural areas to the cities, they require at least 8% YOY GDP growth. It's fallen below that, officially, which means it's probably not even that in reality. The Chinese military is already preparing for massive civil unrest with the Ministry of the Interior prepping counter terrorism units and so on to deal with any movements.

If America and Europe cannot buy cheap Chinese consumer goods, then there is no reason for China to have the economy it wants and needs.
User avatar
Sea Skimmer
Yankee Capitalist Air Pirate
Posts: 37390
Joined: 2002-07-03 11:49pm
Location: Passchendaele City, HAB

Re: Geithner signals tougher stance on China

Post by Sea Skimmer »

J wrote: Note the bolded sections. $11 billion total on rail transportation, this is barely enough to cover a major city nevermind an entire country. And under energy there's absolutely no funding for nuclear.
Of course it’s not going to have much for rail or nuclear, nothing else takes longer in planning then those sorts of things. Obama wanted ‘shovel ready’ projects and that rules out new rail lines and nuclear power plants almost out of hand. I’m not saying I like the plan, but this is a reality that no amount of wishful thinking can overcome. It will easily take six to ten years to approve a site for a new nuclear plant, and just as long to get the rights to the land for a railroad, no matter how low impact of a light rail line it might be. Some metro expansion projects in the US have been held up over 20 years by litigation and are still inbuilt. All the money that is budgeted for rail is no doubt going into improvements in existing lines, like higher speed switches and additional passing sidings.
"This cult of special forces is as sensible as to form a Royal Corps of Tree Climbers and say that no soldier who does not wear its green hat with a bunch of oak leaves stuck in it should be expected to climb a tree"
— Field Marshal William Slim 1956
User avatar
Illuminatus Primus
All Seeing Eye
Posts: 15774
Joined: 2002-10-12 02:52pm
Location: Gainesville, Florida, USA
Contact:

Re: Geithner signals tougher stance on China

Post by Illuminatus Primus »

What kind of litigation holds them up? Greenies? Property values by homeowners' associations? What?
"You know what the problem with Hollywood is. They make shit. Unbelievable. Unremarkable. Shit." - Gabriel Shear, Swordfish

"This statement, in its utterly clueless hubristic stupidity, cannot be improved upon. I merely quote it in admiration of its perfection." - Garibaldi in reply to an incredibly stupid post.

The Fifth Illuminatus Primus | Warsie | Skeptical Empiricist | Florida Gator | Sustainability Advocate | Libertarian Socialist |
Image
User avatar
Admiral Valdemar
Outside Context Problem
Posts: 31572
Joined: 2002-07-04 07:17pm
Location: UK

Re: Geithner signals tougher stance on China

Post by Admiral Valdemar »

I'd expect a whole host of "all of the above" if it's anything like what we can see over here. NIMBYs and BANANAs are the kind of people who relish teaming up with eco-nuts when it suits their purpose of keeping property prices high by not having that mean ol' powerplant nearby.
User avatar
ray245
Emperor's Hand
Posts: 7956
Joined: 2005-06-10 11:30pm

Re: Geithner signals tougher stance on China

Post by ray245 »

Admiral Valdemar wrote:China is screwed whether it stimulate or not. Their latest figures show a huge loss of GDP growth. It is well established that by population growth alone and those moving from the rural areas to the cities, they require at least 8% YOY GDP growth. It's fallen below that, officially, which means it's probably not even that in reality. The Chinese military is already preparing for massive civil unrest with the Ministry of the Interior prepping counter terrorism units and so on to deal with any movements.

If America and Europe cannot buy cheap Chinese consumer goods, then there is no reason for China to have the economy it wants and needs.
Couldn't the same thing be said, of America before the great depression?

It seems annoying that anyone who refuse to be American's 'puppet' has to bear the consequences. If there is anything I don't like about Democrats, it is their economic policy against China, and the reason they use.

Come on? Using Human rights as a reason to stall China's economic growth? At the least use a more reasonable argument if you are going to be more trade protectionist.
Humans are such funny creatures. We are selfish about selflessness, yet we can love something so much that we can hate something.
User avatar
Uraniun235
Emperor's Hand
Posts: 13772
Joined: 2002-09-12 12:47am
Location: OREGON
Contact:

Re: Geithner signals tougher stance on China

Post by Uraniun235 »

What sort of funding would one expect out of the federal government for nuclear? I mean yeah I'm personally totally okay with socialized nuclear-powered electricity for all, but I'm pretty sure there'd be a big backlash against the government basically saying it was going to drive all of the private electric utilities out of business.

