At the 20^th African Growth and Opportunity Act (AGOA) annual forum in Johannesburg last week, the United States (US) government and Congress, African trade ministers and business representatives, organised labour and civil society agreed it should be reauthorised before expiring in 2025.

When AGOA was last renewed in 2015, it seemed that might be the last renewal, and that this concession should be replaced by a conventional reciprocal free trade agreement (FTA) or several FTAs. AGOA gives eligible sub-Saharan African countries duty-free access to the US market for most products without having to reciprocate. A decade later, no such FTAs are in prospect, not least because the US has gone off free trade.

So, faced with the alternative of no preferential access for Africa after 2025, both sides of the Atlantic seem committed to extending AGOA. The only questions are the period of renewal, and how to ensure more African countries can benefit.

Constance Hamilton, Assistant US Trade Representative for Africa, said before the forum that AGOA ‘has not met the expectations we had in 2000,’ when it was founded. Though some countries have benefitted, AGOA hasn’t been a ‘game changer for the continent’ in boosting its overall economy and regional integration.

So the forum discussed ways to bring in more countries – this after the number was reduced from 35 to 31. Niger and Gabon will be ejected from 1 January 2024 because of coups, and Uganda and Central African Republic for undemocratic behaviour.

However, the priority is renewal. Participating African countries’ trade ministers called for an extension of at least 10 years, and retention of all current beneficiary countries to preserve value chains and support Africa’s industrialisation efforts.

The forum heard that apart from the benefits to Africa, AGOA also supported 155 000 US jobs. The US also backed the programme’s renewal through statements or video messages by President Joe Biden, Secretary of State Antony Blinken and several congressional leaders of both parties. That bipartisan support is vital as reauthorisation would happen in Congress.

And just after the forum closed, Democratic Party Senator Chris Coons – an influential friend of Africa on the foreign relations committee – released a draft bill to renew AGOA until 2041. ‘This long-term extension would provide businesses with the predictability needed to invest in Sub-Saharan Africa at a time when many firms are looking to diversify their supply chains and reduce dependence on China,’ Coons said.

His bill proposed several changes to expand AGOA’s usage, reflecting many issues discussed at the forum. For instance, to extend the programme and integrate it with the African Continental Free Trade Area (AfCFTA), Coons’ bill would modify AGOA’s rules of origin to allow inputs from North African AfCFTA members.

His bill would also keep more countries in AGOA by only ‘graduating’ them out when they have maintained high-income status for five consecutive years. This would avoid removing some countries and letting them back in if their economies fluctuated around the high-income threshold – as Mauritius recently did. The draft bill also proposes that the current annual eligibility reviews of all 49 sub-Saharan African states happen only every three years.

However, Coons’ bill has a sharp sting in the tail. It intends to eject South Africa from AGOA by calling for an immediate ‘out-of-cycle’ review of the country’s eligibility. The move reflects resentment on both sides of the aisle in Congress about Pretoria’s warm relations with Russia, Hamas and its sponsor Iran.

Stephen Lande, President of international business advisers Manchester Trade, supported the bill – but as the first step to renew and then enhance AGOA. He told ISS Today that South Africa’s Trade, Industry and Competition Minister Ebrahim Patel made the same proposal at the end of the forum. Prompt renewal would avoid a decline in orders in AGOA’s most successful sector (garments assembled from Far East fabrics), since it takes about two years to complete an order.

But Lande said the changes in Coons’ bill wouldn’t correct some of AGOA’s major challenges. He proposes giving the US administration more discretion in deciding which countries should be removed, instead of being forced to remove those that fall foul of the bill’s conditionalities. At present, more than 10 of the 49 countries are not eligible for AGOA benefits.

‘The Administration should be able to weigh the advantages of removing a country versus the collateral damage. For instance, allowing a dictator to scapegoat the US for his own failings, or letting China in, or harming the very groups AGOA is designed to assist (women in the sewing trade who have been harmed by AGOA suspensions in Madagascar and Ethiopia), or disrupting supply chains.’

Lande said he would also ease the rules of origin, which now require 35% value added in the AGOA member country for the product to qualify. He noted that with components becoming more expensive relative to labour, the 35% threshold was unrealistic. Lande said he would allow duty-free imports of processed cocoa products that currently incur punitive tariffs as they contain dairy products and sugar.

