Monthly Archives: September 2018

China, Economic, United States

America’s economic battle with China risks global slump

GLOBAL ECONOMY

PRESIDENT Trump continues to show no mercy in his dealings with China. Emboldened by the robust American economy and the continuing rally on Wall Street, Donald Trump is convinced that tariff barriers will do more damage to Beijing than Washington, and that eventually his approach will force concessions.

The U.S. President’s decision to impose a 10 per cent tariff on £150bn of goods from China means almost half the products shipped from the People’s Republic to America – with the notable exception of some Apple items – are subject to tariffs, raising prices for US businesses and consumers.

These new measures are in addition to the £38bn of tariffs imposed in July and August.

China, led by President Xi Jinping, lost no time in retaliating by finding another £45bn of US goods to penalise. And the country’s best-known entrepreneur, Jack Ma, founder of digital champion Alibaba, said his promise to create up to 1m jobs in the US was no longer viable because of tensions.

 

DESPITE the threat of higher prices for Americans on goods ranging from textiles to electronics, Trump’s tough line will play well in “rust-belt” states as the Republicans seek to seize back the political initiative ahead of November’s mid-term elections.

The White House’s choice of trade as a weapon to curb Chinese influence and expansionism has been met with horror by the International Monetary Fund in Washington and the World Trade Organisation (WTO) in Geneva.

The Organisation for Economic Co-operation and Development (OECD) have also joined the chorus of critics, warning that world economic output was “hitting a plateau” because of US-China trade wars and fragility in emerging markets.

As the apostles of free trade, it argues that much global prosperity, notably in Asia and emerging markets, has been built on an open trading system.

The Great Depression of the 1930s was the result of nations imposing ever-higher barriers on vital trade such as commodities and farm produce. Despite the criticism there is a conviction in the White House that America’s hardline policy will produce dividends.

Larry Kudlow, the White House’s chief economic adviser, declared: “We are open to talks, if there are serious talks.” In May, China agreed to reduce the tariffs on imported American cars from 25 per cent to 15 per cent, to ease strained relations.

Mr Trump has also been encouraged to act tough after his success in bullying Mexico into accepting new rules for trading. Mexico now has to show that products it assembles contain at least 70 per cent of US content before they can move across borders.

The U.S. President has been able to take on China with some impunity because the American economy is going great guns. Growth has exceeded wildest expectations in the second quarter, at an annual rate of 4.1 per cent, creating jobs.

Farming communities have been hardest hit by Chinese retaliation, which has targeted soya bean production, pig products and beef. Trump has bought farmers’ silence with an increase of £9.1bn in subsidies.

So, what does this chest-beating machoism mean for other Western nations?

The big concern is that if the tit-for-tat war carries on for any length of time, Beijing might flood other countries with cheap goods. Complaints of Chinese dumping of cheap steel and aluminum on international markets have led to swingeing penalties being imposed by the countries where the steel is sold – while the cases are examined at the WTO.

The difficulty for Beijing is that it doesn’t import anything like £150bn of goods from the US though it can slow supply chains – such as components for the iPhone and personal computers.

The importance of better trading relations with neighbours has never been more critical. China recently sealed a far-reaching trade deal with India. In Europe, it reinforces the need for Britain to connect to the EU’s market of 500m people and not allow Brexit to damage relationships.

The biggest concern is that the US-China trade war comes at a moment of potential peril for the global economy. Rising US interest rates allied to domestic political upheaval are driving several market economies, including Turkey, Argentina and South Africa, to the brink.

When the financial inducements of Donald Trump’s tax cuts wear off and American retail prices rise – because of the higher costs of Chinese goods – economic conditions could deteriorate rapidly. The trade fracas might just prove to be the start of the next global slump.

Standard
Britain, Business, Economic, Government, Society, Technology

The rise of automated robots is creating fear in the workplace. But why?

ECONOMIC & TECHNOLOGICAL ADVANCES

WE shouldn’t be surprised if trade union’s such as the TUC is waxing lyrical about how robots and new technology will liberate us all to work less for the same money.

After all, no less an authority than Karl Marx claimed automation would help free the miserable proletariat from their mundane drudgery.

