by von
The Washington Post reports that China has partially de-coupled** the Yuan from the Dollar. This move has long been requested by the U.S. Government, and is hoped to ease the U.S.’s trade deficit with China. (HT: Adam C. at RedState.)
We’ll be chatting more about China and trade issues in the coming weeks. Suffice it to say, I view Chinese move on the Yuan as a partial response to the hue and cry that some have raised regarding PetroChina’s bid for Unocol. (The Unocol bid is ably discussed by Bernard Guerrero at Tacitus; short answer: we do better with the Chinese in the system than outside of it.)
_____
*Points to identify the source of the quote.
**The Yuan is still pegged to a basket of currencies that includes the dollar, so it’s wrong to say that "China Severs Its Currency’s Link to Dollar" — as the Post’s current headline reads.
Way too many contextual clues, von. It’s better to offer one very obscure clue and bask in the confusion of your audience.
Considering that you’re way better at this than I am, though, I should just keep my trap shut.
Google is too good.
The Yuan is still pegged to a basket of currencies that includes the dollar, so it’s wrong to say that “China Severs Its Currency’s Link to Dollar” — as the Post’s current headline reads
But that peg will be allowed to gradually move up:
So according to the article the yuan could be allowed to appreciate .15% a day against the dollar if it is really undervalued. If that is true I would say the headline is pretty much correct. And if that is true, we are going to be living in interesting times.
I wondered what those ladies grew in their garden club.
The truth of the matter is that I’m just interested, you know, in Principles of Modern Banking and the History of Piracy.
I plugged part of the quote into Google, and I could read the answer out of the URL of the first result. The second result was the one I expected.
The real issue is the trade gap with China, and the Hill thinking about slapping a 20+% tarrif on Chinese imports. PetroChina’s bid for Unocol simply added a little more air to the smoldering fire.
It was all because of the piece of steak.
The real issue is the trade gap with China, and the Hill thinking about slapping a 20+% tarrif on Chinese imports. PetroChina’s bid for Unocol simply added a little more air to the smoldering fire.
Was that realistic, though? (Did it have the votes?) I took it to be bluster for the folks at home.
I to be honest Von, I think tariff’s may have become a reality if it had not been for Greenspan and others reminding the Hill of their potential political fallout. It’s the kind of thing the right can get behind. We did it with steel and that was protecting us from European competition. And I think there are more folks sitting on the right side of the aisle now than when we said ok to tariffs on steel imports. I acknowledge we have since removed those tariffs.
I give the Hill credit. We have wisely side-stepped the political fallout from imposing tariffs and jumped right into the path of PetroChina as significant threat to national security.
But Saudi investment is ok.