He would designate all AfCFTA members as members of AGOA if they were otherwise eligible – and not just include them for cumulation of inputs as Coons proposes. This would embrace North African countries that aren’t currently part of AGOA.

All these proposals would deepen and extend AGOA benefits. However, Lande’s proposal to give the US administration more discretion to consider other strategic factors, like deciding whether or not to expel African states for bad behaviour, would provoke difficult ethical debates.

Is it better to incentivise democracy by expelling countries for undemocratic behaviour – at the cost of greater African economic advancement and integration? Or to prioritise economic development, believing this will eventually boost democracy? A perennial imponderable.

To read the full article, click here.

The post bodog online casino|Welcome Bonus_scapegoat appeared first on bodog.

• For 2023, we are downgrading our forecast for world merchandise trade volume growth to 0.8 per cent, less than half the 1.7 per cent growth we forecast last April.
• However, the outlook for next year has not been downgraded and remains relatively strong. We predict 3.3 per cent trade growth in 2024, slightly higher than our estimate of 3.2 per cent in April.

So what has led to this revised forecast?

bodog online casino

The downgrade is not entirely surprising as we had already considered the risks to be mostly on the downside in our April forecast.

Several factors have contributed to this revision. The global economy has been grappling with rising inflation and high interest rates since the fourth quarter of 2022, particularly in the European Union and the United States.

While falling energy prices and the end of Chinese COVID-19 pandemic restrictions raised hopes of a quick rebound, strained property markets have prevented a stronger recovery from taking root in China. Added to these factors, the ongoing Ukraine conflict also continues to weigh on the global economy.

The trade slowdown in the first half of 2023 appears to have involved a large number of economies and a wide array of goods, specifically certain categories of manufactured goods such as iron and steel, office and telecom equipment, textiles and clothing, although sales of passenger vehicles have surged in 2023.

The stronger growth predicted for 2024 is likely to be driven by increased trade in goods closely linked to the business cycle, such as machinery and consumer durables, which tend to recover when economic growth stabilizes.

Figures for world GDP growth at market exchange rates, anticipated to be 2.6 per cent in 2023, show little change since the April forecast. However, shifts in the regional composition of growth could influence trade.

Specifically, GDP growth rates for North America in 2023 and 2024 have been revised upwards, from 1.5 per cent and 1.0 per cent, respectively, in April, to 2.2 per cent and 1.4 per cent in the current report. Meanwhile, estimates for Asia for 2023 and 2024 have been revised downwards, from 4.2 per cent and 4.3 per cent, respectively, in April, to 4.1 per cent and 4.0 per cent. European GDP growth in 2023 should come in at 1.0 per cent, up slightly from 0.9 per cent in the April forecast, while growth in 2024 should be 1.4 per cent, down from 1.8 per cent previously. Finally, output in the Commonwealth of Independent States (CIS) region is expected be stronger than previously forecast, both this year and next year.

In terms of imports, demand appears to be weakening in manufacturing economies, with import volumes in 2023 expected to contract by between 0.4 per cent and 1.2 per cent in North America, South America, Europe and Asia. Meanwhile, imports appear set to rise sharply in regions that export fuels disproportionately, thanks to the increased revenues flowing from higher prices.

Effects of trade fragmentation on the global economy

Many people may be wondering how much of the current trade slowdown is due to trade fragmentation, possibly as a result of rising geopolitical tensions, and how much is due to tighter financial conditions as countries around the world raised interest rates to fight inflation. The report suggests that, while we do see initial signs of fragmentation, we do not see evidence of broad-based de-globalization.

For example, the share of intermediate goods in world trade, which provides an indication of the health and extent of global supply chains — a key indication of the extent of trade fragmentation — fell to 48.5 per cent in the first half of 2023, having averaged 51.0 per cent over the previous three years. While this suggests that supply chains may be contracting, it may also simply reflect higher commodity prices as these have a greater influence on the cost of intermediate goods than on final goods costs.

A possible indication of an increase in near-shoring is the recent decline in the share of Asian trading partners in US trade in parts and accessories, which is an important component of intermediate goods. However, while this share fell from 43 per cent in the first half of 2022 to 38 per cent in the first half of 2023, it remains close to the pre-pandemic (2019) share of 39 per cent.

Similarly, the share of politically like-minded trading partners (as measured by United Nations voting patterns) in US total trade recently rose to 77 per cent in the first half of 2023, from 74 per cent in the first half of 2022. Again, while this could signal increased friend-shoring, in fact the 2023 share is very close to the 2019 share of 77 per cent.

