Page 4 of 6 FirstFirst 123456 LastLast
Results 73 to 96 of 122

Thread: It turns out China is not a Painting contractor

  1. #73
    Quote Originally Posted by onthebottom View Post
    He does this all the time, it worked getting him elected, it worked with Mexico and immigration.

    China has no idea what he’s going to do, that has to freak them out.
    They are just waiting him out.
    'Course the recession will likely hit before that happens now.
    “To abandon facts is to abandon freedom. If nothing is true, then no one can criticize power, because there is no basis upon which to do so. If nothing is true, then all is spectacle

  2. #74
    Quote Originally Posted by onthebottom View Post
    He does this all the time, it worked getting him elected, it worked with Mexico and immigration.

    China has no idea what he’s going to do, that has to freak them out.
    In game theory, unpredictable is good, unreliable not so good.
    The statements, views and opinions expressed in this column are solely those of the author and do not necessarily represent anybody else.

  3. #75
    As typical, we get our usual collection of Never Trumpers united with more radical Anti-American/Anti-West socialists. Now it's possible we have a few Mainland Chinese popping up in the conversation. How exciting!

    Folks this isn't about Trump vs. China. No matter how this current trade dispute settles I assure this will be a long-run theme for many years to come. Democrat Presidents, Republican Presidents will be fighting with China over trade for a long time.

  4. #76
    Quote Originally Posted by smuddan View Post
    Wrong ! While Hongkonger didn't have the right to vote just as they don't today, they were entitled to freedom of speech and a fair and independent judiciary system when Hong Kong under the British laws.

    Had the extradition bill passed, the communist China would extradite anyone who they consider a security threat to the ruling party. It's up to the ruling party to determine what they consider as a "security threat" and the courts must rule as directed by the party. It'd literally take away freedom of speech as any disparaging remarks against the communist party would be a crime and the accused would not be entitled to the same legal help as we would get in the western world with democracy.
    Absolute bullshit.

    The extradition law was meant for mainland chinese criminals to be sent back to China for trial, usually for embezzlement of state funds. The extradition process includes review by the HK courts, just like any other country's extradition procedures. China could not automatically request extradition of HK residents unless a case was made that they actually broke the law on the mainland.

    The 2014 protests had to do with the inability to elect the chief executive by popular vote.... which was completely misinformed because very few world heads of state are actually elected directly by the electorate. The US President is elected by the Electoral College, not the people directly. In the UK and Canada, the head of state is HM the Queen; the head of government, the Prime Minister, becomes as such when his party gets the most seats in the House of Commons, not because the electorate voted directly for him.

    Pre-1997, the HK governor was appointed by London, not elected.

    The present system in HK, the legislature is composed of two parts: the representatives elected by the people (40 seats), and the other side, the functional constituency (30 seats), elected from of the business, associations, banking sector and other legal entities that drives HK's society; it is the latter that votes for the Chief Executive. This system was invented by the British as far back as 1984, and more functional seats were added by the British themselves. The system never changed since 1997, and it is false to claim the HK is less democratic than before. The Chief Executive's election is endorsed by Beijing, not decided by Beijing. In the case of the British governor, he never got elected.

    A more balanced view of the situation is contained in an article in Singapore's Straits Times.

    https://www.straitstimes.com/asia/th...star-columnist

    The US is accused of meddling in HK affairs through their US government funded NGO National Endowment for Democracy (NED), and have funded dissident HK organisations over $300,000; they use social media to whip gullible students into a frenzy.

    If China decides to clamp down, the protesters will wind up with a lot less than they have now.

  5. #77
    Quote Originally Posted by wilbur View Post
    Absolute bullshit.

    The extradition law was meant for mainland chinese criminals to be sent back to China for trial, usually for embezzlement of state funds. The extradition process includes review by the HK courts, just like any other country's extradition procedures. China could not automatically request extradition of HK residents unless a case was made that they actually broke the law on the mainland.

    The 2014 protests had to do with the inability to elect the chief executive by popular vote.... which was completely misinformed because very few world heads of state are actually elected directly by the electorate. The US President is elected by the Electoral College, not the people directly. In the UK and Canada, the head of state is HM the Queen; the head of government, the Prime Minister, becomes as such when his party gets the most seats in the House of Commons, not because the electorate voted directly for him.

    Pre-1997, the HK governor was appointed by London, not elected.

