The trade war between China and the US offers great opportunities for Singapore despite doomsayers saying the contrary. When China cancels all its orders for soya beans and pork and other food stuff, and this could also apply to Boeing aircraft, the American producers and manufacturers would have their hands full of these products that their warehouses could not hold. What are they going to do with all the foodstuff and beans and aircraft? There will be over production, over capacity and over employment that would need to be shed.
Who has the money to buy these excess produce and aircraft? If Singapore is smart, ask for fire sale prices. Make sure they are dirt cheap. The Americans must sell, desperate to sell, and there would not be many buyers with the dole. It will be buyer’s market.
What would Singapore do with the purchases? For aircraft, there is SIA and its subsidiaries to pick them up. SIA then can cancel its orders for Boeings as well. With the fire sales, there is no need to go ahead with the orders at high prices. Sorry Trump, you slapped Singapore with Broadcom, now it is only fair that Singapore strikes back.
Singapore can also quietly negotiate with China, the original buyer of Boeings to offer them at greatly reduced prices and make a commision just by being the middleman. This can also apply to the soya beans, pork and whatever. The real end losers would be the American farmers and Boeings and other American producers. China could pick up the same stuff for a song with Singapore making the money and the Americans making the losses.
Singapore should quickly send a special team to the US to pick up these great bargains that come once in a life time. But don't tell Trump that Singapore is capitalising on the spoils of war. Tell Trump Singapore is there to help. Trade war is good for Singapore. Let them fight and Singapore can pick up the pieces.
What do you think? There are caveats of course. The relations between Singapore and the US and China must be really good, not fake good. And the price must be really dirt cheap for China to want to buy.
Now is saying that trade war is bad?
4/06/2018
All the real news or all the fake news?
In the Select Committee on fake news, Janil Puthucheary quoted this, ‘a
survey published by REACH indicated 92% of Singaporeans want tougher
legislation against “fake news”, with a majority vouching for
perpetrators to be punished.'
This one I say is 100% real news. Why I say so? One, a minister would not lie or would not anyhow misquote. Two, Reach is an official govt platform, so would not lie. Three, the people responding to Reach are honest and sincere Singaporeans reflecting on the views of honest and sincere Singaporeans in the whole island.
If I were to conduct a similar survey among the MPs, all 89 of them, NCMP and NMP excluded, 83 would support more stringent laws and 6 would oppose. That would give a 93% supporting for more stringent laws.
If I were to conduct a survey among the SDP or WP followers or some other opposition party followers, I think I would get 100% against more stringent laws. This is also real news.
And hypothetically, if I were to walk into a kopitiam and ask the Ah Pek and Ah Ma political analysts to kee chiu, I think got chance 90% or more would be against more stringent laws because in the kopitiam they talked about anything. Stringent laws may tangkap them before they closed their mouths. But the result could vary depending on which constituency or GRC is the kopitiam in.
If I were to conduct a survey in mysingaporenews, I think at least 70% would vote against more stringent laws. There is one caveat, if Raymond did not bring in his whole gang of IBs to vote. If the latter happens, then the result could be 70% in favour of more stringent laws.
All the above surveys are real surveys, real news, not fake news. Everyone is telling the truth. Now, if one is to avail himself to all these surveys, what is the conclusion? You tell me lah? Who is right, who is telling the truth and who is spreading fake news? It is controversial lah. So what is real news and what is fake news? Depends on who you are and whether you are the law or you are an outlaw. Tiok boh?
This one I say is 100% real news. Why I say so? One, a minister would not lie or would not anyhow misquote. Two, Reach is an official govt platform, so would not lie. Three, the people responding to Reach are honest and sincere Singaporeans reflecting on the views of honest and sincere Singaporeans in the whole island.
If I were to conduct a similar survey among the MPs, all 89 of them, NCMP and NMP excluded, 83 would support more stringent laws and 6 would oppose. That would give a 93% supporting for more stringent laws.
If I were to conduct a survey among the SDP or WP followers or some other opposition party followers, I think I would get 100% against more stringent laws. This is also real news.
And hypothetically, if I were to walk into a kopitiam and ask the Ah Pek and Ah Ma political analysts to kee chiu, I think got chance 90% or more would be against more stringent laws because in the kopitiam they talked about anything. Stringent laws may tangkap them before they closed their mouths. But the result could vary depending on which constituency or GRC is the kopitiam in.
