Posts tagged ‘United States’

05/04/2013

* Chinese overtake Germans as biggest spending tourists

China Daily: “Chinese tourists have overtaken Germans as the world’s biggest-spending travellers after a decade of robust growth in the number of Chinese holidaying abroad, the United Nations World Tourism Organisation (UNWTO) said on Thursday.

Chinese tourists, known for travelling in organised tours and snapping up luxury fashion abroad, spent $102 billion on foreign trips last year, outstripping deep-pocketed travellers from Germany and the United States.

Chinese tourists spent 41 percent more on foreign travel in 2012 than the year before, beating the close to $84 billion both German and U.S. travellers parted with last year.

Tourists from other fast-growing economies with swelling middle classes, like Russia and Brazil, also increased spending in 2012. In recession-hit Europe, however, French and Italian tourists reined in their holiday budgets.

“The impressive growth of tourism expenditure from China and Russia reflects the entry into the tourism market of a growing middle class from these countries,” said UNWTO Secretary-General Taleb Rifai.”

via Chinese overtake Germans as biggest spending tourists |Economy |chinadaily.com.cn.

02/04/2013

* China’s Glass Ceiling

Foreign Policy: “It’s over for America,” a Chinese academic told me in late 2008, two days after Goldman Sachs turned itself into a commercial bank in order to fend off possible collapse. “From here on, it’s all downhill.” Sitting in Beijing as American capitalism seemed to be hanging by a thread, it was easy to believe that one era was ending and another beginning.

The past half-decade should have been the glory years for the spread of Chinese influence around the world. After China’s ravishing 2008 Beijing Summer Olympics, and its startling recovery from the financial crisis, it had a platform to push for a bigger voice in international affairs. At a time when the United States has been navel-gazing on its own deficiencies and beset by dysfunction and infighting in Congress, China has quickly become the main trading partner for a long list of countries, not just in Asia, which should give it all sorts of sway. And at the very least, many Chinese assume, the country should start to resume its role as the natural leader in Asia.

Yet the years since the crisis have demonstrated something very different. Rather than usher in a new era of Chinese influence, Beijing’s missteps have shown why it is unlikely to become the world’s leading power. Even if it overtakes the United States to have the biggest economy in the world, which many economists believe could happen over the next decade, China will not dislodge Washington from its central position in global affairs for decades to come.

China is certainly not lacking in ambition, even if many of its final goals are not clearly articulated. It is implementing plans which challenge U.S. military, economic, and even political supremacy. But on each front, the last few years have demonstrated China’s limitations, not the inevitability of its rise.

China’s effort to gradually squeeze the U.S. Navy out of the Western Pacific did not start with the financial crisis in 2008. The financial crisis did, however, coincide with a new aggressiveness in the way China has pushed its territorial claims in the South China Sea and the East China Sea. Beijing has scored at least one victory, securing control of the Scarborough Shoal, a group of small islands in the South China Sea, from the Philippines in 2012.

But among these tactical successes, China has been sowing the seeds of a strategic defeat. China’s assertiveness is generating intense suspicion, if not outright enmity, among its neighbors. Its “peaceful rise” is not taking place in isolation. There may be echoes in today’s Asia of the late-nineteenth century in Europe and North America, but this is the one critical difference. The United States came into its own as a great power without any major challenge from its neighbors, while Germany’s ascent was aided by the collapsing Austro-Hungarian and Ottoman empires and Russian monarchy on its frontiers. China, on the other hand, is surrounded by vibrant countries with fast-growing economies, from South Korea to India to Vietnam, who all believe that this is their time, as well. Even Japan, after two decades of stagnation, still has one of the most formidable navies in the world, as well as the world’s third largest economy. China’s strategic misfortune is to be bordered by robust and proud nation-states which expect their own stake in the modern world.