    The present system in HK, the legislature is composed of two parts: the representatives elected by the people (40 seats), and the other side, the functional constituency (30 seats), elected from of the business, associations, banking sector and other legal entities that drives HK's society; it is the latter that votes for the Chief Executive. This system was invented by the British as far back as 1984, and more functional seats were added by the British themselves. The system never changed since 1997, and it is false to claim the HK is less democratic than before. The Chief Executive's election is endorsed by Beijing, not decided by Beijing. In the case of the British governor, he never got elected.

    A more balanced view of the situation is contained in an article in Singapore's Straits Times.

    https://www.straitstimes.com/asia/th...star-columnist

    The US is accused of meddling in HK affairs through their US government funded NGO National Endowment for Democracy (NED), and have funded dissident HK organisations over $300,000; they use social media to whip gullible students into a frenzy.

    If China decides to clamp down, the protesters will wind up with a lot less than they have now.
    Obviously you are not as good in understanding why Hong Kongers are against the extradition bill as you are in spreading communist China's propaganda, and you are either ignorant or blind to human rights issues and the lack of a fair and independent judiciary system in Mainland China.

    The 4 chief executives since 1997 were all hand picked by Beijing and the election system in a joke. Incompetence and corruption in various levels of the HK government, from the multi million MTR scandals to the $50million bribery accusations of the previous chief executive, have infuriated and caused great grief among Hong Kongers.

    One thing I can agree with you is that if China send in their troops and apply martial laws, the demonstration will come to an abrupt halt. The only reason they're hesitant is they still need Hong Kong for economic gains and by sending the PLA they risk big time in
    demolishing the "golden egg". Instead, they are infiltrating the HK police force with members of the Chinese Ministry of Public Security and the HK police force is now under the direct control of the Chinese Central Liaison Office in HK

  6. #78
    Registered User
    Join Date
    Oct 2007
    Location
    hornyville
    Posts
    2,643
    Quote Originally Posted by danmand View Post
    Trump blinked.
    President Trump goes around in circles with his China policy and trade war.

    He is either incompetent or making it up as he goes along with the US-China trade war. A trade war he started.

    It does not help he listens to that crackpot Navarro. The Chinese are laughing at these guys.

    The PRC already stated what the pre-conditions to end the trade war. That all US tariffs are to be lifted. That all sanctions against Hauwei to be lifted. There will be no enforcement mechanisms only consultations if a deal is reached. Also talking about domestic Chinese government policy is not negotiable either.

    Those were the pre-conditions publicly stated a few weeks ago.

    What the Americans decide to do, that is entirely up to them.

    Such as having Lightzenger phoning his trade counterpart in China the other day.

    That is all we need to know who is seeking out whom. Just like the last time in May that the negotiations reached a deadlock. The Americans initiated and reached out to the Chinese. The Chinese could not be bothered to do that.

  7. #79
    Never Been Justly Banned
    Join Date
    Jan 2002
    Location
    Hooterville
    Posts
    39,400
    Quote Originally Posted by danmand View Post
    In game theory, unpredictable is good, unreliable not so good.
    They walked away from the deal because they realized it had real commitments in it. He’s being very reliable, they are not.


    At the bottom of all the tributes paid to democracy, is the little man, walking into the little booth, with a little pencil, making a little cross on a little bit of paper - no amount of rhetoric or voluminous discussion can possibly diminish the overwhelming importance of the point.

  8. #80
    Quote Originally Posted by onthebottom View Post
    He’s being very reliable, they are not.
    It would appear that most other governments think otherwise.
    The statements, views and opinions expressed in this column are solely those of the author and do not necessarily represent anybody else.

  9. #81
    Never Been Justly Banned
    Join Date
    Jan 2002
    Location
    Hooterville
    Posts
    39,400
    Quote Originally Posted by danmand View Post
    It would appear that most other governments think otherwise.
    They don’t like his position but it’s consistent. He wants Europe to pay more for its own defense, the Germans to stop using a cheap Euro to run a large trade surplus with the US and China to stop stealing IP and buy more from the US. None of these are controversial, none of these countries are accustomed to a POTUS that will stand up for them.


    At the bottom of all the tributes paid to democracy, is the little man, walking into the little booth, with a little pencil, making a little cross on a little bit of paper - no amount of rhetoric or voluminous discussion can possibly diminish the overwhelming importance of the point.