These findings are in line with the results we presented in the 2023 World Trade Report on 12 September 2023. While they do not yet suggest broad-based de-globalization, nevertheless, we will continue to monitor these trends carefully going forward.

To read the full edition of the WTO’s “Global Trade Outlook and Statistics” which is referenced above, click here. 

To read the full blog by Ralph Ossa, click here.

The post bodog poker review|Most Popular_cycle, such as machinery appeared first on bodog.

In the words of Benjamin Franklin: “No nation was ever ruined by trade, even seemingly the most disadvantageous.” 

Over the last decades, not only were nations not harmed by trade, but they have been reaping unimaginable benefits, which have transformed the standard of living and afforded them greater bodog online casino access to competitively priced goods.

The Arabian Gulf region is an important global trade hub that depends heavily on exporting oil derivates and raw materials to the world. After oil and gas, the chemical and petrochemicals industry is the second largest industry in the region and plays a vital role in the Gulf Cooperation Council economies. The value of chemical trade flow in the GCC reached $88.6 billion in 2021, with exports accounting for $68.6 billion: an increase of 56.5 percent in value in 2021 compared to the year before.

Off the back of this growth, chemical trade is emerging at the forefront of the regional agenda. In 2021, the region set a new record with its trade surplus reaching $53.7 billion (the highest since 2009).

Furthermore, growth in the GCC chemical industry translates into better job creation in the region. In 2021, the chemical sector accounted for 53,900 direct and 107,800 indirect jobs, and 48,500 induced jobs — or a total of 210,200 jobs.

While regional chemical trade has been buoyant over the last three years, opportunities to improve the chemical industry’s international trade position certainly exist. But to achieve this, the policymakers’ role is of paramount importance if we are to see growth in the share of free trade agreements and preferential trade agreements between the GCC and its trading partners. Such deals are increasingly being seen as beneficial to GCC’s economic growth as well as the sustainability of the regional chemical industry. From helping to raise living standards to attract foreign investment, fostering innovation in manufacturing, and connecting businesses with people, free trade deals have an unmatched potential to make industries more sustainable, improve revenues, generate more jobs for the local population, and facilitate the development of advanced technologies.

Free trade agreements will help the region’s downstream players to boost their innovation output and become more competitive globally. Robust provisions on intellectual property rights protection that potentially go beyond the standard protection envisaged in the World Trade Organization’s Agreement on Trade-Related Aspects of Intellectual Property Rights would reduce costs of trading in IP-sensitive goods and promote innovation in sectors, such as the chemical industry. 

Free trade deals not only reduce and eliminate tariffs, but they also help to overcome behind-the-border barriers. As a result, companies can focus on producing and selling goods that best utilize their resources, while other businesses import scarce or locally unavailable goods and raw materials. It is a win-win situation for all. There is good news for local industries too. FTAs are proven to help small and medium-sized businesses to become more competitive and less reliant on government subsidies. Just imagine the sheer value that free trade agreements can unlock — for local communities, consumers, and the overall economy.

While it must be recognized that FTAs could reduce government revenues, which come from existing customs duties, this reduction in revenue would be offset by enabling GCC commodity exports to gain access to protected markets. Gaining access to new markets will in turn enhance the netback for regional exports and generate higher revenue for chemical firms, which are wholly owned by GCC governments.

The international trade landscape has been undergoing a series of tectonic shifts in the face of changing chemicals supply and demand centers, emerging economies claiming a larger share of international trade, world events, such as the war in Ukraine, supply chain challenges, the COVID-19 pandemic, and increasing protectionism.

So, what opportunities lie ahead for new FTAs? The GCC region has the highest intraregional trade share and intensity with China, India, and Turkiye. It has lower trade costs with this group of countries when compared with other economies. Consequently, free trade agreements with China, India, and Turkiye will prove to be beneficial.

If the GCC is signing or planning to sign such an agreement, it would be essential to know which goods are the most efficiently produced and select the most profitable sectors to maximize gains.

In a recent white paper issued by the Gulf Petrochemicals and Chemicals Association, we shared exclusive insights that can help policymakers evaluate the potential economic impact of a free trade agreement. It is a must-read for anyone looking to enhance their understanding of FTAs and their vital role in the chemical industry and the region.

