China Makes Economic Threats

China threatens ‘nuclear option’ of dollar sales

By Ambrose Evans-Pritchard
Last Updated: 1:41am BST 09/08/2007

The Chinese government has begun a concerted campaign of economic threats against the United States, hinting that it may liquidate its vast holding of US treasuries if Washington imposes trade sanctions to force a yuan revaluation.

Two officials at leading Communist Party bodies have given interviews in recent days warning - for the first time - that Beijing may use its $1.33 trillion (£658bn) of foreign reserves as a political weapon to counter pressure from the US Congress.

Shifts in Chinese policy are often announced through key think tanks and academies.

Described as China’s “nuclear option” in the state media, such action could trigger a dollar crash at a time when the US currency is already breaking down through historic support levels.

It would also cause a spike in US bond yields, hammering the US housing market and perhaps tipping the economy into recession. It is estimated that China holds over $900bn in a mix of US bonds.

Xia Bin, finance chief at the Development Research Centre (which has cabinet rank), kicked off what now appears to be government policy with a comment last week that Beijing’s foreign reserves should be used as a “bargaining chip” in talks with the US.

“Of course, China doesn’t want any undesirable phenomenon in the global financial order,” he added.

He Fan, an official at the Chinese Academy of Social Sciences, went even further today, letting it be known that Beijing had the power to set off a dollar collapse if it choose to do so.

"China has accumulated a large sum of US dollars. Such a big sum, of which a considerable portion is in US treasury bonds, contributes a great deal to maintaining the position of the dollar as a reserve currency. Russia, Switzerland, and several other countries have reduced the their dollar holdings.

“China is unlikely to follow suit as long as the yuan’s exchange rate is stable against the dollar. The Chinese central bank will be forced to sell dollars once the yuan appreciated dramatically, which might lead to a mass depreciation of the dollar,” he told China Daily.

The threats play into the presidential electoral campaign of Hillary Clinton, who has called for restrictive legislation to prevent America being “held hostage to economic decicions being made in Beijing, Shanghai, or Tokyo”.

She said foreign control over 44pc of the US national debt had left America acutely vulnerable.

Simon Derrick, a currency strategist at the Bank of New York Mellon, said the comments were a message to the US Senate as Capitol Hill prepares legislation for the Autumn session.

“The words are alarming and unambiguous. This carries a clear political threat and could have very serious consequences at a time when the credit markets are already afraid of contagion from the subprime troubles,” he said.

A bill drafted by a group of US senators, and backed by the Senate Finance Committee, calls for trade tariffs against Chinese goods as retaliation for alleged currency manipulation.

The yuan has appreciated 9pc against the dollar over the last two years under a crawling peg but it has failed to halt the rise of China’s trade surplus, which reached $26.9bn in June.

Henry Paulson, the US Tresury Secretary, said any such sanctions would undermine American authority and “could trigger a global cycle of protectionist legislation”.

Mr Paulson is a China expert from his days as head of Goldman Sachs. He has opted for a softer form of diplomacy, but appeared to win few concession from Beijing on a unscheduled trip to China last week aimed at calming the waters.

If our economy crashes, so does the world economy.

I’m glad China threatened. Maybe our own gov’t. will see that we are open to foreign attacks financially as well as by terrorists.

JFK’s ambition was to equalize the wealth of the world. That’s why the dollar has been continually debased since WWII, to ship American wealth overseas. A wealthy and powerful United States is not in the interests of the NWO.

China may be able to put our economy into a resession, but remember just how many goods we buy from them each year. I say we quit buying their cheap junk, and do likewise to them! Remember to buy American everyone!

One must realize that your government has put your country in this position.

As well, it sounds like China is responding to what it perceives as threats, which is not the same as just making threats out of the blue for no reason.

It won’t just be America that sucks some major wind if China pulls out.

Like it or not - it will affect your safety and well being as well.

If the worlds largest consumer stops consuming, or loses the ability to consume, guess which direction the shit will flow? That’s right, my fence riding little friend - downhill.

Who is down hill? All the countries that have hid behind our skirts their entire life.

Go ahead and root for an american downfall. Just don’t blame us when when you are standing in a bread line wondering how the fuck you got there.

Monroe doctorine…US needs isolationism. Weed ourselves off foriegn control. We can do it. Americans are way too comfortable.

[quote]rainjack wrote:
It won’t just be America that sucks some major wind if China pulls out.

Like it or not - it will affect your safety and well being as well.

