Results 1 to 5 of 5

Thread: Exclusive: China backtracked on almost all aspects of U.S. trade deal - sources

  1. #1
    SackMan518's Avatar
    Range Member

    Status
    Offline
    Join Date
    Oct 31, 2017
    Posts
    3,761
    Groan
    0
    Groans: 0

    Exclusive: China backtracked on almost all aspects of U.S. trade deal - sources

    So China says "trust us" to make reforms covering intellectual theft, currency manipulation, to give them leverage over the US? Yeah ok. They've shown no reason to trust them in the past so they can't a big fat 25% tariff on all of their shit no realizing that we're probably they're biggest customer and there are plenty of countries hungry to take a portion of their manufacturing market to get in the game - namely India and other SE Asian countries. Suck on it Xi Jinping.

    Exclusive: China backtracked on almost all aspects of U.S. trade deal - sources

    The diplomatic cable from Beijing arrived in Washington late on Friday night, with systematic edits to a nearly 150-page draft trade agreement that would blow up months of negotiations between the world’s two largest economies, according to three U.S. government sources and three private sector sources briefed on the talks.

    The document was riddled with reversals by China that undermined core U.S. demands, the sources told Reuters.

    In each of the seven chapters of the draft trade deal, China had deleted its commitments to change laws to resolve core complaints that caused the United States to launch a trade war: Theft of U.S. intellectual property and trade secrets; forced technology transfers; competition policy; access to financial services; and currency manipulation.

    U.S. President Donald Trump responded in a tweet on Sunday vowing to raise tariffs on $200 billion worth of Chinese goods from 10 to 25 percent on Friday – timed to land in the middle of a scheduled visit by China’s Vice Premier Liu He to Washington to continue trade talks.

    The United States said on Wednesday the higher tariffs would go into effect on Friday, according to a notice posted on the Federal Register.

    Trump said on Wednesday that China is mistaken if it hopes to negotiate trade later with a Democratic presidential administration.

    “The reason for the China pullback & attempted renegotiation of the Trade Deal is the sincere HOPE that they will be able to ‘negotiate’ with Joe Biden or one of the very weak Democrats,” Trump tweeted. Trump also said he would be happy to keep tariffs on Chinese imports in place.

    The stripping of binding legal language from the draft struck directly at the highest priority of U.S. Trade Representative Robert Lighthizer - who views changes to Chinese laws as essential to verifying compliance after years of what U.S. officials have called empty reform promises.

    Lighthizer has pushed hard for an enforcement regime more like those used for punitive economic sanctions – such as those imposed on North Korea or Iran – than a typical trade deal.

    “This undermines the core architecture of the deal,” said a Washington-based source with knowledge of the talks.

    One private-sector source briefed on the talks said the last round of negotiations had gone very poorly because “China got greedy.”

    “China reneged on a dozen things, if not more ... The talks were so bad that the real surprise is that it took Trump until Sunday to blow up,” the source said.

    “After 20 years of having their way with the U.S., China still appears to be miscalculating with this administration.”

    An interesting note is Sundance's analysis of what a trade war would do to food prices namely that huge agricultural conglomerates would lose their shirt since they've been speculating on food shares leading to large price increases over the past decade. This however would flood the US market with more food leading to a decrease in prices which benefits us, the consumers of such.

    The likely response from China will be additional tariffs on U.S. goods and/or refusal to purchase U.S. agriculture products. Their strategy will be to get key BIG AG senators, and the U.S. Chamber of Commerce, to target fire toward President Trump over diminished farm prices.

    CTH anticipated this dynamic in 2016. Any Chinese pull-back from U.S. farm purchases hits the Wall Street multinational corporations hardest.

    Multinational corporations, BIG AG, are now invested in controlling the outputs of U.S. agricultural industry and farmers. This process is why food prices have risen exponentially in the past decade.

    The free market is not determining price; there is no “supply and demand” influence within this modern agricultural dynamic. Food commodities are now a controlled market just like durable goods. The raw material (harvests writ large) are exploited by the financial interests of massive multinational corporations.

    Because the domestic supply-side agricultural market is based on perishable goods; this predictable Chinese response has a rapid downstream impact. The wholesale price of domestic food drops rapidly inside the U.S. as the supply now exceeds the market. The multinational mega-food conglomerates will be apoplectic.

    The prices of imported durable goods (stuff from China) will increase, slowly over time; depending on the supply chain for the specific product sector. However, if China retaliates by stopping import of U.S. agriculture products, the prices for U.S. domestic highly-consumable goods drops quickly.

    In this scenario Wall Street is hardest hit. Other than the AG sector, Main Street -and the U.S. consumer therein- actually benefits.

    The Big Club will go bananas.
    Sack

  2. #2
    Meathead's Avatar
    welcome to pwngville

    Status
    Online
    Join Date
    Dec 9, 2003
    Posts
    26,946

    Groan
    0
    Groans: 0
    i woudnt trust china for shit. they are only one tick below the russians in terms of an evil natured gubmint

    the kim jong dungface and china situations were the only things i thought don was doing well with. well, the dong has launched again and china is reneging on verbal trade agreements now that they are getting put in treaty form

    The Great Negotiator (hahahahahaaaaaaaaaaaaa) better have a ready response that works or its vicious trade war time
    One set of rules for all in the beloved community

