coreopsis

U.S. and China: Lecturing Each Other on Trade

ObjectiveFu, what you don't get it is that Pettis has very little standing among his economic peer group, as witness the slashing he received in the letters to the Financial Times this summer. His multiple predictions over the years have consistently been proven wrong but there is always someone out there that doesn't know of his reputation.


On Nov 23 03:15 PM ObjectiveFunction wrote:

> I'm not an economist, so I'm sure I'm missing some fundamental point,
> but it seems the liabilities aren't the worrisome thing. It's abrupt
> and massive declines in the value of the underlying "assets" in a
> glut, as their inability to earn the expected cash flows to service
> those liabilities becomes clear. Without lender forbearance or government
> subsidy, bankruptcy results and equity (wealth) is wiped out....
> extremely rapidly.
>
> Sorry, Michael, what am I missing here?
>
> On Nov 21 08:38 AM Michael Pettis wrote:

Growth in Credit Card Usage in India and China

This is a terribly misleading and superficial article whose brevity is testimony to its emptiness.

Credit cards in China are not like credit cards in the US. Let there be no confusion. This has been well-covered in SA and a simple search will bear this out.

The vast majority (90-95%) of so-called credit cards are, in effect, debit cards by US standards.

The King Canute Economy: Governments' Futile Attempt to Stem the Tide

Ignorance at its purest form and certainly worth a giggle. Welcome to America, land without slaves!


On Nov 22 04:28 PM Esol Esek wrote:

> The 80s - 2007 is gonna look real good in the rear view mirror to
> Americans.

The King Canute Economy: Governments' Futile Attempt to Stem the Tide

Clueless. China is responsible for about 13% of the US trade deficit. What do you think that means?


On Nov 22 09:37 AM chap08 wrote:

> [gulp]

The King Canute Economy: Governments' Futile Attempt to Stem the Tide

Tectonics....twaddle. Why is it that the mentally least equipped always attempt to take on the biggest issues of the day?


On Nov 22 08:41 AM User 353732 wrote:

> The great, omnibus, shift in the world today is the tectonic shifting
> of freedom

The Truth Behind China's Currency Peg

Oh shwash...how paranoid can you Yanks get?

A pity you didn't run for elective office, no?


On Nov 22 05:23 PM Swashbuckler wrote:

I believe that
> the leaders of China are calculating, cunning, and ruthless. They
> are in the latter stages of a chess match with our country, that
> our leaders are not even aware exists.

Berkshire Well Positioned for Buffett's Prediction on Electric Cars

Completely agree with RR. Peterson is emblematic of what's wrong with America: lawyers driving serious decision making. He is very close to a fraud. He will next attempt to run for political office -- and likely win in America where everything is surface, and no substance.


On Nov 22 05:07 PM Road Runner wrote:

> Gandalph, Your link is to a John Peterson article. John Peterson
> is not some authoritative person on electric cars. He is just a
> lawyer that is arguing his pocketbook. He cherry-picks and misinterprets
> information. He gets huge amounts of criticism that he and his groupies
> just blow off.
>
> Who are you going to believe - Warren Buffett who has a long, proven
> track record of great insight into the future, or John Peterson?
> Please everyone, take John Peterson with a grain of salt.

U.S. and China: Lecturing Each Other on Trade

Your comment, Alphameister, is regrettably way beyond that of a polemicist like Pettis, but thanks for trying.


On Nov 18 05:54 PM Alphameister wrote:

> I doubt there has ever been an economic expansion, in China or elsewhere,
> that did not have its imbalances and imperfections. I'm curious
> as to whether you have ever commented on an economic expansion where
> your focus was not on the imperfections. I hate central planning,
> but China seems to do it better than Washington. With huge reserves
> and a continuing trade surplus, China can afford to make some mistakes
> while adapting to a new world order in which the U.S. plays a large
> but decreasing role.

Are We Exacerbating China's Pollution?

I used to think hysteria was a condition of women until I read the article by Denniger. Settle down now, boy! He has predictably brought out the marginals like ebworthen. Unfortunately, freedom of speech does mean that near certifiables will have their day on SA.

Why Krugman Is Wrong About the Yuan

The Nobel committees have been notoriously erratic in their selections over the years. We had the wave of ersatz-'efficient market' winners --- all now proven as emperors without clothes.

Alas, Krugman (from the other side of the economic pasture) is proving that his award, too, was fallible. And I even took a course from him (and thought we was most entertaining).

Ultimately, Krugman is a journalist with office space at Princeton.


On Nov 20 02:59 PM Tony Petroski wrote:

> Mr. Rein. You are right and Krugman is wrong.
>
> From the article: "the Nobel Prize-winning New York Times columnist,
> who wrote on Nov. 15 that China severely undervalues its currency."
>
>
> Forgive me. Peace Prize? Economics? Soccer.
>
> For you who are scoffing at my put-down of Mr. Krugman, I must point
> out that the august body, the Nobel Committee, awarded my President
> the prize for peace. He, after all had....
>
> Are you guys sure this Nobel Committee knows what they're doing?

