Posted on 10/29/2003 11:21:43 AM PST by GrandMoM
High-Level Talks Focus on US-China Trade Dispute By Patrick Goodenough CNSNews.com Pacific Rim Bureau Chief October 28, 2003
Pacific Rim Bureau (CNSNews.com) - U.S. Commerce Secretary Don Evans is holding talks with senior Chinese officials Tuesday on a deepening trade dispute that may lead to punitive steps against Beijing unless it is resolved.
In a statement ahead of his meetings with Chinese premier Wen Jiabao and others in Beijing, Evans said China's trade practices were "creating an unfair advantage that is undercutting American workers."
"China needs to create an economic system that is more transparent and one that allows capital to flow freely in response to market forces," he said. "America and the world have a strong interest in seeing China succeed. China's success begins with fair trade."
U.S. trade officials are unhappy with China on several fronts.
They claim Beijing is keeping its currency, the yuan or renminbi (RMB), low against the U.S. dollar, as a tactic to boost Chinese exports to the U.S., by making Chinese products cheaper on world markets than they realistically should be.
U.S. officials, manufacturers and some members of Congress have blamed China's failure to allow the RMB to float freely for last year's record trade deficit, estimated at $103 billion, and for growing unemployment in the U.S.
They also want China to live up to its World Trade Organization commitments, to loosen controls on some imports and clamp down on rampant violations of intellectual property rights, includining the sale of fake CDs, software, pharmaceuticals and other products.
A telling example of China's failure to protect intellectual property rights, cited recently by Evans, relates to Wrigley's chewing gum, which has a 70 percent share of the Chinese market.
Evans said in a speech in Detroit last month that counterfeiters in Guangzhou had copied Wrigley's products, but didn't stop at selling the pirated gum.
"They copied the Wrigley truck. They drove Wrigley's distribution routes. And when they called on Wrigley's accounts, the pirates paid 'premiums' to the shopowners for accepting the counterfeit gum."
Heritage Foundation research fellow John Tkacik said in a report last week that estimating the value of revenue lost because of piracy was an inexact science.
Even so, he added, "Revenue lost due to piracy in China is in the billions of dollars, even by the most conservative estimates."
The Xinhua news agency last Friday quoted the head of China's intellectual property rights watchdog body, Wang Jingchuan, as saying legal action against pirates had increased by almost 18 percent last year.
"The legal authorities and administrative bodies worked in close cooperation with each other and fought against intellectual property rights infringement, which indicates China's resolve to fulfill its pledges to other WTO members," Wang said.
Lawmakers mull tariffs
Evans' visit follows one by U.S. Trade Representative Robert Zoellick, who warned China last Wednesday that its access to U.S. markets depended on "fair" two-way trade.
President Bush himself raised the currency issue with President Hu Jintao at a meeting on the sidelines of the Asia-Pacific Economic Cooperation (APEC) forum in Bangkok last week.
They agreed to send the issue to a joint panel of experts, although Hu told businessmen separately that keeping the RMB's value stable was the right policy for China.
Chinese central bank governor Zhou Xiaochuan was quoted by the official China Daily Monday as saying China would resist "U.S. pressure for a revaluation."
Treasury Secretary John Snow recently warned that the artificially low exchange rate -- the RMB is pegged at roughly 8.28 to the dollar -- gives China an unfair trade advantage and impacts negatively on the U.S. job market.
Some U.S. lawmakers want to apply tariffs on Chinese imports unless Beijing lets market forces determine the exchange rate and takes other steps to free up trade.
Heritage analyst Tkacik warned, however, that the impact of U.S. tariffs should be carefully considered.
"Across-the-board tariffs on Chinese goods would significantly raise prices for U.S. consumers," he wrote in the report.
A more effective response than applying retaliatory tariffs would be for the government to direct trade representative Zoellick to prepare a formal complaint against China at the WTO, he said.
