Posted on 03/16/2006 1:18:04 PM PST by Zon
This should probably go out to a Freeper financial ping list. Also, Rush might be interested in this.
Just going over to pick up their paycheck for killing the Port deal.
Maybe the two little lovebirds just wanna share an authentic Poo-Poo Platter
Lindsey Graham? He wants to be president some day I think. But he's from the south, so I trust him! LOL
Ah, that was cold!
I think it's rather obvious that a Senator will never ever make a good president. These people sit around and talk clueless of reality.
But the faux Free Traders said that this could NEVER happen! It would be self-defeating. This would cause China's PRC to lose too much money already sunk into U.S. T-Bills! The PRC has no where else to go with all those pretty pieces of paper to get a return....
More blah, blah from the import-lobbyist-apologists.
Reality will soon bite them...and unfortunately us, where it hurts. All because reality was unknown to the faux Free Traders. They lived in a day dream.
To my everlasting regret, I voted for the bum.
Why don't you like him?
And yet, a few days ago, the administration was talking tough against china on economic reform. Even talking retaliation. http://www.freerepublic.com/focus/f-news/1596438/posts
He has his nose too far up McCain's butt.
Well, I thought he did great during the Alito hearings.
He did, but I thought it was grandstanding.
I particularly didn't like him helping McCain attach the "no torture" rider to the defense appropriation (or budget, I can't remember which).
Cozying up to Hitlery, Schumer, and Kennedy are no-no's if you represent SC.
I agree but I seriously think he will run for pres one of these days. What do you think?
But on the Chinese subsidy of their export industry...it can be no doubt that Graham is right. They are not floating their currency as they promised John Snow they would. They spend $195 billion annually to prop up the U.S. dollar, and keep their Yuan deflated.
This is neither altruistic or foolish. They are indeed getting something for this game playing of the rules of trade. They get business orders disproportionate to all other third world nations, racking up a net $100 billion trade surplus against the entire world last year (and that is in spite of a lot games they played to understate that trade surplus)...$200 billion trade surplus against the U.S., whereby they recover more than all their "investment" in the currency manipulation. Then they get "gravy" with the FDI of the foreign direct investments in still more new plant, industry and technology. Hitting $60 Billion last year.
They are sucking in our industry and technology. This is harmful to our own infrastructure and independence...and eventually our nation will pay a high price when the pied piper comes for his pay. And it is an acclerating process as it goes up the value-chain.
"fragile greenback and a U.S. deficit funding program that requires $3bn a day from foreign investors."
I'd say if this is such a big problem that we have to worry about sucking-up to Red China, then it's high time we addressed the deficit.
Bump.
But, oh, wait... we've been told the budget deficits don't matter either!
At any rate, it will be a cold day in hell when this Administration agrees to roll back its own precipitous inflation of federal domestic spending.
They clearly were hoping to just get through their terms before the s___ hits the fan. Maybe that's why they have been positioning to put Hillary into power in '08...they must want her and the Rats to take the fall for it.
I don't think that will fly. They are too good at spin, and this current crowd around the President are just plain awful. Who advised him to defame and slander the U.S. populace as neo-bigots and Islamophobes?
Furthermore, it is an insane gamble, I don't think our country will survive another term of the Xlintons.
I just posted above the previous link...where China itself admitted last year that it was spending $195 billion annually to manipulate their currency.
But look what our Treasury Secretary had the gall to claim just five or six months before hand...as if it would never get called to attention later when he was debunked...