  10. #82
    Quote Originally Posted by onthebottom
    He’s being very reliable, they are not.
    Quote Originally Posted by danmand View Post
    It would appear that most other governments think otherwise.
    Not to mention those on the others side of the 4500 or so lawsuits his previous private 'deals' degenerated into.

    What progress?

  11. #83
    Quote Originally Posted by onthebottom View Post
    They don’t like his position but it’s consistent. He wants Europe to pay more for its own defense, the Germans to stop using a cheap Euro to run a large trade surplus with the US and China to stop stealing IP and buy more from the US. None of these are controversial, none of these countries are accustomed to a POTUS that will stand up for them.
    Actions based upon lies or complete misunderstanding do not amount to policy. I don't think you ever answered my question. Are the PGOTUS's statements regarding who pays tariffs a lie or is he a moron? His lack of understanding or lies permeate most of the fights he has started including trade deficits, NATO, immigration etc.

  12. #84
    Never Been Justly Banned
    Join Date
    Jan 2002
    Location
    Hooterville
    Posts
    39,400
    Quote Originally Posted by toguy5252 View Post
    Actions based upon lies or complete misunderstanding do not amount to policy. I don't think you ever answered my question. Are the PGOTUS's statements regarding who pays tariffs a lie or is he a moron? His lack of understanding or lies permeate most of the fights he has started including trade deficits, NATO, immigration etc.
    I did answer your question, but I will do it again with smaller words and more detail if that will help.

    From an accounting perspective the Chinese pay the tariffs, you can see that in US Treasury receipts.
    https://www.wsj.com/articles/u-s-col...ne-11565168400

    If those extra costs are passed onto the final consumer then the consumer pays the part that was passed on. There is very little evidence that consumers are being impacted:
    https://www.usinflationcalculator.co...flation-rates/

    The reasons the tariffs have not shown up in US inflation are:
    That the $60b of tariffs the US has collected are minuscule in a $20T economy
    That China has to compete for US business and can’t simply pass on all the extra cost
    That costs are not directly tied to prices

    Does that help?

    The simplicity of your sneering question makes you look as stupid as your implying the POTUS is. The lefts voters are not smart enough to understand this, thus the idiotic “who pays the tariff” talking points.


    At the bottom of all the tributes paid to democracy, is the little man, walking into the little booth, with a little pencil, making a little cross on a little bit of paper - no amount of rhetoric or voluminous discussion can possibly diminish the overwhelming importance of the point.

  13. #85
    Quote Originally Posted by onthebottom View Post
    I did answer your question, but I will do it again with smaller words and more detail if that will help.

    From an accounting perspective the Chinese pay the tariffs, you can see that in US Treasury receipts.
    https://www.wsj.com/articles/u-s-col...ne-11565168400

    If those extra costs are passed onto the final consumer then the consumer pays the part that was passed on. There is very little evidence that consumers are being impacted:
    https://www.usinflationcalculator.co...flation-rates/

    The reasons the tariffs have not shown up in US inflation are:
    That the $60b of tariffs the US has collected are minuscule in a $20T economy
    That China has to compete for US business and can’t simply pass on all the extra cost
    That costs are not directly tied to prices

    Does that help?

    The simplicity of your sneering question makes you look as stupid as your implying the POTUS is. The lefts voters are not smart enough to understand this, thus the idiotic “who pays the tariff” talking points.

    Like I said you never answered the question. Repeating facts that are not responsive to the question is not an answer. It is obvious that the treasury is collecting tariffs. Why not simply answer the question. Who pays the tariffs?

  14. #86
    Quote Originally Posted by toguy5252 View Post
    Like I said you never answered the question. Repeating facts that are not responsive to the question is not an answer. It is obvious that the treasury is collecting tariffs. Why not simply answer the question. Who pays the tariffs?
    'cause the answer is in conflict with the Presidents words: Consumers pay.

    Actually, yesterday the President finally admitted it, by delaying the tariffs to after Christmas as a gift to consumers.
    The statements, views and opinions expressed in this column are solely those of the author and do not necessarily represent anybody else.

  15. #87
    Why are you badgering onthebottom when he has answered your question? If prices aren't going up, the U.S. consumer isn't paying the tariffs. Yes, it's that simple.

    Who is paying?
    - Chinese producers or the Chinese govt. either through directly lowering prices and/or through the forced lower value of the Yuan. US$ buys more. As a result of currency devaluation, Chinese goods are 10% cheaper than in May.
    - Retailers who do not want to lose volume.
    - American companies that source Chinese materials and intermediate products for fear that competitors sourcing from other parts of the world are gaining advantage.

