"... American government officials oppose the" sanctions bill "! The United States opposes the appreciation of the renminbi, and the economist Mundell is the first to be promoted. "
A: robert mundell, a Canadian, is a consultant economist of the European Monetary Union Commission and an economic adviser to the US Treasury and the Federal Reserve. This is an American government official? Bill Gates should be the IT minister of China!
"As long as it proves that the United States does not oppose the appreciation of the renminbi, bloggers don't have to look at other words. It must be a traitor."
A: every kind of beauty should be reversed? If someone cheated, would you jump off a building? It is true "patriotism" to pin the choice of one's national interest policy on the praise or opposition of the opponent.
"American policy is chaotic, and Americans are born with defects."
"The United States is a very chaotic country. At one time, the Minister of Commerce said that he opposed the appreciation of RMB. For a time, members forced the RMB to appreciate. They are all officials. Who's in charge? Western freedom is really harmful. "
A: The United States is not a unitary society, but a unitary decision-making country. The more opinions, the better. Even those allied with Hitler have only one decision. Once Congress makes a final decision to the government, everyone must agree. So Clinton said that "patriotism means loving the government", because the government is elected by everyone, and we can't deliberately stumble because of the election failure. American policy is not chaotic at all, but usually the opinions of the government and Congress are different, or even the opposite. On the balance, American voters are happy to see the government and Congress fighting, with the Democratic Party in the White House and the House of Representatives generally dominated by the party, and vice versa. It can be considered that the US government policy, like China, has only one voice; Congress is like a market. In addition to the high degree of evolution, there is no mixed free fighting between men and women in Taiwan Province Provincial Council, and noise is more common. Find a few members to seal the name of a Chinese hawk, saying that senior American officials demand RMB appreciation, just like buying cabbage in the market, they can always find several. It is ridiculous to say that the United States wants the RMB to appreciate!
A: If the following conditions are met, it can be considered that the US policy is against RMB appreciation:
1) The US government opposes the appreciation of the RMB. Evidence: "US Secretary of Commerce Gutierrez said that the White House" does not think that enacting protective legislation is a countermeasure to deal with trade problems "and that the government has taken sufficient measures to deal with China's" unfair "trade behavior. He added: "We have fought more anti-dumping lawsuits with China than with any other country. We believe that we should regulate our relationship with our trading partners through legislation to ensure that trade relations are maintained in a reasonable way. "
2) The US Congress did not pass any bill to force China to appreciate; If so, please tell us. (Obviously not)
Any one of these two articles can be regarded as "the United States opposes the appreciation of the renminbi"; Obviously, the necessary and sufficient conditions are fully established.
3) The US Congress has any bill to force China's RMB to appreciate; This article can be considered as a strong pressure of public opinion; Similar, like "human rights case"
4) Many members of the U.S. Congress demanded RMB appreciation and threatened to move the bill. Please check whether "the so-called US demands RMB appreciation" is beyond this range;
5) There are cheaper ones. Find some articles in American street newspapers that doubt the appreciation of RMB, saying that "the United States demands the appreciation of RMB". That "American official" Mundell "represents the American government in this way".
Answer: Inverse theorem:
1) The US government explicitly supports RMB appreciation (obviously not);
2) The United States will legislate against RMB appreciation (not to mention).
3) The United States will oppose the appreciation of RMB (unheard of). ...
4) and 5), more, readers find it themselves.
"Does this bill, entitled" Poor Americans Speak Out against it ",have anything to do with this? Therefore, several members opposed the statement that the RMB was undervalued, and I don't know where it came from. "
A: I have read several news reports. I remember a congressman who went to China was from the New Orleans constituency. He put forward another motion, asking the federal government to provide special regional welfare subsidies to residents (mainly blacks) who lost their jobs because of low-priced textiles in China. It is obviously impossible to pass the 27.5% punitive tax bill on China. I think this congressman is playing a drunken game. If he doesn't pass the 27.5% bill, then give my constituency more money. Another senator from Texas suggested paying attention to this matter. He is the initiator of Bush's corn fuel case. His motive is only to let Texas farmers sell their agricultural products at higher prices. He also wants to make punitive tariffs by undervaluing China's RMB, make a feint, and then take a batch of cheap money from the federal regional allowance proposed by Congress. In a word, US congressmen are not officials, and what they say is probably foreign, but in fact, they have other plans at home, and they have not yet figured out their true intentions. China, don't flatter yourself. As for what officials have come to Europe, I have not studied them and I don't want to take care of them.
The following questions are not ridiculous:
"Today's foreign exchange reserves mainly enter China in the form of attracting foreign investment."
"A slow rise can prevent hot money from taking away China's wealth."
A: This is a question of how to upgrade. As a scheme, we must accurately calculate what the result of the scheme failure is and how much the loss is. It is meaningless to use the idiom "the consequences are unimaginable" as the calculation result. It is equivalent to saying "no loss". At present, QFII is the official way for foreign capital to enter the Chinese people. Except for the temporary stay of registered capital and working capital of foreign capital and joint ventures, there is almost no other way to enter. Therefore, it is not necessarily right to slow down the rally. In my opinion, it is best to step by step, but advance two and retreat one (do your job well) and change one-way expectations. My preliminary calculation shows that the loss is controllable. Even if it fails, the loss is one order of magnitude smaller than the current position where it does not appreciate. How to maintain China's interests through appreciation is where people of insight really need to contribute their talents.
Finally, talk about the differences and constraints between the Federal Reserve and the Bank of China in currency issuance.
The Federal Reserve is private, but it can't make more legitimate profits. The Fed can issue money at will and put it into circulation in the form of overnight loans or by buying American bonds and raising interest rates and lowering interest rates. The Federal Reserve is completely independent of the US government and is not responsible for the fiscal balance of the US government. Its duty is to maintain prices, which is completely different from that of the Bank of China. The money earned by the Federal Reserve from the implementation of the central bank exceeds the statutory part, and all of it is turned over to the federal finance. It can only be used after the congressional vote every year and quarter in the government budget. In this way, there will be no shortage of central finance in China, and more RMB will be issued to subsidize the central finance in the form of "cash holding tax" from all RMB holders. This article, the US government does not have a "great sense of superiority".