BEIJING (Dow Jones)--About half of last year's steel output in China came from operations without proper permits, a China Securities Journal report said Monday quoting a senior Ministry of Industry and Information Technology official.
Vice Minister Miao Wei told the annual meeting of the China Iron and Steel Association Friday only about 300 million metric tons of last year's 568 million tons of steel output had permits.
"Those that were not permitted won't be allowed to undertake mergers and acquisitions, and can be acquired," Miao said.
The central government also plans to develop three to five globally competitive steel corporations averaging 50 million tons in capacity each, according to the report.
Miao said his ministry's draft policy paper on rules for the steel industry's mergers and acquisitions, incorporating industry comment, would be released soon.
At the same time, Miao said, the State Council's standing committee has approved the ministry's policy paper on managing the elimination of obsolete steel industry capacity, which would soon be issued by China's cabinet-equivalent State Council, according to the report.
Feb. 4 (Bloomberg) -- Real estate, stocks, credit.
China sure has its share of bubbles. Oddly, little attention is paid to
the biggest one of all.
China’s currency reserves grew by more than the
gross domestic product of Norway in 2009. Its $2.4 trillion of reserves
is a bubble all its own, one growing before our eyes with nary a peep
out of those searching for the next big one.
PA-12: Congressman John Murtha (D) died today, reportedly of complications from gallbladder surgery. He was chairman of the House Appropriations Subcommittee on defense.
CPA will hold its Second Annual Legislative Fly-In on
March 2-4, 2010. This is a powerful opportunity for us to work
together to advance trade reform in the halls of Congress. We need to
bring the concerns of the grass roots to our legislators.
This is efficient advocacy, well worth your time. We make all the
meeting arrangements with legislators or their staff, we put together
materials, we plan a message, and we pack meetings together in a
concentrated period of time. You make a bigger impact with your time
using only three of the 365 days in the year. Click here to sign up for the CPA Fly In.
CPA has a special offer--limited time only: the first 50 registrants
get a free copy of Ian Fletcher's new book: Free Trade Doesn't Work.
This is a highly acclaimed book about trade policy and the needed
changes therein.
Agenda:
March 2, 2010: 2p to 6p - Group meeting for training, talking points and team assignments
March 3-4, 2010: Hill visits
Place: Capitol Skyline Hotel, 10 I ("Eye") Street SW, Washington, DC 20024
Once you register, call 202.488.7500 for hotel room reservations and ask for the CPA room
block. You should book for the evenings of March 2 and March 3. CPA
has negotiated discounted rates for a limited number of rooms at $129
per night plus tax.
If you have questions about the events, please call Sara Haimowitz,
Development Coordinator, at 413-203-1410 or email at
This e-mail address is being protected from spam bots, you need JavaScript enabled to view it
Public Citizen's Global Trade Watch blog (Eyes on Trade) pointed out the Administration's mixed messages on trade, coming out of the State of the Union Speech. Their full article is below the fold, with quotes from Congressman Roskam, President Obama, as well as Geithner, Locke and Kirk. The latter three spoke wanting all the trade agreements pushed through Congress. Obama did not speak that way.
Congressman Peter Roskam (R-IL-6) asked Obama to push the pending trade agreements through Congress. Obama would not commit, and he cited the fact that the public is not supportive of trade policy.
But Tim Geithner (Treasury Secretary) and Gary Locke (Commerce Secretary) said that passing those trade agreements (Panama, Korea and Colombia) were part of Obama's plan. And Ron Kirk (U.S. Trade Representative) said he supports the Colombia FTA passage.
Sum: The Administration has no position, but has officials in it that are all over the map. It is up to CPA and the grass roots voters to show elected officials that they will not receive voter support if they keep giving us more of the same trade policy.
I presented, along with CPA board member Dave Frengel, to the Greater Reading Chamber of Commerce about trade policy on January 28, 2010. Rick Malliris of KB Alloys, a CPA member, is a member of that local Chamber and requested the meeting. The U.S. Chamber, Pennsylvania state trade officials, and Don Rongione (saveanamericanjob.com) also testified.
We hoped to persuade the Greater Reading Chamber to support a sensible U.S. trade policy that was good for those making and growing things here in the U.S. We certainly moved that organization, to their credit.
See the YouTube video below, from the Greater Reading chamber, which talks about both the need to enforce trade rules and the need to deal with the foreign currency manipulation issue. Those points are made between the 2:40 to 3:10 mark.