The Texas-based independent analysts, Stratfor, argued that pressing trade sanctions against China could be risky for the Bush Administration.
"This could lead to a backlash by politically powerful U.S. manufacturers such as General Motors and General Electric, who are anxious to get in on the China boom but could suddenly find themselves locked out if Washington imposes sanctions and China retaliates," it said in a briefing Friday.
"The Bush administration could be forced to either face down Congress and oppose sanctions, or to go along with lawmakers and risk opposition from many of its key corporate political backers."
'Undermining security'
According to the associate director of the Cato Institute's Center for Trade Policy Studies, Daniel Griswold, American families clearly benefit from trade with China.
"The clothing, furniture, toys, and electronics that make up a big chunk of Chinese imports keep prices down in American stores and raise the real wages of American families, especially those with middling or low incomes," he wrote in an article on the Cato website.
Griswold said any attempt to erect barriers to trade with China would damage the U.S. economy, and undermine security too.
He disagreed with those who believe enriching China through trade will threaten U.S. security, arguing that putting the brakes on China's economic growth, would cause hardship for hundreds of millions of Chinese.
"A poor, stagnant, and frustrated China would be more unstable and hostile to American interests than an energetic and prosperous one," he argued.
In an article published in China Daily at the weekend, Yin Yue of the China University of Political Science and Law argued that the dispute was political rather than economic.
Noting that 2004 is an election year, Yin said China has become "the victim of U.S. domestic politics."
'Negotiable'
China specialist Prof. Jian Yang of the University of Auckland agreed Tuesday that many in China saw the dispute in political terms.
"The Chinese believe the U.S. side has exaggerated the impact of Chinese exports on U.S. jobs and the Bush Administration is driven by election politics," he said.
On the other hand, even if Beijing decided it was necessary to revalue the RMB, it would not likely do so in a dramatic fashion, lest it be seen as "too weak."
Yang said some Chinese felt their government was entitled to take little or no action, since China's decision not to revalue its currency during the 1997 Asian financial crisis helped other countries, including the U.S.
Asked to predict an outcome to the row, Yang said he doubted it would be allowed to reach a point where it was allowed seriously to damage bilateral relations.
"After all, this is a negotiable issue although the Chinese say it is a matter of sovereignty," he said.
China would eventually adjust its policy, although changes would likely to "gradual and experimental" in nature.
"The dispute may last a while as the White House wants Beijing to move fast and it is facing pressure from various forces.
"Beijing may move faster under strong pressure. However, the White House should understand how far and how fast China could go," Yang said.
Poland in XVIIIc? I am sure there are more examples - "there is no new thing under the sun" (Ecclesiastes 1:9 - "nihil sub sole novum").
Considering the amount of money and effort already expended to forge relationships with PLA officials, the Free Traitors have a large investment in treason.
And when the domestic production is eliminated, they may!
That is the Walmart Model. Get real large and buy your Communist Kitch by the container load, then dump the products on the market, overwhelming the smaller operations that can't purchase full containers nor dictate terms to the suppliers. The Free Traitors are correct in this regard - Walmart has saved the US consumer over $10 billion when calculated at the cash register. Free Traitors will never tell you the costs that don't show up on your receipt.
Palm, as in the makers of the Palm Pilot, deliberately designed the original Zire to be at what the marketers consider a "Single Decision Price". What they mean by that is that the price is so low that the purchaser doesn't need to share the decision to buy with their spouse (as one would do with a $800 TV, or a set of Ping golf clubs). The goal is that a person would see the Palm in it's shrinkwrap container and make a spontaneous purchase. Where am I going with this? Walmart has converted more and more items to "Single Decision" products - this procedure has enabled people to have less discretion in their purchases, allowing people to piss away their money on non-necessary goods. Ultimately this junk ends up in the sanitary land-fill - bypassing the garage sale since it is so crappy in the first place, and for the privlege of being able to make spontaneous irresponsible purchases of junk, we are said to save $10 billion. Oh boy.