If I were to conduct a survey in mysingaporenews, I think at least 70% would vote against more stringent laws. There is one caveat, if Raymond did not bring in his whole gang of IBs to vote. If the latter happens, then the result could be 70% in favour of more stringent laws.
All the above surveys are real surveys, real news, not fake news. Everyone is telling the truth. Now, if one is to avail himself to all these surveys, what is the conclusion? You tell me lah? Who is right, who is telling the truth and who is spreading fake news? It is controversial lah. So what is real news and what is fake news? Depends on who you are and whether you are the law or you are an outlaw. Tiok boh?
4/05/2018
Part 5: Thucydides Trap vs Kindleberger Trap
Current Harvard
University Professor Joseph S. Nye Jr. who served as the Chairman of the
National Intelligence Council between 1993 to 1994 under the Clinton
Administration and subsequently as Assistant Secretary of Defense for
International Security Affairs between 1994 to 1995, wrote in early Jan
2017 in an article in ProjectSydicate.org before the inauguration (20
Jan 2017) of current US President Donald Trump about what history has in
store for him ... The following are extracts from that article:
"As US President-elect Donald Trump prepares his administration’s policy toward China, he should be wary of two major traps that history has set for him. The “Thucydides Trap,” cited by Chinese President Xi Jinping, refers to the warning by the ancient Greek historian that cataclysmic war can erupt if an established power (like the United States) becomes too fearful of a rising power (like China). But Trump also has to worry about the “Kindleberger Trap”: a China that seems too weak rather than too strong.
Charles Kindleberger, an intellectual architect of the Marshall Plan who later taught at MIT, argued that the disastrous decade of the 1930s was caused when the US replaced Britain as the largest global power but failed to take on Britain’s role in providing global public goods. The result was the collapse of the global system into depression, genocide, and world war. Today, as China’s power grows, will it help provide global public goods?
In domestic politics, governments produce public goods such as policing or a clean environment, from which all citizens can benefit and none are excluded. At the global level, public goods – such as a stable climate, financial stability, or freedom of the seas – are provided by coalitions led by the largest powers."
As many foreign ministers and public servants working in foreign affairs would be aware, the current international political system of nation states has existed since the Treaty of Westphalia in 1648. Another renowned Harvard University political scientist at the John F Kennedy School of Government Professor Graham T. Allison Jr. observed in his 2017 book "Destined for War: Can the Americans and China avoid Thucydides Trap?" that since the late 15th century, there were about 16 historical case studies of Thucydides' Trap out of which 75% of them (12 cases) ended up in wars and the remaining 25% (4 cases) avoidance of wars.
In 2015 when China President Xi JinPing met the then US President Barack Obama, President Xi noted in his speech: "The US and China need to work together to avoid Thucydides Trap - destructive tensions between an emerging power and established powers: should major countries time and again make the mistakes of strategic miscalculation, they might create such traps for themselves."
On that, former US President Barack Obama said: "I don't agree with the interpretation of Thucydides Trap that an established power must have conflict with an emerging power. Major powers like China and the US must prevent conflicts as much as possible. I believe the two countries are capable of managing the disagreement."
Alas, when current US President Donald Trump was elected, the first "act" he did was to "shred" the TPP agreement "into pieces" ...
Could US President Donald Trump still have gone ahead with his recent trade walls he erected against several countries' imports ranging from solar panels, refrigerators, steel, aluminium etc if he did not oppose TPP at the outset?
Post by Concerns of a Heartland Sinkie
"As US President-elect Donald Trump prepares his administration’s policy toward China, he should be wary of two major traps that history has set for him. The “Thucydides Trap,” cited by Chinese President Xi Jinping, refers to the warning by the ancient Greek historian that cataclysmic war can erupt if an established power (like the United States) becomes too fearful of a rising power (like China). But Trump also has to worry about the “Kindleberger Trap”: a China that seems too weak rather than too strong.
Charles Kindleberger, an intellectual architect of the Marshall Plan who later taught at MIT, argued that the disastrous decade of the 1930s was caused when the US replaced Britain as the largest global power but failed to take on Britain’s role in providing global public goods. The result was the collapse of the global system into depression, genocide, and world war. Today, as China’s power grows, will it help provide global public goods?
