The Trump transition team recently announced the appointment of Peter Navarro to a newly created post as the head of newly created National Trade Council.
Apparently this appointment will not require a Senate hearing and confirmation. Thus a lightweight could be rewarded for his loyalty and not risk embarrassing the new administration.
On the other hand, Trump could be seriously considering Navarro as his point person in trade negotiations with China. Either way, the possible involvement of Navarro on the most important bilateral relations of the world deserves serious analysis.
At one time, Navarro tried his hand at politics and ran for US Congress, mayor and city council. Each time he came up empty—a many-time loser.
Then he became a lame pundit who concentrated his vitriol on China mixed with questionable reasoning in economics.
As one indicator, Navarro chose Gordon G. Chang to write the forward to his recent book on China’s militarism. Chang was the pundit who predicted the collapse of China in 2001, only to see China’s economy double and then double again.
Navarro came to Chang’s rescue by blaming the Clinton Administration for letting China into the WTO and thus supposedly prevented Chang’s forecast of doom from coming true.
Then Navarro expressed his unreserved admiration for Harry Wu because Wu was a willing talking head in Navarro’s video interviews. Since his death, Wu’s sordid past of lying, stealing other people’s money and cheating on his wife have come to light.
Until Trump’s appointment, that’s the kind of company Navarro kept.
Apparently, he came to Trump’s attention when he said 4-5% GDP growth is possible under Trump’s administration, even while imposing import duties on goods made in China. If that’s really so, the economic growth would have to be increasing at better than twice the historic rate associated with a good year.
The simple but erroneous idea is that import tariff will protect jobs in the domestic market. It simply doesn’t work that way. It’s unbecoming for a Harvard PhD economist, like Navarro, to say so.
Ronald Reagan tried to protect America’s auto industry
A fairly recent example that comes to mind was when Reagan wanted to protect the American auto industry by imposing an import duty on cars made in Japan. The idea was to give the US carmakers breathing space to become more competitive.
Instead of taking advantage of the import barrier to work on their competitiveness, the US car companies simply took advantage of the new prices for imported Japanese cars by raising their own sticker price. It was only after the Japanese makers transferred their plants into the US—and thus avoided the import duty—that the American companies began the serious task of having to compete.
In effect, the import duty “protected” by allowing the American companies to remain inefficient. Only after the Japanese carmakers built their plants in the US that the American companies had to trim their workforce to compete. And by the way, the workforce that went to work for the Japanese carmakers were non-union and got lower pay.
Imposing import duty across the board on goods made in China would be wrong-headed and even more disastrous than asking the American consumer to pay more for their cars.
Most of the consumer goods made in China such as apparel, shoes, toys, and hardware haven’t been made in America in decades. There are no domestic industries to protect and the import tax would just add the daily cost of living for every American.
American companies did not establish plants in China just for low cost labor but also to serve a growing local market there. The personal computer is an illustrative example.
The PC used to be assembled in Taiwan and then the Taiwanese companies moved to the mainland because of the significant savings in labor. Economic pressures forced their component suppliers to follow them. Component suppliers for the PC came from Japan, Korea, Taiwan as well as the US.
Intel combined its China and US manufacturing to stay competitive
One of the US suppliers was Intel. They first set up an integrated circuit assembly and test plant in Chengdu to perform the final manufacturing steps on the microprocessors made in the US. The finished ICs were then shipped to the PC makers all over China.
Gradually as China became a major consumer of PCs, Intel expanded their operations in China, not only at Chengdu but also added a semiconductor fab operations in Dalian.
However, even today Intel continues to make 75% of their semiconductor chips in their US operations even as 75% of their market is outside of the US.
Intel’s total US manufacturing payroll is much higher than its payroll for their Chengdu operation, even though the number of workers employed in Chengdu is “orders of magnitude” bigger than the number engaged in the US—according to my source inside Intel.
The explanation is that the US manufacturing steps are technology intensive and highly automated. Not many workers are required but each has to be highly trained and very well paid. The Chengdu operations involving test and packaging require many workers, but each does not have to be highly technical nor highly paid.
Taking advantage of the comparative advantage (that’s jargon from Econ 101) of each place gives Intel the means to maintain their technical dominance over their competition. This is nothing to do with currency manipulation, just simple economics.
Most of the American companies that set up operations in China may have the low cost labor in mind initially but subsequently justified added investments because China had become a huge market in its own right.
