Barack Obama On China. Say It Ain't So . . . .Oh But It Is.
Barack Obama has called for a BAN on Chinese toy imports into the United States. My first thought upon hearing this was that there must have been some mistake. Now that I realize Mr. Obama actually said this, I am left merely to wonder whether Mr. Obama completely fails to understand world trade or if he is simply calling for this ban as the ultimate in political pandering.
Three months ago, in an interview with Forbes Magazine, I was quoted as saying, "China right now is the current bugaboo."
How right I was/am.
If I had any faith at all in America's politicians, I would be appalled.
It appears most of my fellow bloggers feel likewise.
Citizen Jane Politics Blog views it all with tongue firmly planted in cheek:
Perhaps appealing to the I-don’t-want-my-kids-eating-lead-in-their-toys portion of the electorate, Barack Obama has joined Joe Biden in calling for a complete ban on all toys from China until their safety can be determined. CJP would call for children to play only with sock puppets, but all the socks are made in China too.
O'Regan's World rightly fears what a ban would do to the U.S. economy:
Mr. Obama's true colours shine through in his attempt to further destroy the US economy, though banning all toys from China will without a doubt prop up the US toy manufacturing industry, higher prices would ensure, and as China buys more goods and services from the USA, a trade embargo would have dire consequences if China also decided to stop all imports of American goods and services. It's kinda difficult for the American consumer to purchase US made toys if they are unemployed, due to massive US layoffs in the US over China stopping all US imports.
The China Sourcing Blog rightly thinks the whole toy thing has gotten way out of hand, particularly when quality is improving:
If there is one product that has received way too much attention in 2007, it must be those millions of toys 'made in China,' a tainted few of which caused such an uproar this year. Those 'few,' whether blamed on the faults of foreign importers or on Chinese manufacturers, had a significant impact on global perceptions of the quality of Chinese products. Yet in the aftermath of the Mattel saga Chinese toys, food products and others have all been subjected to stricter quality controls, and have moreover been caught up in 2007 in the general drive for improved quality occurring in China. As reported in a previous posting, China's toy-making heartland in Guangdong province stated already by late November that global demand for its toys had rebounded from the recall dramas of earlier. In the end nothing much has changed, because with Chinese toys still cheap and their quality improving, demand for them will not abate.But not so for Barack Obama.
Raj over at Peking Duck Peking Duck, Raj puts it best by calling it unjust pandering:
Isn't this just pandering to (indeed increasing) consumer fears? I think politicians should seek to calm concerns rather than inflame them. China's safety standards aren't the best in the world, but I think that it is becoming a scapegoat for any manufactured item that develops a problem.* * * *
In some cases, though not necessarily a majority, the problems were caused by American companies giving flawed designs to the Chinese manufacturers. Though it's fair enough to insist on tougher inspections, to ban all Chinese toys for an undisclosed period of time would just result in a tit-for-tat response by Beijing. It's also grossly unjust given many Chinese companies care about the end-consumer and take all reasonable steps to make sure their products are in good condition.
2008Central.net questions the impact on the US economy and wonders why now:
I’ll have to find a better article to exam the statement in a larger context, but this position strikes me as … as … well pretty bad. I mean, given the current economic state, stopping the import of 80% of toys to the United States might present an economic problem for us. Moreover, I wonder how tough we can actually afford to be with China given their growing influence in the liquidity of our economy. No doubt, we need to get tougher with China. But, this is a very different statement than what Sen. Obama made at the NPR debate just a few weeks ago. I wonder what’s changed?
China Venture News analogizes Obama's proposed ban to hunting "rabbits with an elephant gun" and rightly notes "China trade is not a simple 'us and them' issue"
The bottom line though is this: China trade is not a simple "us and them" issue. The companies making toys in Shanghai and Shenzhen for export to America send their profits to New York and are parts of joint ventures that have stockholders in the suburbs of Chicago, Boston, and Topeka.China Trade 101: We may see our trade with China as a case of they sell it and we buy it. But the simple truth is that it's not that simple...
Marvin's 2nd World: puts it all into a near Haiku:
Does he have any idea of how this would hurt Americans? Does he have any idea of how many American businesses would be closed by this? Does he have any idea of how many Americans would become unemployed by this?He has no clue.
