Revaluing the yuan helps no one
-
What good would cheap Nike shoes be if one is unemployed? I'd rather be employed anytime.
All i am suggesting is no export subsidy thru under valuation and compete on equal terms.
Why should the Indonesians, singaporeans and Americans go unemployed because of the unfair Chinese export subsidy? Please explain.
Surely what you say is good for the Chinese must be good for others as well right? what if everybody starts doing the same thing like the Chinese? would that be good? Are you getting the idea now?
Again, why are you people so one sided in your views? What for? -
Assuming if Yuan did appreciate by another 20%, that will mean that their USD200 per month salary will go up to USD240 per month.Originally posted by Salman:What good would cheap Nike shoes be if one is unemployed? I'd rather be employed anytime.
All i am suggesting is no export subsidy thru under valuation and compete on equal terms.
Why should the Indonesians, singaporeans and Americans go unemployed because of the unfair Chinese export subsidy? Please explain.
Surely what you say is good for the Chinese must be good for others as well right? what if everybody starts doing the same thing like the Chinese? would that be good? Are you getting the idea now?
Again, why are you people so one sided in your views? What for?
Are you willling to work for USD240 per month? Is there any american willing to work for USD240 per month? -
you keep talking about others having one sided view, what exactly is your view??Originally posted by Salman:What good would cheap Nike shoes be if one is unemployed? I'd rather be employed anytime.
All i am suggesting is no export subsidy thru under valuation and compete on equal terms.
Why should the Indonesians, singaporeans and Americans go unemployed because of the unfair Chinese export subsidy? Please explain.
Surely what you say is good for the Chinese must be good for others as well right? what if everybody starts doing the same thing like the Chinese? would that be good? Are you getting the idea now?
Again, why are you people so one sided in your views? What for?
Are you speaking from the view of a consumer in america, a manufacturer in China, Indonesia or American, the government of china, america or singapore, the workers in china, indonesia or america??? One thing is certain, what is good for one may be good for some but will not be good for all the others!!
what are equal terms?? please explain.
You have not explain how does a devalued yuan work as export subsidy works for China?? -
based on your argument, if valuation doesn't matter, why would the Chinese want to under value in the first place?Originally posted by Gazelle:Assuming if Yuan did appreciate by another 20%, that will mean that their USD200 per month salary will go up to USD240 per month.
Are you willling to work for USD240 per month? Is there any american willing to work for USD240 per month?
You realise how silly you are now mr.Gazelle? -
You arguement is about job in Singapore and america, and Yes, adjusting the Yuan a few % here and there will not help whinners like you do get a job. dream on loser!!Originally posted by Salman:based on your argument, if valuation doesn't matter, why would the Chinese want to under value in the first place?
You realise how silly you are now mr.Gazelle? -
Looks like your are stuck contradicting logic & common sense.
Plus you showed you have no decent grasp on world economics.
Good for you mr.gazel. -
"Even if China adopted a more flexible currency it would have limited impact on the economic imbalances of large countries," the China Securities Journal quoted the People's Bank of China as saying.
Ironing out the imbalances, which include a big U.S. current account deficit and large surpluses in Asia and oil-exporting countries, principally required the efforts of the major economies, especially the United States, the central bank said.
The bank pointed to the United States' "double deficits" as the primary cause of global economic imbalances.
Washington had the responsibility to reduce its trade and budget deficits and increase its savings rates to restore balance to the global economy, the bank said.
The comments contradicted remarks by U.S. Treasury Secretary John Snow earlier this week that the United States was not to blame for growing global current account imbalances, which he said were a sign of uneven global growth.
Snow is under presure from U.S. law-makers to declare China a currency manipulator, a step he declined to take on Monday.
http://za.today.reuters.com/news/newsArticle.aspx?type=businessNews&storyID=2005-12-01T064115Z_01_BAN124105_RTRIDST_0_OZABS-ECONOMY-CHINA-YUAN-20051201.XML -
I have not time for kids like you. when you get yourself into high school please give me a shout..hopefully itis not about looking for a jobOriginally posted by Salman:Looks like your are stuck contradicting logic & common sense.
Plus you showed you have no decent grasp on world economics.
Good for you mr.gazel. -
bye bye
-
hello Gazelle, don't be unduly disturbed by the bird man ... all in all i should say you make a lot more sense than him ... though this a debatable issue that even economists are not single minded about ...Originally posted by Gazelle:I have not time for kids like you. when you get yourself into high school please give me a shout..hopefully itis not about looking for a job -
I exposed the biased nature of your views and all of you turned bigot immediately. You simply can't justify your arguments.
