Análise das relações EUA-China sob Biden - Xulio Rios (Jiexi Zhongguo Nº36) - Forbes Magazine

Nueva entrega de Jiexi Zhongguo, número 36 Análisis y Pensamiento Iberoamericano sobre China

In Jiexi Zhongguo, Otros by Xulio Ríos

2021-09-30

Reproducimos a continuación el índice del número 36 de Jiexi Zhongguo

Jiexi Zhongguo Nº36

• La relación EUA-RPC: el futuro escenario internacional, Rocío Camerlengo Demmler
• Entre la conciliación y la rivalidad: Perspectivas de las relaciones sino-norteamericanas bajo el Gobierno de Joe Biden, Esteban Poole Fuller
• Nacionalismo Chinês: Pragmatismo e Instrumentalismo na Política Externa, Susana Silva Ramos
• La ruta de la seda polar: interpretaciones desde la teoría de los bienes públicos globales, Eduardo Tzili-Apango
• Situación actual en el Mar de la China Oriental. Avances y retrocesos en la gestión de la Islas Senkaku, José Luis Plata Díaz
• Les jumelages Europe-Chine : questions juridiques et exemples comparés, João Casqueira Cardoso

Sus contenidos son de libre acceso en el banner correspondiente de la web (a la izquierda), o en el PDF adjunto.

https://politica-china.org/otros/nueva-entrega-de-jiexi-zhongguo-numero-36

Forbes Magazine, Oct 4, 2021,12:05am EDT|4,502 views

Trump’s Exit From Asian Trade Pact Damaged America, Boosted China

Stuart Anderson

Senior Contributor

Donald Trump shows the executive order withdrawing the United States from the Trans-Pacific ... [+]Getty Images

Removing the United States from the Asia-Pacific trade pact designed to promote U.S. economic and strategic interests over China’s will go down as one of the worst decisions by an American president in the past 50 years, according to trade and foreign policy analysts. Now that China has applied to join the Comprehensive Progressive Trans-Pacific Partnership, Donald Trump’s decision looks even worse than it did in 2017.

Background: President George W. Bush proposed a trade agreement with like-minded Asia-Pacific countries in 2008. “While quick to embrace TPP [Trans-Pacific Partnership] and successful in concluding an agreement among the parties, President Barack Obama fatally delayed pushing for trade promotion authority from Congress in 2014,” writes Matthew P. Goodman, senior vice president for economics at the Center for Strategic and International Studies. “And in one of his first, catastrophic acts as president, Donald Trump withdrew the United States from the unratified TPP—not understanding that it was one of the most powerful tools he had to compete with his nemesis, China.”

The Latest Developments: On September 16, 2021, China submitted an application to join what is now called the Comprehensive Progressive Trans-Pacific Partnership (CPTTP). The group of countries in the trade pact currently includes Australia, Brunei, Canada, Chile, Japan, Malaysia, Mexico, New Zealand, Peru, Singapore and Vietnam. China’s notification was sent to New Zealand’s trade minister, the designated CPTPP member for such matters, notes Wendy Cutler, a vice president at the Asia Society Policy Institute.

US-China Trade War - Forbes (2018)

The Threat of a Trade War with China That Nobody Is Talking About

By Patrick W. Watson

ForbesApr 16, 2018

Trade and tariffs are all over the news because President Trump is going after China.

The president’s tweets and public statements tell us he doesn’t like trade deficits, particularly the one with China. He seems to view it as a win-or-lose proposition.

That’s not exactly right.

For one, a trade deficit between two nations isn’t unusual. Precise balance would be strange. Countries have different needs, so some import more than others.

Also, it’s not like the side with the deficit loses anything.

In this case, China gets our dollars and we get Chinese-made goods. Your house is probably stuffed with little pieces of the U.S.-China trade deficit.

Is that bad? As an economic matter, it’s just reality.

• Americans want Chinese goods more than we want the dollars spent on them.
• Chinese want those dollars more than they want the goods.

It’s not about winning or losing. Everybody gets what they want.

The Real Threat

There’s a catch, though. I said, “The Chinese want those dollars,” but they’d prefer to use their own currency. Eventually they will, too, but for now we still settle our trade in dollars.

Just as our homes hold Chinese goods, Chinese bank accounts hold trillions of greenbacks. That’s the other side of the trade deficit President Trump hates so much. It’s the same money.

What do the Chinese do with those excess dollars?

Well, they invest many of them in U.S. Treasury securities — to the point that China is our government’s largest foreign lender.

Some people see this as ominous, fearing China will dump this paper and cause a crisis. But doing so would probably require Beijing to take a big loss, and that’s not its style.

