Like what you've read?

On Line Opinion is the only Australian site where you get all sides of the story. We don't
charge, but we need your support. Here�s how you can help.

  • Advertise

    We have a monthly audience of 70,000 and advertising packages from $200 a month.

  • Volunteer

    We always need commissioning editors and sub-editors.

  • Contribute

    Got something to say? Submit an essay.


 The National Forum   Donate   Your Account   On Line Opinion   Forum   Blogs   Polling   About   
On Line Opinion logo ON LINE OPINION - Australia's e-journal of social and political debate

Subscribe!
Subscribe





On Line Opinion is a not-for-profit publication and relies on the generosity of its sponsors, editors and contributors. If you would like to help, contact us.
___________

Syndicate
RSS/XML


RSS 2.0

China versus the US: it is serious

By Chris Lewis - posted Wednesday, 13 October 2010


Sure, the US Congressional Budget Office projects that debt could rise above 90 per cent of GDP by 2020 on present trends, but who is to say that the US will not make important policy reforms.

While major policy reforms are being avoided as Western societies cling to a misguided hope that more and more economic stimulus will save the day, a continued adherence to freer trade - in line with recent trends - will merely ensure the demise of the US along with many other Western nations.

It is one thing to argue that economic reform is needed in Western nations, often with some negative domestic consequences. It is another thing to ask Westerners to accept a tougher standard of living while Communist China or other authoritarian nations rise at their expense.

Advertisement

While much of the developed world confronts debt, China continues its spending spree with its vast reserve of US dollars. Although argued that China is merely seeking to guarantee energy supplies given that its consumption far outstrips its domestic supplies, China’s state-owned Sinopec recently clinched a deal ($US7 billion) with Spain’s Repsol to buy 40 per cent of its Brazilian business, thus giving it access to Repsol Brasil’s estimated reserves of 1.2 billion barrels of oil and gas.

There is also ongoing concern about China’s involvement in politically unstable countries, despite China winning such contracts by building vital new infrastructure (including hospitals, ports, and road and rail links). While difficult to prove, China is accused of “paying multimillion-dollar backhanders in return for African leaders repudiating Taiwan at the UN”.

Sure, Western nations benefit from cheap Chinese imports which helps limit inflation and interest rates, but public opinion will carry the most weight in regards to urging a policy mix that better balances domestic production and consumption. This is despite more than half of China’s exports in 2007 being produced by multinational companies, either alone or in joint ventures with Chinese partners, including about 85 per cent of high-tech exports.

Already, the US House of Representatives has passed legislation (vote 348-79) intended to counter China’s currency controls. While the bill (subject to Senate approval) does not impose automatic penalties, it expands the definition of improper subsidies to include currency manipulation to gain a trade advantage.

Some 181 House members also wrote to Obama urging him to take steps to blunt China’s “predatory” actions to gain “unfair advantage” in environmentally friendly “green” technology, and to increase government resources to deal with Beijing’s “increasingly sophisticated unfair trade practices”.

Such action and sentiment is likely to fuel further protectionist tendencies with the US and China already imposing antidumping duties in recent months on chicken, steel, nylon and tyres.

Advertisement

While a trade war between China and the US would have an immense impact on global trade and economic activity, this would mean that other measures will need to be adopted to boost domestic activity and address budget deficits as the world makes its transition from such a high dependence on China’s exports. Because the West’s reliance upon debt cannot go on forever, this may include both major taxation and social welfare reform.

Should such events unfold, this would mark the third wave of reform for Western nations since World War II. The first period (prior to the 1980s) marked the promotion of freer trade, albeit that many nations relied on import-substitution to develop domestic manufacturing (including Australia). The second period resulted in Western nations allowing manufacturing to decline in terms of employment with the importance of services increasing, aided by an unsustainable level of debt (including some dubious practices which culminated in the global financial crisis). The third period, if it emerges, may see a greater combination of the first two trends to achieve a more appropriate policy mix as populations of many democracies demand measures to better balance production and consumption.

Powerful and influential Western nations (led by the US) have important normative reasons not to accept their demise. As the former Chinese national Helen Wang argues, the US “remains the country standing for the universal ideals that people around the world aspire to - liberty and democracy”. Unlike Americans who have a clear message for the world, the Chinese do not have a vision for themselves, let alone to influence the world. I have talked to Chinese officials, scholars, business people and students. None of them see China as a superpower. In contrast, many of them look up to the United States as a model and admire the “American way of life”.

  1. Pages:
  2. 1
  3. Page 2
  4. 3
  5. All


Discuss in our Forums

See what other readers are saying about this article!

Click here to read & post comments.

51 posts so far.

Share this:
reddit this reddit thisbookmark with del.icio.us Del.icio.usdigg thisseed newsvineSeed NewsvineStumbleUpon StumbleUponsubmit to propellerkwoff it

About the Author

Chris Lewis, who completed a First Class Honours degree and PhD (Commonwealth scholarship) at Monash University, has an interest in all economic, social and environmental issues, but believes that the struggle for the ‘right’ policy mix remains an elusive goal in such a complex and competitive world.

Other articles by this Author

All articles by Chris Lewis

Creative Commons LicenseThis work is licensed under a Creative Commons License.

Article Tools
Comment 51 comments
Print Printable version
Subscribe Subscribe
Email Email a friend
Advertisement

About Us Search Discuss Feedback Legals Privacy