To conclude, as we look to the next decades when the global population is projected to exceed 9 billion by 2050, demand for chemicals and agri-nutrients will continue to rise, creating unprecedented pressure on the industry to deliver its goods to an exploding global population. The GCC chemical industry has strong potential to benefit from the global increase in chemical demand, projected to double by 2050 and provide life-enhancing, safer, cheaper, and more durable chemical products to communities across the world.

To ensure we can successfully deliver on this objective, we need a robust and supportive local and international trade policy framework that helps to advance FTA negotiations which have been stalling for decades and addresses where and to what extent trade opportunities exist, while carefully evaluating the risks and downsides of a potential deal.

The chemical industry is vital to the smooth functioning, prosperity, and growth of the global economy and the GCC region. We, therefore, all share a responsibility to come together and cooperate in this new era of trade and reimagine what progress looks like today and into the future.

• Dr. Abdulwahab Al-Sadoun is the secretary-general of the Gulf Petrochemicals and Chemicals Association.

To read the full blog, please click here.

The post Bodog Poker|Welcome Bonus_.7 billion (the highest appeared first on bodog.

In 2013, Connie Stacey had a business idea: to create a clean, green and quiet replacement for fossil-fuel-powered generators. Stacey, 48, had worked in information technology previously and thought she could use battery technology as an alternative to diesel or gasoline. Her version would be bigger than the batteries in mobile phones, require no technicians or engineers to use, and could be infinitely scalable. She built a prototype, named it the Grengine, and started a company called Growing Greener Innovations to build and market it.

Then came the challenges, first in terms of scaling her product and then delivering it to global markets. She ran into a barrier so many women entrepreneurs face: securing financing. As of 2022, only 2% of venture capital worldwide went to women-owned businesses, with most of those funding decisions made by men. Stacey’s challenges securing financing also underscored the soft discrimination some women face. “I had already built the prototype and there were people who asked me, ‘But who actually invented it?’”

Then there was the issue of bringing her product to the global market. Only 15% of businesses engaged in international trade are led by women, according to the World Trade Organization (WTO).

Stacey finally found success in 2018, when she entered a contest sponsored by the US Department of Defense, where the innovations themselves were the main focus rather than the founders or their fundraising. Stacey won in the energy-efficiency and grid technologies category, and that gave her the momentum she needed. She won awards from 14 other organizations from 2018 to 2023, as well as contracts to supply the Grengine to clients ranging from Canada’s military to a mine in Saskatchewan and a golf resort in Wales.

Today, Stacey exports to six countries, which puts her in that small minority of women-led businesses engaged in international trade identified by the WTO.

Breaking down the gender gap

The imbalance in international trade is one of many inequalities that comprise a global gender gap that will take another 135 years to close at the current pace of policy reform, according to the World Economic Forum (WEF).

The post bodog casino|Welcome Bonus_India involved small, appeared first on bodog.

The Inflation Reduction Act (IRA) approved by the U.S. Congress last August continues to provoke transatlantic frictions. The European Union has welcomed the climate investments in the IRA that will help the United States meet its net-zero commitments under the Paris Agreement. It is concerned, however, that the local content provisions in the bill’s $369 billion in subsidies for electric vehicle (EV) purchases not only violate World Trade Organization (WTO) rules but also favor U.S.-based producers and suppliers.

The Biden administration is not protectionist, and it does not advocate a law of the jungle international economic order where might makes right. But in the effort last summer to pass the IRA before the mid-term elections, the political attraction of a bill that combined measures to combat climate change, create jobs, and push back against Chinese dominance of EV supply chains—a powerful trifecta—may have led to less attention being paid to its implications for key U.S. trading partners.

The administration has already taken steps to assuage European concerns. At the end of December, the U.S. Department of the Treasury issued updated guidance clarifying that U.S. consumers who lease (rather than purchase) imported European electric vehicles will be able to take advantage of the $7,500 in tax credits the IRA provides for “commercial vehicles,” which do not have to meet the stringent North American (United States, Canada, Mexico) requirements for the supply of battery components and critical minerals and as a location of final assembly.

By next month the department has also indicated that it will clarify one key aspect of the IRA with bearing on imports from the European Union, Japan, the UK, and other foreign automobile producers: the language in the bill that exempts imports of EV critical minerals from the North American origin rules if they come from countries with which the United States has a “free trade agreement.”