International Economic Law and Policy Blog refuses to believe Mr. Obama even meant it.
Chris Carr over at the Cal Poly MBA blog deserves credit for borrowing from a great Talking Heads song to note how Obama's pandering is the "same as it ever was."
Mr. Obama, cut out the xenophobia. Quit it with the pandering.
You may actually be President of the US some day and words like this will haunt you and us.
http://www.chinalawblog.com/cgi-bin/mt/mt-t.cgi/2333
Barack Obama On China. Say It Ain't So . . . .Oh But It Is.:
» Obama: China Is Better Than America Democrat=Socialist
And the slow political suicide continues.
Do any of you liberals out there understand yet that all of the “hopechange” this guy is talking about it is direct change to a socialist, government strangled America?
http://www.youtube.com/watc... []
» Obama And Geithner On China. Elecfion Hangover Or The Way Things Will Be? China Law Blog
James Fallows writes an interesting piece, entitled, "Broader point about Geithner, Obama, China, and 'manipulation'" setting out his concerns on how the Obama administration is treating/going to treat China. To summarize what Fallows says (and hey, if... []
Comments
Well, I say Obama is both clueless and pandering. But then I never got Obamamania.
I will say that not even China can compete with the low prices I paid for my better quality European kids stuff (like my German Kettler tricycle, which really is nicer than the made-in-China stuff, including Radio Flyer). But my solution doesn't scale - it's getting it used off Craigslist.
Posted by: Tony | December 20, 2007 4:21 PM
I think Sen. Obama is in collusion with some Chinese local officials. He is making toy quality job one so that the local officials have an excuse to tighten their grip on manufacturers so that they will have to pay more to these officials to get their products "approved".
Posted by: Puzzle | December 20, 2007 4:41 PM
Since the dawn of time, candidates running for President have used the China issue to get votes. Why anyone thinks it would be different this year is beyond me. The funny thing about China is that it unites the most conservative and the most liberal of the American electorate: the Neo-Conservatives crazies on the right and the Protectionist nutcases on the left. As everyone knows, the way you win primaries--and general elections for that matter--is to appeal to your base and to the voters most likely to vote: those with strong views. A more interesting phenomenon is to look at what happens AFTER candidates enter office. From Carter to Reagan to Bush to Clinton and back to Bush, Presidents rediscover the center or you could say put their campaign persona in the closet for three years and get serious about governing the nation as a WHOLE. What has resulted is a moderate, generally pro-China policy for 25 some odd years.
Welcome to election year politics.
Posted by: Jason | December 20, 2007 6:03 PM
"Well, I say Obama is both clueless and pandering. But then I never got Obamamania."
Typical propaganda from foreign chambers of commerce and the general expat community.
Such a ban would force outsourcers to relocate to other countries. Prices would go up, then come back down but not to their China levels. But hey, Americans need to save more anyways.
I say bring the ban! No one really cares what happens to the China expat community anyways.
"From Carter to Reagan to Bush to Clinton and back to Bush, Presidents rediscover the center or you could say put their campaign persona in the closet for three years and get serious about governing the nation as a WHOLE. What has resulted is a moderate, generally pro-China policy for 25 some odd years."
And what causes that result is K Street, not national security or economic security realism.
Posted by: nanheyangrouchuan | December 20, 2007 10:52 PM
I'm with Jason, US presidential candidates have an almost 100% record for vehemently anti-China positions during the campaign, coupled with a 100% moderate China policy after election. Colour me cynical but relieved.
Obama has had a history of coming out with some very weird economic policy statements, but it doesn't mean I wouldn't still be happy to see him in office.
Posted by: Duncan | December 21, 2007 2:47 AM
Obama has it right. Ban Chinese-made toys. Not only that, we should boycott all Chinese-made goods until China stops abusing human rights. A large portion of those Chinese made toys you're fond of are made w/ prison labor. The rest are made in factories where workers toil 80 hours a week on $2/day. Only economic sanctions will force the Communist Party to change its backward & tyrannical ways. Send a message to Beijing. You want global attention & good will? Stop abusing your own people!