The last few years have shown that these countries have no desire to return to a Sinocentric Asia, as existed before the arrival of Western powers in the late-fifteenth century, and one where China is the undisputed leader. All the talk about the Obama administration’s “pivot” to Asia has obscured the much bigger shift that has taken place in the region since the crisis — almost all of China’s neighbors are now deeply anxious about what a powerful, expansionist leadership in Beijing portends for their future. They still want to trade with China, but they also want protection from Beijing’s bullying.”

via China’s Glass Ceiling – By Geoff Dyer | Foreign Policy.

15/03/2013

* Beans means bonanza as oil frackers turn demand for guar into gold rush | The Times

The Times: “Just as America’s booming shale gas industry has helped to wean the country off an unhealthy dependence on imported Middle Eastern oil, a new national addiction is emerging — to the Indian guar gum on which the industry depends.

A merchant paints numbers on sacks of guar as a laborer loads them onto a truck at a grain market in Jodhpur, India

Soaring demand for guar from US oil companies — whose apparently insatiable appetite stems from its use in making the drilling fluids used in the process of hydraulic fracturing or “fracking” for shale gas — triggered a 374 per cent surge in Indian exports between January 2011 and January 2012.

With 80 per cent of global production of guar — which means cow feed in Hindi — India has a near monopoly on the bean, a fact that has led to a bonanza for Indian farmers who witnessed a ninefold increase in prices during 2012. “The price increase has been just astronomical,” says Naveen Mathur, commodities analyst at Angel Broking in Mumbai.

For decades, apart from cow feed, powdered guar has been used as a thickener in toothpaste, pet food and ice cream, but global demand has mushroomed in recent years because oil companies such as Halliburton and Schlumberger have required huge quantities for use as a thickening agent in the fluid needed to squeeze shale gas out of rock formations deep underground.

Almost overnight, guar has become India’s biggest agricultural export, shipments of which were worth $4.9 billion between April and January 2012, roughly double the value of the country’s exports of basmati rice and cotton combined.

Like the Texan oil booms of the 19th century, the guar rush is having a similar effect on the desert state of Rajasthan, where most of it is grown and where some farmers have earned more in a single season than the previous ten put together.

Guar beans, which are milled and powdered to produce gum that is eight times more viscous than cornstarch, grows only in rare climatic conditions — arid areas watered by intermittent but heavy monsoon rains.

But the huge surge in prices and exports has prompted some to ask whether the boom can last.

As Indian farmers frantically plant new areas to meet demand, US oil scientists in Houston are desperately trying to come up with synthetic alternatives, such as carbon methyl cellulose, which could rival guar on both price as well as efficacy.

Others are trying to develop new strains of guar that can be grown in different climatic conditions.

So far, they have not managed to do so — and India’s guar boom looks set to continue.

via Beans means bonanza as oil frackers turn demand for guar into gold rush | The Times.

11/03/2013

* Toy Maker Brings K’Nex Production Back to U.S.

Yet another example of manufacturing returning to the West.

WSJ: “As every American child knows, toys come from the North Pole or—more likely—China. But K’Nex Brands LP, a family-owned company in this Philadelphia suburb, is trying to prove they can still be made in America.

image

Over the past few years, K’Nex has brought most of the production of its plastic building toys back to its factory in Hatfield from subcontractors in China. To make that possible, the company has redesigned some of the toys and even handed over to kids a bit of the assembly formerly performed by hand in China.

“In the long term, it’s much better for us to manufacture here,” says Joel Glickman, chairman of K’Nex and its manufacturing affiliate, Rodon Group. The two companies have combined sales of more than $100 million, making them small players compared with American rivals Hasbro Inc. HAS +1.49% and Mattel Inc., MAT +0.41% neither of which has announced plans to shift production to the U.S.

By moving production closer to U.S. retailers, K’Nex said it can react faster to the fickle shifts in toy demand and deliver hot-selling items to stores faster. It also has greater control over quality and materials, often a crucial safety issue for toys. And as wages and transport costs rise in China, the advantages of producing there for the U.S. market are waning.