In domestic politics, governments produce public goods such as policing or a clean environment, from which all citizens can benefit and none are excluded. At the global level, public goods – such as a stable climate, financial stability, or freedom of the seas – are provided by coalitions led by the largest powers."
As many foreign ministers and public servants working in foreign affairs would be aware, the current international political system of nation states has existed since the Treaty of Westphalia in 1648. Another renowned Harvard University political scientist at the John F Kennedy School of Government Professor Graham T. Allison Jr. observed in his 2017 book "Destined for War: Can the Americans and China avoid Thucydides Trap?" that since the late 15th century, there were about 16 historical case studies of Thucydides' Trap out of which 75% of them (12 cases) ended up in wars and the remaining 25% (4 cases) avoidance of wars.
In 2015 when China President Xi JinPing met the then US President Barack Obama, President Xi noted in his speech: "The US and China need to work together to avoid Thucydides Trap - destructive tensions between an emerging power and established powers: should major countries time and again make the mistakes of strategic miscalculation, they might create such traps for themselves."
On that, former US President Barack Obama said: "I don't agree with the interpretation of Thucydides Trap that an established power must have conflict with an emerging power. Major powers like China and the US must prevent conflicts as much as possible. I believe the two countries are capable of managing the disagreement."
Alas, when current US President Donald Trump was elected, the first "act" he did was to "shred" the TPP agreement "into pieces" ...
Could US President Donald Trump still have gone ahead with his recent trade walls he erected against several countries' imports ranging from solar panels, refrigerators, steel, aluminium etc if he did not oppose TPP at the outset?
Post by Concerns of a Heartland Sinkie
The Americans lost another war
After Vietnam, the Americans are facing another major defeat in the
battle field in Syria. The monster they created in ISIS to destabilize
Syria and to remove Assad has been defeated. No longer are these rebels
shouting long live the Caliphate. No more new fighters joining their
ranks as their dream of a victorious Caliphate has turned to smokes. The
invincible ISIS is as good as dead and gone with the few remnants being
flushed out of Douma and Ghoutta, thanks to their conspirators, the
Americans, working out a deal to let them depart for the little safe
enclave in Idlib. Idlib would be the last stand before Assad and the
Russians wipe them out for good. But it would be a tough fight against
the objections of the Americans, their creator, and the western powers.
The evil Americans would do anything possible, under whatever guises, to
keep the amber of the dying ISIS burning, to live to terrorrise another
day.
Thanks to Putin, the Russians put up a strong stand to support Assad at all cost and this has proven to be the decisive factor that saved Assad from being lynched by the Americans and join Saddam and Gaddafi in nether world.
Trump did not start this and is happy to call it a day and has announced the withdrawal of American troops from Syria. This would leave Assad and the Russians to clean out all remaining rebels in Syria and bring peace back to this unfortunate country.
Russia should not stop at Syria and should continue the offensive to bring about peace in Iraq the same way as in Syria. The American henchmen, the ISIS, are still alive in Iraq and need an all out assault to free Iraq from their clutches and the trouble maker American forces. The Middle East states must save themselves from this perpetual war created by the Americans to make them poor and hapless, to destroy their land and economies and to cripple the Arabs from ever being normal nations and people living in peace. Getting rid of the evil Americans is the only way to bring peace to the Middle East.
Russia is now the key, the white knight, to save the Arabs from killing themselves under a constant state of siege and warfare. Only then can they rebuild their countries and their lives and their people living a normal life like the peaceful nations around the world. If they are going to enjoy peace, they must seek the help of the Russians to free them from this American evil trap of perpetual warfare in their homeland. The Syrians have done it, so can the other Arab states. The Middle East must not be forever the land of instability and warfare under the dictate of the evil American Empire.
The evil Americans may have been defeated again. But war is in their DNA. They have conceded that they could not win a military war against a people that did not want to be ruled by them. So they have started another war on another front, a trade war with China and the rest of the world.
Now which idiot is still saying that the Americans are peaceful people?
Thanks to Putin, the Russians put up a strong stand to support Assad at all cost and this has proven to be the decisive factor that saved Assad from being lynched by the Americans and join Saddam and Gaddafi in nether world.
Trump did not start this and is happy to call it a day and has announced the withdrawal of American troops from Syria. This would leave Assad and the Russians to clean out all remaining rebels in Syria and bring peace back to this unfortunate country.