I'll also freely admit that as an employee of the education system, I'm slightly relieved to see money being thrown at trying to alleviate school budget (and state budget in general) shortages.
Sea Skimmer wrote:It will easily take six to ten years to approve a site for a new nuclear plant, and just as long to get the rights to the land for a railroad, no matter how low impact of a light rail line it might be. Some metro expansion projects in the US have been held up over 20 years by litigation and are still inbuilt.
Twenty years? Jesus. Portland sure lucked out - we still had all the rail right-of-ways leftover from an initial flirtation (more like massive crush) with light rail about eighty years ago, so we've been able to get from zero to lots in twenty years.

Shouldn't this be something that eminent domain would be ideal for? Not only is there the "massive utility to the public" aspect, but it also vastly improves property values near the stops. As for NIMBYs/anti-nuclear shitheads, I say there ought to be a "National Security Energy Assurance Bill" (or something like that) intended to quash any further such lawsuits with one stroke of the pen.
"There is no "taboo" on using nuclear weapons." -Julhelm
Image
What is Project Zohar?
"On a serious note (well not really) I did sometimes jump in and rate nBSG episodes a '5' before the episode even aired or I saw it." - RogueIce explaining that episode ratings on SDN tv show threads are bunk
User avatar
Fingolfin_Noldor
Emperor's Hand
Posts: 11834
Joined: 2006-05-15 10:36am
Location: At the Helm of the HAB Star Dreadnaught Star Fist

Re: Geithner signals tougher stance on China

Post by Fingolfin_Noldor »

ray245 wrote:Couldn't the same thing be said, of America before the great depression?

It seems annoying that anyone who refuse to be American's 'puppet' has to bear the consequences. If there is anything I don't like about Democrats, it is their economic policy against China, and the reason they use.
This is nonsense. America has every right to defend its own economy from manipulations from the outside. China does the same thing as well. Trying to paint China as a wronged party is ridiculous.
Come on? Using Human rights as a reason to stall China's economic growth? At the least use a more reasonable argument if you are going to be more trade protectionist.
You do realise that China also restricts foreign investment? Why shouldn't the US do the same? You have been drinking too much on free trade to forget that free trade has plenty of flaws.
Image
STGOD: Byzantine Empire
Your spirit, diseased as it is, refuses to allow you to give up, no matter what threats you face... and whatever wreckage you leave behind you.
Kreia
User avatar
Guardsman Bass
Cowardly Codfish
Posts: 9281
Joined: 2002-07-07 12:01am
Location: Beneath the Deepest Sea

Re: Geithner signals tougher stance on China

Post by Guardsman Bass »

Kane Starkiller wrote:I have a question. People often talk about "dumping" US Treasuries. What does that mean exactly? Dump them where? Into the Pacific? As I understand it all they can do is sell them and all that does is change ownership.
It's the corollary of that - that they wouldn't be buying any more Treasury Bonds - that is the killer.
“It is possible to commit no mistakes and still lose. That is not a weakness. That is life.”
-Jean-Luc Picard


"Men are afraid that women will laugh at them. Women are afraid that men will kill them."
-Margaret Atwood
User avatar
Fingolfin_Noldor
Emperor's Hand
Posts: 11834
Joined: 2006-05-15 10:36am
Location: At the Helm of the HAB Star Dreadnaught Star Fist

Re: Geithner signals tougher stance on China

Post by Fingolfin_Noldor »

Guardsman Bass wrote:
Kane Starkiller wrote:I have a question. People often talk about "dumping" US Treasuries. What does that mean exactly? Dump them where? Into the Pacific? As I understand it all they can do is sell them and all that does is change ownership.
It's the corollary of that - that they wouldn't be buying any more Treasury Bonds - that is the killer.
It serves China absolutely no purpose to even contemplate doing it. Their biggest customers are in the US. A plunging US dollar will send China down with it.
Image
STGOD: Byzantine Empire
Your spirit, diseased as it is, refuses to allow you to give up, no matter what threats you face... and whatever wreckage you leave behind you.
Kreia
User avatar
ray245
Emperor's Hand
Posts: 7956
Joined: 2005-06-10 11:30pm

Re: Geithner signals tougher stance on China

Post by ray245 »

Fingolfin_Noldor wrote:
ray245 wrote:Couldn't the same thing be said, of America before the great depression?

