Wal-Mart China’s Purchasing System Establishes a Union

I’ll send this over to the Dept. of Labor’s and Attorney General’s offices right away!!

If I pucker up any more to kiss Walmart’s ass, my face will collapse.

U.S., China launch investment pact, spar on markets

Doug Palmer and Jason Subler
Reuters US Online Report Top News

Jun 18, 2008 17:23 EST

WASHINGTON (Reuters) - U.S. and Chinese officials agreed on Wednesday to launch negotiations on a bilateral investment treaty and to expand cooperation on energy and environmental issues, but differences remained as to how quickly Beijing should liberalize its markets.

At the conclusion of two days of high-level economic talks, U.S. Treasury Secretary Henry Paulson said an investment pact “would send a strong signal that our two nations welcome investment and will treat each other’s investors in a fair and transparent manner.”

He said the ten-year energy framework agreement would engage businesses, academics and leading research facilities to share knowledge as well as commercialize new alternative energy and environmental technologies.

The energy pact will focus on electricity, air, water, transportation and conservation of forests and wetlands ecosystems. Specific plans for the pact were not disclosed, but Paulson said it would build upon an energy and environmental cooperation pact announced last December.

Chinese Vice Premier Wang Qishan, standing beside Paulson at a press conference after the latest round of bilateral talks dubbed a “strategic economic dialogue,” said the two countries will coordinate monetary and fiscal policies, adding both were committed to the principles of free trade.

However, Wang did not elaborate as to what such policy coordination would mean in practice.

PRAISE YUAN’S RISE

Paulson told questioners the United States welcomed the increased pace of appreciation in China’s yuan currency CNYNDF=>—much sought by U.S. manufacturers—and wanted more of it. He made light of questions whether China had complained about the weakening dollar’s impact on oil and other commodity prices.

“I don’t see why Chinese officials can’t say something about the U.S. dollar weakness. Everyone else seems to say it around the world,” Paulson said, adding that he still considered U.S. economic fundamentals to be strong.

But Chinese officials took a more measured tone on the dollar, telling reporters a falling greenback was not in U.S. or anyone else’s interest and calling for the United States to be “responsible” in its attitude.

The proposal for a bilateral investment treaty has emerged as the centerpiece of the talks, and Paulson said there will be several meetings of negotiators on it before the next round of SED talks take place in China in December.

“The U.S. will pursue a comprehensive treaty ... which reflects high standards of investor protection and provides legal protections for all economic sectors,” Paulson said.

U.S. business groups see such an investment treaty as a way to pry open closely guarded Chinese markets for everything from financial services to industrial goods.

A five-page “fact sheet” listed numerous specific advances from the SED talks besides the proposed investment treaty, including China’s agreement to allow more foreign companies to issue shares and depository receipts in China as well as the right for foreign-incorporated banks to issue yuan-denominated bonds.

Throughout the talks, Chinese officials have said they wanted to learn the lessons from the United States’ subprime mortgage meltdown, which they blamed on inadequate regulation, implying they will move at a measured pace in opening markets.

REGULATION AN ISSUE

The governor of the People’s Bank of China, Zhou Xiaochuan, highlighted the part that lax regulation of subprime markets played in triggering U.S. financial market woes, saying Beijing needed time to study how to avoid a similar bind.

Inadequate regulation had caused some of America’s problems, Zhou said, adding: “Now, apart from wanting to learn the U.S.’s experience in macroeconomic policy, we also want to learn some of the lessons they have learned as a result of the turbulence.”

That led a U.S. official to warn China faces “significant costs ... if they were to slow down with respect to their financial sector liberalization,” a sign of the importance that U.S. firms pushing everything from credit cards to insurance attach to getting freer access to Chinese consumers.

U.S. complaints about China’s foreign exchange policies took a back seat at this round of the SED talks, as Paulson applauded recent rises in the yuan’s value.

“I told the Chinese I welcome recent increased pace of appreciation of the RMB and urge China to continue its move toward greater exchange rate flexibility, a crucial tool in controlling inflation and managing the domestic economy,” Paulson said.

The Chinese delegation also went to the White House to meet President Bush at midday Wednesday, underlining the importance the administration puts on trade with China after the United States racked up a record $256.2 billion deficit with China last year.