In some cases, China did impose import duty on foreign made products and thus encouraged the American companies to operate inside China—just as Reagan’s import duty encourage Japan’s auto makers to move into the US.
In the end, the local investment benefited the foreign investor, but also China’s economy with a more skilled workforce. The same could apply in the reverse, i.e., as regards to China’s investments coming into the US.
Chinese companies are looking to invest in the US to be closer to the major markets here. They certainly wouldn’t be looking for lower cost of labor but would be paying higher salary for more technically demanding jobs. This could only benefit the local economy in the US.
Xenophobia and stupidity should not discourage these investments just because they are from China.
Navarro makes no bones about demonizing China in everything he has said, but is he really compatible with Donald Trump’s real personal interests?
Last month, a video of Trump’s granddaughter Arabella Kushner reciting a poem in Chinese won the hearts of millions of Chinese. This suggests that Trump’s daughter, Ivanka, and her husband, Jared Kushner, understand the importance of learning Chinese for their 5-year old daughter’s future. Surely they have more influence on Ivanka’s father than Navarro?
Sheldon Adelson has been one of Trump’s major supporters. His billions of net worth is tied to majority ownership of Las Vegas Sands and more than 60% of revenue and profits of the company is derived from Macau. He could hardly be pleased if Trump were to deliberately raise the tension between the US and China.
China exercises its international influence far differently from the American way of relying on military alliances. Close to 100 countries have China as their largest trading partner. Among them, some 60 plus are also members of the Asian Infrastructure Investment Bank or are recipients of AIIB investments. Their relationship with China is based on common economic interests.
The Trump Administration should also consider the merits of developing a bilateral relations based on shared economic interest.
Bilateral basis for common economic interest
Consider for example the economic benefits of tourism from China to the US Last year, less than 3% of China’s total outbound tourists came to the US and they spent over US$30 billion. That was the first full year when the Chinese were granted 10-year, multi-entry visas to visit the US.
The future impact of Chinese tourists on the American economy will continue to grow exponentially, provided of course that the US and China are not engaged in some mano a mano test of military armament.
There are over 330,000 Chinese students studying in the US in the academic year just past. According to the Department of Commerce, these students contributed US$11.4 billion to help prop up the finances of the US universities as well as the local economy.
Not to be overlooked another benefit of these students is that as much as 75% of the graduates would prefer to stay and work in the US if the US would permit.
China produces many more times graduates in science, technology, engineering and mathematics than the US can produce. They are just the talent pool American companies desperately need to keep their plants operating and not having to move them offshore.
Trump has to understand that America is losing jobs to automation and technological advances and not to China. Someday, for example, Uber is going to rely of self-drive cars and all the drivers will have to find another job. Amazon will use drones to deliver their packages and UPS will have to either operate the drones or else find some other line of work.
Encouraging the employment of Chinese graduates will buy Trump time to figure out how to save high paying jobs that will stay ahead of the technology evolution. America’s future lies in generating highly qualified and skilled workers and not in bringing back low paying jobs from overseas.
Thus, we hope that Trump will have the wisdom to look for the win-win approach with China. To promote Navarro’s line of military confrontation and restart the nuclear race can only lead to a lose-lose outcome and such outcomes would be devastating beyond imagination.
Art Laramee
As for Central Asia nations, I Google it, I don’t see anything of the sort, I do see China using its business skill to negotiate for business contract for its own favor…. WITHOUT USING ARMY OR GUNS OR REGIME CHANGE TO ACHEIVE THEM. I cannot say the same for Iraq, Afghanistan, Panama etc…
As for Chinese business investment, I understand why you think as you did, that the Chinese people are weak, they are not capable to opening new business in US, they are only capable of buying up existing business… lol… this is so wrong on many levels, I’m not going into it. But I don’t blame you for think like if this is all you see in the media.
Because when Chinese based company open up a new business in US, it will never get reported, but when China buys a US company…. oh yeah… big headlines "COMMUNIST CHINESE TRYING TO TAKE OVER USA" what a joke. There are plenty of Chinese based company trying to make money by selling to the biggest consumer nation on earth… opening up company in USA to produce Made in USA label products. But you never hear them, because it does not fit the media narrative.