It seems annoying that anyone who refuse to be American's 'puppet' has to bear the consequences. If there is anything I don't like about Democrats, it is their economic policy against China, and the reason they use.
This is nonsense. America has every right to defend its own economy from manipulations from the outside. China does the same thing as well. Trying to paint China as a wronged party is ridiculous.
The problem is, is it in the US best interest to adopt a more confrontational attitude against China?
WASHINGTON – Secretary of State Hillary Rodham Clinton has said no nation is more important to the United States than China. But ties between the two powers may be off to a rocky start just days into the Obama administration.

In his inaugural address Tuesday, President Barack Obama spoke of how earlier generations of Americans had "faced down fascism and communism." China's state broadcaster quickly faded out the audio of its live broadcast, the camera cutting back to a flustered studio anchor.

Then, on Thursday, Obama's choice to lead the Treasury Department, Timothy Geithner, wrote that Obama believes China is "manipulating" its currency, which American manufacturers say Beijing does to make its goods cheaper for U.S. consumers and American products more expensive in China.

Geithner's comments could anger Chinese officials, who closely follow U.S. political rhetoric and frequently decry what they consider foreign interference in China's internal affairs. The United States often criticizes China about human rights and trade abuses, but Washington and Beijing find themselves increasingly intertwined in a host of crucial economic, military and diplomatic efforts.

China's foreign minister, Yang Jiechi, said his country was committed to working with the Obama administration to strengthen ties and cooperation.

"China-U.S. relations are one of the most important bilateral relations in the world," the official Xinhua News Agency cited Yang as saying.

Selig Harrison, director of the Asia program at the U.S.-based Center for International Policy, said it was "very ill-advised for the new administration to confront China as if this were 10 years ago and we were in a strong financial position internationally."

"We are dependent on Chinese goodwill for our economic survival and viability, and, therefore, it seems to me that this type of posture is very risky," he said.

Despite an early face-off with China over an intercepted U.S. spy plane, former President George W. Bush made it a priority to strengthen relations with China while also pushing the country to live up to what he considered its duties as an emerging global superpower and a veto-holding member of the U.N. Security Council.

Trade ties between the United States and China often are tense. China says it has made progress on currency changes and worries about bills introduced in Congress that would impose economic sanctions on China unless it moves more quickly to let its currency rise in value against the dollar.

Although Geithner said China is "manipulating its currency," he suggested Thursday that now might not be the right time to brand Beijing as a currency manipulator under U.S. trade law, which could lead to U.S. trade sanctions against imports from China.

His testimony may not have been a complete shock to China. Yang, the foreign minister, has said he studies American television and newspapers. Obama and Clinton, during their long campaigns to secure the Democratic nomination for president, made no secret of their desires for a tougher position with China about its human rights record and its trade practices.

Still, Obama's young administration is not complete: he has yet to name many of the officials who will be dealing with China issues; he also has not yet decided whether to continue the high-level economic discussions the Bush administration has held twice a year with China since late 2006.

Bonnie Glaser, an analyst with the Center for Strategic and International Studies think tank, said the Chinese have said during the past few months that they want a good start to their relationship with the new U.S. administration.

"Everybody just needs to be a little patient on this," Glaser said. "I would not draw any premature conclusions that the administration has decided to take a tougher stance, and hopefully the Chinese will be patient while the administration works this out."
http://news.yahoo.com/s/ap/20090124/ap_ ... bama_china
Humans are such funny creatures. We are selfish about selflessness, yet we can love something so much that we can hate something.
User avatar
Fingolfin_Noldor
Emperor's Hand
Posts: 11834
Joined: 2006-05-15 10:36am
Location: At the Helm of the HAB Star Dreadnaught Star Fist

Re: Geithner signals tougher stance on China

Post by Fingolfin_Noldor »

ray245 wrote:The problem is, is it in the US best interest to adopt a more confrontational attitude against China?
I don't see why not. China's top leadership has no qualms about adopting confrontational attitude against its neighbours. Idealism has no place in international politics.
Image
STGOD: Byzantine Empire
Your spirit, diseased as it is, refuses to allow you to give up, no matter what threats you face... and whatever wreckage you leave behind you.
Kreia
User avatar
Stuart Mackey
Drunken Kiwi Editor of the ASVS Press
Posts: 5946
Joined: 2002-07-04 12:28am
Location: New Zealand
Contact:

Re: Geithner signals tougher stance on China

Post by Stuart Mackey »

Fingolfin_Noldor wrote:
ray245 wrote:The problem is, is it in the US best interest to adopt a more confrontational attitude against China?

