What is the Chinese currency, and how to trade the Yuan

Euro is rolling down. Forecast as of 16.10.2020

Euro is rolling down. Forecast as of 16.10.2020
The EURUSDis being corrected down amid several negative factors. They are growing political risks in the USA, the second pandemic wave in Europe, and the high risk of a no-deal Brexit. Let us discuss how bad the situation is and male up a EURUSD trading plan.

Weekly euro fundamental forecast

The EURUSD is down to its two-week low for several reasons. The US stock indexes have been trading down for three consecutive days; additional restrictions are introduced in Paris and London because of COVID-19. Besides, the EU officials announce that agreeing a "fair" new partnership with Britain was "worth every effort" but that the bloc would not compromise at any cost, which sends the pound down. The euro bulls are trying to consolidate the price at the bottom of figure 17, betting on China’s rebound and the ECB’s unwillingness to boost the monetary stimulus before December.
China has attracted $6 billion in the dollar-backed obligations, which repeats the record of 2019. According to the median forecast of the financial analysts polled by the Wall Street Journal, China’s GDP will grow by 5.3% Y-o-Y in the third-quarter report, which is much higher than in the April-June period (+3.2%) and close to the data recorded in 2019 (6.1%). The foreign demand for Chinese securities and the optimism about economic rebound allowed the yuan to compensate for most losses resulted from PBoC’s FX interventions. These facts support the euro.
The euro bulls are also encouraged by the ECB’s unwillingness to expand the monetary stimulus at its October meeting. Despite a sharp downturn of the euro-area economy amid the second pandemic waves, the ECB officials believe there is no need yet to ease the monetary policy. According to the head of the Bank of Holland, Klaas Knot, the regulator needs additional information. The ECB Vice-President Luis de Guindos believes that since less than half of the money in the QE framework has been spent, there is no need to boost asset purchases.

ECB monetary stimulus spending


https://preview.redd.it/esnb9ht5dgt51.jpg?width=583&format=pjpg&auto=webp&s=dd293647240a19596f885ecf8728551baa93c363
Source: Bloomberg
The euro is supported by the fact that China’s economy is growing, and the ECB is unlikely to take active measures. However, the dollar demand increases amid the political uncertainty in the US associated with a lower global risk appetite, which sets the EURUSD bulls back.
The number of Americans filing for unemployment benefits rose by 898 thousand in the week ended October 10th, proving the US labor market needs an additional fiscal stimulus. A poor reading has sent the S&P 500 down and strengthened the greenback. Investors still bet on the Democrats’ victory on November 3. However, they are not willing to buy US stocks now, as they remember how Hillary Clinton, who was leading in the ratings, eventually lost to Donald Trump. If the US stock indices continue falling, the market situation will be similar to that of 2017. At that time, the ECB, discontent with the euro strengthening, used verbal interventions, and the pair failed to consolidate above 1.2.

Dynamics of EURUSD in 2017 and 2020


https://preview.redd.it/ck7knoc6dgt51.png?width=593&format=png&auto=webp&s=e04a6232ebb77be11ea89114fb412fd900e69381
Source: Nordea Markets

Weekly EURUSD trading plan

Remarkably, the EURUSD trend depends on the pound now. The UK is discontent with the EU's willingness to prepare for a no-deal Brexit can drop the GBPUSD deeper and send the euro towards $1.159-$1.162. I suggest one continue holding down the EURUSD shorts entered at level 1.178.
For more information follow the link to the website of the LiteForex
https://www.liteforex.com/blog/analysts-opinions/euro-is-rolling-down-forecast-as-of-16102020/?uid=285861726&cid=62423
submitted by Maxvelgus to Finance_analytics [link] [comments]

Trump Didn’t Kill the Global Trade System. He Split It in Two.

This article is taken from the Wall Street Journal written about nine months ago and sits behind a a paywall, so I decided to copy and paste it here. This article explains Trump's policies toward global trade and what has actually happened so far. I think the article does a decent job of explaining the Trade War. While alot has happenedsince the article was written, I still think its relevant.
However, what is lacking in the article, like many articles on the trade war, is it doesn't really explain the history of US trade policy, the laws that the US administration is using to place tariffs on China and the official justification for the US President in enacting tariffs against China. In my analysis I will cover those points.

SUMMARY

When Trump entered the White House people feared he would dismantle the global system the US and its allies had built over the last 75 years, but he hasn't. He has realign into two systems. One between the US and its allies which looks similar to the one built since the 1980s with a few of quota and tariffs. As the article points out
Today, Korus and Nafta have been replaced by updated agreements(one not yet ratified) that look much like the originals. South Korea accepted quotas on steel. Mexico and Canada agreed to higher wages, North American content requirements and quotas for autos. Furthermore, the article points out Douglas Irwin, an economist and trade historian at Dartmouth College, calls these results the “status quo with Trumpian tweaks: a little more managed trade sprinkled about for favored industries. It’s not good, but it’s not the destruction of the system.” Mr. Trump’s actions so far affect only 12% of U.S. imports, according to Chad Bown of the Peterson Institute for International Economics. In 1984, 21% of imports were covered by similar restraints, many imposed by Mr. Reagan, such as on cars, steel, motorcycles and clothing. Protectionist instincts go so far in the US, there are strong lobby groups for both protectionist and freetrade in the US.
The second reflects a emerging rivalry between the US and China. Undo some of the integration that followed China accession to the WTO. Two questions 1) How far is the US willing to decouple with China 2) Can it persuade allies to join.
The second is going to be difficult because China's economic ties are greater than they were between the Soviets, and China isn't waging an ideological struggle. Trump lacks Reagan commitment to alliance and free trade. The status quo with China is crumbling Dan Sullivan, a Republican senator from Alaska, personifies these broader forces reshaping the U.S. approach to the world. When Mr. Xi visited the U.S. in 2015, Mr. Sullivan urged his colleagues to pay more attention to China’s rise. On the Senate floor, he quoted the political scientist Graham Allison: “War between the U.S. and China is more likely than recognized at the moment.” Last spring, Mr. Sullivan went to China and met officials including Vice President Wang Qishan. They seemed to think tensions with the U.S. will fade after Mr. Trump leaves the scene, Mr. Sullivan recalled. “I just said, ‘You are completely misreading this.’” The mistrust, he told them, is bipartisan, and will outlast Mr. Trump. both Bush II and Obama tried to change dialogue and engagement, but by the end of his term, Obama was questioning the approach. Trump has declared engagement. “We don’t like it when our allies steal our ideas either, but it’s a much less dangerous situation,” said Derek Scissors, a China expert at the American Enterprise Institute whose views align with the administration’s more hawkish officials. “We’re not worried about the war-fighting capability of Japan and Korea because they’re our friends.”
The article also points out unlike George Kennan in 1946 who made a case for containing the Soviet Union, the US hasn't explicitly made a case for containing the Soviets, Trump's administration hasn't, because as the the article explains its divided Michael Pillsbury a Hudson Institute scholar close to the Trump team, see 3 scenarios
Pillsbury thinks the third is most likely to happen, even though the administration hasn't said that it has adopted that policy. The US is stepping efforts to draw in other trading partners. The US, EU and Japan have launched a WTO effort to crack down on domestic subsidies and technology transfers requirement. US and Domestic concerns with prompted some countries to restrict Huawei. The US is also seeking to walloff China from other trade deals. However, there are risk with this strategy

