Spekulatius Posted November 12 Posted November 12 8 hours ago, UK said: https://www.investing.com/news/world-news/trump-taps-us-senator-marco-rubio-for-secretary-of-state-3715336 Rubio is a top China hawk in the Senate, and was sanctioned by Beijing in 2020 over his stance on Hong Kong following democracy protests. Lol, there go Chinese stocks - down another 2% or so. I wonder if Tepper is still in his generational trade. BABA is down pretty much where I sold it and that was before the stimulus package was announced. There will be more opportunities to trade stonks. Trump is making volatility great again.
Intelligent_Investor Posted November 12 Posted November 12 Its Joever for the China trade over the next few years if Rubio becomes Secretary of State. Dude hates China with a passion
sleepydragon Posted November 12 Posted November 12 43 minutes ago, Intelligent_Investor said: Its Joever for the China trade over the next few years if Rubio becomes Secretary of State. Dude hates China with a passion it’s bad for china but good for xi
Spekulatius Posted November 12 Posted November 12 Just give Taiwan some nukes. Makes the world a safer place.
nsx5200 Posted November 14 Posted November 14 Some more China news, for those that care... https://www.wsj.com/world/china-xi-jinping-latin-america-acf6dbc1?mod=hp_lead_pos7 "[...] in a region [South America] where China has replaced the U.S. as the dominant trading partner for most big economies[...]Beijing has signed up most of Latin America and the Caribbean to an infrastructure program that excludes the U.S" "China is a voracious buyer of Argentina’s lithium, crude oil from Venezuela and Brazilian iron ore and soybeans" "The region’s nations are generally sincere in their desire for warm relations with the U.S., but they are often seen as a secondary priority in Washington. Beijing’s diplomats and executives, meanwhile, actively engage with local and national governments almost regardless of their political leanings." "The U.S., Feeley [U.S. ambassador, early 2016] said, “looks at Latin America as a problem not an opportunity.”" "China is crowding in with manufactured exports[...]Already some countries are raising tariffs on Chinese goods" It looks like China's making inroad into accessing South America's natural resources while providing additional export outlet. The in-article video also provided more details on the deep-water port that China's invested in via their BRI, as well as the ramp-down of BRI investments due to China's internal financial troubles. With Trump in office, I suspect Latin America will continue to be seen as a problem.
cubsfan Posted November 14 Posted November 14 ^^^ Some of that is to be expected. The USA is awash in natural resources, China not so much.
Spekulatius Posted November 16 Posted November 16 (edited) Just saw this in my substack feed from John Hempton. This is what China‘s largest bank wrote in their shareholders letter. You really can’t make this up. : https://substack.com/home/post/p-151735409?source=queue For reasons I do not need to discuss I find myself reading the annual report of Industrial and Commercial Bank of China - the world’s biggest bank. Sure there are greater than 6 trillion of assets (in USD). I just thought you should see how it is managed. This is a direct quote from the Chairman’s letter: In the past year, we adhered to the guidance of the Party building theory and exercising rigorous corporate governance. We carried out thematic education and united the whole Bank under the guidance of the Xi Jinping Thought on Socialism with Chinese Characteristics for a New Era. We remain committed to “Two Affirmations” and “Two Upholds” implemented them to the letter. We earnestly rectified problems discovered during central inspections, audits, and supervisions, resolutely fought corruption, and unceasingly conducted full and rigorous Party self-governance to forge a clean ICBC. We pushed forward the organic integration between the Party’s leadership and corporate governance. The newly revised Articles of Association has been approved by the regulatory authority and come into effect, and the governance system of a modern financial enterprises with Chinese characteristics continued to be improved. No further comment is required. John Edited November 16 by Spekulatius
crs223 Posted November 16 Posted November 16 Wow. At first I thought “this sounds similar to US corporate platitudes on DEI”. But it’s worse. From ChatGPT: The Chinese principles of the “Two Affirmations” (两个确立, Liǎng gè Quèlì) and the “Two Upholds” (两个维护, Liǎng gè Wéihù) are central ideological directives introduced during Xi Jinping’s leadership in the Chinese Communist Party (CCP). These principles emphasize loyalty to the party's core leadership and reinforce its authority. Two Affirmations (两个确立) The "Two Affirmations" were solidified during the Sixth Plenary Session of the 19th Central Committee of the CCPin 2021. They affirm: The establishment of Xi Jinping’s core position within the Central Committee and the Party. The establishment of Xi Jinping Thought on Socialism with Chinese Characteristics for a New Era as the guiding ideology of the CCP. These affirmations serve to elevate Xi Jinping’s leadership and ideological framework as central to the CCP's governance and China's policy direction. Two Upholds (两个维护) The "Two Upholds" require party members and institutions to: Uphold the authority of the Central Committee of the CCP. Uphold Xi Jinping’s core leadership within the CCP. This principle emphasizes unity and loyalty to the centralized leadership structure of the CCP, with Xi Jinping at its helm. Significance Together, the "Two Affirmations" and "Two Upholds" establish a framework of ideological and political loyalty to Xi Jinping and the CCP's centralized authority. These principles have been instrumental in consolidating Xi Jinping’s power and ensuring policy continuity under his leadership. They also reflect the CCP's emphasis on maintaining internal unity and control amid domestic and international challenges.