Issue 08, 2004 (06 May)
| Content from tdctrade.com |
| US Treasury Finds No Currency Manipulation by China, US Modifies Calls for Floating Yuan During his recent visit to China, Vice President Richard Dick Cheney praised the country for its economic progress. Cheney said that given the expansion of bilateral trade relations Sino-American trade disputes should not be overblown, but he also noted that at present China exports much more to the US than it buys from America. Cheney added, "We think that will change over time as your market opens up more and more as you implement the agreements under the WTO (Word Trade Organisation)", but he also urged Beijing to adopt a flexible, market-driven exchange rate. In this regard, the Bush administration has taken note of the shift in Beijing's position on the value of its currency, which has been pegged to the US dollar for the past ten years at a rate of 8.28 yuan to US$1. This circumstance has led to charges that Chinese manufacturers enjoy an unfair competitive advantage by undervaluing the yuan by 20-45%, which is at least in part to blame for the woes of the US manufacturing sector. However, a number of top Chinese officials now have indicated that establishing a market-driven trading system for the yuan has become a top priority. Under the Omnibus Trade and Competitiveness Act of 1988, the US Treasury Department must submit a report on international exchange rates twice per year. And if the department finds that a country has significantly harmed US trade through foreign exchange rate manipulations, then the treasury secretary is required to conduct "expedited" negotiations to change the practice. However, in its latest report, which was released on April 15th, the US Treasury Department said that neither China nor any other country had systematically manipulated its currency in the second half of 2003. Still, the Treasury's report notes that China's bilateral merchandise trade surplus with the US grew to US$70 billion in the second half of 2003, up from US$60 billion in the second half of 2002. At the same time, the report recognises that more than 50% of China's exports come from foreign-funded operations that use the country for final assembly and processing. The Treasury report states that while a number of economies continue to use pegged exchange rates and intervene in foreign exchange markets, a peg or intervention does not in itself satisfy the statutory test. For the purpose of assessing whether an economy is manipulating its currency, the Treasury undertakes a careful review of the individual trading partners' exchange rates, external balances, foreign exchange reserve accumulation, macroeconomic trends, monetary and financial developments, the state of institutional development and financial and exchange restrictions. In other words, isolated developments in any one area do not typically provide sufficient grounds to conclude that there is exchange-rate manipulation. The Treasury report notes that because of China's exchange-rate peg, balance of payments inflows are absorbed by the Chinese central bank and reflected in an increase in Chinese reserves. As a result, China's official foreign exchange reserves grew by a net US$57 billion during the second half of 2003 to reach US$403 billion, up 16% over the country's foreign exchange reserves at the end of June 2003. This accumulation of foreign exchange reserves has created monetary pressures that fuel domestic credit growth and inflation. China's real gross domestic product (GDP) officially increased 9.1% in 2003, with official fourth-quarter growth coming it at 9.9%. The Treasury report also points out that China's capital controls are largely asymmetric, restricting outflows more than inflows, and hence provide upward pressure on the currency's value. The report observes that the Bush administration has urged China to move as soon as possible toward greater exchange-rate flexibility. A regular dialogue between senior financial officials from the Group of Seven (G-7) industrialised countries and senior finance officials from China has been established. Yet the report goes on to say that China will need to lay the groundwork for floating its currency. It states that Beijing has already taken a number of steps to prepare for a flexible exchange rate regime, having re-capitalised two of its four largest state-owned financial institutions in December 2003 and continued to write off non-performing loans. In addition, the report acknowledges that Beijing has liberalised foreign direct investment (FDI) outflows, is preparing for renminbi trading in Hong Kong and has allowed insurance companies to invest a portion of their portfolio in foreign assets. China also is preparing to allow limited investments in securities traded on foreign markets. US Treasury Secretary John Snow will meet with Vice Premier Huang Ju in Washington in the next few months to discuss the undervaluation of China's currency. Yet the Bush administration has backed off from its earlier demands that China should float its currency. Not without good reason, it should be added. Most economists do not believe that floating China's currency would do anything to reduce the US trade deficit with China. Nor would it be likely to restore lost American manufacturing jobs. Moreover, the yuan's appreciation would damage those US firms that produce in China for the US market. However, it has become increasingly likely over the past few months that Beijing might appreciate the yuan a bit and peg the currency's value to a basket of major currencies, including the US dollar, the euro and the Japanese yen. Off the record, most US officials believe that this would be the most desirable outcome at this time. URL : http://www.tdctrade.com/alert/us0408b.htm
Reproduction in whole or in part without HKTDC's permission is prohibited. |
The Congress is right to bust the Administration...and this Treasury Secretary...for the egregious monstrous misrepresentations asserted in their report.
Just this week China rejected any plan to give up state control of their banks.
So much for free and "fair" trade, right?
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.