ARTICLE

Trump Didn’t Kill the Global Trade System. He Split It in Two.

INTRODUCTION

My main criticism of this article is it tries like the vast majority of articles to fit US trade actions in the larger context of US geopolitical strategy. Even the author isn't certain "The first goes to the heart of Mr. Trump’s goal. If his aim is to hold back China’s advance, economists predict he will fail.". If you try to treat the trade "war" and US geopolitical strategy toward China as one, you will find yourself quickly frustrated and confused. If you treat them separately with their different set of stakeholders and histories, were they intersect with regards to China, but diverge. During the Cold War, trade policy toward the Soviet Union and Eastern Bloc was subordinated to geopolitical concerns. For Trump, the trade issues are more important than geopolitical strategy. His protectionist trade rhetoric has been fairly consistent since 1980s. In his administration, the top cabinet members holding economic portfolios, those of Commerce, Treasury and US Trade Representative are the same people he picked when he first took office. The Director of the Economic Council has changed hands once, its role isn't as important as the National Security Advisor. While State, Defense, CIA, Homeland Security, UN Ambassador, National Security Advisor have changed hands at least once. Only the Director of National Intelligence hasn't changed.
International Trade makes up 1/4 of the US economy, and like national security its primarily the responsibility of the Federal government. States in the US don't implement their own tariffs. If you add the impact of Treasury policy and how it relates to capital flows in and out of the US, the amounts easily exceed the size of the US economy. Furthermore, because of US Dollar role as the reserve currency and US control of over global system the impact of Treasury are global. Trade policy and investment flows runs through two federal departments Commerce and Treasury and for trade also USTR. Defense spending makes up 3.3% of GDP, and if you add in related homeland security its at most 4%. Why would anyone assume that these two realms be integrated let alone trade policy subordinate to whims of a national security bureaucracy in most instances? With North Korea or Iran, trade and investment subordinate themselves to national security, because to Treasury and Commerce bureaucrats and their affiliated interest groups, Iran and the DPRK are well, economic midgets, but China is a different matter.
The analysis will be divided into four sections. The first will be to provide a brief overview of US trade policy since 1914. The second section will discuss why the US is going after China on trade issues, and why the US has resorted using a bilateral approach as opposed to going through the WTO. The third section we will talk about how relations with China is hashed out in the US.
The reason why I submitted this article, because there aren't many post trying to explain US-China Trade War from a trade perspective. Here is a post titled "What is the Reasons for America's Trade War with China, and not one person mentioned Article 301 or China's WTO Commitments. You get numerous post saying that Huawei is at heart of the trade war. Its fine, but if you don't know what was inside the USTR Investigative report that lead to the tariffs. its like skipping dinner and only having dessert When the US President, Donald J Trump, says he wants to negotiate a better trade deal with other countries, and has been going on about for the last 35 years, longer than many of you have been alive, why do people think that the key issues with China aren't primarily about trade at the moment.