The bigger danger is that China may simply buy fewer Treasury bonds. This is simple math. Chinese investors can’t buy our T-bonds unless they have excess dollars — and they won’t if the president succeeds in reducing the trade deficit.

See the problem?

• The U.S. government spends way more than it collects in taxes.
• Treasury must finance the difference by selling bonds.
• Someone with dollars must buy those bonds.
• China’s dollar surplus makes it a natural buyer.

If China doesn’t buy our bonds, somebody else will… but probably at higher interest rates. Prices rise when an external force constrains supply. This will raise Washington’s interest costs and further enlarge the debt.

And when Treasury rates rise, other long-term interest rates (like mortgage rates) rise too. That could make home purchases more expensive, reducing other consumer spending and maybe hurting the housing industry.

So attacking this trade deficit problem — which isn’t really a problem — risks making some actual problems even worse. That’s not “winning.”

Burning Bridges

Now, some say all of this is a negotiating tactic… that the president’s unpredictable tough talk leaves opponents off guard and sets up a “win.”

Such tactics worked for Trump in private business. In fact, the president’s business skill is why many folks voted for him. He promised to negotiate great deals and had a track record for doing it.

The problem: Governing isn’t a business.

In a transactional business like real estate, you probably won’t deal with the same counterparty again. Burning bridges behind you can make sense if you have thousands more unburned bridges in front of you.

In politics, both domestic and international, you must negotiate with the same people repeatedly on different topics. If you’re unreasonable on Item A, it also affects Item B.

Trade negotiations are particularly hard because so many groups have a stake in the outcome. Overt threats rarely help. They might even hurt, by sparking opposition that prevents the other leader from offering concessions.

On the Brink of a Global Trade War

Trump is right that China hasn’t always played fair. Many other nations feel the same way. That’s a negotiating tool the U.S. could use to our advantage.

As China’s biggest export market, the U.S. has plenty of leverage. We could have even more leverage by working with China’s other top customers, primarily Western Europe.

But Trump isn’t doing that. He is doing the opposite by openly threatening Canada, the EU, Japan and other developed countries with tariffs as well.

This makes it hard to ask for their help against China — and even gives China an opening to seek EU support against the U.S.

Consequently, the chance of getting significant reforms from China is lower, and the risk of a negative outcome like trade war is higher.

Maybe President Trump sees that as a risk worth taking. But it highlights another key difference between business and government negotiations.

In his real estate deals, the people at risk were Trump himself and the business partners who willingly joined him. As president, he’s generating risk for everyone. No one gets to opt out.

Financial markets see this and don’t like it at all — nor should they. Events could easily spiral out of control, with harsh economic consequences.

China’s response so far is to threaten its own tariffs on U.S. agriculture and other Trump-friendly sectors. They think penalizing the president’s supporters will make him back down.

I’m not so sure, for two reasons:

• First, those same business groups failed to stop the president’s earlier trade actions. Their influence on the White House appears to have waned.
• Second, being punished by China might make the president’s supporters moreloyal, not less. Outside attacks often unify people who might otherwise split.

If so, the trade fight is likely to get worse before it gets better. So get ready for a long siege.

As 20 companhias que mandam no Brasil (sera?) - Anderson Antunes (Forbes)

O jornalista esqueceu de uma companhia muito importante, que movimenta também, direta ou indiretamente, bilhões de dólares, e que atende pela sigla PT.
Paulo Roberto de Almeida

Anderson Antunes, Contributor

All things wealth-related. And a bit more.

Follow (161)

LISTS 

|

 Forbes Magazine, 

1/23/2014 @ 12:11PM |9,016 views

The 20 Companies That Own Brazil

Comment Now 

Follow Comments

Brazil is known worldwide for its soccer players and supermodels, its lively parties and an appreciation for living life passionately. Another well-known characteristic of the country is its high inequality spurred on by ineffective income distribution practices and clientelistic political systems. For many people, the vast slums that shape the landscape of Brazil’s cities have become an emblematic, almost mythic image of Brazil’s poorest which contradicts the country’s ambition for growth and modernity.

It is true that Brazil’s economic boom of the past decade led to a significant decrease in the country’s poverty rates, but inequality is still a serious problem and one of the major challenges faced by its governors. A report from the World Bank indicates poverty in Brazil has fallen markedly, from 21% of the population in 2003 to 11% in 2009 with numbers continuing to fall. The Instituto Brasileiro de Geografia e Estatística (IBGE) also reported that the richest 20% of Brazilians saw a decrease in their share of wealth over the past decade, whilst the poorest 20%, on the other hand, increased their share of wealth from 2.6% to 3.5% during the same period.