The treasury department has already pointed out that “the term ‘free trade agreement’ is not defined in the Inflation Reduction Act (or in any other statute).” That flexibility suggests there should be room to take steps to further reduce transatlantic tensions. One option could be to negotiate a new, plurilateral critical minerals or raw bodog casino materials agreement among the United States, the European Union, and other economies. Such sectoral deals are normally allowed under WTO rules. Another approach would be to apply the term “free trade agreement” to the 48-member WTO Government Procurement Agreement that includes the EU and other key U.S. trading partners.

A third option would involve taking a more expansive view of what can and should lead to increased trade.

While the U.S.-EU Trade and Technology Council (TTC) launched in 2021 does not include new, de jure market access commitments through tariff reductions, it does commit the two sides to “promote U.S. and EU competitiveness and prosperity and the spread of democratic, market-oriented values.”

If the TTC can achieve its specific objectives—among them, strengthening transatlantic supply chains, forging common rules for artificial intelligence, and creating joint approaches to sustainable trade and decarbonization—it will lead de facto to more trade across the Atlantic. The end results of the TTC and a traditional free trade agreement (for example, the Transatlantic Trade and Investment Partnership launched in 2013 but never concluded) would then be similar, even if the means differ.

In a shifting global environment where trade policy is rightly becoming focused not just on economic growth but also on values and security (protecting the climate, reducing economic dependence on China) a new gauge for what defines a close trading partner, one less dependent on tariff reductions, is needed. While it may be premature for the IRA to grant the U.S-EU Trade and Technology Council the status of a “free trade agreement,” that term would benefit from a rethink to adapt it to the times.

Peter S. Rashish, Vice President; Director, Geoeconomics Program

To read the full article, click here. 

The post bodog online casino|Welcome Bonus_guidance appeared first on bodog.

WASHINGTON, DC – Africa is on the cusp of an economic transformation. By 2050, consumer and business spending on the continent is expected to reach roughly $16.1 trillion. The coming boom offers tremendous opportunities for global businesses – especially US companies looking for new markets. But unless African policymakers remove existing barriers to regional trade and investment, the continent’s economy will struggle to reach its true potential.

Two major trade agreements – the African Growth and Opportunity Act (AGOA) and the African Continental Free Trade Area (AfCFTA) – will make it easier for African countries to trade with one another, and with the United States. Together, the agreements promise to remove longstanding impediments to industrialization.

AGOA, passed by the US Congress in 2000, gives countries in Sub-Saharan Africa preferential trade access, allowing them to export tariff-free products to the US. Although it will expire in 2025, US President Joe Biden’s Sub-Saharan Africa strategy, unveiled in August, highlights its positive impact and promises to work with Congress on ways to proceed after AGOA lapses.

AfCFTA, on the other hand, is an intra-African trade agreement with no expiration date. Established in 2018, its goal is to deepen trade ties between African countries by removing tariff and non-tariff barriers.

Although these agreements’ scope, focus, beneficiaries, and structure differ significantly from each other, they are essential to strengthening African regional integration. Rather than viewing them as separate or competing agreements, policymakers and investors should recognize how they can complement each other in creating, sustaining, and transforming value chains across the continent.

Value creation is critical to Africa’s economic transformation. In 2014, manufactured goods accounted for about 41.9% of the trade between African countries, compared to 14.8% of their exports to the rest of the world. Greater regional integration will provide Africa with a larger supply market, which will accelerate manufacturing specialization and make African producers more competitive globally. More robust manufacturing industries will provide jobs for low-skilled workers – particularly those not currently integrated into the formal economy. This, in turn, will increase average household incomes, boost domestic demand, spur innovation and diversification, and help protect local economies against external shocks.

AGOA has already created some opportunities for cross-border value chains. Yet despite some success stories like Madagascar’s apparel industry, which relies on an extensive regional supply chain, such opportunities remain limited. While integration has improved since AGOA’s implementation, particularly since 2015, it remains somewhat superficial: less than 17% of Africa’s commercial value is currently generated through intra-African trade.

The real game changer is the AfCFTA. By removing tariffs for a wide range of products across the continent, it will lower production costs and shift foreign direct investment toward manufactured goods, while also reducing transit costs and shortening supply chains – major benefits in a globalized economy.

The International Monetary Fund projects that, under the AfCFTA, Africa’s expanded goods and labor markets will become more efficient, driving a significant increase in African countries’ competitiveness. By creating a true continental market that increases intra-African trade and impels African countries to participate in “production sharing” at a higher rate, the AfCFTA will likely provide a further incentive to US-based multinationals, which will be able to access a larger market and establish a major global hub. AGOA has already spurred many companies to invest in Africa, and the successful implementation of the AfCFTA will strengthen this trend.