OVERVIEW OF THE UNITED STATES TRADE ORIENTATION

Before 1940s, the US could be categorized as a free market protectionist economy. For many this may seem like oxymoron, how can an economy be free market and protectionist? In 1913, government spending made up about 7.5% of US GDP, in the UK it was 13%, and for Germany 18% (Public Spending in the 20th Century A Global Perspective: Ludger Schuknecht and Vito Tanzi - 2000). UK had virtual zero tariffs, while for manufactured goods in France it was 20%, 13% Germany, 9% Belgium and 4% Netherlands. For raw materials and agricultural products, it was almost zero. In contrast, for the likes of United States, Russia and Japan it was 44%, 84% and 30% respectively. Even though in 1900 United States was an economic powerhouse along with Germany, manufactured exports only made up 30% of exports, and the US government saw tariffs as exclusively a domestic policy matter and didn't see tariffs as something to be negotiated with other nations. The US didn't have the large constituency to push the government for lower tariffs abroad for their exports like in Britain in the 1830-40s (Reluctant Partners: A History of Multilateral Trade Cooperation, 1850-2000).
The Underwood Tariffs Act of 1913 which legislated the income tax, dropped the tariffs to 1850 levels levels.Until 16th amendment was ratified in 1913 making income tax legal, all US federal revenue came from excise and tariffs. In contrast before 1914, about 50% of UK revenue came from income taxes. The reason for US reluctance to introduced income tax was ideological and the United State's relative weak government compared to those in Europe. After the First World War, the US introduced the Emergency Tariff Act of 1921, than the Fordney–McCumber Tariff of 1922 followed by a Smoot-Hawley Act of 1930. Contrary to popular opinion, the Smoot-Hawley Act of 1930 had a small negative impact on the economy, since imports and exports played a small part of the US economy, and the tariffs were lower than the average that existed from 1850-1914.
Immediately after the Second World War, when the US economy was the only industrialized economy left standing, the economic focus was on rehabilitation and monetary stability. There was no grandiose and ideological design. Bretton Woods system linked the US dollar to gold to create monetary stability, and to avoid competitive devaluation and tariffs that plagued the world economy after Britain took itself off the gold in 1931. The US$ was the natural choice, because in 1944 2/3 of the world's gold was in the US. One reason why the Marshall Plan was created was to alleviate the chronic deficits Europeans countries had with the US between 1945-50. It was to rebuild their economies so they could start exports good to the US. Even before it was full implemented in 1959, it was already facing problems, the trade surpluses that the US was running in the 1940s, turned to deficits as European and Japanese economies recovered. By 1959, Federal Reserves foreign liabilities had already exceeded its gold reserves. There were fears of a run on the US gold supply and arbitrage. A secondary policy of the Bretton woods system was curbs on capital outflows to reduce speculation on currency pegs, and this had a negative impact on foreign investment until it was abandoned in 1971. It wasn't until the 1980s, where foreign investment recovered to levels prior to 1914. Factoring out the big spike in global oil prices as a result of the OPEC cartel, it most likely wasn't until the mid-1990s that exports as a % of GDP had reached 1914 levels.
Until the 1980s, the US record regarding free trade and markets was mediocre. The impetus to remove trade barriers in Europe after the Second World War was driven by the Europeans themselves. The EEC already had a custom union in 1968, Canada and the US have yet to even discuss implementing one. Even with Canada it took the US over 50 years to get a Free Trade Agreement. NAFTA was inspired by the success of the EEC. NAFTA was very much an elite driven project. If the Americans put the NAFTA to a referendum like the British did with the EEC in the seventies, it most likely wouldn't pass. People often look at segregation in the US South as a political issue, but it was economic issue as well. How could the US preach free trade, when it didn't have free trade in its own country. Segregation was a internal non-tariff barrier. In the first election after the end of the Cold War in 1992, Ross Perot' based most of independent run for the Presidency on opposition to NAFTA. He won 19% of the vote. Like Ross Perot before him, Donald Trump is not the exception in how America has handled tariffs since the founding of the Republic, but more the norm.
The embrace of free trade by the business and political elite can be attributed to two events. After the end of Bretton Woods in 1971, a strong vested interest in the US in the form of multinationals and Wall Street emerged advocating for removal of tariffs and more importantly the removal of restrictions on free flow of capital, whether direct foreign investment in portfolio investment. However, the political class embrace of free trade and capital only really took off after the collapse of the Soviet Union propelled by Cold War triumphalism.
As mentioned by the article, the US is reverting back to a pre-WTO relations with China. As Robert Lighthizer said in speech in 2000
I guess my prescription, really, is to move back to more of a negotiating kind of a settlement. Return to WTO and what it really was meant to be. Something where you have somebody make a decision but have it not be binding.
The US is using financial and legal instruments developed during the Cold War like its extradition treaties (with Canada and Europe), and Section 301. Here is a very good recent article about enforcement commitment that China will make.‘Painful’ enforcement ahead for China if trade war deal is reached with US insisting on unilateral terms
NOTE: It is very difficult to talk about US-China trade war without a basic knowledge of global economic history since 1914. What a lot of people do is politicize or subordinate the economic history to the political. Some commentators think US power was just handed to them after the Second World War, when the US was the only industrialized economy left standing. The dominant position of the US was temporary and in reality its like having 10 tonnes of Gold sitting in your house, it doesn't automatically translate to influence. The US from 1945-1989 was slowly and gradually build her influence in the non-Communist world. For example, US influence in Canada in the 1960s wasn't as strong as it is now. Only 50% of Canadian exports went to the US in 1960s vs 80% at the present moment.