And you do know, there is plenty of US business buying up Chinese own business and opening company in China as well, but you don’t see the same sensationalist tone on how US is trying to steal Chinese company…
Art Laramee Yes, Art, very good, I see I may have soften your view somewhat on China. And I do agree with you that both US and China’s action is main to serve their own nation’s interest… as IT SHOULD BE. And I think this world is big enough for China to secure its own interest without directly harm US’s interest… simply because US has classified its own interest way more unnecessary than it should be… when was the last time you hearing China advocate Latin American refugee human rights or black American human rights? in contrast, when was the last time you hear about US complain about China’s human right? China’s human right has nothing to do with US interest, but US do make it its own interest for some reason. Same with Tibet, Hong Kong, Taiwan, South China sea to a less extend etc…. when was the last time you hear China complain about US’s trade sanction on Cuba? China don’t do it, because China’s don’t justify US’s action in its own neighborhood as China’s interest… but everything Chain do its own land/neighborhood is somehow US’s interest LOL. And when China ignore US say and does it anyway in its own neighborhood and US can’t do any tying to respond, it will only diminish US credibility and make it look weak.
Its funny you put up example of Argentina, which make me assume you do know some history of that nation, Argentina at one point was just as vibrant as US during its early days, it was receiving new population from Europe only 2nd to US in the 1800s, but political corruption and bad policy making slowly make it of what it today.
You don’t have to worry about US, US is by far, the most lucky nation on earth for its geography, it border 2 oceans on each side with weak nations on north and south of it, it has vast resources and usable lands with relatively few people, it has a modern manufacturing base as well as great economic innovation and unmatched culture influence for decades to come. (China is trying to do the same thing as it should be for China)
All of this is achieve by the past generation of US wise leaderships, even though US has made many tactical and strategic mistakes in recent decades, but the strong foundation that has been set by earlier generation will secure US’s advantage for at least 20 years for global hegemony, and 100 years of regional hegemony.
The key for US’s future does not lie with China or Russia, it lies from within its own strength, because if you are strong from inside, you will be strong from outside, if you are weak on the inside, you will not be able to keep up with your power projection and eventually collapse from inside and outside.. aka USSA
Sun Tzu said "To secure ourselves against defeat lies in our own hands, but the opportunity of defeating the enemy is provided by the enemy himself. "
You need to have more confidence in US’s own ability at home than what Chinese is doing aboard.
As for Catholic Church… again you really really need to read up about the church’s history in China. The Holy See is NOT new to China at all, there has been exchanges between the Vatican and China dated all the way back to the Yuan dynastic (1000s AD). Catholic church have tired many times to convert Chinese into Christians without much success, but it was only relatively successful during China’s weakness in the late Qing dynasty in the late 1800s. And how should I put it…. the interaction between Catholic church and Chinese people… were not peaceful, the members of Catholic churches helped the spread of imperialism (Yes Europe was very close to capture China like they did with India at one point), helped smuggle opium, helped to force China to sign unequal treaty which give them extra right, its ideology even indirectly started a civil war which killed 20-30 million Chinese… let’s put it that way… the church was not a positive influence China in the early days. That is why China is worried about them trying the same crap all over again, I personally think it’s not necessary, because the Christianity today is downright pacifist compare to the spread of Islam. But from the past records, China does have the right to worry about outsider trying to spread its influence in China again without China’s control again, and if you were a Chinese and you know the history of the church, you would be even MORE concerned about this than the Chinese leadership… I’m judging by your concern on Chinese investment in US.
In the last 20 years, most countries support free trade. The concept of free trade was agreed between China and USA, and it hided the fundamental difference between China(poor) and USA(Rich).
USA and China thought they could work together with fair competition rules which were accepted by both (WTO). When USA had very strong economy power compared to China, such fair competion rules were not important enough to break the cooperation. But now, the status is changed. China and its companies have enough power to challenge USA. USA and its companies do not have absolute decision power anymore. Under this situation, fair competion rules become critical.
USA product is expensive, because their companies need to fullfill kinds of laws such as enviroment, minium salary etc.. However, China companies do not need or they have ways to escape these rules….
I cannot see any chance for cooperation between China and USA under Trump’s administration because fair competion rules are too difficult to implemented in China and USA. It is time to decide which country will win the world: USA or China.
