The G7 Picks Up The Gauntlet. - Politics Forum.org | PoFo

Wandering the information superhighway, he came upon the last refuge of civilization, PoFo, the only forum on the internet ...

Talk about what you've seen in the news today.

Moderator: PoFo Today's News Mods

#15176733
The G7 has, it appears, entered into serious talks of cooperation in countering China's 'Belt and Road' programs in less-developed nations. China, it appears, has used these programs to obtain generous concessions from nations unable to meet their economic commitments to China.

Should the G7 actually come up with a program and pony up the needed funds, it will be interesting to see how they go about securing their investments. Some of the countries which might be involved as recipients have highly developed 'economic infrastructures' which capture unguarded funds and transfer them to Swiss banks and other hidey-holes.

Regards, stay safe 'n well.

Ref: https://www.theguardian.com/world/2021/ ... initiative
#15176738
G7 has become irrelevant over time. None of economies of these countries are based on production and exporting. Private sectors shrink in almost all these ecountries. Government spending reached historical up levels. Even export oriented ones like Germany shows no real growth over a decade.

My advice to these stupid countries stop saying unreal things like "countering China". Instead you should beg China for a better relations.
#15176909
Image

Presidents Cyril Ramaphosa of South Africa and Moon Jae-In from South Korea, together with Australian Prime Minister Scott Morrison, joined the G7 leaders. The Group of Seven (G7) is now more diverse with the participation of Asian and African leaders. However, the presence of South Korea made the Japanese prime minister uncomfortable and he refused to hold a priministeral meeting with his South Korean counterpart, citing a military drill planned on a Korean islet, which is also claimed by Japan. Biden's anti-China agenda was watered down by France and Germany because of their close economic relations with China. After Trump, it is not easy to push an American agenda. Suga's Olympic initiative was received well by G7 leaders, who reiterated their support for the holding of the Olympic and Paralympic Games Tokyo 2020 in a safe and secure manner as a symbol of global unity in overcoming COVID-19.
#15176913
In addition, the U.S. Congress has passed on a bipartisan basis a bill aimed at countering China's R & D efforts in the economic and military sphere. One can read about it here:

Tony Romm of the Washington Post wrote:The Senate voted on Tuesday to adopt an approximately $250 billion bill to counter China’s growing economic and military prowess, hoping that major investments in science — and fresh punishments targeting Beijing — might give the United States a lasting edge.

In a chamber often racked by partisan division, Democrats and Republicans found rare accord over the sprawling measure, known as the United States Innovation and Competition Act, as lawmakers warned that Washington risked ceding the country’s technological leadership to one of its foremost geopolitical adversaries.

The proposal commits billions of dollars in federal funds across a wide array of research areas. It pours more than $50 billion in immediate funding into U.S. businesses that manufacture the sort of ultrasmall, in-demand computer chips that power consumer and military devices, which many companies source from China. And it paves the way for the next generation of space exploration at a time when Washington and Beijing are increasingly setting their eyes on the stars.

With it, lawmakers also approved a host of proposals that seek to limit China’s economic aspirations and curb its political influence. The bill opens the door for new sanctions targeting Beijing over its human rights practices, commissions a new study about the origin of the coronavirus and calls for a diplomatic boycott of the upcoming 2022 Winter Olympics. It even authorizes $300 million specifically to counter the political influence of the Chinese Communist Party.

“I have watched China take advantage of us in ways legal and illegal over the years,” Senate Majority Leader Charles E. Schumer (D-N.Y.), the lead author of the bill, said during an interview before its passage. “The number one thing China was doing to take advantage of us … was investing heavily in research and science. And if we didn’t do something about it, they would become the number one economy in the world.”

The bill still must be adopted by the House, where some Democrats have raised early concerns with the Senate’s approach. Its passage comes on the same day the White House organized a new task force to address potential disruptions in the U.S. supply chain, seeking to further boost U.S. manufacturing of key medicines and technology at a time when many of those products and materials are made in countries including China.