    The downside is that Euro companies could source materials in China and sell finished goods in the U.S. I believe that closing the Canadian backdoor with the USMCA deal was a critical step before the trade war with China.

    You guys have to stop repeating declarations you hear on liberal media. There is very little nuance in liberal media reporting. It's either negative Trump or it's not reported at all. There's a horde here that would never concede this point.

  16. #88
    Quote Originally Posted by danmand View Post
    'cause the answer is in conflict with the Presidents words: Consumers pay.
    Yes, of course, some products for some time. The overall impact on consumers has been negligible to date as evidenced by inflation numbers.

    As I noted above, much of what China sells to the World has been recently discounted 10% by way of China's currency devaluation. Think about that on a global scale. Every country that competes with Chinese producers must deal with the price reduction. Global consumers not just American consumers are the winners.

  17. #89
    Quote Originally Posted by WyattEarp View Post
    Why are you badgering onthebottom when he has answered your question? If prices aren't going up, the U.S. consumer isn't paying the tariffs. Yes, it's that simple.

    Who is paying?
    - Chinese producers or the Chinese govt. either through directly lowering prices and/or through the forced lower value of the Yuan. US$ buys more. As a result of currency devaluation, Chinese goods are 10% cheaper than in May.
    - Retailers who do not want to lose volume.
    - American companies that source Chinese materials and intermediate products for fear that competitors sourcing from other parts of the world are gaining advantage.

    The downside is that Euro companies could source materials in China and sell finished goods in the U.S. I believe that closing the Canadian backdoor with the USMCA deal was a critical step before the trade war with China.

    You guys have to stop repeating declarations you hear on liberal media. There is very little nuance in liberal media reporting. It's either negative Trump or it's not reported at all. There's a horde here that would never concede this point.
    And hence once again the Trumpanistas demonstrate that they are the dumbest most gullible cohort on the planet.

  18. #90
    Never Been Justly Banned
    Join Date
    Jan 2002
    Location
    Hooterville
    Posts
    39,400
    Quote Originally Posted by danmand View Post
    'cause the answer is in conflict with the Presidents words: Consumers pay.

    Actually, yesterday the President finally admitted it, by delaying the tariffs to after Christmas as a gift to consumers.
    I answered it, he’s too stupid to understand it. I can explain it to him but I can’t understand it for him.


    At the bottom of all the tributes paid to democracy, is the little man, walking into the little booth, with a little pencil, making a little cross on a little bit of paper - no amount of rhetoric or voluminous discussion can possibly diminish the overwhelming importance of the point.

  19. #91
    Never Been Justly Banned
    Join Date
    Jan 2002
    Location
    Hooterville
    Posts
    39,400
    China's economy worsens in July, industrial growth at 17-year low as trade war escalates
    https://www.reuters.com/article/us-c...-idUSKCN1V404X

    BEIJING (Reuters) - China’s economy stumbled more sharply than expected in July, with industrial output growth cooling to a more than 17-year low, as the intensifying U.S. trade war took a heavier toll on businesses and consumers.

    Activity in China has continued to cool despite a flurry of growth steps over the past year, raising questions over whether more rapid and forceful stimulus may be needed, even if it risks racking up more debt.

    After a flicker of improvement in June, analysts said the latest data was evidence that demand faltered across the board last month, from industrial output and investment to retail sales.

    That followed weaker-than-expected bank lending and gloomy factory surveys in recent days, along with the return of producer price deflation, reinforcing expectations more policy support is needed soon.

    “China’s economy needs more stimulus because the headwinds are pretty strong and today’s data is much weaker than consensus,” said Larry Hu, head of Greater China economics at Macquarie Group in Hong Kong.

    “The economy is going to continue to slow down. At a certain point, policymakers will have to step up stimulus to support infrastructure and property. I think it could happen by the end of this year.”

    Industrial output growth slowed markedly to 4.8% in July from a year earlier, data from the National Bureau of Statistics showed, lower than the most bearish forecast in a Reuters poll and the weakest pace since February 2002.

    Analysts had forecast it would slow to 5.8%, from June’s 6.3%. Washington had sharply raised some tariffs in May.

