China is losing the trade war in nearly every way.

Forbes ^ | 1-14-19 | Kenneth Rapoza

[dynoman]

China is still the world’s No. 2 economy and is still the monster of emerging markets, but regardless of those bonafides, Xi Jinping’s country is losing the trade war in nearly every way imaginable.

[dynoman]

Some non fake news for a change!

[2ndDivisionVet]

Ping!

[Candor7]

Xi Jinping’s country is losing the trade war in nearly every way imaginable.>>>>>>

And when that happens there is a danger of war in the Pacific, just as it was with Japan in 1941.

Therefore the Pacific Fleet has to be well supplied and completely trained for what can be coming. This is a hard task because Obama ruined the effectiveness of the Pacific Fleet’s leadership.

[Political Junkie Too]

Something else that Pelosi doesn't want President Trump to talk about at the SOTU address that she's trying to cancel?

-PJ

[dynoman]

And here’s dessert; https://www.bloomberg.com/news/articles/2018-11-19/china-is-paying-for-most-of-trump-s-trade-war-research-says

[Leaning Right]

Well, there were articles out the other day saying China’s trade surplus with the United States was bigger than ever. So if China is losing the trade war, I guess we losing it more.

Here’s one such article:

https://www.cnbc.com/2019/01/14/china-2018-full-year-december-trade-exports-imports-trade-balance.html

[edwinland]

The headline seems like it was written for a different article.

[z3n]

China doesn’t have the natural resource/energy problems that Japan had before WWII when they were getting pinched.

I’m not ruling out that China would employ more hardball in negotiations including bluffing are more aggressive military stance, but as long as significant escalations are avoided, they really don’t have major reasons to abandon peace-time trade for war when their future economic ceiling is very high, even if things are currently not on the upswing with the US

[babble-on]

Forbes is a blog-site. You can post your articles there, too, for a fee.

[bert]

-—Current polls, while early, suggest Trump loses to most Democratic challengers in November 2020. ——

Actually, Steve Forbes is a never Trumper on the scale with Bill Kristol. Forbes always prints anti Trump news with never a favorable comment. Forbes has literally gone to hell and is no longer a conservative voice of authority.

I find my self unable to read the print edition that has degenerated into meaningless lists and exploits of those under thirty. Forbes is nolonger a financial source of dependable truth

[SeekAndFind]

For those who don’t bother to read the article ( I DID ), here’s the fly in the ointment (from the above article ):

China plays the long game. There are no elections on the calendar that threaten to upend Xi’s rule. Unless his economy tanks and unemployment gets out of control, Xi can take a little bit of pain. He’ll be around longer than Trump, who has less than two years left in his first term. Current polls, while early, suggest Trump loses to most Democratic challengers in November 2020.

The two biggest China hawks in the Democratic Party—Nancy Pelosi and Chuck Schumer—are not running for president. Xi may be able to assume things return to the status quo, even if current tariffs remain. The previous Democratic administration of Barack Obama preferred only to complain about intellectual property and only used tariffs to target a handful of products, like Chinese tires, under World Trade Organization rules. Trump can care less about the WTO, so China wins if a new Democratic president leaves the trade dispute up to those guys instead of the President. Xi would love that.

[bert]

Here is the graph of the Alibaba BABA stovk price. As perhaps the foremost Chinese corporation, the decline in the stock price is telling

[Yashcheritsiy]

Somebody better alert humblegunner so he can scold them for not posting the whole article in the text.

[SoFloFreeper]

😆

[RayChuang88]

China has a gigantic 800 gorilla problem few people are willing to talk about: the health care costs of all those people suffering from the effects of serious air and water pollution problems. With 20% of Earth's population, that cost could be monumental and could clean out China's liquid reserves pretty quickly.

[dynoman]

Here’s a PDF of the study;

http://www.econpol.eu/sites/default/files/2018-11/EconPol_Policy_Brief_11_Zoller_Felbermayr_Tariffs.pdf

[dynoman]

The trade balance is a separate issue and should not be conflated with the trade war.

The increase in the trade deficit is because of a strong dollar and a strong US economy. Until we manufacture more here we will still buy from China.

[dynoman]

PLEASE don’t!!

[dynoman]

The point is - those saying american consumers are paying for all of the tariffs are lying. One article I read said the american consumers are paying less than 25% of the tariffs. China is paying the majority, their businesses lowered their prices so they wouldn’t lose volume and market share. That’s why their economy and stock market is taking a hit.

https://www.breitbart.com/politics/2018/11/21/free-trade-economists-fail-china-paying-trump-tariffs-not-u-s/

[dynoman]

https://gbtimes.com/chinese-producers-bear-brunt-of-costs-from-us-tariffs-research