BASIS OF THE US TRADE DISCUSSION WITH CHINA

According to preliminary agreement between China and the US based on unnamed sources in the Wall Street Journal article US, China close in on Trade Deal. In this article it divides the deal in two sections. The first aspects have largely to do with deficits and is political.
As part of a deal, China is pledging to help level the playing field, including speeding up the timetable for removing foreign-ownership limitations on car ventures and reducing tariffs on imported vehicles to below the current auto tariff of 15%. Beijing would also step up purchases of U.S. goods—a tactic designed to appeal to President Trump, who campaigned on closing the bilateral trade deficit with China. One of the sweeteners would be an $18 billion natural-gas purchase from Cheniere Energy Inc., people familiar with the transaction said.
The second part will involve the following.
  1. Commitment Regarding Industrial Policy
  2. Provisions to protect IP
  3. Mechanism which complaints by US companies can be addressed
  4. Bilateral meetings adjudicate disputes. If talks don't produce agreement than US can raise tariffs unilaterally
This grouping of conditions is similar to the points filled under the 301 investigation which serve the basis for initiating the tariffs. I have been reading some sources that say this discussion on this second group of broader issues could only be finalized later
The official justifications for placing the tariffs on Chinese goods is found under the March 2018 investigation submitted by the office of the President to Congress titled FINDINGS OF THE INVESTIGATION INTO CHINA’S ACTS, POLICIES, AND PRACTICES RELATED TO TECHNOLOGY TRANSFER, INTELLECTUAL PROPERTY, AND INNOVATION UNDER SECTION 301 OF THE TRADE ACT OF 1974. From this investigation the United States Trade Representative (USTR) place US Tariffs on Chinese goods as per Section 301 of the Trade Act of 1974. Here is a press release by the USTR listing the reasons for placing tariffs, and the key section from the press release. Specifically, the Section 301 investigation revealed:
In the bigger context of trade relations between US and China, China is not honoring its WTO commitments, and the USTR issued its yearly report to Congress in early February about the status of China compliance with its WTO commitments. The points that served as a basis for applying Section 301, also deviate from her commitments as Clinton's Trade Representative Charlene Barshefsky paving the way for a trade war. Barshefsky argues that China's back sliding was happening as early as 2006-07, and believes the trade war could have been avoided has those commitments been enforced by previous administrations.
I will provide a brief overview of WTO membership and China's process of getting into the WTO.
WTO members can be divided into two groups, first are countries that joined in 1995-97, and were members of GATT, than there are the second group that joined after 1997. China joined in 2001. There is an argument that when China joined in 2001, she faced more stringent conditions than other developing countries that joined before, because the vast majority of developing countries were members of GATT, and were admitted to the WTO based on that previous membership in GATT. Here is Brookings Institute article published in 2001 titled "Issues in China’s WTO Accession"
This question is all the more puzzling because the scope and depth of demands placed on entrants into the formal international trading system have increased substantially since the formal conclusion of the Uruguay Round of trade negotiations in 1994, which expanded the agenda considerably by covering many services, agriculture, intellectual property, and certain aspects of foreign direct investment. Since 1994, the international community has added agreements covering information technology, basic telecommunications services, and financial services. WTO membership now entails liberalization of a much broader range of domestic economic activity, including areas that traditionally have been regarded by most countries as among the most sensitive, than was required of countries entering the WTO’s predecessor organization the GATT.
The terms of China’s protocol of accession to the World Trade Organization reflect the developments just described and more. China’s market access commitments are much more far-reaching than those that governed the accession of countries only a decade ago. And, as a condition for membership, China was required to make protocol commitments that substantially exceed those made by any other member of the World Trade Organization, including those that have joined since 1995. The broader and deeper commitments China has made inevitably will entail substantial short-term economic costs.
What are the WTO commitments Barshefsky goes on about? When countries join the WTO, particularly those countries that weren't members of GATT and joined after 1997, they have to work toward fulfilling certain commitments. There are 4 key documents when countries make an accession to WTO membership, the working party report, the accession protocol paper, the goods schedule and service schedule.
In the working party report as part of the conclusion which specifies the commitment of each member country what they will do in areas that aren't compliant with WTO regulations on the date they joined. The problem there is no good enforcement mechanism for other members to force China to comply with these commitments. And WTO punishments are weak.
Here is the commitment paragraph for China
"The Working Party took note of the explanations and statements of China concerning its foreign trade regime, as reflected in this Report. The Working Party took note of the commitments given by China in relation to certain specific matters which are reproduced in paragraphs 18-19, 22-23, 35-36, 40, 42, 46-47, 49, 60, 62, 64, 68, 70, 73, 75, 78-79, 83-84, 86, 91-93, 96, 100-103, 107, 111, 115-117, 119-120, 122-123, 126-132, 136, 138, 140, 143, 145, 146, 148, 152, 154, 157, 162, 165, 167-168, 170-174, 177-178, 180, 182, 184-185, 187, 190-197, 199-200, 203-207, 210, 212-213, 215, 217, 222-223, 225, 227-228, 231-235, 238, 240-242, 252, 256, 259, 263, 265, 270, 275, 284, 286, 288, 291, 292, 296, 299, 302, 304-305, 307-310, 312-318, 320, 322, 331-334, 336, 339 and 341 of this Report and noted that these commitments are incorporated in paragraph 1.2 of the Draft Protocol. "
This is a tool by the WTO that list all the WTO commitment of each country in the working paper. In the goods and service schedule they have commitments for particular sectors. Here is the a press release by the WTO in September 2001, after successfully concluding talks for accession, and brief summary of key areas in which China hasn't fulfilled her commitments. Most of the commitments made by China were made to address its legacy as a non-market economy and involvement of state owned enterprises. In my opinion, I think the US government and investors grew increasingly frustrated with China, after 2007 not just because of China's back sliding, but relative to other countries who joined after 1997 like Vietnam, another non-market Leninist dictatorship. When comparing China's commitments to the WTO its best to compare her progress with those that joined after 1997, which were mostly ex-Soviet Republics.
NOTE: The Chinese media have for two decades compared any time the US has talked about China's currency manipulation or any other issue as a pretext for imposing tariffs on China to the Plaza Accords. I am very sure people will raise it here. My criticism of this view is fourfold. First, the US targeted not just Japan, but France, Britain and the UK as well. Secondly, the causes of the Japan lost decade were due largely to internal factors. Thirdly, Japan, UK, Britain and France in the 1980s, the Yuan isn't undervalued today. Lastly, in the USTR investigation, its China's practices that are the concern, not so much the trade deficit.

REASONS FOR TRUMPS UNILATERAL APPROACH

I feel that people shouldn't dismiss Trump's unilateral approach toward China for several reasons.
  1. The multilateral approach won't work in many issues such as the trade deficit, commercial espionage and intellectual property, because US and her allies have different interest with regard to these issues. Germany and Japan and trade surpluses with China, while the US runs a deficit. In order to reach a consensus means the West has to compromise among themselves, and the end result if the type of toothless resolutions you commonly find in ASEAN regarding the SCS. Does America want to "compromise" its interest to appease a politician like Justin Trudeau? Not to mention opposition from domestic interest. TPP was opposed by both Clinton and Trump during the election.
  2. You can't launch a geopolitical front against China using a newly formed trade block like the TPP. Some of the existing TPP members are in economic groups with China, like Malaysia and Australia.
  3. China has joined a multitude of international bodies, and at least in trade, these bodies haven't changed its behavior.
  4. Dealing with China, its a no win situation whether you use a tough multilateral / unilateral approach. If the US endorse a tough unilateral approach gives the impression that the US is acting like the British during the Opium War. If you take a concerted Western approach you are accused of acting like the 8 Powers Alliance in 1900.
  5. Trump was elected to deal with China which he and his supporters believe was responsible for the loss of millions manufacturing jobs when China joined the WTO in 2001. It is estimate the US lost 6 Million jobs, about 1/4 of US manufacturing Jobs. This has been subsequently advanced by some economists. The ball got rolling when Bill Clinton decided to grant China Most Favored Nation status in 1999, just a decade after Tiananmen.
  6. China hasn't dealt with issues like IP protection, market access, subsidies to state own companies and state funded industrial spying.
To his credit, Trump has said his aim was not to overthrow authoritarian governments, and that even applies to the likes of Iran. The Arab spring scared Russia and China, because the US for a brief moment placed the spread of democracy over its security interest.

