tv Cross Talk RT June 14, 2019 10:30am-11:00am EDT
in the tech sector and this is really what it's more about it's who's going to dominate and that's why it's taking so hard to get an agreement and it's that's why it's so politically important more so for trump because he's up for reelection but of course the chinese leadership has to come through for the chinese people because well they've been on a pretty good roll for the last 30 years they want to keep it going go ahead heather that is that is very true i think it's important to stay where we are in the tariff negotiations the u.s. has imposed thus far 25 percent and $200000000000.00 worth of goods coming from china and that was recently increased from only 10 percent now china has also retaliated anywhere between 5 and 20 percent tariff on $110000000000.00 worth of u.s. goods i think it's also important to remember that we buy we meaning the u.s. a lot more goods from china than they do from us so i have some point in time china will run out of terrorists to retaliate on and i and so they may resort to other
measures of retaliation outside of tariffs same question to you michael in forest hills here i mean it really is about a paradigm shift one power not wanting that shift to occur and another one feels that it's finally reached its place on the global stage i mean the this is these are piers they are genuinely piers now economically but it's something the u.s. has never had to confront go ahead michael well that doesn't stop you needed. were economic surrender it was china and russia and other countries all could be dependent on united states information technology. dollar and finance. in their culture so that these countries do something america doesn't like it can impose sanctions on them that will hold whole apart all of the connections of their economy no other economy is going to go along. yes and china and any other
economy is going to say we'd better be independent from any ability of the united states to suddenly disrupt their activity by imposing sanctions so we're going to have our own arrangements for food for oil or mation technology so the but what was doing is. china together with other countries to make turn to ways to in effect trump is imposing sanctions on the united states well it's very interesting because john i mean what i want hang on let me go to john and then we could make it a free for all john made you know what you know with the kind of relationship that is occurring during the so-called trade war here i mean doesn't this give initiative to for the chinese to actually innovate even more if they're going to be cut off from these technologies and these products and these consumers then they can do it on their own end and in some ways it seems like a kind of a wise move because he does have to swallow the bitter pill now and you'll be much
better later so i mean i gan i mean kind of echoing what michael is saying right here is that in a sense here by targeting specific companies they're actually spurring innovation in china itself go ahead john. well i guess you're talking about targeting while this is actually very true so far in china in the u.s. being you know working where well in terms of economic integration this you know post-race going on is also very large operation here in china representing something like 402500 1000000000 dollars of interest here so that the success of global value chain that meaning global very chim production across the pacific has been credible to successful but so far you know the chinese status of learned that this is in danger now why always a prime example of that this motto is you know you can have blind faith is the motto and this actually drives copper china further into self innovation self indigenous being self-reliant so i think this is
a. very dangerous sign coming out that the global very choose stories in is in shambles right now and also want to get a point. to where there's just said it's chu that the united states maintains a very large trade deficit with china some point china's going to run off goes to put on taro some but porn is there 40 percent of the chinese exports to nana's things actually so she was corporate america operating here in china and that means that a lot of these types of hitting products that actually imported about american companies into u.s. and altimeter all paid by by american consumers you know the studies out there are pointing out that the average burden for american family is going to be somewhere between 700 dollars to 1000 dollars so sooner or later people going to realize this you know the prices at wal-mart at amazon dot com is going up and the average american working families up footing the bill for this so it's actually not in the
americas interest to you know just protests and this is not just one way street i mean the exports coming from china to the u.s. they are all a socialist. the benefits of quitting to copper america and you know the good. american families and the people of this ok how do you want to jump in there go ahead a lot's been said. yeah i mean yeah i guess i'll be the one person to push back but i'm on with 2 professors and i and i am not a professor so i will be cautious all raise my hand in the administration in the us i know that this also hurts us it wal-mart has said prices are going to have to go up and it also hurts china perhaps even more than the us and as a free market capitalist i mean i don't necessarily like the idea of tariffs or want to impose tariffs but i do understand the us the administration u.s. trade teams position that china has been stealing our intellectual property for