Russia should not stop at Syria and should continue the offensive to bring about peace in Iraq the same way as in Syria. The American henchmen, the ISIS, are still alive in Iraq and need an all out assault to free Iraq from their clutches and the trouble maker American forces. The Middle East states must save themselves from this perpetual war created by the Americans to make them poor and hapless, to destroy their land and economies and to cripple the Arabs from ever being normal nations and people living in peace. Getting rid of the evil Americans is the only way to bring peace to the Middle East.
Russia is now the key, the white knight, to save the Arabs from killing themselves under a constant state of siege and warfare. Only then can they rebuild their countries and their lives and their people living a normal life like the peaceful nations around the world. If they are going to enjoy peace, they must seek the help of the Russians to free them from this American evil trap of perpetual warfare in their homeland. The Syrians have done it, so can the other Arab states. The Middle East must not be forever the land of instability and warfare under the dictate of the evil American Empire.
The evil Americans may have been defeated again. But war is in their DNA. They have conceded that they could not win a military war against a people that did not want to be ruled by them. So they have started another war on another front, a trade war with China and the rest of the world.
Now which idiot is still saying that the Americans are peaceful people?
4/04/2018
Post by Concerns of a Heartland Sinkie - Part 4
As mentioned in late 2016 in MSN and (mentioned) again in early 2017, a head and shoulder trend was formed in terms of the tide of globalisation and at least a 70% chance of an unmistakable trend reversal?
1) 911 marked the "left shoulder"?
2) The 2008 GFC the "head"?
3) And Jun 2016 Brexit & Nov 2016 "Brexit+++" marked the right "shoulder"?
The current wave of globalisation that took off massively in the 1970s could be in reverse gear?
However, way back in late 2014 and again in 2015, the warning sirens of possible de-globalisation was sounded (in MSN) but noboLEE paid any heed (to it)?
As mentioned previously (& repeatedly) in 2014 to 2017 (in MSN), the last cycle of internationalisation (aka globalisation) was in even higher gear than the current but the trade wars that started in the 1890s culminated 2 decades later in the WW1 that saw Pax Britannica ceding its preeminent world policeman role and the global hegemon title was left unfilled ......, can any reader recall? (Pls KEE CHIU ...)
Subsequently, the then world order collapsed in a power vacuum and an anarchic world order ensued.
During those inter-war years (1919-1938), the global economy went into a tailspin, wall street collapsed in 1929 and precipitated the first ever global Great Depression?
The late Professor Charles Kindleberger, in his 1973 book "The World in Depression: 1929-1939", expounded his world famous theory of HST (Hegemonic Stability Theory).
The late Professor passed away in 2003 (at the ripe old age of 92) after the 2nd Gulf War broke out.
The fast recovery of Western Europe was to a large extent due to the late Professor spearheading the then Marshall Plan in the post-war reconstruction.
Many policies that the late Professor advocated that are key determinants of a stable world order are now been "thrown into the incinerator" ...?
The immutable MSN wiseman lao hero wrote in his post dated 4/03/2018: "Hundred Flowers Movement Revisited 百花运动" under the final two short but thundering concluding paragraphs:
Quote
"People who did not know history or learn from the mistakes in history would be condemned to make the same mistakes and bury themselves only to verify that history would repeat itself with their folly.
Thank you very much for a precious but painful lesson in history."
Unquote
Given China's latest retaliatory counter protectionist measures announced this afternoon, a full blown trade blows between the world's 2 top most preeminent economic powers and giants seems unavoidable UNLESS the perpetrator who started this potential full scale trade war back down ...?
In 1985, Sg's founding PM went to Capitol Hill, Washington and spoke in the joint US Congress session [see Youtube video: https://youtu.be/X6CZ3C0niPg], arguing against an oncoming trade war then between the Americans and the Japanese which culminated in the 1987 Plaza Accord and an immediate 30% revaluation of the Yen vis-a-vis the major world currencies in particular the USD but which also subsequently led to the "destruction" of the then world #2 economic powerhouse and the subsequent Japanese economic malaise since 1990 ...?
This time unlikely there will be another iconic world leading figure to thwart the US of firing the 1st trade cannon (which already happened) and more importantly there will not be a repeat of the 1987 "Plaza Accord"?
What next?
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)