UNDERSTANDING HOW THE US MAKES DECISIONS REGARDING CHINA

At this moment, China or the trade war isn't an area of great concern for the American public, among international issues it ranks lower than international terrorism, North Korea and Iran's nuclear program.
According to the survey, 39 percent of the country views China’s growing power as a “critical threat” to Americans. That ranked it only eighth among 12 potential threats listed and placed China well behind the perceived threats from international terrorism (66 percent), North Korea’s nuclear program (59 percent) and Iran’s nuclear program (52 percent). It’s also considerably lower than when the same question was asked during the 1990s, when more than half of those polled listed China as a critical threat. That broadly tracks with a recent poll from the Pew Research Center that found concern about U.S.-China economic issues had decreased since 2012.
In looking at how US conducts relations foreign policy with China, we should look at it from the three areas of most concern - economic, national security and ideology. Each sphere has their interest groups, and sometimes groups can occupy two spheres at once. Security experts are concerned with some aspects of China's economic actions like IP theft and industrial policy (China 2025), because they are related to security. In these sphere there are your hawks and dove. And each sphere is dominated by certain interest groups. That is why US policy toward China can often appear contradictory. You have Trump want to reduce the trade deficit, but security experts advocating for restrictions on dual use technology who are buttressed by people who want export restrictions on China, as a way of getting market access.
Right now the economic concerns are most dominant, and the hawks seem to dominate. The economic hawks traditionally have been domestic manufacturing companies and economic nationalist. In reality the hawks aren't dominant, but the groups like US Companies with large investment in China and Wall Street are no longer defending China, and some have turned hawkish against China. These US companies are the main conduit in which China's lobby Congress, since China only spends 50% of what Taiwan spends lobbying Congress.
THE ANGLO SAXON WORLD AND CHINA
I don't think many Chinese even those that speak English, have a good understanding Anglo-Saxon society mindset. Anglo Saxons countries, whether US, UK, Canada, Australia, New Zealand and Ireland are commerce driven society governed by sanctity of contracts. The English great philosophical contributions to Western philosophy have primarily to do with economics and politics like Adam Smith, John Locke, David Hume and Thomas Hobbes. This contrast with the French and Germans. Politics in the UK and to a lesser extent the US, is centered around economics, while in Mainland Europe its religion. When the Americans revolted against the British Empire in 1776, the initial source of the grievances were taxes.
Outside of East Asia, the rest of the World's relationship with China was largely commercial, and for United States, being an Anglosaxon country, even more so. In Southeast Asia, Chinese aren't known for high culture, but for trade and commerce. Outside Vietnam, most of Chinese loans words in Southeast Asian languages involve either food or money. The influence is akin to Yiddish in English.
Some people point to the Mao and Nixon meeting as great strategic breakthrough and symbol of what great power politics should look like. The reality is that the Mao-Nixon meeting was an anomaly in the long history of relations with China and the West. Much of China-Western relations over the last 500 years was conducted by multitudes of nameless Chinese and Western traders. The period from 1949-1979 was the only period were strategic concerns triumphed trade, because China had little to offer except instability and revolution. Even in this period, China's attempt to spread revolution in Southeast Asia was a threat to Western investments and corporate interest in the region. During the nadir of both the Qing Dynasty and Republican period, China was still engaged in its traditional commercial role. Throughout much of history of their relations with China, the goals of Britain and the United States were primarily economic,
IMAGINE JUST 10% OF CHINA BOUGHT MY PRODUCT
From the beginning, the allure of China to Western businesses and traders has been its sheer size I. One of the points that the USTR mentions is lack of market access for US companies operating in China, while Chinese companies face much less restrictions operating in the US.
This is supported by remarks by Henry Paulson and Charlene Barshefsky. As Paulson remarked
Trade with China has hurt some American workers. And they have expressed their grievances at the ballot box.
So while many attribute this shift to the Trump Administration, I do not. What we are now seeing will likely endure for some time within the American policy establishment. China is viewed—by a growing consensus—not just as a strategic challenge to the United States but as a country whose rise has come at America’s expense. In this environment, it would be helpful if the US-China relationship had more advocates. That it does not reflects another failure:
In large part because China has been slow to open its economy since it joined the WTO, the American business community has turned from advocate to skeptic and even opponent of past US policies toward China. American business doesn’t want a tariff war but it does want a more aggressive approach from our government. How can it be that those who know China best, work there, do business there, make money there, and have advocated for productive relations in the past, are among those now arguing for more confrontation? The answer lies in the story of stalled competition policy, and the slow pace of opening, over nearly two decades. This has discouraged and fragmented the American business community. And it has reinforced the negative attitudinal shift among our political and expert classes. In short, even though many American businesses continue to prosper in China, a growing number of firms have given up hope that the playing field will ever be level. Some have accepted the Faustian bargain of maximizing today’s earnings per share while operating under restrictions that jeopardize their future competitiveness. But that doesn’t mean they’re happy about it. Nor does it mean they aren’t acutely aware of the risks — or thinking harder than ever before about how to diversify their risks away from, and beyond, China.
What is interesting about Paulson's speech is he spend only one sentence about displaced US workers, and a whole paragraph about US business operating in China. While Kissinger writes books about China, how much does he contribute to both Democrats and the Republicans during the election cycle? China is increasingly makING it more difficult for US companies operating and those exporting products to China.

CONTINUED

submitted by weilim to IntlScholars [link] [comments]

Overview of Current Market Valuations and Toyota Motors (TM)