    Infrastructure investment, which Beijing has been counting on to stabilize the economy, also dropped back, as did property investment, which has been a rare bright spot despite worries of potential housing bubbles.

    Crude steel output fell for a second straight month, while production of motor vehicles continued to fall by double digits. Hi-tech manufacturing output rose by a slower 6.6%, and the country’s power output edged up just 0.6%.

    The industry ministry said last month that China would need “arduous efforts” to achieve its 2019 industrial growth target of 5.5% to 6.0%.

    INVESTMENT, RETAIL SALES GROWTH COOLS

    China’s economic growth cooled to a near 30-year low of 6.2% in the second quarter, and business confidence has remained shaky, weighing on investment.

    While officials have cautioned it would take time for higher infrastructure spending to kick in, construction growth has been more subdued than expected.

    Fixed-asset investment rose 5.7% in January-July from the same period last year, lagging expectations of a 5.8% gain and dipping from the previous reading.

    But readings by sector showed a more marked loss of momentum in critical areas at the start of the third quarter.

    Infrastructure investment rose 3.8% in the first seven months from a year earlier, slowing from 4.1% in the first half despite massive local government bond issuance, mainly to fund road and rail projects and other civic works.

    Data from Japanese construction equipment maker Komatsu Ltd. (6301.T) showed activity remained weak, with operating hours for its machines in China falling for a fourth straight month.

    In a sign the housing market’s resilience may be waning as Beijing cracks down on speculation, property investment slowed to its weakest this year. It rose 8.5% in July on-year, from June’s 10.1%. Though home sales inched back to growth, new construction starts cooled.

    Retail sales are also pointing to growing consumer caution, most evident in slumping auto sales but also in property-related spending on items such as home appliances and furniture.

    Retail sales rose 7.6% in July, well off consensus of 8.6% and weaker than the most pessimistic forecast. Sales had jumped 9.8% in June, which many analysts had predicted would be temporary.

    Job security worries may also be a factor. Nationwide survey-based unemployment edged up to 5.3% from 5.1% in June, though market watchers believe it could be much higher.

    FILE PHOTO: Trucks transport containers at a port in Qingdao, Shandong province, China July 11, 2019. REUTERS/Stringer
    “We maintain our view that (economic) growth has yet to bottom out and expect Beijing to maintain its easing policy stance,” economists at Nomura said.

    Nomura expects growth will slow to 6.0% in the third and fourth quarters, the bottom end of the government’s target range.

    Authorities have already announced hundreds of billions of dollars in infrastructure spending and corporate tax cuts over the last year, and repeatedly cut bank’s reserve requirements (RRR) to free up more funds for lending and reduce borrowing costs.

    But credit demand has been tepid, with companies in no mood to borrow or invest given the uncertain business outlook and banks wary of rising bad loans.

    Sources told Reuters recently that more aggressive action such as interest rate cuts are a last resort, as it could fuel a rapid build-up in debt and financial risks.

    Highlighting those concerns, the Politburo, a top decision-making body of the Communist Party, took the unusual step last month of announcing it would not use the property market as a form of short-term stimulus.

    ESCALATING TRADE WAR

    Recent months have been marked by a sudden escalation in the year-long U.S.-China trade war that has raised risks for both economies and sparked fears of a global recession.

    A brief ceasefire was shattered earlier this month after U.S President Donald Trump vowed to impose a 10% tariff on more Chinese goods from Sept. 1.

    China let its yuan currency slide to an 11-year low days later, prompting the U.S. Treasury Department to label Beijing a currency manipulator.

    Some relief came on Tuesday, however, after Trump said he would delay duties on some Chinese imports including cellphones and other consumer goods, in an apparent effort to blunt tariffs’ impact on U.S. holiday sales.

    Still, new tariffs will go into effect next month on about half of Washington’s $300 billion target list of Chinese goods, and analysts say the chance of any durable trade deal after the recent escalations has sharply receded.


    At the bottom of all the tributes paid to democracy, is the little man, walking into the little booth, with a little pencil, making a little cross on a little bit of paper - no amount of rhetoric or voluminous discussion can possibly diminish the overwhelming importance of the point.

  20. #92
    Quote Originally Posted by onthebottom View Post
    I answered it, he’s too stupid to understand it. I can explain it to him but I can’t understand it for him.
    Simple question. On whom is a tariff levied?