The first four on the list outweigh the economic power of Brazil’s union. (PHOTO: WIkipedia)

But inequality is not a problem exclusive to Brazil. As political and business leaders gather the World Economic Forum in Davos, Switzerland, to discuss the improving global economy, a new study indicates that the rich have become richer, ever more increasing their grip on economic dominance throughout the world — according to British humanitarian group Oxfam International, the 85 richest people on the planet now control a wealth of about $1.7 trillion, which equals that of the bottom half of the global population, or about 3.5 billion people.

The Awful Truth About Brazil's Protests: The 'Country Of The Future' Is Still Hostage To Its PastAnderson AntunesContributor

The Richest People In Brazil 2013: The Full ListAnderson AntunesContributor

How Brazil's Poorest State Minted One Of The Country's Richest -- And Most Controversial -- Political ClansAnderson AntunesContributor

“It is staggering that in the 21st century, half of the world’s population owns no more than a tiny elite whose numbers could all sit comfortably in a single train carriage,” said Winnie Byanyima, Oxfam’s executive director. “Widening inequality is creating a vicious circle where wealth and power are increasingly concentrated in the hands of a few, leaving the rest of us to fight over crumbs from the top table,” Byanyima said.

That sort of gap is also evidenced when looking at Brazil’s largest corporations and the power they wield. Thinking about that, the Brazilian NGOsInstituto Mais Democracia and Cooperativa EITAcreated a ranking to show who controls Brazil’s capital, most of the time through an almost invisible power structure.

The result is astonishing, with a biopsy of over 2,000 companies in order to find the ultimate owner in each one of its byzantine ownership structure. By taking into account the ownership in these companies and their net revenues, the study mapped the people and corporations with greater economic power in Brazil’s trillion-dollar economy, which is concentrated within a group of about 12 corporations that together represent more than 50% of the total wealth generated by all listed companies. The first four on the list even outweigh the economic power of Brazil’s union, which is about $192.35 billion, not to mention that the top 20 companies listed are directly connected to 10 FORBES billionaires, whose combined net worth is $47.1 billion (as of March 2013).

Check the list with the 20 companies that control Brazil:

1. Telefonica S.A. (telecommunications)

Country of Origin: Spain

Total economic power: R$ 187.46 billion ($79.99 billion)

Controlled by Banco Bilbao Vizcaya Argentaria, Caja de Ahorros y Pensiones de Barcelona and Blackrock.

2. Previ (pension fund)

Country of Origin: Brazil

Total economic power: R$ 145.8 billion ($62.21 billion)

Controlled by Caixa de Previdencia dos Funcionarios do Banco do Brasil

3. Telemar Participacoes (telecommunications)

Country of Origin: Brazil

Total economic power: R$ 112.1 billion ($47.83 billion)

Controlled by AG Telecom, LF Tel S.A., BNDES, Bratel Brasil, Fundacao Atlantico de Seguridade Social, Previ, Funcef and Petros

4. BBD Participacoes (finance)

Country of Origin: Brazil

Total economic power: R$ 102.4 billion ($43.7 billion)

Controlled by Lazaro de Mello Brandao

5. Stichting Gerdau Johannpeter (steel)

Country of Origin: Brazil

Total economic power: R$ 70.8 billion ($30.21 billion)

Controlled by Klaus Gerdau Johannpeter, Germano Hugo Gerday Johannpeter, Frederico Carlos Gerday Johannpeter and Jorge Gerdau Johannpeter

6. Wilkes Participacoes (retail)

Country of Origin: Brazil/France

Total economic power: R$ 67.6 billion ($28.84 billion)

Controlled by Peninsula Participacoes and Sudaco Participacoes

Billionaire connection: Abilio dos Santos Diniz

7. Blessed Holdings (food processing)

Country of Origin: Brazil/United States

Total economic power: R$ 61.7 billion ($26.33 billion)

Controlled by FB Participacoes (the Bertin and Batista families)

8. Banco Santander S.A. (finance)

Country of Origin: Spain

Total economic power: R$ 61.2 billion ($26.11 billion)

Controlled by Santander

9. Jereissati Participacoes (telecommunications, shopping centers)

Country of Origin: Brazil

Total economic power: R$ 50.1 billion ($21.38 billion)

Controlled by the Jereissati family

10. Ultra S.A. Participacoes (fuel distribution)

Country of Origin: Brazil

Total economic power: R$ 48.6 billion ($20.74 billion)