Hello All,
Every now and then I do stock screens to see if there are any companies that would be a good value investment. Thanks to the bull market, the opportunities have been few and far between over the last year or two. However one company has consistently popped up in my screens. I initially ignored it as the company is in a sector I personally don't like to invest in due to the large capital requirements. The company is Toyota Motors (TM).
Simply put, the valuation seems too good to be true.
First off, let me show you what I am talking about. Here are the heat maps from FinViz:
Now as you can see, the general trend of the market is giving you discounts to Financials, Utilities, and Basic Materials, more specifically oil and gold.
Of those sectors, I really only like Financials as big oil has been in a downward trend over the past three years. Both Exxon and Chevron have produced less oil than the previous years and are both spending at near record high CapEx levels with no turnaround yet. I have continuously looked at both of them as I don't have any oil in my current portfolio, but haven't got myself to buy either of them.
Financials will continue to be attractive at these levels as investors still don't trust their book values since the financial crisis even though asset quality has continued to improve on a broad base. Over the next 5 years, interest rates will rise which will increase their spread which in turn increases their profitability.
For the most part, it appears healthcare, consumer goods, and services are currently overvalued.
Now, let's look at Toyota. Below is a quick multiples valuation against TM's peers. These are from Yahoo! Finance as GM isn't on FinViz for some reason.
P/E
Forward P/E
P/E/G
P/BV
As you can see, the whole sector looks cheap on a multiples basis, but of that bunch Toyota seems to win out on an overall valuation based on multiples.
Per my own investing rules, as I am a long term shareholder, I won't touch a company that has recently been bankrupt, therefore I rule out GM for any potential investments.
Now Toyota is too big of a company to do a full report on in a couple of days. However, of what little research I have done, this is what I have found.
First of all, on a macro perspective, the yen has weakened against both the US Dollar and the Chinese Yuan. Over the past two years, the Dollar and Yuan have both gained over 30% to the yen and over 10% this past year. This is a great thing for a Japanese multinational as North America and Asia is TM's second and third largest markets which combined are 46% of 2013's sales.
Because of this, profitability should be higher within Toyota which is also a reason to buy them over GM or Ford as the american automakers will lose money with a strong dollar overseas.
Over the past three years, TM has a Compound Annual Growth Rate (CAGR) of 5.12%. Last year, North America saw 32.8% sales growth and Asia saw 30.22% sales growth. This compounded with the yen weakening is a one-two punch.
Due to the strong demand in both North America and Asia, Toyota has had a surge in Consolidated Net Income for Fiscal Year 2014 of 135% in which ForEx is responsible for 123% of that growth alone. In this latest quarter, Net Revenues are up 23.9% with Net Income up 118%.
Toyota's Shareholder Presentation
Margins have increased across the board with their Gross Profit increasing from last year:
TM's Gross Profit Margin
As for a quick look at the balance sheet, Toyota has been de-leveraging over the past 5 years with Total Debt / Equity of 1.25 in 2009 to 1.16 in 2013. Book Value per Share has stayed relatively flat but grew 15.14% from 2012 to 2013. Compare that to a one year increase in share price of only 12.25% I believe we have a winner.
This is only what I have found off of a couple hours looking at this tonight and have only scratched the surface as to the information on this company.
However after just a small amount of research I firmly believe this is a truly undervalued company and should be bought right away.
References: Quick Stats pulled from TM's Annual Report
EDIT Thank you all for the replies. I should state that this is just beginning due diligence and there are several assumptions with this thesis, mainly that the Yen will stay depressed at least over the next year. This type of condition is a short term catalyst only and not a long term theme. As some have mentioned already, FX has been almost entirely behind TM's profit and there are real geopolitical risks between Japan and China.
Next week I will put together another post looking more into the actual underlying company's long term performance and management's strategic plan going forward. That way we can get a glimpse of what the company might look like in the future.
Again thank you all for the kind words and the intelligent discussion around this topic.
submitted by magesform to investing [link] [comments]

Subreddit Stats: CryptoCurrency top posts from 2016-06-07 to 2017-06-06 02:47 PDT

Period: 363.15 days
Submissions Comments
Total 999 15798
Rate (per day) 2.75 42.46
Unique Redditors 448 3925
Combined Score 39454 48727