-
you merely exposed yourself to be a hermaphroditic salamander ... and i think no one deserves the titlle "you can't justify your arguments" better than yourselfOriginally posted by Salman:I exposed the biased nature of your views and all of you turned bigot immediately. You simply can't justify your arguments. -
Yu see, you people are stuck in your arguments. You don't even dare to back upo your stand.
-
I believe most people just dont want to waste their time arguing with you, partly because of your inability to answer simple questions.Originally posted by Salman:Yu see, you people are stuck in your arguments. You don't even dare to back upo your stand. -
US has two foreign policy. ANd can go in either direction in favour of president election, the biggest support.
China is the mkt, evryone knows that and they have to be there, 24/7, all operations in china for efficiency and fast.
EVen singapore has overvalue dollar for some countries and over value for other countries. The multiple factor is always changing.
Rigth now undervalue yuan is good for singapore as we get students, workers and professional here and construction workers and prc girls. This somehow account for their spending here. If overvalue, they will go straight to europe and US. If they can damn afford harvard and stanford, why go NUS?
The casino is not for show, its for the day when overvalue yuan will create ever richer chinese and 30 000 jobs here when the redesign of jobs in service sectors. Jobs here will still be loss due to geographic changes and restructuring. you can see mnay jobs loss here are due to restructurely and moving closer to mkt place. From sales to manufacturing to supply and transport. The greatest fear is they bypass singapore for las vegas and reno except for spill over.
Right now a under value yuan is good for all of us and gradually increase. A sudden over value will kill china mkt and the first casualty will be singapore. -
there will always be each country for itself thinking. If china don;t go for it, there will always be malaysia , indon, india, vietnam and combodia.
Before china time, there is malaysia, east and west and indon batam. before that, singapore was the one, US workers hated the most. For evry relocation here , many jobs loss in us. Now it is happening to singapore.
In china, operation in shanghai and shenzhen have become too expensive so many have shifted to suzhou and other cheaper industries cities, plenty of young energetic workers.
Overvalue Yuan or under value yuan , the world changes and revolves, every thing shifts. To survive and feed family, we have to even become mobile workers regardless what goh chok tong says about working oversea as quitters.
Just look at the numbers of singaporean traveling to malaysia evryday to work and same for indonesia. Anyway its okay as long its a job that feed the family. -
devalue currency is one weapon for US to control a country future and direction. They could not do it with iraq except with military occupation.
A currency attack could trigger leadership change or even support for war against Iran.
Its the new world when a concentrated currency attack could bring a country to its knee. Thats why china has to be very careful about US intentions by devalue to safe and unattackable level.
it happen to indonesia and thailand, nearly malaysia. -
Thats right, when jobs are lost in this region to China, we lose jobs and demand as well.
This is largely because of two reasons, huge population of China and undervalued Chinese Yuan. -
December 12, 2005 11:11 AMOriginally posted by Salman:Thats right, when jobs are lost in this region to China, we lose jobs and demand as well.
This is largely because of two reasons, huge population of China and undervalued Chinese Yuan.
China Will Consider Neighbours' Economic Situation Before Changing Policy
CHANGING POLICYÂ… China Prime Minister Wen Jiabao delivering his keynote address at the Special Leaders Dialogue, held in conjunction with the 11th Asean Summit. The three-day summit is organised by Asean-Business Advisory Council and co-organised by the Asian Strategy & Leadership. Pix: Anuar Isman
By Alan Ting
KUALA LUMPUR, Dec 12 (Bernama) -- China will consider its neighbours' economic and financial situation before making any changes to its economic policy so as to maintain stability in the region.
Its Prime Minister Wen Jiabao said that as China continued to pursue economic growth and reform its currency regime it would continue to ensure that any changes would not affect its neighbours' financial and economic stability.
Citing the 1997 Asian financial crisis as an example, Jiabao said that China has continued to resist pressure to devalue the yuan and the effort brought some stability to its neighbours' economies.
Last July, China abandoned its US dollar peg in favour of a basket of currencies.
"We have taken into consideration its full impact on China's economy and the impact on our neighbours. We will continue to do so in the future," he said in his keynote address at the Special Leaders Dialogue, held in conjunction with the 11th Asean Summit.
