Slashdot Mirror
China Probes US Renewable Energy Policy
PolygamousRanchKid writes "China's Commerce Ministry on Friday announced an investigation into U.S. government policy and subsidy support for renewable energy, after a U.S. decision earlier this month to probe sales of Chinese-made solar panels in the United States. 'The Ministry of Commerce has decided to initiate a trade barrier investigation into policy support and subsidies for the U.S. renewable energy sector,' a statement on the ministry's website (www.mofcom.gov.cn) said. The announcement said Chinese companies argued that the U.S. policies 'constitute a trade barrier against the export of Chinese renewable energy products to the United States.'"
how about a probe of china currency rigging?
I swear to God...I swear to God! That is NOT how you treat your human!
I see China is mastering the art of He said, she said.
Back in the day, the US would (correctly) accuse China of something and it would go unanswered, so everyone would assume it was true:
US: "China's doing bad things."
China: (silence)
Populace: "Yeah, I guess it's true."
Now, in the 21st century, it goes like this:
US: "China's doing bad things."
China: "The US is doing bad things."
Populace: "Well, both sides are accusing each other. I guess they're both equally bad. The truth lies somewhere in the middle, right?"
China: (Laughs maniacally, thinks "This is the best way to do public relations. We don't even have to change anything.")
Reminds me of how China would constantly get hit with human-rights abuses accusations, then they started writing up biased reports against everyone else. "See, everyone else in the world is just as bad!"
Those whole issue of subsidies and trade with China are moot. Chinese currency policy already has a far greater impact on trade than any tariff or subsidy. China likes to claim that they don't manipulate their currency to gain an advantage but that is bold faced lie. European empires played currency games with each other for centuries and Japan/South Korea did the same in the 70s and 80s, we know exactly what it looks like.
Countries suppress the value of their currency to aid exports. The result is a massive trade imbalance, huge currency reserves, and lots of inflation. Now these things can happen without currency manipulation for a short while. But when the effect is massive and long lasting its a pretty good indication of government intervention.
Harley was nearly shuttered due to bad management and an image which the mass market didn't want to be associated with. They would never be able to compete on price with Honda or Suzuki. Their saving grace was a genious marketing manager who turned the "biker gang" image into a "weekend warrior" image.
Their financial problems started long before cheaper bikes being imported.
Harley was nearly shuttered because of their engineering and managerial incompetence. Congress's solution made the problem worse: they instituted an enormous tariff on any motorcycle with more than 700cc of engine displacement. This just meant that the Japanese manufacturers subsequently figured out how to wring absurdly large amounts of horsepower from small-displacement engines, while Harley continued to sit around with their thumbs up their asses. Today, any of the big four Japanese makes produce a bike with a 600cc engine that produces over a hundred horsepower, whereas a 1200cc Harley engine struggles to break 45hp. So the Japanese companies sell all kinds of bikes to every market all over the world while Harley sells gaudy, incompetent cruisers to an increasingly aging market of American fanboys.
US protectionism = patriotism
Foreign country protectionism = communism
That's a drastic oversimplification of the thing, from what I've read, so much so that it's hardly a fact. The loan was neither approved nor approved of during the Bush administration.
Yes, the loan program that Solyndra was approved under was started during the Bush administration. Yes, Solyndra was selected as a possible loanee during the Bush administration. No, the loan was not approved during the Bush administration. The loan went up for review before Obama took office and was denied. (Note that that doesn't mean the Bush administration was necessarily opposed to the loan.) During the Obama administration it was revived and revised. It was pushed forward more quickly than some were comfortable with, with groundbreaking ceremonies being planned and scheduled while review of the loan was still pending. Communications show the worry that officials had that the groundbreaking would be leaked just before the OMB might recommend against the loan.
I'm not trying to take a side either way here, just fill in some details. Maybe it will help prevent the "partisan pissing content" and flamewars you seem to want to provoke.
I vote based on politicians' actions, unless contrary to my preconceptions. Often wrong, never uncertain. #iamthe99%
LOL.
When we do it it's protecting our industry, when the rest of the world does it, suddenly "OMG unfair trade barriers!".
Won't somebody please think of the free market?
Just let the dollar depreciate to a fair value (meaning: a lot) and the US industry will be competitive in no time. You would have to pay a lot more for your oil and Chinese consumer products though. When all the other countries have artificially depressed currencies, you should start to wonder about yourself. You know, just as you should when all the other jerks are driving on the wrong side of the road.
So in the list of people involved with the loans:
* homeowner
* mortgage company employee
* loan approval officer
* mortgage security trader
* investor
* ratings company employee
you want to blame, for the collapse of our economy, the one person who has no financial training nor any responsibility beyond their one tiny loan? That's taking "blame the victim" to new levels.
There are lots of books which try to explain all the problems leading up to the recession; I recommend "All the Devils Are Here". Please read one or more before you try to blame the crisis on any one group or on any simple cause. It took lots of effort by many many people who knew better to cause it.
I don't remember rebates or subsidies from the government on computers for consumers. The industry was initially funded largely by the government with defense and other agencies purchases, but never any subsidies. The government did not make computers cheap or efficient or powerful, consumer demand did.
"Defense and other agencies purchases" is a subsidy! More than that, though, just because you don't remember doesn't mean it didn't happen: NASA, DARPA and the military built the computer industry as part of the massive funding binges that were the space race and the Cold War push for intelligence gathering (spy satellites, code breaking, etc). It took decades before the 1980s made the personal computer profitable from a consumer standpoint; before that it was all--or almost all--government supported "purchases" ie. subsidies.
Now we're in a fight for the future with China, and instead of investing in technology we're spending a NASA-sized piece of the budget on air-conditioning in Iraq and Afghanistan, and lambasting Solyndra because it was left to fend for itself against a Chinese trade war machine. You think China isn't already thinking this way? Look at rare earth metals; China spent a decade killing the market by subsidizing their mines, and now that they have a monopoly they're using it to extract concessions from Japan by "restricting" exports.
Politicians bleat about "not wanting to start a trade war." Start one? We're in one; we're just losing!