Spekulatius Posted November 16 Posted November 16 (edited) The shareholder letter fails to even mention the shareholders or shareholder value. There is (imo) no other take than that shareholders don’t count and it’s clear that they are screwed or sacrificed for the greater good, just the Hero in that hero movie. Edited November 16 by Spekulatius
Paarslaars Posted November 16 Posted November 16 Or they keep up appearence for the CCP in official communication? Dnno maybe wishful thinking.
UK Posted November 22 Posted November 22 https://www.bloomberg.com/news/articles/2024-11-22/texas-raises-pressure-on-chinese-investments-with-exit-order
Spekulatius Posted November 22 Posted November 22 Somebody check on Tepper if he is still OK. Or maybe he sold into the surge he caused.
zippy1 Posted November 23 Posted November 23 This piece of news is kind of interesting. It is possible to read it with google translator. Basically, the government of ChaoZhou in the Guangdong provience decided to do a safety inspection on the stores. If a business fails the safety inspection, it can be fined quite severely. Apparently, quite a few stores decide to close to avoid being inspected. The unofficial story is tha the stores are closing "en masse." These store owners are creative in why they close the stores for the day. The reasons for not opening for business are like "Be afraid of Ghost", "having a fight with my spouse", "the owner is in a bad mood" in the news story. If the story is true, the finance of the local government has to be in bad shape to do this. https://www.hk01.com/即時中國/1078816/潮州-汕頭傳大量店舖關門停業避檢查-官方-只是個別商戶
Spekulatius Posted November 23 Posted November 23 (edited) 48 minutes ago, zippy1 said: This piece of news is kind of interesting. It is possible to read it with google translator. Basically, the government of ChaoZhou in the Guangdong provience decided to do a safety inspection on the stores. If a business fails the safety inspection, it can be fined quite severely. Apparently, quite a few stores decide to close to avoid being inspected. The unofficial story is tha the stores are closing "en masse." These store owners are creative in why they close the stores for the day. The reasons for not opening for business are like "Be afraid of Ghost", "having a fight with my spouse", "the owner is in a bad mood" in the news story. If the story is true, the finance of the local government has to be in bad shape to do this. https://www.hk01.com/即時中國/1078816/潮州-汕頭傳大量店舖關門停業避檢查-官方-只是個別商戶 I guess they will escalate to unannounced inspection very quickly. Sort of like “Afraid of the ghost” . It’s probably a subtle hint of being afraid of ghouls from the government. Here is another story from China when we visited our Chinese subsidy: My boss wanted to make a little smalltalk and ask the other manager who spoke a little English: ”How is your wife?” Answer: “ She is ugly!” We quickly looked at each other than at the translator and changed the subject. We later talked with the translator when the other manager wasn’t around. The translator translated everything word for word for us but neither he nor the Chinese manager understood the intend (he was around when above happened ), but as it turns out “saying my wife is ugly or not pretty “ is just being modest in China. It would be impolite and bragging to say “ My wife is pretty”. He also misunderstood the question thinking it pertains to his wife looks, not as polite small talk or genuine interest. Edited November 23 by Spekulatius
zippy1 Posted November 23 Posted November 23 5 hours ago, Spekulatius said: I guess they will escalate to unannounced inspection very quickly. Sort of like “Afraid of the ghost” . It’s probably a subtle hint of being afraid of ghouls from the government. Here is another story from China when we visited our Chinese subsidy: My boss wanted to make a little smalltalk and ask the other manager who spoke a little English: ”How is your wife?” Answer: “ She is ugly!” We quickly looked at each other than at the translator and changed the subject. We later talked with the translator when the other manager wasn’t around. The translator translated everything word for word for us but neither he nor the Chinese manager understood the intend (he was around when above happened ), but as it turns out “saying my wife is ugly or not pretty “ is just being modest in China. It would be impolite and bragging to say “ My wife is pretty”. He also misunderstood the question thinking it pertains to his wife looks, not as polite small talk or genuine interest. the kind of culture difference can really surprise me. I asked my friend, who had been a factory manager in China for quite a few years and left recently about this story. He said likely the low level governemnt guy who leaked the inspection date would be scolded. Then he will go making arrangements with these store owners that they will take turn to open, be inspected (and be fined....)... There is not much the store owners can do....
