(no title)
robinsoncrusue | 1 month ago
Sure, Mark Carney gave his little speech in Davos. The same Mark Carney, that led Brookfield while its finance arms operating out of US.
But realistically, how is opening up to China more even considered as the alternative? When has any deal with China worked at a strategic advantage for the other side? Is not the whole reason the so called globalization project failed was because players like China did not play by the same rule or did not even have to play by the same rule? What gives they will when you open up the market more to them? All it takes is for them to take your product, copy it and sell it 20x cheaper and flood the market everywhere else.
benrutter|1 month ago
Whenever I've heard people speculate on the US bond market losing its footing, the suggestion isn't that "Japan will be the new US" (eg) - it's that investor will spread assets across multiple places (US, Japan, EU, etc) to hedge against risk, rather than just the US.
tick_tock_tick|1 month ago
fcantournet|1 month ago
izacus|1 month ago
jfyi|1 month ago
We also need to seriously adjust our line of thinking at what they are capable of. The "copycat" era is ending. Our supply chains have hammered their youth with generations of engineering knowledge. If you are relying on an ideological difference to assume they are not capable of innovation, you are making a strategic mistake.
plaidfuji|1 month ago
The question is whether China offers long-term stability for external investment. Should US retirement portfolios load up on Chinese equities?
ajross|1 month ago
I don't know what that means? Market crashes are changes in speculative value, they don't care about counting literal amounts of currency. Selling US securities doesn't require that the resulting "liquidity" move anywhere else, just that the owner prefers to see a cash balance to a stock certificate or whatever.
Basically this point seems like a big "confused money with value" mistake.
neilwilson|1 month ago
For every seller there has to be a buyer.
drgo|1 month ago
saguntum|1 month ago
robinsoncrusue|1 month ago
TacticalCoder|1 month ago
[deleted]
throwawayqqq11|1 month ago
nl|1 month ago
Australia did well out of the Australian-China free trade agreement and then won the subsequent (Australian-caused) trade war.
Turns out being able to produce iron ore cheaper than anyone else and having plenty of alternate buyers when China bans imports means the iron ore price just goes up, Australian miners make more money and Chinese manufacturers get annoyed at Chinese trade policies.
Wasn't awesome for Australian lobster fishers though.
dgellow|1 month ago
No chance. Unless that happens after a lots of other countries leave
Hikikomori|1 month ago