  21. #93
    Quote Originally Posted by onthebottom View Post
    China's economy worsens in July, industrial growth at 17-year low as trade war escalates
    https://www.reuters.com/article/us-c...-idUSKCN1V404X

    BEIJING (Reuters) - China’s economy stumbled more sharply than expected in July, with industrial output growth cooling to a more than 17-year low, as the intensifying U.S. trade war took a heavier toll on businesses and consumers.

    Activity in China has continued to cool despite a flurry of growth steps over the past year, raising questions over whether more rapid and forceful stimulus may be needed, even if it risks racking up more debt.

    After a flicker of improvement in June, analysts said the latest data was evidence that demand faltered across the board last month, from industrial output and investment to retail sales.

    That followed weaker-than-expected bank lending and gloomy factory surveys in recent days, along with the return of producer price deflation, reinforcing expectations more policy support is needed soon.

    “China’s economy needs more stimulus because the headwinds are pretty strong and today’s data is much weaker than consensus,” said Larry Hu, head of Greater China economics at Macquarie Group in Hong Kong.

    “The economy is going to continue to slow down. At a certain point, policymakers will have to step up stimulus to support infrastructure and property. I think it could happen by the end of this year.”

    Industrial output growth slowed markedly to 4.8% in July from a year earlier, data from the National Bureau of Statistics showed, lower than the most bearish forecast in a Reuters poll and the weakest pace since February 2002.

    Analysts had forecast it would slow to 5.8%, from June’s 6.3%. Washington had sharply raised some tariffs in May.

    Infrastructure investment, which Beijing has been counting on to stabilize the economy, also dropped back, as did property investment, which has been a rare bright spot despite worries of potential housing bubbles.

    Crude steel output fell for a second straight month, while production of motor vehicles continued to fall by double digits. Hi-tech manufacturing output rose by a slower 6.6%, and the country’s power output edged up just 0.6%.

    The industry ministry said last month that China would need “arduous efforts” to achieve its 2019 industrial growth target of 5.5% to 6.0%.

    INVESTMENT, RETAIL SALES GROWTH COOLS

    China’s economic growth cooled to a near 30-year low of 6.2% in the second quarter, and business confidence has remained shaky, weighing on investment.

    While officials have cautioned it would take time for higher infrastructure spending to kick in, construction growth has been more subdued than expected.

    Fixed-asset investment rose 5.7% in January-July from the same period last year, lagging expectations of a 5.8% gain and dipping from the previous reading.

    But readings by sector showed a more marked loss of momentum in critical areas at the start of the third quarter.

    Infrastructure investment rose 3.8% in the first seven months from a year earlier, slowing from 4.1% in the first half despite massive local government bond issuance, mainly to fund road and rail projects and other civic works.

    Data from Japanese construction equipment maker Komatsu Ltd. (6301.T) showed activity remained weak, with operating hours for its machines in China falling for a fourth straight month.

    In a sign the housing market’s resilience may be waning as Beijing cracks down on speculation, property investment slowed to its weakest this year. It rose 8.5% in July on-year, from June’s 10.1%. Though home sales inched back to growth, new construction starts cooled.

    Retail sales are also pointing to growing consumer caution, most evident in slumping auto sales but also in property-related spending on items such as home appliances and furniture.

    Retail sales rose 7.6% in July, well off consensus of 8.6% and weaker than the most pessimistic forecast. Sales had jumped 9.8% in June, which many analysts had predicted would be temporary.

    Job security worries may also be a factor. Nationwide survey-based unemployment edged up to 5.3% from 5.1% in June, though market watchers believe it could be much higher.

    FILE PHOTO: Trucks transport containers at a port in Qingdao, Shandong province, China July 11, 2019. REUTERS/Stringer
    “We maintain our view that (economic) growth has yet to bottom out and expect Beijing to maintain its easing policy stance,” economists at Nomura said.

    Nomura expects growth will slow to 6.0% in the third and fourth quarters, the bottom end of the government’s target range.

    Authorities have already announced hundreds of billions of dollars in infrastructure spending and corporate tax cuts over the last year, and repeatedly cut bank’s reserve requirements (RRR) to free up more funds for lending and reduce borrowing costs.

    But credit demand has been tepid, with companies in no mood to borrow or invest given the uncertain business outlook and banks wary of rising bad loans.

    Sources told Reuters recently that more aggressive action such as interest rate cuts are a last resort, as it could fuel a rapid build-up in debt and financial risks.