Source: Reuters US Online Report Top News

When Henry gets back and Dubya has the time, I want to take them both over to NAM headquarters and roll them both another fat doobie again.

I would think the time of the union-bustin’ goons (RDS, matthew, and bbrd) would be better spent blogging at the Wal-Mart China site.

Oh, wait, Wal-Mart China doesn’t have a blog. I wonder why?

get a life ken and get your head out of you know where.

AP
US steel industry wins trade case against China
Friday June 20, 4:42 pm ET
By Martin Crutsinger, AP Economics Writer
US manufacturers win victory that clears the way for penalty tariffs against Chinese pipe

WASHINGTON (AP)—U.S. steel pipe manufacturers, who have been battling a surge in imports from China, won a major victory Friday when the International Trade Commission cleared the way for the imposition of stiff penalty tariffs for the next five years.


The commission voted 5-0 that the U.S. industry was being harmed by the import of circular steel pipe. The decision marked the first time a U.S. industry has won a decision to impose tariffs on a Chinese product based on the argument that the Chinese government was unfairly subsidizing a Chinese industry.

The commission ruling means penalty tariffs ranging from 99 percent to 701 percent will be imposed on Chinese imports of circular welded pipe, a form of pipe used in a variety of construction jobs, such as home plumbing and sprinkler systems.

For more than two decades, the U.S. government had refused to consider subsidy cases against the Chinese government because China was classified as a non-market economy.

However, the Bush administration, facing increasing anger over soaring trade deficits with China, reversed course last year and announced it would treat China in the same way as other countries in disputes involving government subsidies.

The pipe case is the first to clear all the government hurdles for the tariffs to go into effect. Last year, the Commerce Department imposed penalty tariffs on imports of Chinese glossy paper, but the trade body blocked the tariffs by ruling that the domestic industry had not proven it was being materially harmed by the imports.

In the pipe case, the Commerce Department found that the Chinese government was providing unfair subsidies. It also found that the pipe was being sold in this country below the cost of production, a practice known as dumping. The penalty tariffs for the government subsidies, known as countervailing duties, and the antidumping tariffs were upheld by the trade commission vote.

Chinese exports of circular pipe have exploded since 2002, rising from 10,000 tons that year to 750,000 tons in 2007. The U.S. industry said the increase in imports had resulted in the loss of 500 pipe worker jobs, representing about one-quarter of the work force.

Plants making circular welded pipe, also known as standard pipe, are located in 13 states—Pennsylvania, Ohio, Illinois, Arkansas, Texas, Missouri, Alabama, Kansas, California, Wisconsin, Iowa, Tennessee and Arizona.

The case before the government was filed by six pipe producers and the United Steelworkers union, whose president, Leo Gerard, called the commission ruling a major victory that should send a clear message to China and to politicians in this country.

“China is a trade cheat,” Gerard said in a conference call with reporters. “They undermine the market, depress prices and destroy jobs.”

Gil Kaplan, a lawyer representing the pipe companies, predicted the ruling could be the first of a wave of victories by U.S. companies battling Chinese imports.

“This decision marks a fundamental turning point in the U.S.-China trade relationship,” Kaplan said. “The subsidies that the Chinese are giving a whole host of their manufacturing industries is a big reason the U.S. trade deficit has been growing so rapidly. This is the first time the United States is standing up and saying we are not going to put up with this and we will impose duties to offset the subsidies.”

A spokesman for the Chinese embassy in Washington did not immediately return a call seeking comment.

The companies bringing the pipe case were Allied Tube & Conduit, IPSCO Tubulars Inc., Northwest Pipe Co., Sharon Tube Co., Western Tube & Conduit Corp. and Wheatland Tube Co.

The circular welded pipe case is one of a number of cases that have already been filed accusing the Chinese of providing their manufacturers with unfair subsidies. Other cases involve different types of pipe as well as tires, lightweight thermal paper and laminated woven sacks.

The U.S. trade deficit with China hit an all-time high of $256 billion last year, an amount equal to one-third of the total U.S. trade deficit and the largest imbalance ever recorded with a single country. Critics contend that the soaring trade deficits have played a major role in the loss of more than 3 million U.S. manufacturing jobs since 2001.