Top Submitters' Top Submissions

  1. 5473 points, 127 submissions: CryptoCurrencyNews
    1. Russian President Vladimir Putin Discusses Using Ethereum with Vitalik Buterin (214 points, 52 comments)
    2. Suddenly Vladimir Putin Meets Vitalik Buterin, Endorses Ethereum (140 points, 16 comments)
    3. Japanese Airline Accepts Bitcoin As Cryptocurrency Fever Spreads Across the Region (139 points, 6 comments)
    4. Siacoin Value Reaches US$0.01 As Trading Volume Surpasses Ethereum (130 points, 88 comments)
    5. Coinbase Users Can Now Buy and Sell Litecoin (126 points, 44 comments)
    6. Leading Japanese ATM Manufacturer Oki Gets into Bitcoin ATM Business (111 points, 4 comments)
    7. Bitcoin to Be Accepted at 260,000 Stores in Japan by This Summer (110 points, 15 comments)
    8. Russia’s Central Bank Drafting Proposal to Classify Bitcoins as Digital Goods (109 points, 13 comments)
    9. Japan’s Bitpoint to Add Bitcoin Payments to 100,000+ Stores (105 points, 0 comments)
    10. The Japanese are Using Bitcoin More than Expected (101 points, 4 comments)
  2. 1226 points, 36 submissions: Coinosphere
    1. Bitcoin expected to become part of everyday life in the Caribbean within eighteen months as banks abandon the region (70 points, 11 comments)
    2. Marijuana now legal in eight more US States while vendors get more bitcoin options (63 points, 0 comments)
    3. Bitfinex hacked, halts trading, deposits, and withdrawals - 119,756 BTC lost so far with no insurance (61 points, 4 comments)
    4. Hacker holds San Francisco railway to ransom, demands 100 bitcoins (56 points, 8 comments)
    5. Santander says ‘Yes to bitcoin’ in Brazil (53 points, 3 comments)
    6. Ukraine to be the first government to integrate blockchain technology, targets corruption (53 points, 1 comment)
    7. 50% of all consumers would use bank alternatives, including bitcoin, as Bank irrelevance grows (50 points, 0 comments)
    8. South Korea plans national digital currency using a Blockchain (47 points, 7 comments)
    9. Hackers auction NSA cyber weapons for bitcoin (43 points, 2 comments)
    10. Seafile replaces Paypal with bitcoin after Paypal privacy shenanigans (43 points, 0 comments)
  3. 1109 points, 20 submissions: Lukovka
    1. The IRS is Due to Present its Digital Currency Strategy to Congress Next Week (152 points, 49 comments)
    2. Huobi is the First Chinese Cryptocurrency Exchange To Allow Ethereum Trading (105 points, 19 comments)
    3. Bitcoin jumps to fresh record near $1,900 amid increased political risk (103 points, 23 comments)
    4. Bitcoin Exchanges Kraken, Poloniex To Be Scrutinized For Possible Insider Trading, Manipulation (102 points, 52 comments)
    5. US National Security Advisor: Bitcoin Needs to Be Understood, Not Feared (85 points, 1 comment)
    6. The Price of Bitcoin Breached $2,000 (72 points, 8 comments)
    7. Bitcoin soars above $1,700 as market cap adds $1 billion in just 24 hours (69 points, 23 comments)
    8. Coinbase CEO Claims The Company Saw 40,000 User Registrations in one day (61 points, 11 comments)
    9. Bitcoin Isn’t Money, Rules US Judge in Money Laundering Case (53 points, 3 comments)
    10. Bitcoin Investors Switching to Other Cryptocurrencies Due to Rising Fees (50 points, 18 comments)
  4. 697 points, 5 submissions: backforwardlow
    1. Ripple was 100% premined. Stellar was 97% premined. (271 points, 163 comments)
    2. Dear noobs, if you ask for investment advice, people will tell you to invest in what they hold, even if it makes you poor. (258 points, 46 comments)
    3. Stop using Poloniex (104 points, 145 comments)
    4. Too much money is being thrown at risky unknown entities. (46 points, 83 comments)
    5. Madness - Stratris now has a higher marketcap than Dash and Monero and volume more than both combined. (18 points, 53 comments)
  5. 687 points, 8 submissions: AnythingForSuccess
    1. Shills these days...can't believe its so accurate (206 points, 18 comments)
    2. How Litecoin feels right now (136 points, 41 comments)
    3. Daily reminder to keep your wallets safe, a guy is about to get robbed of 70+ BTC (101 points, 13 comments)
    4. Bubble confirmed (93 points, 189 comments)
    5. Are we in a cryptobubble akin to dotcom bubble? (52 points, 79 comments)
    6. Daily reminder guys! (52 points, 20 comments)
    7. Thoughts on IOTA project? (28 points, 17 comments)
    8. Is there some detailed rebuttal to these worrying Ethereum issues? (19 points, 26 comments)
  6. 679 points, 20 submissions: helmsk
    1. Bitcoin Transactions Declared VAT-Exempt in Norway (86 points, 3 comments)
    2. Countdown: Bitcoin Will Be a Legal Method of Payment in Japan in Two Months (85 points, 2 comments)
    3. Zeronet Wants to Replace the Dark Web by Marrying Bitcoin to Bittorrent Over Tor (46 points, 3 comments)
    4. New Image Hosting Service Pays Thousands of Uploaders in Bitcoin (45 points, 4 comments)
    5. Central Bank of Nigeria Says ‘We Can’t Stop Bitcoin’ (43 points, 6 comments)
    6. Coinbase Exits as Hawaii Requires Bitcoin Companies to Hold Fiat Reserves (40 points, 7 comments)
    7. Europe Lays Out Roadmap to Restrict Payments in Cash and Cryptocurrencies (35 points, 1 comment)
    8. Polish Bitcoin Adoption Escalating with Strong Ecosystem (32 points, 1 comment)
    9. One of These 5 Hyperinflating Economies Could Adopt Bitcoin in 2017 (31 points, 6 comments)
    10. A Look At Bitcoin Bubbles, When Will the Next One Be? (25 points, 7 comments)
  7. 653 points, 24 submissions: e-ok
    1. Europe Will Have Power to Ban Blockchain Tech in January 2018 (54 points, 20 comments)
    2. Italy's Largest Taxi Fleet Accepts Bitcoin (44 points, 2 comments)
    3. Bitcoin Projects on Github Surpass 10,000 (41 points, 3 comments)
    4. Bitcoin Symbol Left Out of Unicode's Latest Version (41 points, 4 comments)
    5. Malta's Prime Minister Says Europe Should Become the Bitcoin Continent (37 points, 3 comments)
    6. SEC Rejects Rule Change for Bitcoin ETF (32 points, 0 comments)
    7. Bitcoin Price Poised for a Breakout, Technical Analysis Shows (29 points, 5 comments)
    8. ECB to EU: Tighter Regulations, Less Anonymity on Digital Currencies (29 points, 8 comments)
    9. China's Constant Bubbles Drive Investors to Bitcoin in Droves (27 points, 0 comments)
    10. Yuan Heading for Big Drop -€“ What China's Outflows Mean for Bitcoin (26 points, 1 comment)
  8. 632 points, 15 submissions: -bnc
    1. Japan's largest Forex market opens Bitcoin exchanges to overwhelming demand (170 points, 1 comment)
    2. EU Parliament states Virtual Currencies cannot be anonymous (68 points, 26 comments)
    3. Wells Fargo sued for suspending Bitfinex wire transfers (68 points, 2 comments)
    4. ShapeShift launches trustless asset portfolio platform, Prism (54 points, 18 comments)
    5. Coinify and Countr partnership brings Bitcoin payments to 3,000 merchants (43 points, 2 comments)
    6. Civic launches decentralized identity solution for all occasions (35 points, 3 comments)
    7. UASF - Bitcoin's emergency plan to enact SegWit (29 points, 4 comments)
    8. Lightning Network XCTx adoption ushers in a new era of cryptocurrency functionality (25 points, 1 comment)
    9. Brazil pilots Bitcoin solution for real estate registration (24 points, 4 comments)
    10. 21 launches Lists, for bitcoin powered ‘microconsulting’ (21 points, 1 comment)
  9. 619 points, 1 submission: throwaway23613
    1. I Just Became a Crypto Millionaire (619 points, 242 comments)
  10. 609 points, 9 submissions: TommyEconomics
    1. Cryptocurrency passes $100B in total market cap! (169 points, 13 comments)
    2. Bitcoin just dropped below 50% dominance for the first time ever. (138 points, 78 comments)
    3. Bitcoin dominance now at 59.7%, below 60% for the first time ever. (68 points, 25 comments)
    4. Altcoin market cap passes $10B for first time. (60 points, 35 comments)
    5. Total cryptocurrency market cap now exceeds $20B for the first time! (59 points, 8 comments)
    6. Cryptocurrency market cap passes $70B alongside Bitcoin passing $2000 (31 points, 3 comments)
    7. Search traffic for "Cryptocurrency" hits all-time high! (30 points, 0 comments)
    8. We just hit a $40 billion market cap for cryptocurrency, congrats everyone! (30 points, 15 comments)
    9. Made a video that explains Monero, and on the current market situation. Check it out and let me know what you think! (24 points, 5 comments)

Top Commenters

  1. CryptoInvestor (527 points, 49 comments)
  2. trancephorm (494 points, 135 comments)
  3. nugymmer (347 points, 157 comments)
  4. Metasaurus_Rex (297 points, 23 comments)
  5. undystains (257 points, 28 comments)
  6. backforwardlow (250 points, 57 comments)
  7. algar32 (237 points, 68 comments)
  8. Rxef3RxeX92QCNZ (225 points, 75 comments)
  9. xmr_lucifer (225 points, 39 comments)
  10. ohiomoonchild (222 points, 67 comments)
  11. CryptoMaximalist (202 points, 36 comments)
  12. KalpaX (201 points, 68 comments)
  13. antiprosynthesis (183 points, 70 comments)
  14. peacheswithpeaches (178 points, 26 comments)
  15. c_reddit_m (173 points, 80 comments)
  16. NateOnTheNet (172 points, 51 comments)
  17. disignore (168 points, 22 comments)
  18. Justtryme90 (164 points, 45 comments)
  19. kap_fallback (163 points, 23 comments)
  20. thedesertlynx (155 points, 62 comments)
  21. Darius510 (153 points, 49 comments)
  22. We_are_all_satoshi (153 points, 33 comments)
  23. _moto (151 points, 21 comments)
  24. MR_CHNYD (150 points, 55 comments)
  25. DeepSpace9er (148 points, 26 comments)