Posted by: Derek | December 21, 2007 7:37 AM
Jason hit the nail on the head, bingo! China, the No.3 enemy (after Iran and North Korea) as far as the intelligent and rational (hehe) American people are concerned, has been the convenient scapegoat for years. Bashing China will win votes, you know it, I know it, everybody knows it.
Following this logic, I suggest Derek go work for the candidate that you like and take your agenda even further and present the following to the American people: Let's stop trading with China, let's stop dealing with China, let's boycott China and everything Chinese; let's cut off diplomatic relations with China and kick the Chinese ambassador out of the glorious US of A. Better yet, let's invade China and perform a regime-change and install a pro-American government in Beijing. :-) We are only trying to help the poor Chinese people.
I guarantee that the candidate that says the above will be the next president. :-)
Posted by: Pffefer | December 21, 2007 2:34 PM
I think Obama's statement, while obviously controversial, is valid. I am all for free trade and China being the world's factory, but if the Chinese are going to specialize in producing my country's toys, I damn well want them to be forced to follow safety regulations and testing that my government agrees to. Why should I accept unilateral assurances by the Chinese government that their imports are safe?
Obama is not for outright banning Chinese toy imports; he is for making Chinese factories create products that meet our standards and he is willing to hit them where it hurts (their wallet) to make it happen.
I admire Obama for standing up against the status quo of big businesses controlling politics whether I agree 100% agree with what he has to say or not.
Posted by: Whitney | December 22, 2007 11:49 AM
Unfortunately, but not surprisingly, this whole issue (deadly toys) has hit too close to home for too many Americans, and now has become too big of an issue to ignore. I think a lot of the overreaction we're seeing has to do with an undercurrent of serious economic anxiety on the part of U.S. citizens who are (also unfortunately) feeling a little extra xenophobia due to years of the economy being horribly mismanaged by our "first MBA president".
However, no one who actually deals with the logistics of China sourcing really thinks that every toy in every shipping container can be inspected -- Obama trying to force the issue in this way might be inadvisable, but the waves of recall after recall have made it unignorable as well (and in dire need of an enforceable solution one way or the other).
I'm still for him, 100%, even if I don't agree with him 100% (I'd be scared if I did, since I don't even agree with MYSELF 100% of the time).
Obama in '08!
Posted by: Brad Kenney | December 22, 2007 6:27 PM
Why did Barack Obama call for a BAN on Chinese toy imports into the United States?
Should it be such a bad thing to have Barack Obama call for a complete ban on all toys from China until their safety can be determined?
Especially, since China's toy manufactures have already proven unsafe for children, containing excessive amounts of lead poisoning, whom these toys will certainly target children and every Chinese employee making them!
If China didn't produce unsafe children toys, there would be NO need to worry about safety. The FACTS have proven China needs to improve the safety of their products, rather than have more legal attorneys such as above drag this issue out in hopes of more legislation for profits.
I'm sure you wouldn't want your children exposed to lead poisoning, so they would not become mentally retard for life, right?
I don't know about you, but seeing how the above attorneys comments completely miss the point and would choose to babble more on this very important concern for our children's safety issues, is really no different then them blood sucking politicians all claiming to be doing us a favor...
What attorney's will heal our children from China's poorly development that allows excessive lead poisoning to be used on children's toys?
Better yet, what attorney's will protect the Chinese employees who are mostly young adults just starting out in life to be subjected to these unsafe working conditions that harm both the individual and society?
Of course, the answer to the above is always about where the money flows...
Nobody in China needs to hunt to find exploited Chinese working as cheap labor, but by all means complain and blame about someone willing to stand up, to care, to insure these unsafe, unhealthy and damaging practices to society are reformed.
It's just business as usual.
But for many children harmed by China's unsafe excessive lead poisoning, whom are not mentally retarded for life, are you going to financially support them, insure their happiness in life and provide them the support they require?
Sure, it is so easy to attorney's to just twist words around, but children right now are being harmed by China's toys...
And it's NOT just toys here that needs only to be addressed.
Consider China's human rights, economic development and rise.
At whose expense will China's rise come?
Lawyers and attorneys are like corporations, as they both operate outside the law, being in that neither take responsibility for their actions...