I don't see why not. China's top leadership has no qualms about adopting confrontational attitude against its neighbours.
Naturally, but is the US in a position to do that?
Idealism has no place in international politics.
I wouldn't agree with that, where would we be without idealism to set our goals for our own improvement, whatever that might be?
I would say that realistic means and methods are required to achieve an ideal state or at least make gains in that direction.
Via money Europe could become political in five years" "... the current communities should be completed by a Finance Common Market which would lead us to European economic unity. Only then would ... the mutual commitments make it fairly easy to produce the political union which is the goal"

Jean Omer Marie Gabriel Monnet
--------------
User avatar
Fingolfin_Noldor
Emperor's Hand
Posts: 11834
Joined: 2006-05-15 10:36am
Location: At the Helm of the HAB Star Dreadnaught Star Fist

Re: Geithner signals tougher stance on China

Post by Fingolfin_Noldor »

Stuart Mackey wrote:Naturally, but is the US in a position to do that?
The same could be asked that of China. If their biggest customers don't buy their goods, who would they sell to? Themselves? With what money?
I wouldn't agree with that, where would we be without idealism to set our goals for our own improvement, whatever that might be?
I would say that realistic means and methods are required to achieve an ideal state or at least make gains in that direction.
Idealism has no place because no side will ever get what they want, and it then boils down to managing expectations and achieving the agreement that all sides will agree, and often that doesn't happen, which is why we just had a recent conflict in Gaza.
Image
STGOD: Byzantine Empire
Your spirit, diseased as it is, refuses to allow you to give up, no matter what threats you face... and whatever wreckage you leave behind you.
Kreia
User avatar
ray245
Emperor's Hand
Posts: 7956
Joined: 2005-06-10 11:30pm

Re: Geithner signals tougher stance on China

Post by ray245 »

Fingolfin_Noldor wrote: Idealism has no place because no side will ever get what they want, and it then boils down to managing expectations and achieving the agreement that all sides will agree, and often that doesn't happen, which is why we just had a recent conflict in Gaza.
Pure idealism is the thing you are looking for here. Pure idealism without taking account of realism. Any seriously, I doubt any long-time members here will even support the idea that pure idealism is a good thing.

Idealism that is rooted in reality is things that produced things that is beneficial. Without idealism, we will not have the concept of a statehood based on agriculture, Science will not take root in any culture and things like Democracy will never happen.

Fingolfin_Noldor, I don't think you are arguing against Idealism entirely, but if you do, that means what you are doing is pure idealism as well.

Isn't it idealistic to argue against Idealism totally?
Humans are such funny creatures. We are selfish about selflessness, yet we can love something so much that we can hate something.
User avatar
CmdrWilkens
Emperor's Hand
Posts: 9093
Joined: 2002-07-06 01:24am
Location: Land of the Crabcake
Contact:

Re: Geithner signals tougher stance on China

Post by CmdrWilkens »

Illuminatus Primus wrote:What kind of litigation holds them up? Greenies? Property values by homeowners' associations? What?
I can give you a real quick example:

The "Purple" line in the DC suburbs of Montgomery and Prince George's County. Starting around about 1992 regional transportation planning began realizing that its a hell of a lot easier to go from the suburbs into DC than from suburb to suburb. Way back when this wasn't a problem but now that the close in suburbs (like Silver Spring, Bethesda, College Park and the like) have become employmnet hubs of their own there is a need for fols to move from one suburb to the other easily for both work and recreation.