But K’Nex has found it impossible so far to produce 100% U.S.-made toys, the firm’s goal. The K’Nex experience shows both the attractions of “reshoring” production and the difficulties of making that happen in a country whose manufacturing infrastructure has atrophied.

Lining up suppliers has been a complicated chore in the U.S., where toy-making skills have faded. China, by contrast, has a vast, efficient network of suppliers and skilled labor. “In China, you can go over with just a drawing and say, ‘I need a million of these,'” says Michael Araten, chief executive of K’nex. That helps account for a huge U.S. deficit in the toy trade. In 2012, U.S. imports of toys, games and sporting goods, mostly from China, totaled $33.5 billion, or about three times U.S. exports of such items.”

via Toy Maker Brings K’Nex Production Back to U.S. – WSJ.com.

See also: 

01/03/2013

* China’s billionaires on rise

China Daily: “China has had more billionaires created by its stock markets this year than in the United States – 212 compared with 211 – a new survey revealed on Thursday.

China's Rich List – The Inside Story

According to the latest Hurun Global Rich List 2013, there were 1,453 people in the world with personal wealth of $1 billion or more at the end of January.

Another significant sign of more wealth being created in the East came with figures showing Asia was home to the highest number of billionaires, with 608, followed by 440 from North America and 324 from Europe, said Hurun researchers.

Among individual countries, the US and the Greater China area dominated with 408 and 357 respectively, followed by Russia, Germany and India.

Between them, the US and China now have half of all billionaires on the planet.

Moscow, with 76 billionaires, is the billionaire capital of the world, followed by New York, Hong Kong, Beijing and London, according to the report.

Mexican telecom czar Carlos Slim, 73, was ranked as the “Richest Man on the Planet” with a personal fortune of $66 billion, followed by US investor Warren Buffett with $58 billion in wealth.

Founder of fashion brand Zara, Amancio Ortega of Spain, shoots into the top three with $55 billion in wealth.

Real estate, telecommunications, media, technology and retail were the most common sources of wealth, the report added.”

via China’s billionaires on rise |Economy |chinadaily.com.cn.

28/02/2013

* New top diplomats in China signal focus on U.S., Japan, North Korea

Reuters: “China is signaling that it is keen to get on top of troubled ties with the United States, Japan and North Korea with the likely appointment of two officials with deep experience of these countries to its top diplomatic posts.

Chinese Foreign Minister Yang Jiechi attends a joint news conference with his Russian counterpart in Moscow February 22, 2013. REUTERS/Maxim Shemetov

Current Foreign Minister Yang Jiechi, ambassador to Washington from 2001-2005 and a polished English speaker, is tipped to be promoted to state councilor with responsibility for foreign policy, three independent sources said. China has only five such councilors and the post is senior to that of foreign minister.

Yang, 62, will likely be replaced as foreign minister by Wang Yi, China’s ambassador to Japan from 2004 to 2007 and a one-time pointman on North Korea. Both will be appointed during March’s annual full session of parliament, the sources said.

“Yang Jiechi will be in the driving seat, he knows a lot about Sino-U.S. relations,” said Jean-Pierre Cabestan, a China expert at Hong Kong Baptist University.

“China-Japan is high on the list (too) … With Shinzo Abe and the LDP back in the saddle in Tokyo, I’m sure they’re a bit concerned about the right wing twists of domestic politics and Japanese foreign policy as well.””

via New top diplomats in China signal focus on U.S., Japan, North Korea | Reuters.

24/02/2013

* Will China Ever Be No. 1?

Foreign Policy: “Will China continue to grow three times faster than the United States to become the No. 1 economy in the world in the decade ahead? Does China aspire to be the No. 1 power in Asia and ultimately the world? As it becomes a great power, will China follow the path taken by Japan in becoming an honorary member of the West?

English: Senior Minister Lee Kuan Yew of Singa...