many years and has forced joint ventures if you want to do business with china in beijing where you are john i think you have to transfer you form a joint venture and you transfer all of your trade secrets to them and then they can use that data or they are using that have their data. join or they're just a company but if it's a joint venture how targeting you know if it's a joint venture how's that. well that's good because china is not supposed to be able to give our trade secrets to their domestic companies that's putting our u.s. domestic manufacturers added disadvantage and that's what we're targeting that well we want to have business which we ask people to do during their life i mean basically fair and yeah but they still do the joint ventures why because their profits to be made i mean we've known this for a very long time michael you were disagreeing jump in technology is universal there is no such thing as a trade secret that's like saying that china shouldn't grow its own mood because we grow up grow our food. when they're talking about trade secrets you're talking
about monopoly pricing in the united states once they have other countries china and others dependent on us. patent rights and monopolies just like the pharmaceutical companies that charge an enormous braces for growth that's not a pretty secret when when a company by a late. normal free trade in us now which is a monopoly every other country has the right to produce it cos if some other country tries to exploit them by selling it in an exploitative rent grabbing price over and above us ok well john i know you're going what is it like knowledge of good job good job one is the technology theft in the so-called theft of intellectual property so we're the 1st one to make the point that no country can make any progress significant progress on the technology of phones by just stating and and technology transfer coercion them self's corporate china has to be
innovating and they have been climbing the technology lead us no doubt about it and also i'm not going to defend it or snow you know that it's an actual property theft in china that's when it happens but a point is that i think the united states was talking about a state sponsored theft of intellectual property so i mean as a distinction here i'm not sure that's true i mean if you look at the u.s. t.r. right robert the 2nd 3 all report. he talks about theft of intellectual property rights he doesn't distinguish between you know it's individual companies or government sponsored a theft seems a very important distinction here i don't think there's a very solid evidence to support the idea that the chinese government is engaging the state sponsored saft systematic comprehensive set of corporate america's intellectual properties i don't think that's true there was a spot to the technology transfer again i want to make this again i mean the finish has a good enough to we have to make a distinction between the government and individual companies when individual company tossed american companies about for me and joint venture in china of course
the chinese side who said look you know what can you offer on the table is there any technology transfer you can you can offer us in exchange for something we are on the table and if you call that force technology transfer i'm not sure that's really forced i mean this is a well that is that that's going on that's why you go issue here and that's why i said these companies willingly go into these joint ventures here had to finish out the 1st block of the program to groups like those who are against one maybe 3 against one go ahead 40 seconds have the report we go to break again fly i'm sorry i just think again no no no problem this is fine it's not my position it's the president trump in the u.s. t.r.s. position and not just a republican or democratic issue when there has been democratically important us from from the past president obama for example has filed 16 cases of what the world trade organization about chinese the chinese stealing our intellectual property as well as dumping goods like aluminum and steel on u.s.
soil in those most of those i think have been resolved but bernie sanders also saying that they have destroyed millions of u.s. american jobs a bill clinton in recently chuck schumer here in d.c. saying playing tough heather and ahead of them going on china has gotten not just a robot like i'm very good at letting go of the united states really nice little money to hang on john but the chinese didn't steal any to. obs it was american corporations that did it it wasn't china ok or i'm going to just ignore that they are going to going away are going to go to our shores we're going to show our grain and after that short break we'll continue our discussion on trying to trade more say with our team. looking. ok.
the weapon once missed and then what happened on 3 swung at the observations didn't hit him i never saw any contact with. any kind of went back to where they were so the officers back here there try again 15 feet apart at this point and that's when the officer is gone and he did it on 3. actually as a national survival stacey let's learn. let's say. your police response they have to fight street thank you for. the story that's right.
