Courtesy of Jan-Martin Feddersen of immobilienblasen
First the US and now China ( the country with the biggest surplusses ) …… Just what the doctor ordered…… Now combine this with the following chart ( for more more "depressing" charts see A Tale of Two Depressions ) and we all can only hope that this kind of "cancer" isn´t spreading…. But i have some serious doubts…..
Nachdem die USA ja bereits trotz einmal mehr großer Worte von Obama die "Buy American" Klausel in Ihrem Konjunkturpaket haben festschreiben lassen kommt jetzt der nächste Tiefschlag…… Wenn die Weltkonjunktur eines nicht gebrauchen kann dann ist es eine Ausuferung des Protektionismus. Das jetzt ausgerechnet China ( das Land mit den größten Handelsüberschüssen ) genau in diese Richtung marschiert ist mehr als bedenklich und läßt einem bei dem nachfolgenden Chart ( mehr depressive Charts via A Tale of Two Depressions ) noch pessimistischer in die Zukunft blicken…….
China has introduced an explicit “Buy Chinese” policy as part of its economic stimulus programme in a move that will amplify tensions with trade partners and increase the likelihood of protectionism around the world.
In an edict released jointly by nine government departments, Beijing said government procurement must use only Chinese products or services unless they were not available within the country or could not be bought on reasonable commercial or legal terms.
The government also said it was launching an investigation in response to complaints from domestic industry associations which accuse local governments of favouring foreign suppliers in procurement related to the country’s Rmb4,000bn ($585bn, €421bn, £356bn) economic stimulus package.
Just a few months ago Beijing was raging against a proposed “Buy American” clause included in the US economic rescue package.
“Some countries raised clauses to prioritise the purchase of products of their own countries in their economic stimulus packages,” Yao Jian, a Chinese commerce ministry spokesman, told reporters in February. “We express deep concern about these [measures] … under the current financial crisis, measures issued by all countries should not cause negative impacts, and especially they should not send out wrong messages.”
Most economists agree China’s economy is starting to recover as a result of its aggressive stimulus package but the country is still struggling with unemployment and fears widespread layoffs could lead to serious social unrest.
The edict was issued jointly by the legislative office of the State Council,China’s cabinet, the national development and reform commission (the country’s powerful state planning agency) and the ministries of industry and information, supervision, housing, transport, railways, water resources and commerce.
The new edict bans local governments and departments from discriminating against domestic suppliers in their procurement. Foreign companies operating in China argue that the opposite is in fact true and that they have been largely cut out of procurement related to the government’s stimulus package.
> More evidence via Michael Pettis that the potential for trade conflicts are rising……
> Hier ein anderes Beispiel das verdeutlich das sich Risiko von Handelskonflikten sich merklich erhöht hat…..
Trade tensions are not improving. Last week I had dinner with a very senior China manager at a large German company and he told me expected anti-dumping suits to surge in the first quarter of next year. As if to beat him to the punch yesterday’s Financial Times came up with this story (“China accused of predatory pricing practices”)
“We are puzzled by this discussion, especially since most European companies operating in China are locally incorporated and have not benefited directly from the government’s stimulus package,” said Joerg Wuttke, president of the European Union Chamber of Commerce in China.
“Requiring government procurement to favour Chinese goods and services certainly won’t help to address China’s trade surplus of €170bn.”
UPDATE: Ambrose Evans-Pritchard
China risks trade suicide Beijing is playing with fire by issuing a `Buy China’ edict for its stimulus package.
Beijing risks making the same catastrophic error as the US Congress when it passed the US Smoot-Hawley Tariff Act in 1930. America was then the rising surplus power, like China today. It was the chief beneficiary of an open global system.
By imposing tariffs, Washington triggered massive retaliation. While nobody escaped the Great Depression that ensued, the effects were unequal. The US suffered a far steeper decline in output than the rest of the world. Britain muddled through relatively well in a trade bloc behind Imperial Preference.
China’s action is extremely disturbing. It confirms what we have long feared, that the Chinese government is sufficiently worried about rising unemployment to adopt suicidal measures. Nor does this episode instill confidence in the `China recovery story’.