Senior Minister Lee Kuan Yew of Singapore,  (Photo credit: Wikipedia)

Despite current punditry to the contrary, the surest answer to these questions is: No one knows. But statesmen, investors, and citizens in the region and beyond are placing their bets. And U.S. policymakers, as they shape the Obama administration’s pivot to Asia, are making these judgments too. In formulating answers to these questions, if you could consult just one person in the world today, who would it be? Henry Kissinger, the American who has spent by far the most time with China’s leaders since Mao, has an answer: Lee Kuan Yew.

Lee is the founding father of modern Singapore and was its prime minister from 1959 to 1990. He has honed his wisdom over more than a half century on the world stage, serving as advisor to Chinese leaders from Deng Xiaoping to Xi Jinping and American presidents from Richard Nixon to Barack Obama. This gives him a uniquely authoritative perspective on the geopolitics and geoeconomics of East and West.

Lee Kuan Yew’s answers to the questions above are: yes, yes, and no. Yes, China will continue growing several times faster than the United States and other Western competitors for the next decade, and probably for several more. Yes, China’s leaders are serious about becoming the top power in Asia and on the globe. As he says: “Why not? Their reawakened sense of destiny is an overpowering force.” No, China will not simply take its seat within the postwar order created by the United States. Rather, “it is China’s intention to become the greatest power in the world — and to be accepted as China, not as an honorary member of the west,” he said in a 2009 speech.

Western governments repeatedly appeal to China to prove its sense of international responsibility by being a good citizen in the global order set up by Western leaders in the aftermath of World War II. But as Kissinger observes, these appeals are “grating to a country that regards itself as adjusting to membership in an international system designed in its absence on the basis of programs it did not participate in developing.”

via Will China Ever Be No. 1? – By Graham Allison and Robert D. Blackwill | Foreign Policy.

See also: https://chindia-alert.org/prognosis/superpowers/

14/02/2013

* Claims China is world’s No 1 trading economy are nonsense

SCMP: “The high import and export numbers are distorted by domestic firms fiddling taxes and the country’s heavy involvement in processing trade

scm_biz_tom_holland_14-02.art_2.jpg

Mainland imports of goods from the mainland via Hong Kong (left) and foreign value-added content of China’s exports

If you believe the media reports, China passed another milestone last year, overtaking the United States to become the world’s biggest trading economy.

According to data from Beijing’s customs officers, China’s total imports and exports of goods reached US$3.87 trillion in 2012.

In contrast, figures from the US Commerce Department show that America’s international goods trade was worth just US$3.82 trillion.

Hooray! China beats the US by US$50 billion.

Except there’s a problem: the figures are nonsense.

The most obvious way they are wrong is because China’s import and export numbers are heavily distorted by domestic companies fiddling their taxes.

Under mainland regulations, exporters of electronic gadgets and other widgetry can claim a value-added tax rebate worth 17 per cent of the goods’ value.

What’s more, under the Closer Economic Partnership Arrangement, no tariffs are charged on goods imported into the mainland from Hong Kong, provided the importer claims a relatively small component of value was added in the city.

As a result, mainland companies ship huge quantities of goods to Hong Kong, where their value is marked up by around 20 per cent before they are re-imported back into the mainland.

With this dodge, the scammers not only get their tax rebate when they export. By over-invoicing the re-imports, they get to circumvent the mainland’s capital controls and ship money offshore, either to invest in international markets (or Hong Kong’s properties) or to round-trip back into the mainland as foreign direct investment, which qualifies them for yet more tax breaks.

Figures from the Hong Kong government show the city was responsible for re-exporting some US$116 billion worth of stuff from the mainland back to the mainland last year, a 13 per cent increase over the year before (see the first chart).

If we assume the mainland importers claimed that 17 per cent of the value of their purchases was added in Hong Kong, which is in line with the Trade Development Council’s figures, then we can estimate that the value of the mainland’s total goods trade – both exports and imports – last year was exaggerated by some US$212 billion.

As a result, it looks very much as if China still lags some US$160 billion behind the US in terms of its international trade in goods, with just US$3.66 trillion of combined imports and exports in 2012, compared with America’s US$3.82 trillion.