The challenge for policymakers is to accelerate this process and ensure that the two programs complement each other. One way to do this is to deepen and broaden communication channels between Africa and the US, making it easier for investors interested in doing business in Africa to be better prepared for the expected growth in demand for regionally-sourced products. Supporting individual countries in implementing the AfCFTA would also help streamline the process.

A key problem that remains to be addressed is AGOA’s eligibility criteria, which are set on a country-by-country basis. These criteria can be detrimental to regional integration, as one country’s removal could affect another country’s supply inputs, thereby creating a ripple effect. For example, when Madagascar was removed from the AGOA-eligible list in 2010 following a coup d’état, the five African countries from which it had been sourcing apparel inputs were also punished. Considering the broader effect of country-specific sanctions will help prevent unintended investor risk.

Effective regional integration is essential for Africa. Without it, the continent will continue to be overlooked and outpaced globally in manufacturing, information technologies, and agriculture. When considering the future configuration of both AGOA and the AfCFTA, policymakers should regard them as complementary mechanisms for ensuring Africa’s long-term economic development.

Landry Signé is a professor and managing director at Thunderbird School of Global Management and a senior fellow at the Brookings Institution.

To read the full piece, please click here.

The post bodog sportsbook review|Most Popular_demand, and appeared first on bodog.

However, China’s rise to economic stardom could not have been achieved without its heavy integration with the technologically developed world, particularly the United States. When it comes to international trade, science and technology can cross national borders much easier than goods or people. International cooperation can play a large role in propelling technological advancement forward. Within the last three decades, internet protocols, hardware design and manufacturing, software development, and IT standards have evolved within a global system, with countries relying on each other for shared knowledge and techniques. As such, both China and the United States’ technological development fields have benefited greatly from global interdependence. 

However, in recent years, the possibility of the United States and China’s economic “decoupling” has become a hotly debated topic among scholars and the media. Their decoupling refers to the “deliberate dismantling—and eventual re-creation elsewhere—of some of the sprawling cross-border supply chains that have defined globalization and especially the U.S.-China relationship in recent decades.” While decoupling is becoming an increasingly popular path, political desires to decouple must not lead to rash decision-making. After years of interdependence, decoupling the two most powerful nations has serious implications, not only for the future of technological development, but for the broader objectives of global cooperation.

Bodog Poker

Despite the term becoming an increasingly used buzzword in international economic discussions, decoupling in our globalized world has not been an easy phenomenon to measure. According to research conducted by faculty at the Columbia Business School, one new innovative method to determine decoupling is by focusing on patent technology between the two nations. By using the propensity for “domestic patents in a technology area to cite foreign patents relative to citing their own,” researchers created a measure that indicates the degree of technological decoupling between the U.S. and China. Specifically, the research focuses on three historical “screenshots”—2000, the year before China’s entry to the WTO; 2009, the end of the Great Recession; and 2019, the end of the sample period, which coincides with open attempts of decoupling. By using these three periods of time, researchers were able to chart the development of decoupling over the last two decades as economic rivalry heightened between the two nations.

After integrating comprehensive patent data from the U.S. and China, the study finds that overall, technology integration between both countries steadily increased throughout the first two decades of the 21st century. As expected, during this period, China also exhibited more dependence on U.S. technology than the U.S did on Chinese technology; after joining the WTO and integrating with world markets, China naturally relied heavily on U.S. innovation to aid its growth and development. Interestingly, however, while China’s dependence on the U.S. increased during the first decade studied, its technological integration with the U.S. decreased since the end of the Great Recession. In other words, the propensity for new Chinese patents to cite U.S. technology steadily decreased in the last decade, marking a significant change in the relationship between the two nations.

Understanding These Trends

This research provides a good baseline for how technological decoupling is unfolding between the U.S. and China, and the trends can be applied to predict the future relationship between the two nations. While the unprecedented interdependence between the U.S. and China throughout the last two decades cannot be quickly nor easily ended, the raw patent data reveals one clear indication: technological decoupling has already begun. And because of the intensifying bodog sportsbook review state of economic and geopolitical rivalry both nations find themselves in today, this decoupling will likely gain momentum in the years to come. 