Why should corporations be without responsibility? Because lawyers and attorneys created this and then do nothing about it.
Everyone in China or the U.S. knows of many examples where corporations have harmed society, have stolen taxpayers money and polluted the environment without a single person going to jail, as the rule of law states a corporation is only a made up individual...
Ever take a ghost to court? But the rest of us cheap labor Chinese employees pay the price of no voice, no representation, and suffer so a few greedy and corrupt can exploit for greater profits...
Wal-Mart has full time employees that depend upon the U.S. government for food stamps. Why should American taxpayers pay the lack of employee salaries while recording record history profits?
It's the same with Exxon, as they charge American more, but record the highest earnings in all their history.
It's time for a RED REVOLUTION now...
Posted by: Red Rabbit | December 26, 2007 11:12 AM
Is that saysing American's child life is more valuble/expensive than china's ? Americans, you can either choose not to use any cheaper, made in China toys, or keep the mouth shut up and help China's Manufacture to raise the safty standad, which protects all the Children in the world. Of course, the first choice donot make any affacts on China's growth. However, compares to the low quality toys of China, the "low quality" of Barack Obama is more worrisome to all mankind!!!
Posted by: Chuznan | January 1, 2008 12:15 AM
Why all "Chinese" toys? Why not all Chinese products? This arbitrary line drawing just shows how stupid he is, and frankly how stupid the American voters are.
Posted by: biff | January 31, 2008 11:34 PM
How refreshing to hear someone finally not afraid to take on the Communist Government of China.
How about producing some toys here right in the US of A?
Right on Qbama!!!!
Posted by: Diane | February 3, 2008 3:28 PM
Hmmm....lets see. Tainted toys, tainted pet food, tainted chocolate. I support his decision and would be everyone on this blog a round of drinks if it should happen. If we could only be so lucky.
Posted by: Kali | May 12, 2008 3:38 PM
People on here noting how black-and-white Obama's comments are know what they're talking about- we couldn't just ban imports of any kind from China at this point, especially while they hold over over $600 billion in dollar assets.
On the other hand, China just banned all food imports from Italy following the Mozzarella/Dioxine issue: why isn't there a similar uproar over this ludicrous over reaction? Italy has one of the highest food hygiene standards in the world, and we know about the dioxine problem because they cared enough to investigate. Many travellers in China get sick simply from eating food prepared in poor hygienic conditions.
Why is ok for China to "protect" its citizens in this way, but when the western nations do it, it's imperialist? Why are they still not sanctioned by the WTO after only paying lip-service to their little counterfeit problem that's hollowing out artisanal european sectors? Why are they similarly not sanctioned for subsidizing their factories in a way that would be considered illegal were it to happen anywhere else?
Sure, Obama oversimplified the problem, but we have to stop pretending that this is a healthy relationship, and good for him for having the guts to speak out on this. Did I miss McCain's big roll-out on China policy? Is McCain even aware that Mao's been dead for 32 years? I'm not so sure.
Posted by: spike | May 21, 2008 1:36 AM
Here is an interesting article about Obama’s plan to have China revalue the yuan:
http://www.therelevantelephant.com/blog/entry/made_in_china_trade
Posted by: Nathan | July 14, 2008 2:17 PM
A few tainted toys? What planet are you on? The products coming from China (not just toys)are a dangerous international disgrace. You have one of the toughest-if not impossible jobs in the world: defending China...
Posted by: rjjrdq | November 20, 2008 10:43 PM
China is lending money to USA and subsidising its goods for US consumers who will keep on buying cheap, poor quality and dangerous Chinese goods till China owns the whole of USA and the future of all Americans.As far as American corporations sending money earned in China owned back to USA is concerned....If this was the case, how did China end up holding a fifth of US debt ? Greedy US corporate bosses like their wall St counterparts have taken a short term view since their bonuses are linked to immediate results.And just like the implosion of Wall st this will lead to implosion of whatever manufacturing prowess is left of the USA.Today China openly threatens to sell US treasuries if USA takes any economic action against it which means US will only fall deeper into the chinese debt trap.
Posted by: jupiter | December 21, 2008 12:42 PM