For some experts, the burst of activity invoked the specter of the Cold War, when the United States spent once-unfathomable sums to counter the growing reach of the Soviet Union. Decades later, some lawmakers have shied away from the same comparison with Beijing, even as they authorized massive investments to better position U.S. businesses against their Chinese counterparts.

“This is not about a zero-sum relationship or resurrecting a Cold War mentality,” Democratic Sen. Robert Menendez (N.J.), the chairman of the Senate Foreign Relations Committee, said in a speech earlier in the debate.

The Senate’s effort also marks an evolution from the economic confrontations between the United States and China under President Donald Trump. During the last administration, the White House waged a trade war against Beijing, imposing massive tariffs in a tit-for-tat that analysts say caused deep damage to some parts of the U.S. economy. Democrats led by President Biden have tried to dial back Trump’s approach and rhetoric, even as they increasingly have come to share in some of Trump’s alarm about Beijing’s rise.


https://www.washingtonpost.com/us-polic ... echnology/
#15176921
Torus34 wrote:The G7 has, it appears, entered into serious talks of cooperation in countering China's 'Belt and Road' programs in less-developed nations. China, it appears, has used these programs to obtain generous concessions from nations unable to meet their economic commitments to China.

Should the G7 actually come up with a program and pony up the needed funds, it will be interesting to see how they go about securing their investments. Some of the countries which might be involved as recipients have highly developed 'economic infrastructures' which capture unguarded funds and transfer them to Swiss banks and other hidey-holes.

Regards, stay safe 'n well.

Ref: https://www.theguardian.com/world/2021/ ... initiative


Nothing serious took place. Talks vs hundreds of billions already invested is not a serious challenge to the BRI.

It also remains to be seen how B3W will be funded, beyond vague assertions by American diplomats that the program will incorporate existing multinational funding programs.

Moreover, B3W funding will be attached to conditionalities regarding human rights, climate change, corruption and the rule of law. This raises the question why developing countries will choose to work with a patchwork of funding initiatives wedded to intrusive conditionalities rather than continue seeking China’s simplified and no-strings-attached BRI funding.

How does the US plan to marshal its private-sector firms and banks to support B3W? Currently, the political atmosphere in the country remains hostile to large firms and banks, with Biden himself planning to finance his domestic Build Back Better program by raising taxes on big business.

The recent US-led initiative to institute a global minimum tax on multinationals reduces their competitiveness against China’s state-backed companies. Exactly how do American private-sector companies expect to maintain their competitiveness as part of a B3W package deal to developing countries?

Moreover, how does the US plan to offer attractive technologies to developing countries that choose B3W over BRI? Republicans remain allergic to industrial policy that seeks to divert public-sector funding toward research and development in strategic sectors. This has allowed China to steal a march over the US over 5G (fifth-generation telecom) technology, for example.

https://asiatimes.com/2021/06/bidens-b3 ... hinas-bri/

The Senate voted on Tuesday to adopt an approximately $250 billion bill to counter China’s growing economic and military prowess


250b vs over a trillion earmarked for annual spending in China every year on economy and infrastructure. As Feeble as Biden himself.
#15176923
@Igor Antunov

Igor Antunov wrote:250b vs over a trillion earmarked for annual spending in China every year on economy and infrastructure. As Feeble as Biden himself.


Source with evidence to support your claim? Also, is this in terms of the Chinese yuan or the American dollar?
#15176926
Politics_Observer wrote:@Igor Antunov



Source with evidence to support your claim? Also, is this in terms of the Chinese yuan or the American dollar?