Around during the late Glendening and early Ehrlich administrations the whole project finally gelled into one 16mi long route from one branch of DC's subway system on the NW side to the terminal station on the E side of town. This would create an arc across the entire north side of town connecting the branches of the DC Metro with several of the communities along the way. Just this past year the Preliminary Alternatives Analysis/Draft Environmental Impact Statement was finally prepared and it still splits itself into 3 different Bus Rapid transit and 3 Light Rail Transit options of which the Maryland Transit Agency still has to decide which to pursue. In the midst of this several of the wealthy landowners along the highest capacity routes have started a "grassroots" campaign and retained high priced lawyers to basically decry any attempt to run light rail through their property even though the land on which it would run is actually state land already (part of an old CSW right of way that became a local hiking/biking trail). From first conception in 1992 through first draft AA/DEIS in 2008 and the earliest possible construction sometime in the 2010-2013 timeframe.All this is because the State still has to pick an alternative (which could last well into 2010 itself) then the FTA has to approve the project before moving forward to Preliminary Engineering and Final Environmental Impact Study after which the final project is submitted to the FTA for funding approval before construction can even start.

In other words from start to finsih the project, despite near universal approval from the county boards, county executives, and support fom the State, will take at least 20 years if there are no delays due to litigation from the Town of Chevy Chase or the Columbia Country Club.
Image
SDNet World Nation: Wilkonia
Armourer of the WARWOLVES
ASVS Vet's Association (Class of 2000)
Former C.S. Strowbridge Gold Ego Award Winner
MEMBER of the Anti-PETA Anti-Facist LEAGUE

"I put no stock in religion. By the word religion I have seen the lunacy of fanatics of every denomination be called the will of god. I have seen too much religion in the eyes of too many murderers. Holiness is in right action, and courage on behalf of those who cannot defend themselves, and goodness. "
-Kingdom of Heaven
User avatar
J
Kaye Elle Emenopey
Posts: 5837
Joined: 2002-12-14 02:23pm

Re: Geithner signals tougher stance on China

Post by J »

Kane Starkiller wrote:I have a question. People often talk about "dumping" US Treasuries. What does that mean exactly? Dump them where? Into the Pacific? As I understand it all they can do is sell them and all that does is change ownership.
The holders of US Treasuries sell them en masse which crashes the price of the Treasuries and drives the yield through the roof. This has several effects:
  • Since all interest rates in the US are based off the yield of Treasuries, interest on mortgages, credit cards, business loans and so forth go sky high. Instead of the 5% mortgage rates we now enjoy, it'll be closer to 20%. Lending is cratered overnight.
  • Since the yield has now skyrocketed, the US will have to pay a much larger debt service charge to keep from defaulting on its debt. This money comes out of the budget and leaves less money available for everything else.
  • The US will lose some of its ability to deficit spend and budgets will have to be slashed. Foreign countries & investors currently buy around $700-750 billion of US Treasuries every year which means the US has that much extra money to spend. Once the dumping starts, and after the big dump, those buyers won't be in a buying mood. There will be a lot fewer buyers and thus the US has less money to spend.
  • The points above can setup a death spiral if things get out of hand. Companies are driven out of business by towering interest payments, citizens are bankrupted by the same, the currency market goes bananas, the government has a greatly shrinking income stream and needs to pay out a lot more in debt service charges, in short, there isn't enough money to go around and everyone will be a lot poorer. Like Iceland.
This is what's known as a bond market dislocation, everything and everyone gets crushed down. The only thing that's worse would be the US defaulting on all its debt.
This post is a 100% natural organic product.
The slight variations in spelling and grammar enhance its individual character and beauty and in no way are to be considered flaws or defects


I'm not sure why people choose 'To Love is to Bury' as their wedding song...It's about a murder-suicide
- Margo Timmins


When it becomes serious, you have to lie
- Jean-Claude Juncker
User avatar
Ma Deuce
Sith Marauder
Posts: 4359
Joined: 2004-02-02 03:22pm
Location: Whitby, Ontario

Re: Geithner signals tougher stance on China

Post by Ma Deuce »

ray245 wrote:Come on? Using Human rights as a reason to stall China's economic growth? At the least use a more reasonable argument if you are going to be more trade protectionist.
The "human rights" argument is mainly for the consumption of the American middle-class professional urbanite vote (yuppies, DINKs etc), who themsleves hate protectionism of any kind because they have drunk the "service economy" kool-aid, and don't want anything to get in the way of the foreign goods they crave. The only way to make them support protectionism is to use an excuse like "human rights" to make the reasons seem unrelated. "Protecting jobs" is of no concern to them, for as long as their jobs aren't in danger of being outsourced, they don't give a shit if Joe the Factory worker is reduced to flipping burgers because his job skills aren't transferable, or even if entrie cities turn into burned out high-crime hellholes because the local industry shut down and nothing moved in to fill the void.