Jiabao said that China is also committed to East Asian economic prosperity and will continue to play its role as a good neighbour.
On the advantage gained from its participation in Asean+China, he said that the benefits were felt by its 1.3 billion population and the private sector through vast business opportunities.
Its trading ties with Asean saw the country importing 25 percent of products from the 10 member countries in 2003.
Asean is currently China's fifth largest export market and its fourth largest source of imports.
Trade between Asean and China for the first nine months of this year stood at US$94.54 billion (US$1=RM3.77) and is expected to reach US$120 billion by the end of the year.
"We expect our domestic market to grow to US$2 trillion in the next five years," Jiabao said.
-- BERNAMA
http://www.bernama.com.my/bernama/v3/news.php?id=170407 -
I believe that if the value of the yuan is higher it may help our exports but in the long run it is inevitable that companies will still relocate to overseas markets be it china or india.Originally posted by Salman:Thats right, when jobs are lost in this region to China, we lose jobs and demand as well.
This is largely because of two reasons, huge population of China and undervalued Chinese Yuan.
Reasoning is many of the companies here traditionally depend on foreign MNC business, the problem is we either do a lot of contract manufacting or manufacture a lot of semi-finished products or provide a lot of services for MNC, we have very very few branded products that enjoy high acceptances overseas like sony, hitachi, nike samsung etc ... that can earn huge income and provide jobs for a lot of people with diverse skills and backgrounds. hence if these MNC were to move overseas a lot of our local companies will relocate to be close to their customers otherwise mainlanders having the advantage of already being there will jump in and snatch these opportunities away.
And once these local companies move the other local companies that supply either services or raw materials to these overseas local companies will close shop or move also because logistically it makes no sense to source these services and raw materials "remotely" from singapore when one can get it in China and even cheaper still due to currency exchange or low cost.
The government can do very little to save these jobs for singaporeans. If they interfere too much companies may lose confidence and pack up everything and move out, jobs are lost, investments are lost, economy takes a nosedive.
But if the government proactively encourage companies under the guise to "expand" overseas to take advantage of low cost opportunities, companies may instead only relocate manufacturing activities but keep the "base" here. In this way some jobs are lost but all is not lost, investments are still here, economy may still improve because companies registered in singapore although have manufacturing activities overseas may enjoy better profits and higher growth operating in bigger or newer markets.
The way out for us is we have to fix the problem here in singapore, move away from low/mid end product manufacturing, move away from the image that we only know how to do quality things for people and reverse that position to be other people do quality things for us instead, and that way is to build more products with strong brand names or buy over companies that have these brands if we cannot build. -
Salman, I think you need to get over this old issues and move on with life. A stable China will eventually create more opportunity for Singapore, not the other way round.Originally posted by Salman:Thats right, when jobs are lost in this region to China, we lose jobs and demand as well.
This is largely because of two reasons, huge population of China and undervalued Chinese Yuan. -
salamander, so far, you're the only shameless idiot who continues to talk big even when an overwhelmingly superior, opposing argument has been shoved right into your face. and it's not just me but everyone who beats you. you can't get any more shameless than that.Originally posted by Salman:Yu see, you people are stuck in your arguments. You don't even dare to back upo your stand.
other than calling names, i've not seen any substance from you so far. be a man, don't change topics, back up what you say and make a stand. don't wriggle away like some pathetic salamander. -
A stable China yes, it will create more opportunity for businesses in singapore operating in that theatre but on the local employment scene it can be bad news.Originally posted by Gazelle:Salman, I think you need to get over this old issues and move on with life. A stable China will eventually create more opportunity for Singapore, not the other way round.
Personally I have to be a bit selfish being just a simple commoner and ordinary employee I tend to hope more that something bad will happen in china, maybe war with taiwan, maybe social problems between rich and poor in china create another revolution and all investors flee and wake up from their dream, come to their senses, come back to this region.
What good is a cheap pair of nike if in the end I cannot put bread on the table holds some real truth also. But the harder truth is that companies have no blood loyalty to countries, only loyalty to money.
The foreign MNC want to be there, either because low cost means higher profits or because their own competitors back home are operating in the China or India theatre so they no choice also, if they don't move they are accountable to their own shareholders. And once they move a lot of local companies are going to die or have to move there, both situation are bad news for singaporean employees.
In the not so distant future I see those with degrees competiting with non-degree workers for jobs traditionally done by non-degree holders if not properly handled this can lead to many social problems here.
but I will stop here before I too become a casulty, this debate har .. on revaluing the yuan has just turned into a flaming forum.