John Brown As for China investment in the US, I diod not say it is harmful. I don’t know if it is harmful. It is a case that they are buying jobs not creating them. Don’t know what the multinationals are doing with all the money they get from China like GE, so don’t know how to evaluate. I am not a historian or an economist, just a consumer of news, but I read RT Asia Times and other non-American based web sites, so not just western sources. I read for example today that China won’t allow Catholics tyo have a connection with Pope. In other words. Catholics not allowed to be Catholics. Chinese are not saints. So neither are we and we need to keepoure eyes on the priorities, jobs in manufacturing.
John Brown I find your arguments minus rthe sarcasm persuasive enough to do more reading. If you check my wording you will not find I think China is evil. But I do think China is intending to diminish the US in an economic war and I contend we will be like Argentina if we don’t respond and protect ourselves.
There are many sources for the story on Tajhikistan and Turkmenistan for that matter. Just google oil china turkmenistan tajikhistan and land. Read away.
The free trade policies was created by the U.S.! Now, they are calling foul when things goes against them.
The Chinese labourers are like modern slaves working hard to save up, only to find out that most of their savings ends up buying U.S. treasuries and other Western governments bonds so Westerners enjoy consumption without useful labour!
Now, China is experiencing capital flight to the tune of $1 trillion per annum. With out of control debt build-up and liquid assets leaving the country simultanously, how is China going to have the equity to back up its liabilities when you see overvaluation occurring in the property market.
Art Laramee
part 2 of reply
4. Taiwan, you do know that Taiwan is part of unfinished Chinese civil war right? You do know that the 2 side is officially still at conflict with each other right? And you do know that no nation on earth is treating a civil war situation as peacefully as China and Taiwan, when the balance of force is extremely 1 sided right? China have given much economic concessions towards Taiwan when it can simply decide to solve it by force, but the reality that they are not, again… says much more.
5. Trading with Tajikistan, I call bull, give me your sources that China DEMAND land from Tajikistan? Please don’t be like Trump, you can’t just make stuff up. And no, sources from Info Wars and Newsmax don’t count.
6. You didn’t mention the all time favorite "Mao killed 100 million Chinese" But I will address it anyway, yes, Mao killed about 20-40 million Chinese, and he was a horrible leader, but he did bring the end of a century of chaos and civil war in China, and lay the foundation for a unified political China, and the fact that China is what its today, means in the end, Mao LOST, the person made China possible is Deng Xiaoping, and Mao hated Deng, Deng was purged 3 times by Mao. But luckily, when Mao died, there was a coup, and Deng took over, and Deng pretty much turn over all of Mao’s policy. This shows today’s China is not the same as Mao’s China. Again, you will not believe me, but I stand by every word I typed, do research for yourself, instead of let other people think for you. You do have a brain, please use it.
China is no saint, but its action last 100-200 years towards other nations is whole lot better compare to US’s action towards other nations. And I do agree with you on Trump, he is a media man, but that does not mean he have what it takes to govern.
And lastly, I still call bull on your assessment that China’s investment in US is harmful, China is behind US in technology, but they are not as behind as you think, Chinese doing business in US is the same reason US doing business in China… MAKING MONEY. Oh and what a shocker … Smithfield food processing business…. come with some lands… I mean who would have imagined that agriculture and livestock needs lands to survive…. those evil Chinese am i rite? Why can’t they grow food and raise livestock on no land? What’s next? AMC theater company owned by China uses precious American electricity? Ok enough with the sarcasm. By your logic… if Chinese company open business in US is bad for US… does that mean US company open business in China is bad for China? Obvious you think not, because in your previous comment, you said US has done much to help build up China with their businesses… so why its good for China when US open business in China, and bad for US when China open business in US? Racism?
Art Laramee
I did cast your China’s intent as evil, because you said "China’s quest for world dominance towards any other country and God help those in its way"
But if that is not what you meant, no harm done.
And yes China’s intent is good for China, just like US’s intent is good for US, BUT it does not mean China’s intent is good for China and bad for everyone else, you think like Trump, AKA, I must win and you must lose, there can be only one winner. Why not both US and China benefits?
And you are right, my defense of China is NOT what your understanding of their history, because with all due respect, all of your view on China is from the Western media, where China can only be evil and nothing else. But I do encourage you to learn more about it… not just reading the "free media". And I’m going to refute what you said point by point.