Spekulatius Posted November 27 Posted November 27 I had no idea how bad it is: https://www.csis.org/analysis/threat-chinas-shipbuilding-empire If the war between the US and China lasts longer the US Navy has no chance, imo.
mcliu Posted November 27 Posted November 27 (edited) How does the US make a geostrategic blunder of this magnitude..? Edited November 27 by mcliu
John Hjorth Posted November 27 Posted November 27 22 minutes ago, Spekulatius said: I had no idea how bad it is: https://www.csis.org/analysis/threat-chinas-shipbuilding-empire If the war between the US and China lasts longer the US Navy has no chance, imo. Your posting above, simply put, by trying to kidding us all - unintensionally, I still think here, - here on CoBF, with this stuff. I just don't buy any of this information at par. Quoting '230 times larger' in yellow? Where the heck is your own soul in posting such stuff here on CoBF?
mcliu Posted November 27 Posted November 27 https://archive.is/ePRUj Actually according to Reuters and the US Navy it's closer to 630x. What has those in Washington even more perturbed, however, is Beijing’s ability to build and repair vessels. One recent unclassified slide released by U.S. naval intelligence estimated that China’s total shipbuilding capacity was now more than 632 times that of the U.S. U.S. officials warn that Beijing can call on dozens of shipyards larger and more effective than the notoriously troubled Huntingdon Ingalls facility in Newport News, Virginia, the largest U.S. military shipyard. When it comes to warships, Beijing is now outbuilding the U.S. to a remarkable degree. Between 2003 and 2023, China more than doubled its guided missile destroyer fleet to 42. Over the last 10 years, it has launched 23 new destroyers compared to only 11 built by the U.S. Since 2017, China has built eight guided missile cruisers while the U.S. completed none. That naval production capacity is backed up by an even larger civilian shipbuilding sector. In 1999, Chinese shipyards accounted for only five percent of merchant shipping tonnage globally each year. Now, that proportion stands at over 50 percent, with Chinese yards attracting almost 60 percent of new merchant ship orders last year. That contrasts with the United States, which produces just 15-25 new merchant vessels every year, less than five percent of the global total.