Controlled by Daisy Igel, Paulo Guilherme Aguiar Cunha, Ana Maria Levy Villela Igel, Fabio Igel, Christy Participacoes, Marcia Igel Joppert, Joyce Igel de Castro Andrade, Rogerio Igel and Lucio de Castro Andrade Filho

Billionaire connection: Daisy Igel

11. Andrade Gutierrez S.A.(construction services, telecommunications)

Country of Origin: Brazil

Total economic power: R$ 42.4 billion ($18.09 billion)

Controlled by the Andrade and Gutierrez families

12. Rio Purus Participacoes (textile, steel)

Country of Origin: Brazil

Total economic power: R$ 37.4 billion ($15.96 billion)

Controlled by Dorothea Steinbruch

Billionaire connection: Dorothea Steinbruch

13. Belga Empreendimentos e Participacoes S.A. (sugar and ethanol)

Country of Origin: Brazil

Total economic power: R$ 36.6 billion ($15.62 billion)

Controlled by Rubens Ometto Silveira Mello

Billionaire connection: Rubens Ometto Silveira Mello

14. Iupar – Itau Unibanco Participacoes S.A. (finance)

Country of Origin: Brazil

Total economic power: R$ 34.7 billion ($14.81 billion)

Controlled by Itausa (the Setubal and Villela families), Companhia E. Johnston de Participacoes (the Moreira Salles family)

Billionaire connection: Alfredo Egydio de Arruda Villela Filho and Ana Lucia de Mattos Barretto Villela

15. Casino Guichard Perrachon (retail)

Country of Origin: France

Total economic power: R$ 33.8 billion ($14.42 billion)

Controlled by Bengal LLC, Pincher LLC, Oregon LLC, King LLC, Segisor and Lobo I LLC

Billionaire connection: Abilio dos Santos Diniz

16. Peninsula Participacoes Ltda. (retail, food processing)

Country of Origin: Brazil

Total economic power: R$ 33.8 billion ($14.42 billion)

Controlled by the Diniz family

Billionaire connection: Abilio dos Santos Diniz

17. Kieppe Patrimonial Ltda. (construction services, oil & gás)

Country of Origin: Brazil

Total economic power: R$ 33.7 billion ($14.38 billion)

Controlled by the Odebrecht and Gradin families

Billionaire connection: Victor Gradin

18. Cia Brasileira de Energia (energy)

Country of Origin: Brazil

Total economic power: R$ 31.2 billion ($13.31 billion)

Controlled by AES Holdings and BNDES

19. Itausa Investimentos Itau S.A. (finance, diversified)

Country of Origin: Brazil

Total economic power: R$ 27.7 billion ($11.82 billion)

Controlled by the Setubal and Villela families

Billionaire connection: Alfredo Egydio de Arruda Villela Filho and Ana Lucia de Mattos Barretto Villela

20. Stichting InBev (beer)

Country of Origin: Belgium/United States

Total economic power: R$ 27.1 billion ($11.56 billion)

Controlled by Eugenie Patri Sebastian and BRC Sart

Billionaire connection: Jorge Paulo Lemann, Carlos Alberto da Veiga Sicupiraand Marcel Herrmann Telles

Eike Batista: o mais rico do Brasil - Forbes

Billionaires List
Big Man In Brazil
Keren Blankfeld
Forbes Magazine, March 29, 2010

Eike Batista has ridden up the commodities boom to become the richest guy in his country. He aims to keep going.

In Brazil, perhaps the only thing that's bigger than Eike Fuhrken Batista is Pão de Açúcar, the peak that dominates Guanabara Bay in Rio de Janeiro. "Sugarloaf" mountain stares across to his tenth-floor office in the Praia do Flamengo building. Six years ago Batista swore he'd become Brazil's richest man. Now he is: With a net worth of $27 billion, two-thirds of that gained over the last 12 months, he's on his way to arriving at his latest boastful goal, becoming the world's wealthiest guy. His Facebook page mentions how rich he is three times.

Batista, 53, has made a pile in resources and other services: mining (MMX), energy (MPX), logistics (LLX), real estate (REX), shipbuilding (OSX), tourism and entertainment. But two-thirds of his fortune comes from a relatively new source--OGX Petróleo e Gas Participações, the oil-and-gas exploration company he founded in July 2007 and took public a year later. "If you compare the 17,000-to-1 ratio of success for gold discoveries to the 2-to-1 ratio for [offshore] oil," says Batista, "you can see why I became so enthusiastic about creating OGX." What's with all the "X"s in his companies' names? They're meant to suggest the multiplication of wealth. He almost always lives up to the promise. Shrewdness, drive and well-placed risks figure in his extraordinary success. So do good timing and sheer luck.