-
if we tolerate under valuation of the yuan, then don't cry when you have unemployed people or Singaporeans working for less than $1000 per month.
-
Bush sticks to China rule
As a long-time student of US policies and attitudes towards China, I am always amazed at one enduring element I call the China Exception. Presidents can come and go; Congress can be led by either the Democrats or the Republicans; but China has always been viewed with a special eye by Americans.
Liu Kin-ming
Tuesday, December 20, 2005
As a long-time student of US policies and attitudes towards China, I am always amazed at one enduring element I call the China Exception. Presidents can come and go; Congress can be led by either the Democrats or the Republicans; but China has always been viewed with a special eye by Americans.
The United States, the bastion of anti-communism during the Cold War, considered the Russians to be wicked and dangerous. The Chinese, somehow, were seen as more benign and misguided. In other words, the Russians were bad communists while the Chinese were good communists.
US attitudes toward China swing between love and skepticism but the Soviet Union was always considered the bad guy. What's more, the Soviet Union didn't have Fortune 500 acting as its lobbyists like China does.
Even George W Bush, the most revolutionary US president since Ronald Reagan, does not seem totally immune to this romanticism about China.
I happen to be a strong supporter of Bush. I admire his courage and insight in trying to bring democracy and liberty to many parts of the world. This, Bush argues and I agree, is the best way to fight terrorism. In a nutshell, I like the Bush doctrine.
But it seems to be applicable to anywhere else but China. Ellen Bork, acting executive director at the Project for the New American Century, made a compelling case at a panel discussion hosted by the American Enterprise Institute last Wednesday in Washington.
Bork simplified the Bush doctrine down to three key points.
First, the United States would show active leadership.
Second, it would promote liberal democracy.
Third, it would oppose dictatorships, and one strategy is regime change.
Washington apparently is not pursuing these policies towards Beijing.
"The US has not made the establishment of liberal democracy a top priority for China," Bork said. Instead, Washington still believes in "economy first, politics later."
Bush's speech in Kyoto last month cited Taiwan and South Korea as examples of political liberalization through economic development. He claimed Taiwan "has moved from repression to democracy as it liberalized its economy.
"And like South Korea, the opening to world markets transformed the island into one of the world's most important trading partners. And like South Korea, economic liberalization in Taiwan helped fuel its desire for individual political freedom - because men and women who are allowed to control their own wealth will eventually insist on controlling their own lives and their own future."
But it's much more complex than that, Bork said. In the 1980s, the United States started to withdraw support from dictatorships in Asia, from South Korea, the Philippines to Taiwan.
"Democracy is not inevitable from economic development," Bork said.
While development can provide a basis for real change, getting people rich alone won't do it. Constant pressure and vigilance, as well as the economic card, are a must for meaningful change.
The United States still has leverage over China. Think of why the European Union did a U-turn on lifting the arms embargo on China earlier this year.
And Bork said: "The fear of losing the most-favored nation status led to the release of [political] prisoners."
To apply the Bush doctrine to China, Bork thought, the United States should spend some yet-to-be-spent capital.
"Washington shouldn't look to the Chinese Communist Party for reforms and should stand with Chinese dissidents like we did with the Soviet dissidents before," she suggested.
Fellow panelist Pei Minxin, senior associate and director of the China program at the Carnegie Endowment for International Peace, disagreed.
He said: "Bush can't just stop by [former secretary to late party general secretary Zhao Ziyang] Bao Tong's house for coffee" as it's impossible for protocol reasons.
Another panelist Lorne Craner - formerly assistant secretary of state for democracy, human rights and labor and currently president of the International Republican Institute - rejoined: "That could take place at the US ambassador's residency."
And Ying Ma from the AEI suggested US officials could meet Chinese dissidents in the United States more often.
Bush didn't receive any dissidents of course, during his trip to China. He worshipped in a state-sanctioned church instead, a move that might end up sending the wrong signal.
While Bush was critical of China in his Kyoto speech, he was more restrained when he went to China. He is someone who carries deep convictions, risking his presidency in trying to implement democracy in Iraq.
But when the president pays Beijing much more courtesy than he would other dictatorships, then I know the China Exception is here to stay.
http://www.thestandard.com.hk/news_detail.asp?pp_cat=15&art_id=8269&sid=5968658&con_type=1