If the worlds largest consumer stops consuming, or loses the ability to consume, guess which direction the shit will flow? That’s right, my fence riding little friend - downhill.

Who is down hill? All the countries that have hid behind our skirts their entire life.[/quote]

I guess the skirt thing explains all the cheerleaders…

Rooting? Who’s rooting?

Anyhow, of course a major economic disaster in the US would represent a disaster for economies on a global scale. Has somebody suggested otherwise?

The fact I am lamenting the fact that the US government put the US in this position, assuming you were bitching at my post, has nothing to do with either hoping or expecting it may happen.

However, I do have to admit that if any administration is dumb enough to fuck things up so badly, it would be your favorite, the Bush administration.

China will not do anything. To slide the US economy into recession will slide the Chinese economy into a depression of unbelievable magnitude. Simply not concievable. We have the ability to blockade China with a naval blockade and shut down imports and exports. Because we can, doesn’t mean we will or have an interest in doing so.

The Chinese government holds large reserves. They can’t compete against the US and 3 or 4 other major nations if we choose not to allow their “dollar dump” to have an effect.

The Free Market allowed this to happen and the market will bring it back in balance.

Olympic Games anyone? Looking forward to Bejing?

China would hurt themselves worse than they would hurt us.

Economic warfare would hurt everyone.

[quote]vroom wrote:
I guess the skirt thing explains all the cheerleaders… [/quote]

Who’s cheering? The only pom-poms I see are the one’s you and your little terrorist friend are holding anytime something bad is said about the US. In fact - I have noticed you say “we” and “us” when speaking about rights, and “you” and “them” when you are looking down your nose in judgement.

You are. How hard is that to figure out? Sorry - the fake fence riding is played out. And just to let you know - no one ever believed the shtick in the first place.

No one had mentioned it at all. I notice you didn’t say a damn thing about it, what with your excitement about getting to blame our government and all.

Yes it does.

And there is the veiled hope that it will indeed happen. Are you really so obtuse, and/or stupid not to know that this foreign investment in the US - heavy investment at that - is not a new thing?

Please explain how it is the President’s fault. How did he “fuck things up so badly”?

Go back to your tree, and think about ways to stop talking out of your ass.

[quote]rainjack wrote:
Who’s cheering? The only pom-poms I see are the one’s you and your little terrorist friend are holding anytime something bad is said about the US. In fact - when I have noticed you say “we” and “us” when speaking about rights, and “you” and “them” when you are looking down your nose in judgement.[/quote]

You spend far too much time trying to psychoanalyze my posts Rainjack. Seriously. You are also bad at it.

As usual, nothing so far but attempts at attacking through characterizations. Anything non-personal you’d like to say about the issue?

I don’t like the Bush administration. I don’t like the way the Bush administration does things. You may not agree, but do you think you could support their actions if you feel so strongly about it, or are you limited to inventing bullshit postures on my part so you can make fun of them and knock them down?

[quote]
And there is the veiled hope that it will indeed happen. Are you really so obtuse, and/or stupid not to know that this foreign investment in the US - heavy investment at that - is a new thing?[/quote]

There is no veiled hope. You are an idiot. As well as running a huge deficit, perhaps due to launching a second and unnecessary war, the Bush administration has managed to piss off 90% of the world, create conflict where none is needed, and play the game of brinksmanship.

Defend that if you have something to say about the matter. Again, inventing opinions so that you can attack them is just a really sad move on your part.

[quote]
Please explain how it is the President’s fault. How did he “fuck things up so badly”?[/quote]

Iraq, FEMA, huge increases in debt, brinksmanship. Allowing things like Abu Graib on his watch. Harriet Miers and Alberto Gonzales. Scooter Libby. The guy is a turdball. That’s my opinion. You have a defence for him, then stand up like a man and voice it. Inventing opinions to attach to me instead so you can tear them down is just demonstrating your own ineptitude.

[quote]
Go back to your tree, and think about ways to stop talking out of your ass.[/quote]

You should take your own advice.

I’m not sitting on the fence at all. I’m describing why I think the Bush administration is crappy. I know that hurts your little hero worshipping feelings, but if you don’t feel like supporting the Bush administration, then by all means continue to make yourself look foolish by inventing new stances for me.

You can reread my first post after reading this post. You’ll find it consistent. We are hearing about so-called Chinese threats because the Bush administration is making noises about China and raising the stakes. I know you think bluster is a great way to deal with things… but I don’t have to agree with you.