welcome back to cross talk we're all things considered i'm peter about oh man you were discussing straight war. ok let me go back to what i call in forest hills look i am for the president getting a good trade deal with china or whatever that deal is then we have to talk about its nuts and bolts but i do support the american national interest i'm reaching out to have the right here ok i'm just trying to kind of peel back some of the kind of propaganda that we hear in the mainstream media now i mean you know michael you know him currency manipulation what was quantitative easing ok i mean there are different terms for it ok but you know i mean i always pointing at china my why you know i'll be all be i'll be very. controversial here. michael with a lot of people are just jealous of china's enormous success i mean it is it is the
one of the most amazing economic miracles in such a short amount of time when i was a young man you know china you when you open up like a you know an atlas and you know the f.b.i. fact book you know like china which is not there to be the most populous country in the world that nobody ever really talked about it except for its commie danced now we have to talk about it a lot. and i've been to china it is a remarkable place to see now. a huge middle class i mean it's extraordinary i think you know these people are not really well informed what china is really all about except for it's the new adversary which is so boring go ahead michael well china has succeeded and gotten rich by following the same policy that america followed in the 19th century they get rich it has a mixed economy and it uses the public sector to subsidize the basic needs transportation education health to provide these really so that employers do not
have to pay workers a high enough price so that they can afford high priced housing like americans high priced health care the americans cannot acknowledge china is succeeding with a mixed economy which it calls socialist but then you'd have to call the american economy socialist we have the government subsidizing the ip sector of the military sector subsidizing agriculture china is doing exactly what the united states does and the united states can't understand china because it would have to acknowledge that it itself is a mixed economy and that is an anathema to the free enterprise academics john is and i want to focus on that one question your mom about to ask john i want to ask heather and michael later is there a win win scenario as we go into this because the even though the terminology we use trade war is it someone has to win or lose i mean it's it's such a black and white issue the way it's portrayed in the media and i find that that is
very dangerous because if it's a war someone has to win of course you don't want to lose and it could spread into other areas geopolitics in the military and which of course none of us want that to go happen so you know is a win win possible here because of the rhetoric coming out of the american media and the administration they make it sound like you know this is a an existential threat maybe it will be one day but certainly not now go ahead john. well the chinese scum has been very careful of using this world war i mean the trade war up until the collapse of 11th which is which was about a month ago when vice premier little hook came to washington d.c. and in a negotiation for appox up to up to that point the chinese come in the press in china most of them you know national media is actually controlled by the government we have never used a war war to categorize what's going on between states and china we always were
talking about your trade friction but now i've seen official mention of this world war so i think the chinese government's position has changed it a bit realizing that you know they can't just keep make concessions or concessions some point they have the there's a line they have to join us and we know more any more in. recently just a few days ago a ministry of commerce issued a white paper lay out 3 conditions very clearly a force that if we're going to reach a deal or have to go back to you know before july last year when the tassel impose order additional have to be gone that's the 1st condition the 2nd issue is that. commitment china scum and has is going to make doing this train a go she has to be reasonable and and the moderates you know words there's a reach between present she and present championing the summit meeting argentina in november that china is committed to buy
a soda months and seems the. the trade deficit some u.s. keeps worsening since last november the american side has made additional amount of demand that we have to increase imports from u.s. china's going to say this has to be more the 3rd thing is that the force the macas of digital things from regarding any legislative timetable on the chinese spot china's government thinks that's infringe upon their busy infringement upon china sovereignty so these are the 3 issues that. you know i have to be resolved and the mother opinion the disagreement is not so much respect to the substance of the americas concern for china structural issues or even the trade deficit among i think. even this amount that the loan issue right now is god being forced to match because of it or was the enforcement mechanism doesn't have to be going through the legislative avenues they don't have to they have to the canning for him to function
is some of the and that's the bottom line that's going to was that's a very subtle things that the china's going to have very good point how they're i mean and it was one of the questions that i sent out to all of you here i mean the united states the mending structural changes and how china does business in its own country i mean that is a bit of a reach isn't it i mean it shows a lot of disrespect. to the dominant and submissive country again that's not going to work now i mean like it or not as much as the american media doesn't understand it china and the united states are roughly peers now ok and you have to start treating it as one go ahead heather well they should be piers i hope so and i don't want to trade war i mean i don't think anyone in the administration wants a trade war but it is our right to point out i think we'd all be in agreement that asking china to change things their structural policies for example their state owned enterprises. is maybe reaching too far like you said i think it's
