OT - U.S.-China Trade: A Secret Standoff?

[Guest guest]

U.S.-China Trade: A Secret Standoff?

By Shannara Johnson

http://www.caseyresearch.com/displayArchiveArticleWwnk.php?id=245

 

In the last few weeks, there’s been a flurry of reports in the U.S. media

about Chinese products exported to the United States.

 

Toothpaste imported from China was found to be tainted with diethylene

glycol, a thickening agent – and an ingredient in anti-freeze..

 

Five types of farmed fish and seafood that supposedly contained traces of

potentially harmful antifungal and antibiotic drugs were placed on hold by the

FDA.

 

The popular wooden toy trains of Thomas and Friends, made in China, were

recalled in early June due to the presence of lead in some of the surface paint.

 

U.S. regulators ordered New Jersey tire importer Foreign Tire Sales to recall

about 450,000 Chinese-made tires that were missing a gum strip, a safety

feature that prevents tread separation.

 

Almost every day, it seems, we hear about a new product from China that may

be hazardous to our health. According to the U.S. Consumer Product Safety

Commission, Chinese-made products have accounted for 60% of recalls this year…

and

U.S. consumers are getting more and more wary of any goods from that country.

 

Even though only 15.6% of all U.S. imports come from China, some areas weigh

more heavily than others. For example, within the last decade, China has

become the third-largest exporter of seafood to the United States. According to

USA

Today, China produces 75% of the world’s garlic, and 2006 was the first year

that U.S. consumers bought more garlic grown in China than in California. 40%

of the apple juice consumed in the U.S. comes from China, and 19% of our

honey.

 

Since 2002, reported MarketWatch, “Imports of Chinese agricultural, fish and

forestry products have grown from $2.9 billion to more than $7 billion last

year, a 69% jump.â€

 

But China has been exporting goods to America for decades, so why has this

problem only come to light recently, and with such a Fox News, seizure-spawning,

flashing alert flurry?

 

We at WWNK, ever vigilant for ulterior motives, have been wondering why the

government-induced, U.S. media machine-hyped “Chinese Contamination Scareâ€

is

reaching such a climax these days.

 

Don’t get us wrong, we don’t enjoy digesting poisonous substances any more

than the next guy. And we’re more than happy to see tainted products being

eliminated from the market.

 

But… and it’s a big “but,†we doubt very much that this contamination

started only yesterday. Until recently, apparently U.S. regulatory authorities

didn’

t find anything wrong… or simply failed to take a closer look. In our recent

article “China’s Food Scandals†(WWNK 5/15/07

http://www.caseyresearch.com/displayArchiveArticleWwnk.php?id=241 ), for

example, we talked about the lax

regulatory procedures in the U.S., with less than 2% of Chinese imports being

sampled by inspectors.

 

Of course you could say that after the pet food scandal in April, the Food

and Drug Administration has become more alert and has been scrutinizing Chinese

imports more closely. And it’s probably true.

 

However, we don’t believe in the inherent benevolence of the FDA, a

government agency that has repeatedly proven to be acting in its own

self-interest.

Thus, we’ve had the suspicion that there might be more behind this sudden

scrutiny than meets the eye.

 

To examine the bigger picture, we have to enter the area of U.S.-Chinese

economic policy… an area that seemingly has nothing to do with the recent

scandals.

 

The Trade Deficit

 

If you’re a longtime WWNK reader or a r to any of our other

services, you’ve heard us talk about the U.S. trade deficit with China, which

hit a

record $233 billion last year. In other words: we’ve been importing cheap

goods

from China but haven’t been exporting much back to them. Instead, we’ve been

paying the Chinese in U.S. dollars, which – as our resident investment guru,

Doug Casey, likes to say – are basically an “IOU Nothing.â€

 

That fact slapped the Chinese in the face when in June 2005, they attempted

to actually convert a few of their paper dollars into real assets by buying

U.S. oil giant Unocal for $18.5 billion. Suddenly the free-trade-touting,

globalization-supporting U.S. Congress started to put up protectionist fences

and

ultimately thwarted the deal. And even though all kinds of “sensibleâ€

political

reasons were cited at the time, that move was the equivalent of flipping the

Chinese off, telling them that their accumulated U.S. paper was worthless.

 

Beijing didn’t take very kindly to that. In the last few years announcements

have grown louder that China is planning to diversify their foreign currency

reserves, which plainly means getting rid of their U.S. dollar holdings and

putting their money into other currencies and assets. And they’re not the only

ones concerned about the mountain of dollar bills piling up in their vaults.

 

Meet Congressmen Charles Schumer (D-New York) and Lindsey Graham (R-South

Carol.), two Americans the Chinese most definitely have seen more of than they

ever wanted.

 

About four years ago, Washington conceived of its own masterplan for reducing

the trade gap: China, the U.S. government reasoned, should drop its currency

peg to the U.S. dollar, thereby raising the value of the Chinese yuan/renminbi

and lowering the value of the dollar. Less value, less debt… simple, eh?

