Comments for China and Protectionism: It Ain't Quite as Simple as They Tell Us at http://www.cepr.net , comment 1 to 6 out of 6 comments http://www.cepr.net Sat, 18 May 2013 04:10:23 +0100 FeedCreator 1.7.3 http://www.cepr.net/index.php/blogs/beat-the-press/china-and-protectionism-it-aint-quite-as-simple-as-they-tell-us#comment-19813 "China does run a large, but shrinking, trade surplus. Fast-growing developing countries are normally expected to run trade deficits." If a country is not at full emplyment ( and the vast internal migrations show China is not), and is growing, the Capital=Current account equality might not hold. Capital is received in period 1 but used to buy imports in period 2. If the country is growing and attracts growing Foreign Investments,receipts in period 2 will be higher than expenditures paid by receipts in period 1. - Jacques René Giguère Thu, 25 Oct 2012 05:06:49 +0100 http://www.cepr.net/index.php/blogs/beat-the-press/china-and-protectionism-it-aint-quite-as-simple-as-they-tell-us#comment-19796 [quote]shut China out of Treasury auctions? written by Brian Dell, October 24, 2012 12:36 Perhaps barring China from participation in US Treasury auctions, or even just threatening to, would force movement in the exchange rate. ...[/quote] The Walton clan and Wall Street are fairly happy with the current situation, so the chance of this happening is closer to 0% than to 100%. - David Wed, 24 Oct 2012 09:40:24 +0100 http://www.cepr.net/index.php/blogs/beat-the-press/china-and-protectionism-it-aint-quite-as-simple-as-they-tell-us#comment-19795 Perhaps barring China from participation in US Treasury auctions, or even just threatening to, would force movement in the exchange rate. Interest rates would be somewhat higher but I think that would be appropriate since giving the Chinese an ownership interest in US debt when the proceeds of those debt sales finance current consumption in the US creates intergenerational inequity. - Brian Dell Wed, 24 Oct 2012 07:36:48 +0100 http://www.cepr.net/index.php/blogs/beat-the-press/china-and-protectionism-it-aint-quite-as-simple-as-they-tell-us#comment-19793 David Leonhardt has a piece above the fold on the front page which essentially casts doubts on the arguments of the NAFTA free-traders and the centrists economists who like to bash Luddites. He does hint at the importance of full employment. What the piece is lacking however is a mention of the popular movement against corporate free trade back in the late 90s (when we had full employment! Then came Sept. 11th) Unions and environmentalist campaigned against NAFTA and we had domestic riots at the Battle in Seattle over the WTO. After the housing bubbble, OWS continued in thae tradition of unfocused protest though without the riots. I do agree that it would be wise to use the WTO against currency manipulators. - Peter K. Wed, 24 Oct 2012 04:46:10 +0100 http://www.cepr.net/index.php/blogs/beat-the-press/china-and-protectionism-it-aint-quite-as-simple-as-they-tell-us#comment-19792 Has Romney secretly been reading Dean Baker while hiding in a Mormon temple to ask for forgiveness? Romney finally takes a position that adds up and is ignored by MSM. By definition if Chinese currency is manipulated to create a lower ratio of value to the dollar, that makes the dollar stronger. Romney wants to stop the manipulation and make the dollar weaker. And what does MSM say? Nothing. Not a peep other than playing it up as a threat to China. If Obama had said it, it would have gone viral as Weak Dollar machoism. The related question is why does Romney the Great Free Marketeer who attacks the slighest hint of government control of prices anywhere want to regulate currency exchange rates? Whatever happened to Romney's coveted freedom for an entire nation to set whatever currency price it desires in a free global market? Oh wait ... that's only for America the Free Market Nation, not other countries who don't respect anti-competitive property rights ... with the exception of course those who provide outsourcing opportunities for jobs raided by Romney and sent to them. - Last Mover Wed, 24 Oct 2012 02:05:14 +0100 http://www.cepr.net/index.php/blogs/beat-the-press/china-and-protectionism-it-aint-quite-as-simple-as-they-tell-us#comment-19791 If you accept that nations have full sovereignty and can do what they want inside their borders, with exceptions for human rights violations, then you have to accept that intellectual property rights end at national borders unless nations choose otherwise. Allowing sovereign nations to manufacture life saving medications for their own people while ignoring patent protections is an example of how patent protections stand in the way of human rights. The U.S. is a huge illegal exporter of firearms and a giant importer of illegal drugs from countries to our South. Does anyone think that the harm caused by the Chinese copying movies, music and various patented popular culture items does anything close to the damage caused by the U.S. supplying guns and cash to drug lords and gangs to our South? - Robert Salzberg Wed, 24 Oct 2012 00:51:50 +0100