As a growing mutual distrust has colored national attitudes in recent years, decoupling is increasingly viewed as a politically favorable path in both the United States and China. Despite their many differences, both Trump and Biden campaigned on a desire for the United States to decouple from China by decreasing the U.S.’s dependence on Chinese products and supply chains. The COVID-19 pandemic has also heightened domestic political rhetoric on decoupling from China and greatly influenced public opinion about the U.S.’ relationship with the nation. An early 2020 poll on attitudes towards China found that 75% of Americans believe the U.S. should end its dependence on China, specifically when it comes to Chinese medical technologies and exports. Moreover, when asked whether they agreed that the U.S.-China trade relationship should change in a post-pandemic world, 72% of respondents agreed, indicating that an overwhelming majority of the U.S. population holds a negative attitude toward integration with China.

Although China benefited immensely from the economic integration with the U.S., which characterized its rise to economic stardom, China now seeks to decrease its dependence on foreign countries for critical technologies and products. From the Chinese perspective, the government considers decoupling from the U.S. as a potential means to achieve greater independence from the West.  For the U.S., decoupling from China focuses primarily on discouraging Chinese imports in order to safeguard American jobs and national security. For China, however, decoupling serves a broader objective: it marks a shift in China’s strategic focus from one of economic growth to one of economic control. By decreasing its reliance on foreign technologies, China seeks to promote domestic dominance of Chinese firms and leverage this dominance into global competitiveness, thereby becoming a more independent and powerful economic hegemon. 

Ultimately, we know that innovation decoupling has already begun, and because of both nations’ political atmospheres, we can predict that these trends will continue to gain momentum. Although there is a growing political desire within both countries to decrease dependence on each other in this new age of international competition, the immense consequences of innovation decoupling between two world superpowers must be thoroughly considered before it is too late.

Implications for the Future

International cooperation is paramount to properly address the global issues the world faces. However, technological decoupling inhibits the necessary cooperation and integration required to combat challenges that transcend national boundaries. International issues, like the climate crisis and future pandemics, require that the U.S. and China share knowledge, technologies, and innovation with each other in order to be better equipped to solve them. 

While there is a natural tendency for nations to decouple on security technologies, there are pervasive consequences when technological decoupling escalates to a point beyond these conventional boundaries. As political tensions rise between the U.S. and China, complete innovation decoupling becomes more and more of a possibility. Technological decoupling in fields such as microchips and semiconductors could set the stage for decoupling in fields such as green technology or antiviral medications. The implications of decoupling and the rhetoric that surrounds it are far-reaching, and when it comes to the U.S. and China’s cooperation on climate change, we have already begun to see its effects.

A decade ago, the cooperation between the U.S. and China was a primary driver for global efforts to combat the climate crisis. The two nations funded joint research projects, shared best practices with regulators and academics, and most notably, made a joint public pledge to “work constructively together for the common good.” Since then, the world has changed significantly. Rhetoric on decoupling has grown. Both nations have become steeped in suspicion of each other’s intentions. And given that technological decoupling has already begun, it is no wonder why this cooperation is gone.

The implications of complete innovation decoupling between the U.S. and China must not be ignored. There is too much at stake. The solutions to adequately addressing global crises rely on changing the existing trajectory of decoupling between the world’s strongest two economies, before it is too late. As the world descends into intense economic and geopolitical conflict, technological development is one area where international cooperation must not be forsaken for rash politics. 

Nicolas Lama (CC ‘24) is a Senior Editor at CPR and a sophomore studying Political Science, Economics, and East Asian Languages and Cultures. At the Columbia Business School, Nicolas is an undergraduate research fellow, where he conducts research on the economic and political intersections between the United States and China. He was awarded the Critical Language Scholarship to study Mandarin this summer at the Changchun Humanities and Sciences College through the U.S. State Department with the goal of fostering more future mutual understanding between the two nations.

To read the full commentary by the Columbia Political Review, please click here.

The post Bodog Poker|Welcome Bonus_decades of the 21st century. appeared first on bodog.

Local content requirements can help reverse our dependence on foreign nations both by discouraging multinational corporations from relying on fragile global supply chains, and also encouraging them instead to build productive capacity in the United States. They will increase certainty by reducing the likelihood of shortages and scarcity and the price swings like we see today. With this approach, we can exchange volatility for stability in our markets, and industrial decay for industrial strength.

To read the full commentary on the New York Times, please click here.

