Why is European Union so irrational in regards to trade with China?

Click For Summary

Discussion Overview

The discussion revolves around the European Union's trade relationship with China, particularly focusing on the perceived irrationality of the EU's trade policies and decisions. Participants explore the implications of trade balances, debt ownership, and economic strategies, with references to historical contexts and comparisons with other nations.

Discussion Character

  • Debate/contested
  • Exploratory
  • Technical explanation

Main Points Raised

  • Some participants express concern over the EU's negative trade balance with China, citing a figure of -156.3€ billion and questioning the rationale behind agreements to avoid protectionist measures.
  • There are claims that the EU is compromising its economic power by allowing China to purchase bonds and hold euro-denominated assets, with a belief that this could be managed differently.
  • Comparisons are made to Japan's public debt situation, suggesting that Japan's debt is more sustainable because it is primarily owned by Japanese citizens, unlike the EU's situation.
  • Participants note that the US also has a poor trade balance with China, raising questions about the broader implications for Western economies.
  • One participant mentions the reliance on China to fund Western debt, suggesting that this allows leaders to postpone addressing underlying economic issues.
  • Concerns are raised about the real returns on German bonds in the context of inflation, questioning whether this is a sound investment for Europeans.

Areas of Agreement / Disagreement

Participants do not reach a consensus on the EU's trade policies with China, with multiple competing views on the implications of trade balances, debt ownership, and economic strategies remaining unresolved.

Contextual Notes

Participants reference various economic metrics and historical events, but the discussion lacks clarity on the assumptions underlying their claims, particularly regarding the sustainability of debt and the effectiveness of current trade policies.

Tosh5457
Messages
130
Reaction score
28
The trade balance between EU and China is -156.3€ billions, yet today EU agreed with China (http://uk.reuters.com/article/2012/09/20/uk-eu-china-summit-idUKBRE88J0QR20120920) to avoid trade protectionist measures. They keep doing this because China keeps buying EU countries' bonds and has many euro-denominated assets. I honestly think EU is selling itself, by giving money and economic power to foreigners. And this could be handled differently even with the debt EU countries have. For example, Japan is the country who has the most public debt to GDP (230% in 2011 - http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_countries_by_public_debt), well ahead European Union's. But the difference is that Japan's debt is mostly owned by the Japanese (http://www.usatoday.com/USCP/PNI/MONEY/2012-01-08-PNI0101biz-ask-stevePNIBrd_ST_U.htm), so the interest money goes to their citizens.

The trade balance of China and US is also terrible for US. What is the West doing? Where does this irrationality come from?
 
Physics news on Phys.org
Interesting article I came across today:
http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/world-us-canada-19667754
Perhaps the moment in Britain's decline that American policy makers should be focussing upon is 1956. During the crisis caused by an Anglo-French invasion of Egypt, the US stopped the fighting by threatening to pull the plug on the British economy.

It marked the end of Britain's ability to act as an independent global power, and it was the country's indebtedness to the US that caused it.
 
Tosh5457 said:
The trade balance between EU and China is -156.3€ billions, yet today EU agreed with China (http://uk.reuters.com/article/2012/09/20/uk-eu-china-summit-idUKBRE88J0QR20120920) to avoid trade protectionist measures. They keep doing this because China keeps buying EU countries' bonds and has many euro-denominated assets. I honestly think EU is selling itself, by giving money and economic power to foreigners. And this could be handled differently even with the debt EU countries have. For example, Japan is the country who has the most public debt to GDP (230% in 2011 - http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_countries_by_public_debt), well ahead European Union's. But the difference is that Japan's debt is mostly owned by the Japanese (http://www.usatoday.com/USCP/PNI/MONEY/2012-01-08-PNI0101biz-ask-stevePNIBrd_ST_U.htm), so the interest money goes to their citizens.

The trade balance of China and US is also terrible for US. What is the West doing? Where does this irrationality come from?

What is their trade debt holdings of foreign nations vs debt out?

For example, $4.74 trillion of US debt was owned by foreign countries. And the US owns about $6.76 trillion of foreign debt.

http://www.treasury.gov/press-center/press-releases/pages/tg1285.ASPX
 
Everyone is out of ideas as to who will fund more massive spending debt. China is handy and so having them buy the debt allows the leaders in the West kick the can down the road a little longer. The US prints its own money so it can monetize its debt at the cost of inflation. The EU may make moves in that direction as well.
 
Tosh5457:

German 10 year bonds offer 1,5% per year, while in the same time inflation should be round 2% (now it's 2,2%)

It means that effectively you would pay Germans 4,8% of your deposit in real terms for asking them to keep it for ten years. Do you consider that as a poor business for those in Europe? (not mentioning gains from increased trade exchange)
 

Similar threads

  • · Replies 21 ·
Replies
21
Views
3K
  • · Replies 21 ·
Replies
21
Views
4K
Replies
2
Views
2K
  • · Replies 1 ·
Replies
1
Views
3K
  • · Replies 46 ·
2
Replies
46
Views
6K
  • · Replies 31 ·
2
Replies
31
Views
6K