Thank you. Glad that you like it. Peace and best wishes.
Xi On May 10, 10:30 pm, "Sumerian.." <[email protected]> wrote: > Thank you.. > An excellent report. > > Sincere regards.. > > ======= > S1000+ > ======= > > --- On Mon, 4/27/09, xi <[email protected]> wrote: > > From: xi <[email protected]> > Subject: China-USA. One conflict less. > To: "World-thread" <[email protected]> > Date: Monday, April 27, 2009, 11:02 AM > > My comment: Since several years ago, two perspectives have clashed > about the same issue the huge inbalance of foreign trade between USA > and China. USA has shared this issue with many other economies, but > reaction in USA and in those other countries were different. > > Some Americans have told along some years that US corporations > "outsourced" jobs, that sold low quality cheap goods, etc. even that > China has forced USA to borrow. And finally that China´s authorities > manipulate the yuan to push exports. > > On the other hand, some Chinese have told along years that we work > hard to produce cheap goods to let Westerners keep their standard of > life, that we pollute our land for them to enjoy cleaner air, and > finally that must use our profits to fund a standard of life that they > cannot afford. > > The new China´s policy, to promote domestic consumption, if > successful, means that both the American way of life and the Chinese > way of life would change. More and more data suggest that it is being > succesful. Therefore, we have to analyse the consequences much deeper > for both China and USA. And better, for Americans and for Chinese. > > In macroeconomic terms it means that foreign surplus might decline > till complete balance or very little surplus (hopefully) as the > governor of the PBoC told (1). From the American side it means that > its deficit (just with China, yet not necesarilly with the rest of the > world in first steps) would fall to near zero. > > For Chinese, it means that our standard of life will raise even faster > than in past decades. In particular very probably for rural economies > if geography diversification is succesfull as it seems that it will > be. > > For US economy, it means that its economic structure has to change. As > no other economy will be able to fund its debt (foreing debt, not just > Federal debt) any longer, all imports have to be paid through exports. > Yes or yes, US economy has to find which goods and services can be > produced in USA and wanted abroad at a competitive price. > > The option is to let its standard of life fall exactly in the actual > proportion, around 80%. Or in other words, the average US householder > and their public sector would have to live with one fifth of their > current budget. This fall of its standard of life could happen via > inflation, via taxation, via unemployment or via lower wages across > its economy or a mix of them. Does not matter the way to achieve it, > at the end of the day the final picture is that USA as a whole would > divide its domestic consumption, and more or less in the same rate all > sort of expenses, by five. > > Maybe, it will be a middle point. US economy will raise or sustain its > export while domestic consumption does not fall up to one fifth of the > current level but up to one half or one third of it. This is the real > and true crisis in US economy. > > Time scope counts. As policies are not changing too much, at the > current pace of diversification, this final picture will happen in > around five years. > > Peace and best wishes. > > Xi > > (1) China’s Current-Account Surplus May Shrink, Zhou > Sayshttp://www.bloomberg.com/apps/news?pid=20601087&sid=aJatiLRL5KW0&refe... --~--~---------~--~----~------------~-------~--~----~ You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "World-thread" group. To post to this group, send email to [email protected] To unsubscribe from this group, send email to [email protected] For more options, visit this group at http://groups.google.com/group/world-thread?hl=en -~----------~----~----~----~------~----~------~--~---