    Josh Allen is my adopt-a-nigga
    Harrison Phillips is my adopt-a-meatball

  3. #3
    SackMan518's Avatar
    Range Member

    Status
    Offline
    Join Date
    Oct 31, 2017
    Posts
    3,761
    Groan
    0
    Groans: 0
    Quote Originally Posted by Meathead View Post
    i woudnt trust china for shit. they are only one tick below the russians in terms of an evil natured gubmint
    No way, China is far more evil than Russia which isn't really Communist anymore. Not to mention we've practically given away our industrial base to them, given away intellectual property, and have had politicians take money from them in exchange for military secrets and favored status in the WTO (you know who they are). Plus they've sunk a lot of the profits into buying up American property and debt. Russia can't even touch that. If it weren't for American greed those fuckers would be living like the citizens of North Korea but they've become a Communist terror buoyed by Capitalist thirst and we created this dragon.
    Sack

  4. #4
    direbills's Avatar
    Range Member

    Status
    Offline
    Join Date
    Mar 6, 2002
    Posts
    668
    Groan
    0
    Groans: 0
    Quote Originally Posted by SackMan518 View Post
    So China says "trust us" to make reforms covering intellectual theft, currency manipulation, to give them leverage over the US? Yeah ok. They've shown no reason to trust them in the past so they can't a big fat 25% tariff on all of their shit no realizing that we're probably they're biggest customer and there are plenty of countries hungry to take a portion of their manufacturing market to get in the game - namely India and other SE Asian countries. Suck on it Xi Jinping.

    Exclusive: China backtracked on almost all aspects of U.S. trade deal - sources

    The diplomatic cable from Beijing arrived in Washington late on Friday night, with systematic edits to a nearly 150-page draft trade agreement that would blow up months of negotiations between the world’s two largest economies, according to three U.S. government sources and three private sector sources briefed on the talks.

    The document was riddled with reversals by China that undermined core U.S. demands, the sources told Reuters.

    In each of the seven chapters of the draft trade deal, China had deleted its commitments to change laws to resolve core complaints that caused the United States to launch a trade war: Theft of U.S. intellectual property and trade secrets; forced technology transfers; competition policy; access to financial services; and currency manipulation.

    U.S. President Donald Trump responded in a tweet on Sunday vowing to raise tariffs on $200 billion worth of Chinese goods from 10 to 25 percent on Friday – timed to land in the middle of a scheduled visit by China’s Vice Premier Liu He to Washington to continue trade talks.

    The United States said on Wednesday the higher tariffs would go into effect on Friday, according to a notice posted on the Federal Register.

    Trump said on Wednesday that China is mistaken if it hopes to negotiate trade later with a Democratic presidential administration.

    “The reason for the China pullback & attempted renegotiation of the Trade Deal is the sincere HOPE that they will be able to ‘negotiate’ with Joe Biden or one of the very weak Democrats,” Trump tweeted. Trump also said he would be happy to keep tariffs on Chinese imports in place.

    The stripping of binding legal language from the draft struck directly at the highest priority of U.S. Trade Representative Robert Lighthizer - who views changes to Chinese laws as essential to verifying compliance after years of what U.S. officials have called empty reform promises.

    Lighthizer has pushed hard for an enforcement regime more like those used for punitive economic sanctions – such as those imposed on North Korea or Iran – than a typical trade deal.

    “This undermines the core architecture of the deal,” said a Washington-based source with knowledge of the talks.

    One private-sector source briefed on the talks said the last round of negotiations had gone very poorly because “China got greedy.”

    “China reneged on a dozen things, if not more ... The talks were so bad that the real surprise is that it took Trump until Sunday to blow up,” the source said.

    “After 20 years of having their way with the U.S., China still appears to be miscalculating with this administration.”

    An interesting note is Sundance's analysis of what a trade war would do to food prices namely that huge agricultural conglomerates would lose their shirt since they've been speculating on food shares leading to large price increases over the past decade. This however would flood the US market with more food leading to a decrease in prices which benefits us, the consumers of such.

    The likely response from China will be additional tariffs on U.S. goods and/or refusal to purchase U.S. agriculture products. Their strategy will be to get key BIG AG senators, and the U.S. Chamber of Commerce, to target fire toward President Trump over diminished farm prices.

    CTH anticipated this dynamic in 2016. Any Chinese pull-back from U.S. farm purchases hits the Wall Street multinational corporations hardest.

    Multinational corporations, BIG AG, are now invested in controlling the outputs of U.S. agricultural industry and farmers. This process is why food prices have risen exponentially in the past decade.

    The free market is not determining price; there is no “supply and demand” influence within this modern agricultural dynamic. Food commodities are now a controlled market just like durable goods. The raw material (harvests writ large) are exploited by the financial interests of massive multinational corporations.

    Because the domestic supply-side agricultural market is based on perishable goods; this predictable Chinese response has a rapid downstream impact. The wholesale price of domestic food drops rapidly inside the U.S. as the supply now exceeds the market. The multinational mega-food conglomerates will be apoplectic.

    The prices of imported durable goods (stuff from China) will increase, slowly over time; depending on the supply chain for the specific product sector. However, if China retaliates by stopping import of U.S. agriculture products, the prices for U.S. domestic highly-consumable goods drops quickly.

    In this scenario Wall Street is hardest hit. Other than the AG sector, Main Street -and the U.S. consumer therein- actually benefits.

    The Big Club will go bananas.
    Ha ha! The great deal maker. North Korea now has 2 tests since the great deal maker decided to service Kim Jong Eun. And yet Nutsack and his ilk still assume the position for this vile racist. I wonder why? Hmmmm.....

  5. #5
    SackMan518's Avatar
    Range Member

    Status
    Offline
    Join Date
    Oct 31, 2017
    Posts
    3,761
    Groan
    0
    Groans: 0
    Quote Originally Posted by direbills View Post
    Ha ha! The great deal maker. North Korea now has 2 tests since the great deal maker decided to service Kim Jong Eun. And yet Nutsack and his ilk still assume the position for this vile racist. I wonder why? Hmmmm.....
    8 years of no deals and tons of missile tests was better?
    Sack

Posting Permissions

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