Why Krugman Is Wrong About the Yuan

You might add the figures for Saudi Arabia -- then subtract armaments out of the US export total...same conclusion, there isn't really too much the rest of the world wants from the US that's not edible or classified as 'potential military use'.


On Nov 20 08:36 AM Firat Ünlü wrote:

> Has it ever occured to some observers that maybe, just maybe the
> American trade deficit with China is, in some parts, due to Americans
> spending more than their income? After all excessive credit was
> used to buy products which were manufactured abroad.
>
> Country by country the picture for America looks as follows:
> (Imports above exports)
>
> China ... US$323.1 billion
> China ... $61 billion
>
> Canada ... $312.5 billion
> Canada ... US$213.1 billion
>
> Mexico ... $210.2 billion
> Mexico ... $119.4 billion
>
> Japan ... $144.9 billion
> Japan ... $58.1 billion
>
> Germany ... $94.4 billion
> Germany ... $44.3 billion
>
> United Kingdom ... $56.9 billion
> United Kingdom ... $45.4 billion
>
> South Korea ... $45.4 billion
> South Korea ... $33 billio
>
> France ... $41.2 billion
> France ... $25.8 billion
>
> Whilst the case with China is indeed extreme it doesn't really look
> better when looking at other countries.
> Is the whole world supposed to be undervalued?

American Superconductor: Not Just a Wind Power Play

Possibly, but unlikely based on the history of their failure to produce cheap superconducting wire. Let's stop discussing what the wire is used for...let's find out where AMSC's wire is.

President Obama's Trip to Asia Is All About Petitioning China

Trevisani's article is fairly typical of an outsider looking in. The US-China dynamics are nowhere are simplistic as he makes them out to be. I think the trip was a good one for both Obama and China -- and I predict the future will bear me out.

This is only the beginning of a relationship but already the signs are positive if both sides can 'agree to disagree' yet continue to dialogue.

If Obama can fend off the xenophobes, his sincerity and sophistication will carry him far with the current administration in Beijing. For a moment, let's not just be puerile Americans and expect breakthroughs every time we turn the corner.

Why Is China Booming? Surprise, It’s Not the Stimulus

Well of course that's what you would see if you visited Shanghai. You need to get around more. Observing China from the standpoint of Shanghai is like going to Manhattan and extrapolating to the American heartlands.

As for the author of this article, well yes, your observations are largely consonant with other serious observers but a key causal relationship is missing. Consumers don't spend if the economic environment is precarious -- and it is the central and provincial governments which create the confidence for consumer exuberance.


On Nov 18 02:12 AM Paul Harper wrote:

>

Is China Going to Revalue the Yuan?

Just to add to the India comment by Ben.

Yes, indeed, Indian journalists have worked themselves into a lather frothing at the mouth about an imminent invasion of India by China.

This is quite laughable in view of the Chinese opinion that India has made the biggest mistakes of the developing world: no infrastructure, no manufacturing, inability to resolve conflict with its Muslim neighbors, and a rampant population growth that will soon lead India to be larger than China.

No, indeed, thanks but no thanks -- the Chinese want no part of India except to sell to them from the extensive list of goods that they don't have and don't produce.

In alternative energy, their wind turbine manufacturer Suzlon is the laughing stock of the world. I used to think that perhaps, in a spirit of cooperation, they would JV the manufacturing (maybe even engineering) of their lousy equipment to China, but I now think China wants no part of straightening out the Suzlon mess.

A strong and stable India is in the world's best interests, but flinging mud at your neighbors instead of doing real nation-building is not the path.

Could it be true that progress is limited in a country like India where strong, ancient religious beliefs in a 'democratic' context almost assuredly promise stasis? We're watching the US closely to see if a political system can, in fact, be driven by a group of people masquerading under the banner of God.


On Nov 17 08:52 AM Ben Gee wrote:

> The relationship between the US and China today is simular to the
> relationship between the then superpower Great Britain and China
> 160 years ago. The British were also addicted to Chinese products
> it ran out of gold, the then reserve medium. Now, the US just print
> more money to buy Chinese products. 160 years ago, the Chinese neglected
> its defence, the British used opium as an excuse and invaded China
> not once but twice known as the two Opium Wars. People are wondering
> why China is building up its defence. India even predict China will
> invade India before 2012. Forget it, India. China do not want any
> of your problems. China has enough trouble with Tibet and Xinchiang
> and the addition of any part of India will create more trouble than
> it is worth. If China wanted to invade India, would China not had
> done it before India start making the Bomb? Japan? Will China invade
> Japan? After all, Japan invaded China, did it not? No. China will
> not invade Japan, Japan does not have any resourses. And China can
> buy anything from Japan. Why go to war? China can buy anything and
> from anybody except the US. The US think by not selling high tech
> to China, China will not by a rival. This is not funny, it is sad.
> Not for China, the US.