    Highlighting those concerns, the Politburo, a top decision-making body of the Communist Party, took the unusual step last month of announcing it would not use the property market as a form of short-term stimulus.

    ESCALATING TRADE WAR

    Recent months have been marked by a sudden escalation in the year-long U.S.-China trade war that has raised risks for both economies and sparked fears of a global recession.

    A brief ceasefire was shattered earlier this month after U.S President Donald Trump vowed to impose a 10% tariff on more Chinese goods from Sept. 1.

    China let its yuan currency slide to an 11-year low days later, prompting the U.S. Treasury Department to label Beijing a currency manipulator.

    Some relief came on Tuesday, however, after Trump said he would delay duties on some Chinese imports including cellphones and other consumer goods, in an apparent effort to blunt tariffs’ impact on U.S. holiday sales.

    Still, new tariffs will go into effect next month on about half of Washington’s $300 billion target list of Chinese goods, and analysts say the chance of any durable trade deal after the recent escalations has sharply receded.
    No one that I have heard or read is doubting that the Chinese economy is weakening as are the US and EU economies. What does that have to do with who is paying the tariffs. Your fearless leader has on multiple occasions said that the US treasury is collecting billions of dollars from the Chinese. Do you agree?

  22. #94
    Quote Originally Posted by smuddan View Post
    Obviously you are not as good in understanding why Hong Kongers are against the extradition bill as you are in spreading communist China's propaganda, and you are either ignorant or blind to human rights issues and the lack of a fair and independent judiciary system in Mainland China.

    The 4 chief executives since 1997 were all hand picked by Beijing and the election system in a joke. Incompetence and corruption in various levels of the HK government, from the multi million MTR scandals to the $50million bribery accusations of the previous chief executive, have infuriated and caused great grief among Hong Kongers.
    You're just as gullible as the students subject to US propaganda fed through social media.

    Beijing does NOT select the Chief Executive; it rubber stamps the selection made by the functional constituency as below. Stating otherwise is an outright lie propagated by US meddling in HK social media.


    [Basic Law] Article 45
    gives the requirements for choosing the Chief Executive, and Annex I does likewise in a more specific manner.

    The Chief Executive of the Hong Kong Special Administrative Region shall be selected by election or through consultations held locally and be appointed by the Central People's Government

    The specific method for selecting the Chief Executive is prescribed in Basic Law Annex I: "Method for the Selection of the Chief Executive of the Hong Kong Special Administrative Region". The Election Committee shall be composed of 1200 members from the following sectors:
    Sector Members[1]
    Industrial, commercial and financial sectors 300
    The professions 300
    Labour, social services, religious and other sectors 300
    Members of the Legislative Council, Representatives of district-based organisations, Hong Kong deputies to the National People's Congress, Representatives of Hong Kong members of the National Committee of the Chinese People's Political Consultative Conference 300
    Total 1200



    It so happens that some of the groups within the sectors above are pro-Beijing, and this allows the dissidents and US agitators to conflate this tilt into outright Beijing control, which is bullshit.

    HK still has an independent judiciary, and any extradition request would be reviewed by it, as is the case with any other country's extradition treaty. The threat of automatic extradition by Beijing is a red herring meant to whip up gullible students in order to destabilize HK and China in order to further US and [lapdog] UK geopolitical interests. But China is not Ukraine. China will never again bow to foreign domination it experienced in the 19th century, that resulted in humiliation and loss of its territory for 100 years.

  23. #95
    Quote Originally Posted by onthebottom View Post
    China's economy worsens in July, industrial growth at 17-year low as trade war escalates
    https://www.reuters.com/article/us-c...-idUSKCN1V404X
    If the official numbers aren't good, we can bet the Chinese economic numbers are worse than being reported. I'm sure someone will point out that our statistics aren't 100% accurate either. The difference is we can openly discuss statistical anomalies. We have many academic and research institutions collecting their own data. Most importantly, we can disagree with our government and the information it circulates without reprisal and punishment.

  24. #96
    Quote Originally Posted by wilbur View Post
    You're just as gullible as the students subject to US propaganda fed through social media.
    I find it arrogant when a poster on a political thread insults a people or an electorate to be too stupid to know what's good for them.

    The U.S. has refrained from publicly supporting the HK dissidents. I'm sorry if it offends you that HK people are waving U.S. flags as a symbol of freedom.

Page 4 of 6 FirstFirst 123456 LastLast

Posting Permissions

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