Posted on 09/14/2010 1:44:53 PM PDT by bruinbirdman
A State Council think-tank in China has warned Washington that the US will come off worst in a trade war if it imposes sanctions against Beijing over the two nations' currency spat.
Ding Yifan, a policy guru at the Development Research Centre, said China could respond by selling holdings of US debt, estimated at over $1.5 trillion (£963bn). This would trigger a rise in US interest rates. His comments at a forum in Beijing follow a string of remarks by Chinese officials questioning US credit-worthiness and the reliability of the dollar.
China's authorities seem split over how to respond to moves on Capitol Hill for legislation to punish Beijing for holding down the yuan. The central bank has ruled out use of its "nuclear weapon", insisting that it would not exploit its $2.45 trillion of foreign reserves for political purposes. "The US Treasury market is a very important market for China," it said.
However, the mood is hardening on both sides of the Pacific. The dispute risks escalating if China's trade surplus with the US climbs further and more US jobs are lost. US Treasury Secretary Tim Geithner, who has taken a softly-softly line in the past, said on Friday that China had done "very little" to correct the undervaluation of the yuan since ending the dollar peg in June.
Mr Ding reflects thinking among some in the Poltiburo, who seem convinced that the US is in decline and that China's rise as an exporter of goods and capital give it the upper hand.
"They are utterly wrong," said Gabriel Stein from Lombard Street Research. "The lesson of the 1930s is that surplus countries with structurally weak domestic demand come off worst in a trade war."
He described the implicit threat to sell Treasuries as "empty
(Excerpt) Read more at telegraph.co.uk ...
Sorry, missed the Roofer example.
So I take it you are OK with people coming here illegally, Taking Americans jobs, because they work cheaper.
I understand you're trying to keep in character, but did you actually read this before posting it? You want me to be banned because I support buying American to help Americans keep their jobs?
A number of people have tried to explain to you the economic consequences of "spending just 50 cents extra" for something, and you can't grasp it.
For once we agree. I can't grasp the idea that shipping jobs, not to mention revenue and advanced technology, to China, and then borrowing money from them to pay for the unemployment benefits for the people we laid off, is a good policy.
Speaking of which, you never answered my question. How do you feel about all of this technology being exported to China so that you can buy a computer for less? Surely, that's a simple question for one with your expertise to answer.
TopQuark: And how are you going to implement this --- via tariffs? And what about TV sets, given that none is produced in the U.S. for decades?
As you point out, TVs aren't produced here any more. Do you want to see that happen on a larger scale? I don't, and I don't need tariffs to want to keep jobs, not to mention industries like electronics, over here.
And I'm under no obligation to shift the conversation to the topic you want, when you won't even acknowledge the Law of Unintended Consequences. The fact that you cannot even comprehend it in the scope of a discussion about government intervention into the market indicates that you probably drifted onto the wrong website.
Where did I make the claim that our benevolent government can save our jobs. Quite the opposite, I agreed with you that their interference is making things worse.
And I'm under no obligation to shift the conversation to the topic you want, when you won't even acknowledge the Law of Unintended Consequences.
Shipping our technology to other countries has EVERYTHING do with unintended consequences, as do laying off the American consumers you're counting on to buy your cheaper products and borrowing money from foreign countries to pay their unemployment benefits.
And you're right, you have no obligation to answer my question. Just remember that I'm not the only one reading your failure to reply to it.
I'm glad people are reading this, because they see you spinning like a top. Let's say your benevolent government chooses to save some jobs in the steel-producing industry . . . in order "save" money on unemployment benefits, etc., as you postulate. How many jobs in the steel-consuming industry are you willing to sacrifice, and pay unemployment benefits for? How are you so certain you are "saving" anything? Remember, this is our government we're discussing.
Until you can answer the above without another one of your dodges, then you haven't demonstrated that you are capable of understanding my response to your question.
As I said to YOU SEVERAL TIMES, I don't support government interference. I don't need government interference to know it's in my best interest to buy American and help keep jobs here.
Remember, this is our government we're discussing.
Yup, they couldn't even teach you how to read.
There's really no point in having this conversation if you can't even remember what you've written.
How far did your five dollars go?
I bought a pair of boots from Red Wing for twice what I paid for china crap. They have lasted me four years, the china made boots, 6 month of discomfort.
I just purchase a saw blade from Bad Dog tools, and drill bits. The cost is at least three times what I spent on a regular blade, and the bits, 180 for a set up to a one inch drill. We will see how long they last, but i they are half as good as they look in the Demo I made a good deal.
Just bought a JD tractor, 100% American Made. Did not cost me a dime more then the Kubota I could have purchased. Same quality, same price.
In this case the 25 cents is worth it to see fellow country-men working.
I wish I could state that Deere itself follows your "Buy American" Strategy.
You make me laugh. You have to be careful what you say around here - people will call you on it.
Damn, I miss Ponderosa....
Call me what, exactly? Names? Start acting sanctimonious? Maybe issue a death threat or two? (Haven't seen one of those in a while).
And just to put the resume issue to bed, I sent mine to U.S. Steel once. I was called in for an interview (to my surprise), but the first words out the guy's mouth were "I don't have a job for you, I just wanted to meet you."
So we sat for an hour and chatted about things like electric arc furnaces, unfunded pension liabilities, and "too big to fail" (He laughed at the last one, while I noted the incongruity of his doing so in a teak-lined office).
Not really making a point, just sharing the story. And maybe reminding you, in my own way, that I made my name 42 to 48 thousand pounds of steel at a time, while it appears that your company (I might be incorrect, but no matter--you still act it) looks like it does a lot of its shipping via FedEx or UPS.
I wish the same thing.
The Japanese Yamnar is made in the US, so that is a plus.
Whatsamatter, run out of straw men?
How far did your five dollars go?
If it didn't pay for foreign nukes that could be used against us, I'll fork over the extra $5.00. If it saves the jobs of Americans who in turn buys products from my company, then it will come back to me anyway. And if those jobs I helped save happen to be held by Vets, well, no Freeper can argue with that.
I haven't been to my local Wal-Mart to confirm it, but I will.
I hope it doesn't disappoint you that I see this as good news.
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.