John Maynard Keynes predicted in his 1930 Essay, Economic Possibilities For Our Grandchildren, that technology would allow people to work no more than 15 hours a week. “Three days a week is quite enough,” he opined. Keynes didn’t have any grandchildren, but if he had, it’s highly unlikely they would be basking in hours of leisure time.

Employment in the UK is at its highest since 1974, when ABBA won the Eurovision song contest and we actually did have a three-day week (but for all the wrong reasons).

Not everyone sees the advance of robots and technology in the workplace, in warehouses, manufacturing plants or even in new possible areas such as care homes, as a good thing. Fears that machines will make humans redundant or enslave us are as old as technology itself. Crackpot ideas such as Amazon’s robot-driven cage for its employees – now mercifully ditched – is an example that doesn’t exactly help.

In a fascinating speech on the future of work, Bank of England governor Mark Carney said that, in the past, machines substituted for “hands” or manual labour. Now artificial intelligence means they might replace “heads” or brain work, leaving “hearts” to people – or, in other words, work that involves emotion, imagination, innovation, caring and creativity, which could translate into more fulfilling work that adds value to the economy.

 

HISTORY tells us automation does not take away human work, but simply shifts people from one type of work to another.

One of the biggest technological revolutions receives virtually no attention from economists because it has mainly affected women. But, by making housework so much easier, the spread of domestic appliances such as vacuum cleaners and washing machines has arguably changed the workplace and society as much as the smartphone.

The idea that robots will take employment away from humans rests on the “lump of labour” fallacy that there are a fixed number of jobs in an economy, so if a robot takes one, a human being will be consigned to the dole queue. In reality, however, it is not like that. Economies are dynamic, so if robots add to productivity and growth then more, not fewer, jobs will be created for humans.

This doesn’t mean the introduction of technology will be seamless. Overall, technology may be beneficial, but individuals can and do lose out if their jobs are taken over by machines and they are not able to find alternative employment quickly.

What Keynes ignored in his analysis is that many of us, probably including himself, have workaholic tendencies and absolutely don’t want to be idle.

For anyone who wonders why multimillionaire chief executives don’t just put their feet up and enjoy their loot, think of it this way: the higher paid someone is, and the more status and admiration they glean from their work, the less incentive they have in taking more leisure time.

Standard
Health, Medical, Research, Science

Injection of antibodies could reduce risk of heart attacks and strokes

MEDICAL RESEARCH

THOUSANDS of lives could be saved every year after scientists discovered a group of antibodies that dramatically reduce the risk of heart attacks and strokes – and revealed plans to develop an injection of the substance for those most at risk.

The researchers say their discovery could lead to the development of a test to determine a person’s risk of heart disease within three years and an antibody injection to protect them in as little as five years.

A lead researcher at Imperial College London, said: “If this line of research is successful it would mean a revolution in tackling the biggest killer in the world.”

Everybody has at least some of these antibodies, but levels vary widely between people and that plays a crucial role in determining how likely they are to suffer life-threatening heart problems.

The effect of the antibodies is so profound that people with high levels of them are 70 per cent less likely to develop heart disease than people with low levels of them.

High levels of the antibodies show their hosts have less of the dangerous plaques in their arteries that cause most heart attacks and strokes.

The discovery has the potential to save numerous lives, leading heart specialists have said.

More than 100,000 people in the UK die each year from a cardiac arrest or stroke that has been caused by plaque on the inside of an artery. By discovering which patients have plaques that are more likely to rupture and why, thousands of lives a year could be saved.

The development of new drugs might be used to tweak the immune system to prevent people from having a heart attack or stroke.

The British Heart Foundation is known to have funded much of the research and has given Dr Khamis – a consultant cardiologist at Hammersmith Hospital – £1million to develop his work further. He is working on a blood test to identify people at high risk of heart disease by measuring levels of the antibody. He hopes this will be available on the NHS in the next three to four years.

Those people identified as being most at risk can then make lifestyle changes to reduce the threat.

Even more significant, Dr Khamis is also developing an antibody injection that could be given to patients at high risk, which he hopes would be available in the next five to ten years.

However, he cautions more research is needed on both the test and the treatment to confirm their effectiveness before they could become available.

Scientists do not yet fully know why some people have higher levels of the antibodies.

Standard