Besides if "China's economic growth" is dependant on the US comitting economic suicide, then why should anyone have a problem with US protectionism stalling it (except the Chinese themselves, of course). Economic suicide may seem like an overly dire prediction but it really is the only logical conclusion of free trade with countries that refuse to open thier economy to you as you have to them (not to mention the robber-baronry that's allowed in China makes it impossible for Western industries with all their pesky labor laws to compete on a level playing field even if China did open up it's economy). It's like tying one of your arms behind your back in a fistfight, regardless whether the other guy agrees to do the same.

Finally, you consistently ignore the fact that China is highly protectionist of it's own economy (as mentioned earlier), yet cry foul when the US even lifts a finger to protect any aspect of it's own economy. Why are you so insistent that the US meekly allow foreign predation to exterminate it's strategic industries and vital economic organs, and in so doing completly destroy it's sovereignty and ability to decide it's own future? You whine about how the Americans try to make others their "puppets", yet seem to expect them to put other countries interests before their own.
Image
The M2HB: The Greatest Machinegun Ever Made.
HAB: Crew-Served Weapons Specialist


"Making fun of born-again Christians is like hunting dairy cows with a high powered rifle and scope." --P.J. O'Rourke

"A man who has nothing for which he is willing to fight, nothing which is more important than his own personal safety, is a miserable creature and has no chance of being free unless made and kept so by the exertions of better men than himself." --J.S. Mill
User avatar
mr friendly guy
The Doctor
Posts: 11235
Joined: 2004-12-12 10:55pm
Location: In a 1960s police telephone box somewhere in Australia

Re: Geithner signals tougher stance on China

Post by mr friendly guy »

Fingolfin_Noldor wrote:
Stuart Mackey wrote:Naturally, but is the US in a position to do that?
The same could be asked that of China. If their biggest customers don't buy their goods, who would they sell to? Themselves? With what money?
I thought China's biggest export market is now the EU and not the US.
Never apologise for being a geek, because they won't apologise to you for being an arsehole. John Barrowman - 22 June 2014 Perth Supernova.

Countries I have been to - 14.
Australia, Canada, China, Colombia, Denmark, Ecuador, Finland, Germany, Malaysia, Netherlands, Norway, Singapore, Sweden, USA.
Always on the lookout for more nice places to visit.
Pelranius
Sith Marauder
Posts: 3539
Joined: 2006-10-24 11:35am
Location: Around and about the Beltway

Re: Geithner signals tougher stance on China

Post by Pelranius »

Don't the Chinese buy a lot of our goods?

And tariffs on most of the stuff is a waste of time, generally speaking, simply because the consumer goods that are "Made in China" are typically assembled from parts coming in from other, usually, Asian countries. There's very little value added by the Chinese.
Turns out that a five way cross over between It's Always Sunny in Philadelphia, the Ali G Show, Fargo, Idiocracy and Veep is a lot less funny when you're actually living in it.
User avatar
Ma Deuce
Sith Marauder
Posts: 4359
Joined: 2004-02-02 03:22pm
Location: Whitby, Ontario

Re: Geithner signals tougher stance on China

Post by Ma Deuce »

Don't the Chinese buy a lot of our goods?
Not enough, I'm afraid. The value of goods China exports to the US exceeds the value of goods the US exports to them by nearly six times. This ratio has been growing ever wider since the US reported it's first trade deficit with China in 1985.
And tariffs on most of the stuff is a waste of time, generally speaking, simply because the consumer goods that are "Made in China" are typically assembled from parts coming in from other, usually, Asian countries. There's very little value added by the Chinese.
Source? Even if true, this would only be the case if the tariffs specifically target Chinese goods, rather than all imported goods of certain types regardless of origin, exempting countries in the NAFTA zone, of course.
Image
The M2HB: The Greatest Machinegun Ever Made.
HAB: Crew-Served Weapons Specialist


"Making fun of born-again Christians is like hunting dairy cows with a high powered rifle and scope." --P.J. O'Rourke

"A man who has nothing for which he is willing to fight, nothing which is more important than his own personal safety, is a miserable creature and has no chance of being free unless made and kept so by the exertions of better men than himself." --J.S. Mill
Post Reply