a threat to their international independence and then seen as an infringement on their sovereignty as john rightly point pointed out but the fact is if we are dealing with things that have gone on for decades sense bill clinton helped china to the world trade organization in 2001 of stealing intellectual property theft and force joint ventures even though the americans want to do business with china where the 2 largest economies in the world of course the americans want to do business with china we just don't want china to steal. well billions and billions of stuff from from americans and reckless i was betting that this is really americans eat the west end we started directing you ever asked started this program you know when talking about this grand paradigm shift and that's really what's going on here i i i'm kind of it a miss you know going to michael and in forest hills the i mean it's not about intellectual property is there intellectual property theft i suppose there is ok but that's not the the game changer in all of this i think that it's thrown out
there it's red meat for the media to show that america is a victim ok america's not a victim in all this that they think that you kind of trade agreements they've had with countries around the world since the 2nd world war it's all their own fault i do agree that donald trump is doing some really good things and far as straight is concerned and he has to do more but he has to has he has to realize he's not dealing with mexico here he's dealing with china go ahead michael well that is a trade war is really in this case a war of economic system the united states once trying to do what russia did under yeltsin to our turn over its industry to let american financial institutions come in and really take ownership of chinese economic development so the question is what kind of a planned economy are you going to you know america has a centralized planned economy planned by waltz through china has a planned economy planned by politicians now who do you want to plan your economy american banks in their own interest in the financial sector which is creating debt
or do you want a non financial life plan that he's not an actual industry actual labor actually raising the living standards instead so underneath that what they call a parade war is as war of economic systems and a war will the world be multinational multilateral or will it be unilateral that really what it is and what i think you as the go has economy go ahead other you know the u.s. economy as far. are often china i mean in my opinion we have unemployment at the lowest levels in 50 years 3.6 percent wages are rising g.d.p. above 3 percent 7000000 job openings i don't think it's the same in china right now they have declining exports declining g.d.p. in 2018 the lowest in 28 years and the i.m.f. is actually downgrading china's forecasted growth so actually if you want anything on the merry go there's a shift in terms of those are nationalism verse from every. angle on everybody hold
your breath everybody hold your breath there we go john jump in go ahead john. your stats are wrong china's g.d.p. is 6.4 percent last quarter that's double the united states and if you grow some of china's exports and i'm going to go laying off data all gone not last may the the stats just came out last the dismay policy made exports close by 7.7 percent which do not have stayed. there for the last come but was there trying to get it had hoped. tear the exports was european union with c.n. that's the south asian southeast asian countries they're going by more than 10 percent so overall you know there's going to be some difficulties i admitted that i mean this this trade or is having. causing problems here in china and if someone can company ogg will be a lot of china publicly moved to vienna philippines malaysia those companies doing that but let me tell you even if we. think about the worst and now if we do right
of china's exports united states that's only representing something between $1.00 to $1.00 but 2 percent of china's g.d.p. so it's something that china scum as we can pair with and then would have to bear with if we go down in a very dangerous path so you know some point if i may not going to keep make concessions again and ok to be ok john i made. you want to hang on i want to go to heather heather 30 seconds because it was rather lopsided here go ahead heather. well i just i think we had $150.00 page agreement or a draft of a proposed agreement which we did between the u.s. and china last month. u.s. treasury secretary said that it was a great agreement i think the vice premier and president xi in china were also very optimistic that a good deal could be reached but somehow overnight the u.s. trade team saying that china read negara
a lot of the aspects the core issues like currency manipulation force joint venture is an intellectual property and those were not up for negotiation on the u.s. side now i don't know if that's true or not because china is pushing back saying that we were asking them to change what you michael and john pointed out and fringing on their sovereign and they're here they're struggling are being downright mean stuff for us to be talking about but on different episode of graustark many thanks to my guest in washington forest hills and thanks to our viewers for watching us here darkie see you next time to remember. we are in strange situation where everybody is making a lot of noise about military action against iran but nobody in the part of that
alliance actually wants to do it there's no desire for it so do you hope that iran makes a mistake. somehow and then does it some kind of confrontation and then the iranians will be forced to come to the table you know begging for some kind of solution on american terms but you know i think that is dreaming that's a pipe dream. so you say that brings this to the end of the series if we could just let josie marino walk away and say we decided to treat a stone post to a very special farewell party. we walked along and interesting path of the day but this time to go back to the punchline and thanks for putting on so secret body. with a red carpet the only thing that i didn't enjoy was my then sing.
eat for each. meeting. to lead you to the wrong room yes. one of them wanted something you didn't want it and you believe that anybody should. be on the local solutions to. your own work or one lose your means leave your speech yesterday look at your bullshit a little eve lucas and shoot. the theory was that. you know it is much more of.
a u.k. court rules wiki leaks co-founder julian a song will not face his u.s. extradition hearing until next year if convicted in america he could face up to 175 years in prison. also this hour the crew of one of the oil tankers damage them a suspected attack and the gulf of oman say they were hit by a flying projectile apparently contradicting u.s. claims that it planted a mine on the bus all around has hit back at the american allegation accusing the u.s. of resorting to sabotage diplomacy. and tech giants are ques of silencing speech they don't like that after you tube removed a video by a project. on the way social media.