USD's equivalent. Has been over $1 trillion into civic works for years (not including R&D, military and energy)

(approx. $1.07 trillion) of this amount is scheduled for implementation in 2020.

https://www.chinabankingnews.com/2020/0 ... -for-2020/

It's rather obvious only need to care to look;

Image

x3 new york state's (not just city, but entire state) worth of infrastructure every 12 months.
#15176927
@Igor Antunov

It looks like you are referring to China's spending on it's infrastructure rather than R & D. However, infrastructure is important too and the U.S. needs to spend money on infrastructure. You can't be penny wise but pound foolish. Republicans don't want to spend on infrastructure because they represent rich white folks in the U.S. and they know to pay for infrastructure you would have to raise taxes on those rich white folks because they are ones with most of the money or at least the ones who give the most to the republican party.
#15176928
To be fair US doesn't have any money to spend on infrastructure. It would have to halve its military budget and reallocate-and not even come close to what China is spending; and even then it would merely be just managing to service its debt interest-for as long as the petrodollar printing scam holds up.

Bidens little adventure in Europe is really superfluous. Also managed to ink an agreement on outlawing forced labor exports. Good thing the US prison system where slavery is literally legal doesn't rely on exports.

G7 meeting only served to highlight how clownish this all is but more importantly how much economic sway Germany has over global affairs vs the US..

It's poetic at least; the US sends a senile old man on his last legs to represent it at an international forum.
#15176930
Igor Antunov wrote:To be fair US doesn't have any money to spend on infrastructure. It would have to halve its military budget and reallocate-and not even come close to what China is spending; and even then it would merely be just managing to service its debt interest-for as long as the petrodollar printing scam holds up.

Bidens little adventure in Europe is really superfluous. Also managed to ink an agreement on outlawing forced labor exports. Good thing the US prison system where slavery is literally legal doesn't rely on exports.

G7 meeting only served to highlight how clownish this all is but more importantly how much economic sway Germany has over global affairs vs the US..

It's poetic at least; the US sends a senile old man on his last legs to represent it at an international forum.

Indeed; it reminded me of Reagan and Gorbachev in the 1980s - the young, dynamic leader of the Soviet Union versus the obviously senile, nap-prone leader of a declining old empire.... Remind me again how that worked itself out in the end, @Igor Antunov.... :)
#15176944
Potemkin wrote:Indeed; it reminded me of Reagan and Gorbachev in the 1980s - the young, dynamic leader of the Soviet Union versus the obviously senile, nap-prone leader of a declining old empire.... Remind me again how that worked itself out in the end, @Igor Antunov.... :)


Turns out it didn't matter in the end that Gorbachev was a literal traitor to his party - the US won't last much longer.
#15176954
Igor Antunov wrote:
To be fair US doesn't have any money to spend on infrastructure. It would have to halve its military budget and reallocate-and not even come close to what China is spending; and even then it would merely be just managing to service its debt interest-for as long as the petrodollar printing scam holds up.

Bidens little adventure in Europe is really superfluous. Also managed to ink an agreement on outlawing forced labor exports. Good thing the US prison system where slavery is literally legal doesn't rely on exports.

G7 meeting only served to highlight how clownish this all is but more importantly how much economic sway Germany has over global affairs vs the US..

It's poetic at least; the US sends a senile old man on his last legs to represent it at an international forum.



We don't spend enough, China is propping up a bubble. Neither approach makes sense, frankly.

The West is slow and clumsy and flawed. But don't count your empires before they hatch.

Germany is the de facto leader of the EU, of course they have a lot of influence.

I have been surprised by Biden's competence, genuinely surprised. He does his homework...
#15177000
It seems the G7 ended up being a beano in Cornwall. Apart from excess vaccines being donated after the West have been vaccinated first (which I believe was always the idea anyway) and Johnson basically breaking his own deal and the EU having a platform to complain about that, what was actually achieved? The only G that matters today is G20 given China and the emerging markets are there.
#15177001
@late

Why are you surprised by Biden's competence. He has a lot of experience in Washington and foreign affairs and has been around for a very long time. Experience matters.
#15177002
Politics_Observer wrote:
@late

Why are you surprised by Biden's competence. He has a lot of experience in Washington and foreign affairs and has been around for a very long time. Experience matters.



He has a history of making mistakes. My impression of him was that he was an affable second stringer.

@Juin I will just say this, I don't think the […]

Your historical assessment is bullshit because […]

@Juin From what I have seen, most republicans […]

muh mental rape. Only if you don't meet y[…]