The post Bodog Poker|Welcome Bonus_governs federal government appeared first on bodog.

The overall growth rate will remain near 6 percent this year, a historically high level after a recession, but the expansion reflects a vast divergence in the fortunes of rich and poor countries, the International Monetary Fund said in its latest World Economic Outlook report.

Worldwide poverty, hunger and unmanageable debt are all on the upswing. Employment has fallen, especially for women, reversing many of the gains they made in recent years.

Uneven access to vaccines and health care is at the heart of the economic disparities. While booster shots are becoming available in some wealthier nations, a staggering 96 percent of people in low-income countries are still unvaccinated.

“Recent developments have made it abundantly clear that we are all in this together and the pandemic is not over anywhere until it is over everywhere,” Gita Gopinath, the I.M.F.’s chief economist, wrote in the report.

The outlook for the United States, Europe and other advanced economies has also darkened. Factories hobbled by pandemic-related restrictions and bottlenecks at key ports around the world have caused crippling supply shortages. A lack of workers in many industries is contributing to the clogs. The U.S. Labor Department reported Tuesday that a record 4.3 million workers quit their jobs in August — to take or seek new jobs, or to leave the work force.

The post Bodog Poker|Welcome Bonus_until it is over everywhere appeared first on bodog.

While France may be the odd-man-out in the submarine deal, it should recognize that this has nothing to do with a weakened U.S. commitment to transatlantic relations and more to do with its primary focus on balancing and containing China’s growing influence. Along with most EU member states, France has shown an unwillingness to take on China, preferring to forge politically appetizing economic agreements with China even if they come at the expense of long-term strategic interests. 

While the Europeans might defend their approach to China by arguing they want to maintain strategic autonomy, the reality is that on many digital issues, they treat China like a preferred partner while giving the cold shoulder to the United States. The clearest example of this has been in the EU’s approach to digital policy. The EU has launched multiple efforts aimed at the United States, its close ally and partner, from attempting to build a European cloud to counter U.S. cloud providers to repeated attacks on successful U.S. tech companies through new tax, data protection, and competition policies. Most galling of all is the EU’s resistance to the transfer of European personal data to the United States, claiming that the U.S. government is an untrustworthy partner—despite U.S. intelligence agencies supporting counter-terrorism activity in Europe—while seemingly ignoring the risk presented by the Chinese government by not scrutinizing data transfers to China Never mind how the EU overlooks the surveillance activities of its own member states. 

Europe loves seeing itself as a global regulatory superpower when it comes to digital policy. Yet, the EU’s actual impact on global digital regulations—whether on data protection, AI, cybersecurity, or digital markets—will inevitably be limited if it fails to work with like-minded partners to embed its values and approaches in a larger part of the global digital economy. As much as it may try, it can’t enforce its regulations on everyone, certainly not on China. Pragmatic cooperation with the United States (and other like-minded partners) is a way to extend its strategic influence and promote its interests and values. The contrast with digital authoritarian and protectionist countries could not be clearer in terms of what other values and rules may fill the vacuum in the absence of global leadership. 

While some EU officials have stated that they do not want the TTC to focus on confronting China, ignoring the challenge posed by China’s rise is both impractical and imprudent. From AI to supply chains to intellectual property to 5G to cybersecurity, digital trade and technology policy will be heavily shaped by China’s actions and ambitions. Thankfully some EU member states, like Denmark, recognize what’s at stake and remain committed to transatlantic cooperation. Both U.S. and European strategic interests require limiting Chinese innovation mercantilism and digital authoritarianism—when the EU does not work with the United States on this goal, it should not be surprising to see the U.S. government focus attention on other allies and partners who want to build this multilateral coalition. Hopefully, other EU member states, and the European Commission, put France’s emotions to one side and get back to focusing on the region’s interests. As the great French leader Charles de Gaulle stated, “no nation has friends, only interests.” It is in the interest of France and the EU to work with the United States on the TTC. 

Daniel Castro is vice president at the Information Technology and Innovation Foundation (ITIF) and director of ITIF’s Center for Data Innovation.

Nigel Cory is an associate director covering trade policy at the Information Technology and Innovation Foundation. He focuses on cross-border data flows, data governance, intellectual property, and how they each relate to digital trade and the broader digital economy.

To read the full commentary from the Information Technology & Innovation Foundation, please click here.

The post bodog online casino|Welcome Bonus_surprising to see the appeared first on bodog.