CO-Sen: There has yet been no primary in Colorado. But front running Republican (Lieutenant Governor) Jane Norton leads incumbent Mike Bennet (D) by a whopping 14 points. 51-37%. This according to Rasmussen.
Andrew Romanoff (D) the former state House Speaker is challenging Bennet in the Democratic primary. He does better against Norton, trailing by 7. 45-38%.
Bennet has boatloads of cash. Romanoff does not. Bennet is considered the favorite in the Dem primary.
NH-Sen: It is, perhaps, a premature comparison, because the primaries in New Hampshire have not been held. But presumed Republican nominee Kelly Ayotte leads presumed Democratic nominee Paul Hodes 46-39%. The Research 2000 poll also has data on the primaries.
NH is a former Republican state that turned solid blue in 2008. But it is perhaps trending back for now. The Dems are in trouble in many places.
Research 2000 polls are often contracted by the liberal blog DailyKos, but the numbers were pretty accurate from this independent polling firm in 2008. And of course, this poll shows a Republican lead as have many Research 2000 polls recently.
Those of us in the trade battle have heard "export and innovate" as a strategy for years. It got us where we are now. The snake oil salesmen say nice, incomplete things that distract from the real problem. Unfair trade practices that cause an unprecedented import surge and unprecedented offshoring of production and wealth.
We all wondered what Obama would do. It looks like he wants to "export and innovate." Or just "export." So he said in the State of the Union address.
Now Gary Locke, the Commerce Secretary, unveiled the plan. Its a bad plan.
The administration on Thursday unveiled its new strategy to make good on President Obama’s promise to double American exports in the next five years. The approach included pledges to pursue more trade agreements, increase pressure on trading partners to open markets and the creation of an export promotion cabinet.
How, exactly, do you increase exports to China, Korea, etc. when they manipulate currency making our goods far too expensive? How, exactly, do U.S. exporters overcome the global 19% tariff - in the form of a VAT? When do we address the gargantuan subsidies created and hidden by non-market economies, state-managed economies, and even the EU that cause unfair import competition?
Maybe there is a silver lining here. But I don't see it.
Obama had a chance to create jobs. He had to reduce the trade deficit to do it. Stimulate through a stimulus bill, then restructure the economy by remedying the trade imbalance.
But this action increases the chances he will be a one term president.
The U.S. is losing more emerging technologies than any time in its history. We still innovate, we still build some new technologies like batteries. But they are produced and manufactured elsewhere. And if a company starts production here, they often move elsewhere.
I blogged separately on an exchange between Obama and Arlen Specter at a meeting the President had with Senators on February 3, 2010.
Senator Brown, citing the fact that emerging technologies are bypassing us, asked the President a question about whether we are going to have a manufacturing policy given the fact that other countries do so.
Obama said that China is not a democracy so does not debate or filibuster. He said the Ron Bloom is going to provide a report on manufacturing. He said the U.S. still innovates. He did not cite the unfair trade and investment and IP practices overseas which cause this shift in manufacturing.
President Obama spoke before the Senate Democratic Policy Issues Conference on February 3, 2010. Senator Arlen Specter pressed Obama on China's unfair currency and trade practices.
Specter cited China's numerous unlawful practices, and asked the President (1) if he would support more effective remedies, and (2) if he would support revising or revoking "that bilateral treaty" that gives "China such an unfair trade advantage."
Obama responded poorly, basically saying "no" to anything effective. He said he opposed revoking trade relationships with China... which I suppose may be a decent answer in a narrow sense.
Then Obama said he is stepping up enforcement of trade agreements. That certainly is an improvement from the Bush Administration, but you can't remove the hundreds of trade violations cited in the USTR National Trade Estimate through case by case, industry by industry enforcement. More simply, enforcement alone is not a solution.
But then came the worst part of the answer. Obama said Asia is an export market for us, and we will do export promotion. How exactly will you overcome the currency tariff? Or the VAT tariff? Or the domestic content, or domestic control, or domestic ownership requirements there? Export promotion presumes you have fair market access. And export promotion ignores unfair import competition when they ship their stuff here.
The U.S. has been increasing exports, but the imports have skyrocketed. And our economy has been gutted.
TradeReform.Org is a blog created and sponsored by the Coalition for a Prosperous America that discusses U.S. trade
policy. The posts and commentary are not necessarily the official policy or
views of CPA. We encourage participation and lively debate.