Top Submissions

  1. I Just Became a Crypto Millionaire by throwaway23613 (619 points, 242 comments)
  2. Cryptocurrency website starterpack by Luit03 (451 points, 31 comments)
  3. I believe we are safe now. by proce55or (443 points, 35 comments)
  4. The Tokes Platform releases 4/20 Newsletter outlining new developments: products, mobile app, and more... #420Blazetheblockchain by Cryptnition (308 points, 3 comments)
  5. MONERO EXPLAINED by cryptoKL (292 points, 71 comments)
  6. Visualization of Cryptocurrency Correlations by SNAP_Longterm (280 points, 49 comments)
  7. Ripple was 100% premined. Stellar was 97% premined. by backforwardlow (271 points, 163 comments)
  8. CryptoMarkets right now by sneaky_soy_sauce (270 points, 16 comments)
  9. A warning - I am about to buy by kriegsfuehrung (264 points, 62 comments)
  10. Dear noobs, if you ask for investment advice, people will tell you to invest in what they hold, even if it makes you poor. by backforwardlow (258 points, 46 comments)

Top Comments

  1. 211 points: Metasaurus_Rex's comment in $10K to invest - What to do?
  2. 132 points: disignore's comment in Cryptocurrency website starterpack
  3. 121 points: illSeeMyselfOutNowOk's comment in A warning - I am about to buy
  4. 107 points: undystains's comment in Ripple was 100% premined. Stellar was 97% premined.
  5. 103 points: imonlyherefortheeths's comment in Since I got into cryptocurrencies a week ago, that's my crypto app folder on iPhone - am I missing something?
  6. 97 points: madhattared's comment in I hate to be this guy but... we are in a huge bubble, hear me out
  7. 92 points: CharlieBaumhauser's comment in Ripple is a scam
  8. 87 points: kongclassic's comment in What are your alt coin trading strategies?
  9. 73 points: CryptoInvestor's comment in What is your cryptocurrency you follow and why?
  10. 73 points: CryptoInvestor's comment in Thoughts in general on $SC - Siacoin?
Generated with BBoe's Subreddit Stats (Donate)
submitted by subreddit_stats to subreddit_stats [link] [comments]

USD CNH Forex Analysis this week ❤️ XTrade Europe Forex News The State of the Chinese Yuan Why is China suddenly devaluing the yuan? Forex 101: Forex Report, 8.11.15 China Devalues Yuan Chinese Yuan (CNY) & US Dollar (USD) Currency Chinese Currency - Yuan USD/CNY Price Forecast – Verging On Major Breakout

Chinese Yuan/U.S. Dollar forex price quote with latest real-time prices, charts, financials, latest news, technical analysis and opinions. Online Forex Trading with Yuan; CNY vs other currencies; Pictures of Yuan . Common names for CNY. The Chinese yuan (plural kuai) or renminbi (RMB) meaning ‘people’s currency’. It uses the symbol ¥. Countries with CNY. The People’s Republic of China, apart from Hong Kong or Macau. The CNY might sometimes be accepted in these two administrative regions, but they have their own currency ... What yen/yuan means. Symbol ¥ is a currency (money) sign called by Japanese "yen" (JPY) and by Chinese "yuan" (CNY which you can see on picture). The symbol resembles a Latin letter Y with a double stroke. The base unit of both currencies shared the same Chinese character pronounced yuán in Mandarin Chinese and en in Standard Japanese. In Forex, the symbol of the Chinese yuan is CNY, with CN referring to the People's Republic of China, and Y to the Yuan. CNY Chinese currency and CNH Chinese currency. What is the difference between CNY currency and CNH currency? The Chinese RMB currency is traded onshore and offshore, with capital controls preventing the Chinese currency from going offshore. With this in mind, the Chinese ... The symbol used for the Yuan is ¥, and there are three Forex codes connected with this currency: RMB, CNY and CNH (which refers to the offshore tradable currency). The Chinese Yuan is used across the People’s Republic of China but not in Macau or Hong Kong (although it is sometimes accepted in these two regions), and it is not accepted as legal tender in Taiwan. There are several other ... Hey friends hope you are well and welcome to the new update from the forex market. The Chinese Yuan has completed the bullish setup and ready to move up against US Dollar. In today's article we will watch the different chart patterns and indicators that are giving signals for the bullish movement of an Chinese Yuan. A big falling wedge: On long term monthly... 9. 1. Chinese Yuan Is Going To ... CNY: In currencies, this is the abbreviation for the China Yuan Renminbi.

[index] [13685] [12202] [16538] [22711] [17933] [13251] [26079] [2273] [29426] [22809]

USD CNH Forex Analysis this week ❤️

Sign in to make your opinion count. ... #yuan #forex #tradewar We provide fast and flexible access to over 16,000 financial markets – including indices, shares, forex and commodities – through ... http://forexwinners.ru/forex/xtrade-e... XTrade Europe Forex News The State of the Chinese Yuan. The Chinese Yuan symbol is ¥. What is the Chinese currency ISO code? The ISO code for Chinese currency is CNY. What are the frequently used notes in China? The Chinese currency notes consist of ... The U.S. dollar is in the midst of a two-stage breakout relative to its long-term performance against the Chinese yuan. The greenback began its major advance in the early parts of 2014, and these ... The presentation for Chinese Yuan & US Dollar currency, imports and exports in China, and recent economic news in Global Business Management class. Present @Aj. Philip Y. Freiberg. This is a quick supply and demand Forex analysis update for the Chinese currency pair, USDCNH Chinese Yuan offshore. In our last update, we were expecting this Forex cross pair to retrace to a ... Coach Matt brings a special edition of the Forex Report in the wake of the decision by the Chinese to devalue the YUAN by 2%. This was done in part due to the Chinese exporting, the SDR inclusion ...

http://binary-optiontrade.vestlittcont.tk