1. The so call Tibet Genocide is a nothing but pure anti China PR. First of all, Tibet is not as independent as you have been brainwash, simple Google history of Tibet, you can see Tibet and China has a long interconnected history together all the way back 700AD, at various dynasty of China it was under direct or indirect influence for more than a thousand years., from historical point of view, China has more rights to Tibet than US has the rights to California or Texas or Hawaii. And NO, China have NOT forced Tibet Chinese marriage, and NO, China has not killed off all of the Tibetans, if you look at Tibet’s population, Tibetan has increased by couple million since 1949, their life expectance, their overall well being is dramatically increased… if you call this "genocide" this must be the most failed genocide in the history of human race. Even now, minorities in China like Tibetans enjoys affirmative action, where they can get in schools with MUCH LOWER scores than Han Chinese, they also are not effected by the 2 decade long 1 child policy. If you look at the minority population inside China, their number has increased a lot more than Han population. I DARE YOU TO LOOK IT UP
And do you even know what is the story of Dollar Lama my friend? Before China took over, Dali Lama belong to the elite of the elite aka 0.01% of the population, where he and his lieutenant enjoy a life of luxury, while 99% of population was worse off than slaves. People caught stealing food punishment was routinely cut off hands, legs, blinded etc…. it was closest to hell on earth as possible. LOOK IT UP. The elite monks would have flocks of little boys and use them as sex slaves. And guess what happen when after communist won civil war and went to Tibet? That’s right, they ended their life styles, Dali Lama actually stayed in Tibet when China took over, he only flee later on after a few years with his elite followers. The ones who enjoyed the good life, almost no ordinary people went with him.
Now lets compare the US’s treatment towards its own native Americans. Since US took over their lands, what was the treatment towards them??? Point made!!!!!
2. South China sea, there are trillion dollars of trade good going through it each year… and guess what? VAST MAJORITY OF THOSE SHIPPMENTS ARE FROM CHINA AND TO CHINA, so why would China cut off its own trade? Isn’t it more likely that China is doing this to SECURE its own trade line to fight back against potential US blockade?
Also please help me name once… just once that China have harmed commerce travels in the South China sea??? Out of trillions of dollars of trade, out of thousands of commercial ships moving through South China sea just one example of China disrupting trade, please sir, I’m begging you to find me just ONE example!!!!!
3. Hong Kong, do you even know the littlest of HK history? You do know that HK was taken by threat/force from China by the British Empire right? When communist took over in 1949, they can literally walk over and take over HK within 24 hours at literally any day/hours from 1949-1997, but they didn’t they leave HK alone, and only took it back in 1997 when the imposed 99 year British lease expired, and after that, China have the FULL RIGHT to fully incorporate HK into its own society/government, but they didn’t, they give HK more rights than any other Chinese city, you complain and moan about HK protest about Chain, but the fact that China is allowing HK to protest says more than anything else. Now… let’s look at some other examples shall we? When US sign treaty with the Native American and promise them rights…. but soon discover resources on those lands… what happen to the Native Americans??? POINT MADE.
Sorry Cal, my answer was flip because I tuned out when I misremembered who has sold out and who hasn’t. I agree with you, the multinationals are the ones behind our trade problems and the hollowness of our manufacturing capacities. But we walked into this with open eyes diswcussing moving from an industrial economy to a service economy. Just didn’t anticipate the turn of events. Now we have to adjust our trajectory to avoid Argentina future.
Cal Lii yeah, sorry about that. Fingers got in front of brain on that one.
John Brown Sorry if you perceive I cast China’s intent as evil. That is not my view.
China’s intent is good for China and a benefit to the rest of Eurasia as China was a beneficiary to American outreach under Nixon and beyond. But China’s goal is not good for the USA so we must defend ourselves. That doesn’t mean we must defeat China, just we must do what we can to prevent the ultimate outcome of China’s intentions.
Again, I am not saying China is wrong, just saying it’s not good for us. Several people here have viewed me through their own defensive bias and misjudged my comments by adding their view of my motivation.
Your defense of China is not my understanding of their history. Far as I can tell, China killed millions of its pown citizens under Mao Tse Tung. They invaded Tibet and forced marriages between Tibetans and Chinese nearly completely destroying the Tibetan blood lines. They have moved to dominate the South China Sea where much of the world commerce travels, they took back Hong Kong rather than allow it to continue it’s productive life under lease and they claim Formosa/Taiwan with threats.
In trading with Tajikistan, they demanded future committmitment of oil and land in exchange for development funds to upgrade their economy.
China is no saint, but to be fair, no country has claim to that title.