Hey this is good news! Everytime China threatens shit like this it is because the U.S. got some sort of upper hand in out trade with them. Let them treaten. They have more to lose than we do. Yet another mistake of the Nixon Administration, opening trade with these cocksuckers.

I liked them better when they all wore grey and rode bikes everywhere. We could have gotten Bangladesh to make our plastic toys and paper hats. They’d have been more appreciative too.
Hey, maybe we can move our China operations to our new freinds, Lybia.

[quote]vroom wrote:
You spend far too much time trying to psychoanalyze my posts Rainjack. Seriously. You are also bad at it.[/quote]

I am only as good as the subject I have to work with. Trust me - it takes no time at all to figure you out. All you have to do is post.

Would you be the pot, or the kettle in this particular situation.

But just to set you straight - I addressed the issue quite accurately. It is through no fault of mine that you have a diminished capacity to comprehend the written word.

I’m not an inventor. I call it as I see it. I am not the biggest fan of Bush. My point - which you obviously missed - was that this is not a presidential problem.

Is it an overt hope then? You have absolutely no clue about this matter. Your rush to judge the president is stupidity in motion.

I’ll throw you a bone, here. In the 70’s and 80’s it was the Saudis and the Japanese that was so heavily invested in the U.S. That happens when emerging economies want a safe place to invest. They will invest in the most stable, and profitable country on the planet, and we are glad to take their money. But now that it is China and Bush - it’s all Bush’s fault.

You are passing sad, and closing in on pathetic at an ever increasing rate.

I have. Please see the above reference to your diminished capacity. You keep proving my assertions correct.

SO a bad USSC nominee, and a goat screw of a prison is a valid reason to blame Bush for China’s investment in the US?

Dude - what the fuck? You are a blooming idiot, but even so, you are capable of better.

[quote]pat36 wrote:
Hey this is good news! Everytime China threatens shit like this it is because the U.S. got some sort of upper hand in out trade with them. Let them treaten. They have more to lose than we do. Yet another mistake of the Nixon Administration, opening trade with these cocksuckers.

I liked them better when they all wore grey and rode bikes everywhere. We could have gotten Bangladesh to make our plastic toys and paper hats. They’d have been more appreciative too.
Hey, maybe we can move our China operations to our new freinds, Lybia.[/quote]

Nixon’s move to open relations with China was a stroke of genius.

It has been our willingness to give them MFN status without holding their feet to the fire that has caused our current situation - which has nothing to do with their stupid threats of selling of their investment in us.

Finally, a post with some on-topic discussion…

[quote]rainjack wrote:
Is it an overt hope then? You have absolutely no clue about this matter. Your rush to judge the president is stupidity in motion.
[/quote]
Your rush to absolve him is similarly stupid.

What you are ignoring is that the issue is not simply that someone else holds debts.

The fact is that the economy is much more vulnerable during periods of very large deficits. And, of course, the stance of the administration, the messages that get sent overseas, through various departments, is very much under the direction of the administration.

Who do you think has been in charge of these things for the last while?

No, they are but examples of his ongoing inability to make good decisions. Make no mistake, if the Chinese are making threats now, it is because they are feeling threatened. If you want to make the case that they feel threatened from other sources, go for it.

It would be nice to see you address issues instead of spewing your incessant nonsense.

[quote]vroom wrote:
It would be nice to see you address issues instead of spewing your incessant nonsense.[/quote]

Nonsense? I’m not the dipshit crying about Abu Grahib, and trying to tie it to China’s idiotic threat to pull their money out of the U.S. That particular award will go to the great thinker.

I have addressed the issue and far more accurately than you have.

Once again, I’ll spell out the real issue, and not the fluff and sparkly lights that seem to be distracting you. This time I will use bullets, and write really slow.

  1. Our country has always been open to foreign investment.

  2. This is not the first time a country we (populace) don’t particularly like investing very heavily in our country.

  3. Bush, Clinton, Bush, Reagan, Carter, Ford, and possibly even Nixon have dick to do with foreign investment. It is a function of how we are viewed by the world (economically), and our ongoing reputation as the safest place to sack away money.

  4. Court appointees, wartime prisons, Presidential assistants, or just plain dislike of a president has dick to do with whether or not we are a safe place to invest.

  5. The only difference between the Saudis, Japanese, and Chinese is that China made a stupid statement in an attempt to show how powerful they are.