International Trade Commission: http://www.usitc.gov/

Thursday 19 June 2008

by: The Associated Press

Washington - The Supreme Court on Thursday struck down a California law that blocked use of state money for anti-union activities.

The court ruled on the state’s first-in-the-nation law that bars employers from using state money to influence employees’ views on unions in their workplace.

The justices decided by a vote of 7-2 that federal labor law bars California from regulating union-related activities.

The U.S. Chamber of Commerce, backed by the Bush administration, said the state was trying to silence employers from weighing in on organizing efforts. Federal labor law allows employers to be involved as long as they don’t threaten reprisals.

Justice John Paul Stevens, writing for the court, agreed that the state ventured into territory that belongs to the federal government. Congress already has rejected “California’s policy judgment that partisan employer speech necessarily ‘interferes with an employee’s choice about whether to join or be represented by a labor union’” Stevens said.

California contended that its 2000 law simply sought to ensure that the state doesn’t subsidize an employer’s pro- or anti-union activities, allowing California to maintain a neutral position in labor disputes.

In dissent, Justices Stephen Breyer and Ruth Bader Ginsburg agreed with the state that the law did not amount to the kind of regulation that is prohibited under federal labor law.

California’s law has been followed by similar attempts in other states, including New York, which passed a more limited version. Union activists and pro-union lawmakers elsewhere have been waiting to see the outcome of the California case before deciding how to proceed.

The Chamber challenged the law in 2002 and won in federal court. A three-judge panel of the 9th U.S. Circuit Court of Appeals in San Francisco agreed, but the full 9th Circuit overturned the Chamber’s position in 2006, determining that California’s law was not pre-empted by federal statute.

The case is Chamber of Commerce v. Brown, 06-939.

----------------------------------------------------------------

ddrb,

“Federal labor law allows employers to be involved as long as they don’t threaten reprisals.”

Thanks for posting an article that shows that a company DOES have the right to try to disuade employees from joining a union and it is not against the law or a crime!!

E. Chou in cheap union busting imports are boss!

You might be wasting your time sharing your stash with Dubya. If memory serves me right his drug of choice is COCAINE! He would probably turn his nose up at your doobie offer (pun intended).

Uh huh, Big D..... if you are familiar with the term ‘doobie’ you must also be a drugged-out dreg of society.

Such a shame. He was a nice boy!

Well Ken it looks like I have let the proverbial “cat out of the bag” But I think that RDS (aka Bob) did that also on a previous post. LOL

Hey Bob, looks like you let out the secret to knowing who the old stoners are. According to you, if you know the slang you are automatically a drug user, I guess that makes you as guilty as you have charged others.

RDS: Where’s the thanks for posting the article about U.S. Steel companies winning a 5 to 0 ruling AGAINST China?Enabling tariffs for 5 years of up to 700%-Where’s YOUR patriotism??

I hate America. Chinese communism and Walmart are so much better that I would sell this country out for the benefit of the Waltons or the Wangs. Low prices above all!! Even if it destroys American retail worker wages and lives, destroys American families, destroys American worker mortgage payments to own homes or afford healthcare, destroys American manufacturing jobs, destroys the American economy and even destroys America itself!! THE LOVE OF MONEY IS ALL THAT MATTERS TO ME, NOT AMERICA!! EVEN M ATT HEW VANTRESS IS WITH ME ON THAT!!

Nice touch using the double exclamation points. (!!)

Nice touch using the double exclamation points. (!!)

OMG, I thought that they were deer tracks!! LOL!!

ddrb,

“Where’s the thanks for posting the article about U.S. Steel companies winning a 5 to 0 ruling AGAINST China?Enabling tariffs for 5 years of up to 700%”

Sounds much the same as the UAW did back in the 1970’s against Japan automakers!!  In the end, how much difference did it make?

quality sucks.i hate quality and everything it stands for including american jobs that displace chinese workers in the communist paradise and all the crap they send us from china.wm benefits and you american patriots can all drop dead as quality seeking fools wanting american made quality products and supporting your fellow americans you elitist wm hating hypocrites.everybody does it so wm crap is ok and the entire system must be right.you are all stupid