All Trump is doing is focusing on trade with China and Mexico where the diosparity is eggregious. He uses simple phrases to catch people’s attention, especially the media which is poorly informed and not very bright.
You are wrong about China. They are not creating thousands of jobs save the new glass making operations. They are buying thousands of jobs. This gives them access to the technology and expertise to learn and transfer back to China. I could type a large paragraph on actuals to prove my point. Smithfield foods is an example where they also bought 100,000 acres of arable land along with the nation’s largest pork producfing operation.
Art Laramee If you mean Walmart isn’t American in the sense of having America’s best interests in mind, you would be correct. But then there would be *no* American companies.
Walmart is owned by Americans, controlled by Americans, and headquartered in America.
I must admit, a lot of what you said is correct, however your final conclusion is false, because you association of China’s motivation as evil and US motivation as good is wrong and biased.
To be totally fair, no nation’s currency should be reserve currency of the world, this is a unfair advantage, you can literally print money and other people have to accept it, from a Chinese perspective, this is unfair, what what if they want to use their own currency to do trade with other nations?
And yes you are right about China’s today is achieve with much help from US, but you are wrong about the motives, US didn’t help China to build up their economy by the goodness of their heart, they wanted to exploit cheap Chinese labor and take advantage of lazy Chinese environment laws, this already have done much harm to China. The only difference in the end is that China got smart, they didn’t waste the money they earned from doing business with US, they used the profit to re-invest in their own education, infrastructure, technology, and now they are moving up the value chain and challenging US in its own game.
And NO, China is trying NOT to dominate the world when compare to US, not even close, look at how many oversea military bases US have vs how many China have. Look at how many regime change/coup/civil war have China done in the past 200 years vs US have done? Tell me when was last time China trying to spread Communism or Confucianism or Buddhism to other nations? vs US spreading "freedom and democracy" to other nations? China has no ideology or force other to believe in its own ideology, this cannot be said for USA.
And yes you are correct that US does need to invest in its own manufacturing and I hope they do it. I hope Trump can do something about it, but the way he is going at it, may not be the best method. All nation need to have a manufacturing base, at least for national security point of view. Both US and China.
And lastly, you are FLAT wrong about Chinese investment in US is no benefit to US citizen, they are opening thousands of factory/businesses employing tens of thousands of US citizens, bring jobs and income to much needed place, just like when US opened factory in China in the 80s 90s and provided much employment to Chinese people.
Overall your are a lot smarter than the typical yahoo commentators, but you still suffer from ethnocentrism.
Zheng He Certainly I am making money or I’m already elsewhere. One person makes money does not negate the rigged national trade policy. One of the most dubius China custom imposed on reimportation for service (rework for product failure). If products made in China exports and found to be defected and need send back to China for rework. It would require several weeks to apply and pay for rework contract to send the to factory to fix their problem in the first place and the quantity must match or tariff/penalty will apply. That China policy designs for only 1 purpose to prevent anything to import back to China, even their own products.
Michael Do 20 years in China? If you were not making money you wouldn’t hang around for too long let alone for 2 decades that defies logic.
George Koo exactly! Most impressive and too bad it has as an unnecessary aim, the destruction of the international dollar because we will have to do something to defend.
Michael Do Thanks for this useful information.
Erik Wu’s feet of clay was first reported in NYT and Wash Post. If you can access Google where you are, you can find the stories easy.
Art Laramee No apology necessary. The process takes a long time. Iran’s application is still pending, but when all of them are in the fold, SCO will go from China, Central Asia, South Asia, Iran in Middle East and Russia in the north. Pakistan and India are hardly buddies but shared economic interests outweigh all.
Art Laramee I deal with China for 20 years in manufacturing. There is no such thing is free trade with China. China puts all road blocks all the time to import anything into China. China has tariff on anything imported and if it is not enough then it put up the regulation to kill it. China is a master of trade manipulation at an epic level. 45% tariff might not be enough for China since they will just devaluate currency more to match it. Do you know that China has 15-22% tariff on PCB imported while China makes 90% of PCB worldwide herself? I can make the list as long as China Great Wall. China plays the zero sum game. In order for China to win, everyone else must lose. China never plays win-win games with anyone. Wonder why China has a big trade deficit with??? Japan. Who is the master of the trade game and support directly by Japanese government. Japan never has any illusion about China and Japan wins.