But even those figures are dubious. That’s because much of China’s international commerce consists of processing trade. High-value components from developed economies get imported, bolted together by low-paid workers in China’s factories, and then re-exported to their final markets.

As a result, China’s contribution to the total value of the goods it exports is low by international standards.

Infamously, one 2011 study estimated that China’s share of the value added in a made-in-Shenzhen iPad with a US retail price of US$499 was just US$8.

Overall, according to the trade in value added database compiled by the Organisation for Economic Co-operation and Development, the foreign value-added share of China’s exports amounted to 26 per cent of their face value in 2009. For US exports, the proportion was 11 per cent.

That makes a huge difference to the raw trade numbers. In 2009, the foreign value-added content of China’s exports was worth almost US$400 billion, compared with US$160 billion for US exports (see the second chart).

Adjust the gross trade numbers to allow for this difference, and it soon becomes apparent that China is still a long way from becoming the world’s largest trading economy in any meaningful sense, despite what last week’s headlines may have claimed.”

via Claims China is world’s No 1 trading economy are nonsense | South China Morning Post.

 

See also: https://chindia-alert.org/2013/02/12/6166/

13/02/2013

* The Economic Impact of a War Between Japan & China

From: http://www.onlinemba.com/blog/economic-war-between-china-japan

“Global economists are keeping their eyes glued to the Asia-Pacific region, where a bitter feud is brewing between two of the world’s most powerful nations over a small collectivity of islands in the East China Sea. The Chinese government argues that a treaty signed during the first Sino-Japanese War (1894-95) conferred ownership of the islands to China. Japan has long disputed these claims, and today argues that the islands are integral to its national identity.

English: Japan_China_Peace_Treaty_17_April_1895.

English: Japan_China_Peace_Treaty_17_April_1895. (Photo credit: Wikipedia)

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=V7SA3p8ys-s&feature=youtu.be 

The argument came to a head last September, when a boycott of Japanese products led Chinese demonstrators to target fellow citizens who owned Japanese cars. Three months later, the situation escalated when when Japanese jets confronted a Chinese plane flying over the islands; no shots were fired, but the act of antagonism has set a troubling precedent between the military forces of both nations.

The conflict between China and Japan has put the United States in a precarious position: if a full-scale war were to erupt, the U.S. would be forced to choose between a long-time ally (Japan) and its largest economic lender (China). Last year, China’s holdings in U.S. securities reached $1.73 trillion and goods exported from the U.S. to China exceeded $100 billion. The two countries also share strong economic ties due to the large number of American companies that outsource jobs to China.

However, the U.S. government may be legally obligated to defend Japan. In November, the U.S. Senate added an amendment to the National Defense Authorization Act that officially recognizes Japan’s claims to the disputed islands; the U.S. and Japan are also committed to a mutual defense treaty that requires either country to step in and defend the other when international disputes occur. Not honoring this treaty could very easily tarnish America’s diplomatic image.

The countries of the Asia-Pacific region are collectively responsible for 55 percent of the global GDP and 44 percent of the world’s trade. A major conflict between the region’s two largest economies would not only impose a harsh dilemma on U.S. diplomats, but also have a significant impact on the entire global economy. It is in every nation’s best interest that the Chinese and Japanese settle their territorial dispute peacefully.”

See also: https://chindia-alert.org/2013/01/25/china-japan-move-to-cool-down-territorial-dispute/

02/01/2013

* Obama Eyes $108 Billion Annual Asia Prize Vying With China Trade

Bloomberg: “More than a century and a half after Millard Fillmore dispatched an emissary to Asia to transform commerce across the Pacific, a U.S. president again sees an historic opportunity to strengthen America’s role in the region.

Obama Eyes $108 Billion Annual Asia Prize Vying With China Trade

Barack Obama sent his secretary of state, Hillary Clinton, to Asia for a record 86 days in his first term, including — for the first time — stops in all 10 members of the Association of Southeast Asian Nations. Obama himself became the first sitting commander-in-chief to visit Myanmar, a nation the International Monetary Fund says may be the next economic frontier in Asia.