mcliu Posted November 27 Posted November 27 (edited) You can explore some raw data for shipbuilding: Vietnam produced 8x, Finland 4x, Italy 7x. The shipbuilding industry is basically dead in the US. https://unctadstat.unctad.org/datacentre/dataviewer/US.ShipBuilding Edited November 27 by mcliu
UK Posted November 27 Posted November 27 2 hours ago, Spekulatius said: I had no idea how bad it is: https://www.csis.org/analysis/threat-chinas-shipbuilding-empire If the war between the US and China lasts longer the US Navy has no chance, imo. Perhaps as things stand today all this mismatch is still quite fixable...at least by reducing their overcapacity first. Sorry for the black humour:)
Castanza Posted November 27 Posted November 27 12 hours ago, mcliu said: How does the US make a geostrategic blunder of this magnitude..? Poor leadership since Reagan
nsx5200 Posted November 27 Posted November 27 5 minutes ago, Castanza said: 12 hours ago, mcliu said: How does the US make a geostrategic blunder of this magnitude..? Poor leadership since Reagan https://www.noahpinion.blog/p/why-cant-the-us-build-ships NotebookLM: "Main Themes: Historical decline: The U.S. shipbuilding industry has struggled to compete commercially since the Civil War, marked by a long decline punctuated by brief wartime booms. High input costs: High labor and steel costs in the U.S. make it difficult to compete with countries that leverage lower-cost labor, like China and South Korea. Cultural factors: A lack of national drive to make the U.S. shipbuilding industry internationally competitive, combined with protectionist policies and union resistance to technological advancements, have hampered progress. Innovation without commercialization: Despite pioneering key shipbuilding innovations, the U.S. has failed to translate these innovations into successful industries. National security concerns: The decline of the U.S. shipbuilding industry poses a significant national security risk, particularly in the face of growing Chinese shipbuilding capacity." The article list the miss opportunities for the US ship building industries going as far back as pre-Civil war era. The Reagan action is just one of the them. Some hopeful news along the lines of country/industry specialization shared amongst the value-aligned countries: "Now, the US is looking to Asia's[Korean] shipyards to help close that [ship building] gap as the two superpowers[U.S., China] move closer to a potential conflict." Inverting the problem, here are some reasons why China's shipbuilding got so big: https://www.businessinsider.com/chinas-shipbuilding-power-players-making-warships-at-a-rapid-pace-2024-9 "Its most significant shipyards produce both military and commercial vessels, leveraging industry for defense means" I don't have references to it, but from what I read in the past, the Chinese government's been making intentional decades-long investment in this area, similar to what they're currently doing with EV and AI.
Castanza Posted November 27 Posted November 27 @nsx5200 China has an interesting history of ship building. If you go back tot he 1400's (age of exploration) and look at Henry the Navigator from Portugal; he could barely make it to parts of Africa without major catastrophe. In the same time (unbeknownst to the rest of the world), the Chinese were already sailing half way around the world. The Europeans were sailing in groups of 3 or 4 with ships about half the size of WWII destroyers. Meanwhile the Chinese had fleets of hundreds of ships that were massive in comparison. The Europeans couldn't match them in size until the 1800's. They were also extremely innovative like having a few ships in the fleet filled with nothing but topsoil so that they could grow citrus fruit while at sea and fend of scurvy. So the question is, why did the Chinese not take this 400 year window and dominate the world? They could have easily dominated the age of exploration but chose not to because they are extremely conservative and more focused on preservation. Changes in leadership kept expansion in check and focus on internals. So if history is any lesson here, I don't think the Chinese mindset is likely to have changed. The Chinese don't really do anything on a global scale unless it is a near certainty with hedges on their part, because they have been forever internal focused. Preservation over expansion has almost always been their moto. Do you think the ramp up in their fleets change this mindset?
Spekulatius Posted November 27 Posted November 27 (edited) The Chinese shipyards are dual use, they produce both military as well as commercial vessels. The US shipyards are ancient rust buckets who only produce a ship here and there when they get an order. I think it takes about 10 years to get an aircraft carrier ready for deployment from start to finish. The time during WW2 was less than 12 month. I learned that at a tour on the US Hornet in Alemeda. The US had in WW2 production capacity for 10 aircraft carrier/ year, while the Japanese could do 1-2. Many people think that Japan lost the war in the battle of Midway, but they really lost it before it started because because the US had 5 x the shipbuilding capacity the Japanese had. Similary,if there is any extended engagement, the US would lose a naval war just by means of attrition. The US would need to do what the Japanese tried to do and end the war quickly. I think the us needs to restructure the industrial complex to become dual use for many things, especially ships and aircraft. The current system to produce small batches here and there can’t really produce a lot of stuff and we know that modern wars are not going to end quickly either and you need lots of stuff to fight and win. Edited November 27 by Spekulatius
Recommended Posts
Create an account or sign in to comment
You need to be a member in order to leave a comment
Create an account
Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!
Register a new accountSign in
Already have an account? Sign in here.
Sign In Now