  6. I am not defending anyone in particular. Your argument is stupid, and totally misdirected. Calling attention to that is not, by default a defense of anything but using a little common fucking sense.

China’s got an iPhone clone already.

http://www.popsci.com/popsci/technology/e7e48a137b144110vgnvcm1000004eecbccdrcrd.html

What’s that? Crap you say? Remember when Japanese cars were considered second grade in the US?

[quote]rainjack wrote:
Nonsense? I’m not the dipshit crying about Abu Grahib, and trying to tie it to China’s idiotic threat to pull their money out of the U.S. That particular award will go to the great thinker. [/quote]

Abu Graib, for example, is not a personal attack on you. That is what I am referring to by way of nonsense… your penchant for mischaracterization in order to create a stance that is easy to knock down.

We may not agree on the issues, but the fact you are actually expressing opinion on the subject is a welcome change.

It is a function of government debt. Trade, for example, involves settling a bill for goods, whereas holding onto government debt for decades at a time is a different animal which results in built up leverage.

So, again, you may disagree, but governments that choose to run huge deficits feed the situation we are arguing about. Ignore that fact if you wish, but you haven’t convinced me otherwise as of yet.

No, but they show the character of the current leadership. The situation is not entirely that a foreign country holds debts, is it? The situation is that a country that holds debts is feeling heat from the government to the point that we are having this discussion.

You are focusing on one aspect of this to promote a viewpoint that I think is lacking in depth.

Perhaps, but at the same time, the part you are not apparently willing to consider is why they felt the need to make such a statement.

Which administration is so good at dividing the world and pissing away international good will? Is it possible that this is yet another example of that so-called leadership?

[quote]
6. I am not defending anyone in particular. Your argument is stupid, and totally misdirected. Calling attention to that is not, by default a defense of anything but using a little common fucking sense. [/quote]

You haven’t shown my viewpoint to be misdirected, as of yet, perhaps you will. However, so far, you seem to be ignoring half of the issue. The issue is not simply that another country holds US debt. There is more to it.

[quote]vroom wrote:
We may not agree on the issues, but the fact you are actually expressing opinion on the subject is a welcome change.[/quote]

If there is any doubt about what my opinion is on a given topic - it is soley due to the stupidity of the reader.

You, on the other hand have a 4+ year history of never having enough balls to take a stand. You drape yourself in some sort of self-described genius, and expect those that question you to figure it out for ourselves.

[quote]It is a function of government debt. Trade, for example, involves settling a bill for goods, whereas holding onto government debt for decades at a time is a different animal which results in built up leverage.

So, again, you may disagree, but governments that choose to run huge deficits feed the situation we are arguing about. Ignore that fact if you wish, but you haven’t convinced me otherwise as of yet.[/quote]

You need to learn the difference between debt and deficit. They are not interchangeable.

You haven’t proven a thing. Your argument is extremely bad. If you were correct - no one would invest in the US be it short or long term.

Deficit spending is a function of the Congress - not the president - but that is beside the point.

I would invite you to read some of the Federalist Papers written by Alexander Hamilton, since you seem to have a problem understanding the value of foreign debt.

My job is not to convince you of anything. I just call bullshit where I see it.

[quote]No, but they show the character of the current leadership. The situation is not entirely that a foreign country holds debts, is it? The situation is that a country that holds debts is feeling heat from the government to the point that we are having this discussion[/quote].

Character has dick to do with investment. If that were so - there would be no NYSE - or any other form of investment in this country.

You want character to matter - but it doesn’t. Investment cares only about the bottom line: safety and return. We have both in spades.

The discussion is being had:

  1. Because you blame the damn president - which is just too ignorant to entertain any further

  2. Because China made threats that are absolutely untenable. Their plan would be cutting off their head to spite their face.

You are assigning blame to phantom causes - and my position is lacking depth? How fucking deep does it need to be? It is really quite simple. No need to go on a nuance search - which must truly break your tree-thinking heart.

Willing to consider their feelings? Not really. It was a stupid threat. Stupidity does not deserve understanding what they were feeling. How hard is that for you to grasp? You have been into the “let’s understand why they felt waht they felt” mode for…well…since you started posting in the political forum. It was stupid when you started it, and it is even more stupid now.

Yes there is - they hold debt, and they made a stupid untenable threat. Anything else is feel-good bullshit on your part. The issues reside in the bottom line - not on the emotional fringes where you seem to think they should be.

If this place were such a bad investment - we would not be having this conversation.