Or just open fire...
These products would last only a limited time and the buyers had to toss it, because the warranty had expired. Know anything about this??????
You are correct. And that day is coming sooner than you might think. Of course, those "American interests" will not be the same "American interests" that you might be expecting them to be (you and I, and most Americans, might not be included in them).
Massive MEGA-BUMP for that one.
I grew up 'back in those days'. "Back in those days" a man almost always supported his family on his own wages alone. Women generally did not work and stayed home to raise the children. Families were usually larger as well, which make the discrepancy even greater. Today, it almost always takes both the man and the woman working to maintain the same lifestyle (some would argue the the lifestyle has degenerated), and large numbers of people require government assistance of some sort as well.
If that's the way you feel. If not, try a Google-search on "wto+ruling."
It seems you have selective hearing. This is because you must shill for the Hate America crowd, and therefore you ignore the parts that say that the money raised by tariffs (a tax on foreign producers and domestic consumers), is used to reduce taxes on domestic producers and thus makes domestic products cheaper for everyone.
You prefer to keep Americans uncompetitive and you prefer to maximize the penalties on US Producers and minimize penalites on foreign Producers. That makes you a traitor to this country and a whore to China.
We need fewer people like you, and more patriots.
Being stupid doesn't help make your comment witty.
I know being a Libertarian is a mental defect, so therefore you don't understand Cause & Effect. But for those who read these things and aren't constrained like you by their own penchant for anti-Americanism, tariffs tax the other guy. Since you are pro-Chinese, pro-Malaysian, pro-Mexican, anti-American, this probably causes you great distress and emotional turmoil to even contemplate passing the tax burden from American workers to foreign workers who only see the United States as a place to dump their products and their unwanted citizens.
I know that Libertarians wish to see the present mechanism of penalizing profits and taxing the American producers continue. Any thought of reducing taxes on US citizens by transfering those taxes to foreign businesses probably makes you break out in hives. That is why you write stupid and vapid dreck like you did.
Tariffs can reduce taxes on American workers. Certainly when tariffs are placed on goods that can be made domestically, then American workers are more competitive and can be hired. But you, like your Liberal bretheren wish to see American workers stay on the unemployement line and depend on government to survive. You would much rather see Chinese slave labor goods sold in the US at "dumping" prices because you would rather see the Chinese military use money from American consumers to build weapons to spread their Communism. Again, your goals are identical to your leftist bretheren.
Tariffs do make products cheaper - usually in the long run. If the reason why products are not made domestically is because of the high cost of labor and the regulation that accompanies labor, then labor is often replaced with technology (requiring high-tech workers to design and build such automation). Presently, it is easier and cheaper to use slave labor, but if these low prices due to slave labor are raised by tariffs, then that advantage is lost and then automation becomes more attractive. There is a reason why hand-crafted cars cost considerably more than mass-produced types. Apparently as a Libertarian, you prefer to see more slavery and less technology.
Your comment "Freedom is Slavery" seems to be a Freudian slip, and you are really stating what you truly believe.
And last, "War is Peace" comes straight from the aparatchiks of the Communist Party. The Marxists accused Ronald Reagan for wanting to go to war by building the MX and Peace Keeper missles, and later by introducing SDI. By you parroting perfectly the rhetoric of the Marixsts, you are showing the Libertarian philosophical roots in global tyranny. As you may know, the Libertarian Party was totally for the US not defending herself against terrorism, and the Libertarians joined their bretheren arm in arm to protest the miltiary operations in Iraq. Clearly, the Libertarians believe that people should be under the power of totalitarians and dictators. That is why you borrow from your communist buddies and say "War is Peace" in such a mocking way.
Thanks again for your determined efforts to prove without a shadow of a doubt that Libertarians are really Marxists the means may on the surface appear different but the ends are indistinguishable.
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.