After roughly 25 years in precious metals Batista decided to bet on oil. In November 2007, four months after he formed OGX, state-owned Petrobras announced the discovery of an oil bed in the Santos Basin Tupi area, off Brazil's southeastern coast. With a potential 8 billion barrels of oil equivalent, it was the largest discovery ever made in Brazil (at the time the country had 14 billion barrels of oil and gas reserves). Batista, who has long had connections within Brazil's government, had been in touch with Paulo Mendonça, a 34-year veteran of Petrobras who had just retired as its chief of exploration. A little inducement--big salary, an equity stake in OGX and stock options based on performance (what Batista gamely calls "a bonus with an onus")--persuaded Mendonça to set aside retirement and work for the new company, along with six experienced colleagues. "In the end, if you spend on know-how, the risk you're taking on is smaller," says Batista. Especially on know-how that's so well connected.

OGX was created just in time to become one of the first--and last--big players in an auction of exploration licenses by the Brazilian National Petroleum Agency. Only two weeks before the leases went up for bid, the Brazilian government decided to remove the most promising 41 blocks closest to the Tupi field that Petrobras had just discovered. The multinationals jockeying for those reserves were sidelined.

Meanwhile OGX offered $800 million for the exploration rights on 21 concession blocks in four different shallow-water basins, in some cases outbidding Petrobras. Batista pulled out $375 million from his own pocket; the rest came from 12 investors (including the Ontario Teachers' Pension Plan and New York City's Ziff brothers), some of whom had bet with him on earlier deals. After the bidding OGX held concessions covering roughly 1.7 million acres, making it the biggest private player in oil and gas. (Last year OGX acquired an additional 70% participating interest in 4.9 million acres from the nearby Pamaíba Basin.) The company then contracted for five semisubmersible rigs, with leases of two to three years plus renewal options, and hired a survey ship to collect seismic data. OGX also built a 3-d oilfield visualization center five floors below Batista's office. Since most blocks are in shallow water and relatively easy to access, production costs could be as low as $8 a barrel, compared with perhaps $35 for offshore Brazilian crude trapped under thick layers of salt.

In June 2008 OGX raised $4.1 billion in an initial offering, the largest in Brazil's history at the time. Batista himself invested another $450 million. He's a little touchy when asked about how much of this good fortune is strictly his own brilliant planning. "You cannot exist as a $20 billion company with speculation," he says. "Luck is Brazil being in this stable economic position today; luck is Brazil having these blocks available for bidding. But it's also a lot about discipline and hard work. There's also timing: When I did the IPO the price of oil was $140. That wasn't my doing. That was luck."

Some Brazilians who have followed Batista for years claim that he is locked in a classic Oedipal battle, perpetually trying to outshine his powerful father, Eliezer Batista da Silva. Dad protests. "Eike always gave signs of being a man who liked to get things accomplished," he says, "but I never imagined his success would be in this scale." Eliezer, now 85, presided over Brazil's behemoth mining company, Vale do Rio Doce, before it was privatized in 1997. During his presidency Vale, which had been primarily an iron ore exporter, expanded its operations globally and diversified into other metal markets and into pulp, forestry, shipping and railways. His reach in politics extended beyond leading the state-owned company: Minister of Mines & Energy off and on since 1962, Eliezer was named Secretary of Strategic Affairs in 1992 by President Fernando Collor. "I want to make it clear that I follow Eike's path more than he follows my path," says the elder Batista, who once advised Enron executive Rebecca Mark and today serves as a general business advisor to his son. "I've never been involved in oil."

Eike Batista bristles at the idea of any help from Dad. "All my businesses started from zero," he says. "My father was a problem for me because he never let me near Vale," he adds. "I wasn't allowed because he was afraid of a conflict of interest. I'm the one who made my own connections." Not to mention, laughs Batista, "my dad doesn't believe in taking risks."

Raised with his six siblings in Germany from age 12 to 23, mostly by his German mother, Batista studied metallurgy at the University of Aachen and claims he sold insurance door-to-door to help pay for school. In 1979 he returned to Brazil to try his hand at gold trading in the Amazon. His father thought he was crazy, but within 18 months Batista managed to bring in $6 million in commissions for himself. He used the loot to invest in a rudimentary operation of garimpeiros, men who lift gold ore from the jungle with pans and nets. But he underestimated the difficult logistics and the prevalence of diseases in the area. With only $300,000 left, he joked with friends that he should have taken the $6 million and hung out at the beach. But the workers eventually produced up to $1 million in gold per month. "Thank God, the mine was idiot-proof," quips Batista. "Only an extremely rich mine could have withstood all the mistakes I made. I was lucky."