 

Or so they thought. The Chinese didn’t like the plan a bit. Not only was

there nothing in it for them but a revalued yuan would make Chinese exports more

expensive and therefore less competitive. Bye-bye, everyday low prices at

Wal-Mart.

 

China’s booming economy relies on the fact that they can produce and sell

goods more cheaply than other countries. And a recent study by China’s

National

Development and Reform Commission (NDRC) stated that the country faces its

worst employment crisis ever, due to the children of baby boomers flooding the

job

market. China, states the report, needs to create 25 million new jobs each

year… that’s the combined population of Australia and New Zealand. You do

the

math.

 

Meanwhile, on the U.S. side, messieurs Schumer and Graham were sent to China

to negotiate the de-pegging deal, and were met with some serious stonewalling.

Yet, after numerous visits – and some heavy bullying in the form of threats

to introduce a 27.5% tariff on all Chinese goods – the Chinese government

agreed to remove the dollar peg in July 2005.

 

The result, though, was not quite what Washington had hoped for. Instead of

allowing the yuan to float freely against the dollar, the Chinese central bank

kept it on a tight leash, restraining the currency’s movements. Between July

2005 and June 2007, the yuan appreciated only 8.2% against the greenback,

leaving the U.S. government fuming in frustration and the trade gap continuing

to

grow.

 

Since 2005, Schumer and Graham have been jetting over to Beijing almost every

month – negotiating, debating, pleading and threatening. And every time the

Chinese officials smilingly nodded and promised that yes, soon, very soon, the

yuan would be allowed to rise higher… honestly, cross our hearts and hope to

die.

 

Fighting the Wrong Fight

 

Of course, as with almost all things that occur in one of the world’s largest

collection of self-dealing poseurs, the U.S. Congress, they are missing the

point entirely, which makes this whole battle painful, yet comedic, to watch.

 

A current account deficit doesn’t necessarily imply either a good or a bad

connotation. Any thesis that begins with the notion that the large U.S.

trade/capital imbalance is a problem which must be actively rectified is

hopelessly

flawed, because the supposed imbalance is not a problem. It is either a symptom

of a problem or is not indicative of any problem whatsoever.

 

Any economist or Congressman who is focused on reducing the “trade deficitâ€

is like an auto mechanic recommending ear plugs or a louder stereo as an

unequivocal fix to the loud knocking sound in your car engine rather than

attempting to deduce the reason why it is making that sound.

 

For the sake of time and space, and the point of this article, we won’t go

into the real reasons resulting in the large U.S. trade deficit, but suffice it

to say that its roots lie mainly in monetary inflation of the U.S. dollar,

which Congress has played a key role in fostering and propagating.

 

Given that the problem originates with the U.S. government and the Federal

Reserve itself, something the Chinese likely know all too well, the monthly

visits by American politicos to Beijing must be greeted by increasing skepticism

and behind-the-scenes derision.

 

The Game Continues

 

Nevertheless, the game goes on.

 

In the last two years Congress has several times come close to branding China

a “currency manipulator,†a hypocritical condemnation that could lead to

severe trade restrictions.

 

In return, a recent China Daily article stated that “China sold more U.S.

Treasury bonds in April than any time in at least seven years,†worth $5.8

billion – while Fed Chairman Ben Bernanke and U.S. Treasury officials were

busy

denying that such a sell-off even existed.

 

And so the skirmishes continue: You slap me, I slap you, an eye for an eye.

The outwardly appearance of the U.S. and China being friendly trading partners

has become a paper-thin patina for brooding hostility.

 

And now there’s the U.S. scare about tainted Chinese products that seems to

have ballooned into a full-blown scandal. Although we don’t doubt that the

contamination is real, we wonder if the new-found diligence of the previously

rather indifferent and incapable FDA is just another blow in the tit-for-tat

battle with China.

 

Could it be that, as long as China was considered a “friend†by the U.S.

government, officialdom was encouraged to overlook tainted products? Could it be

that the sudden concern with Chinese products is one way to punish the Chinese

for not complying with the U.S. government’s misguided monetary policy

demands? It’s certainly possible… and, we think, likely.

 

[Ed. Note: As we write this, there’s news that the yuan has risen to

unprecedented levels against the dollar. China Daily reports that “the

People’s Bank

of China (PBoC) set the midpoint at 7.5951, breaking the 7.60 barrier for the

first time since China ended its peg to the U.S. dollar in July 2005.â€

Coincidence? What do you think? Let us know at feedback.]

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

[Guest guest]

I've been wondering about the recent spate of issues

with chinese imports. The subject is far too wide and

tall for me to speculate at this point, but I suspect

over time we'll see some change that tips the hands of

those involved.

 

The US has a crippling trade imbalance with China, and

the current admin is ill-suited to address it

diplomatically. I wouldn't put a scheme passed them

though.

 

 

, surpriseshan2

wrote:

>

>

>

> U.S.-China Trade: A Secret Standoff?

> By Shannara Johnson

> http://www.caseyresearch.com/displayArchiveArticleWwnk.php?id=245

>

> In the last few weeks, there’s been a flurry of reports in the

U.S. media

> about Chinese products exported to the United States.