As in the wake of U.S. Commodore Matthew Perry’s 1850s voyages to Japan, American companies are seeking greater opportunities, with General Electric Co. (GE) and Ford Motor Co. backing Obama’s plan for an 11-country Pacific trade deal that could bring in $108 billion a year. Instead of Perry’s gunships, what may propel Asian nations toward Obama’s vision is concern from Japan to Vietnam that China’s ascendance may pose a threat.

“The U.S. is serious about its commitment to Asia and sees Asia as the future in terms of economic growth in the 21st century,” said Simon Kahn, chairman of the American Chamber of Commerce in Singapore and Google Inc. (GOOG)’s chief Asia-Pacific marketing officer. “That has a very real impact in discussions with business counterparts in terms of thinking about long-term investments.”

Personal History

The connection is part personal for Obama, 51, who lived in Jakarta from 1967 to 1971. In his second year in office, the president returned to Indonesia’s capital, addressing an audience of about 6,000 at the University of Indonesia highlighting prospects for deeper economic ties, “because a rising middle class here means new markets for our goods, just as America is a market for yours.”

Less than two years after Obama’s visit, Boeing Co. (BA) confirmed a record 230-plane order valued at $22.4 billion at list prices from PT Lion Mentari Airlines, a budget carrier in Indonesia, the world’s fourth most-populous nation.

“If you look at global growth, obviously this region is where the action is,” Bill Ford, executive chairman of the second-biggest U.S. automaker, said in a response to questions while on a visit to Thailand, where he toured a $450 million plant that the Dearborn, Michigan-based company opened this year. The administration’s support for U.S. manufacturers has helped Ford expand its exports of the Explorer sport-utility vehicle to more than 90 nations, he said.

Growth Prospects

The IMF forecasts developing countries in Asia to grow 7.7 percent in 2017, almost triple the pace of advanced economies, increasing demand for everything from toothpaste and automobiles to missile systems as nations protect their newfound wealth.

Asian stocks also demonstrate the region’s lure, with the MSCI Asia Pacific Excluding Japan Index climbing 100 percent since Obama took office, a period when the MSCI World Index rose 56 percent. Price-to-earnings ratios present “no obstacle” to more gains, according to Nomura Holdings Inc. equity strategists led by Michael Kurtz in Hong Kong. Kurtz’s team targeted 530 for the MSCI Asia Pacific Excluding Japan Index in 2013 in a note dated Dec. 3, marking a 14 percent gain from current levels.

Obama’s trade strategy is built around the Trans-Pacific Partnership. Negotiators from 11 countries — Australia, Brunei, Canada, Chile, Malaysia, Mexico, New Zealand, Peru, Singapore, the U.S. and Vietnam — will meet in Singapore in early March for the 16th round of talks aimed at bringing down tariffs, strengthening patent protection and allowing greater access to government contracts.

Stepping Up

“There are significant risks to the U.S. of being marginalized in Asia if they do not step up to the trade plate,” said Deborah K. Elms, head of the Temasek Foundation Centre for Trade & Negotiations in Singapore. “They have to be able to push the TPP past the finish line.”

Japan, South Korea, Thailand and the Philippines are all considering joining the TPP talks — a move that, along with an entry by Indonesia and 11 mostly smaller nations, could bring the U.S. annual income of $108 billion a year, according to Asia-Pacific Trade, a website whose contributors include Peter A. Petri, a Brandeis University professor.

The U.S. aims to complete the TPP talks by the end of next year and have it take effect by 2015, Michael Froman, deputy national security adviser for international economic affairs, said in an interview.”

via Obama Eyes $108 Billion Annual Asia Prize Vying With China Trade – Bloomberg.

Related articles

Law of Unintended Consequences

continuously updated blog about China & India

ChiaHou's Book Reviews

continuously updated blog about China & India

What's wrong with the world; and its economy

continuously updated blog about China & India