The economic relationship between China and the United States is the defining issue of our day. While debates over health care are vital to American society, and while challenges ranging from Iran to Afghanistan to North Korea are real, nothing will determine the arc of the coming decades – or will shape domestic life and prosperity in the United States – more than the emergence of China as a global economic superpower unrivalled except by America.
The rise of China is hardly a secret, but because it is a complex economic that is constantly evolving, it gets less attention than hot-button issues. Absent a real crisis between the two, the relationship is more about the flow of capital and the nature of global business than it is about heated battles inside the Beltway or on Main Street. And while the rise of China and America’s increased dependency on Chinese loans to fund its deficits certainly generates anxiety, it’s mostly amorphous barring some specific issue to focus it.
How that relationship came to be is the subject of my new book, Superfusion: How China and America Became One Economy and Why the World’s Prosperity Depends On It. While this economic fusion has taken more than two decades to evolve, with the crisis of the past year, it has become both a tighter embrace and one more fraught with tension. It’s to the credit of both governments – for now – that those tensions have not boiled over.
For their part, the Chinese are concerned about the viability of the American economic system and about the long-term value of their more than $1 trillion of investments in American bonds. They are also dependent on the market even a recession-mired America offers, with exports to the United States still near $300 billion a year. Americans are worried about the effect of lower-cost Chinese labor on U.S. jobs, even though most of the lost jobs were lost long ago and have as much to do with the corrosive effects of technology on labor as they do with cheap production in China. Meanwhile, China offers turbo-charged growth for American companies, as the Chinese government turns to companies like Caterpillar and GE to help with the industrial build-out and as Chinese consumers buy more goods – even a bankrupt GM sold 1.6 million cars in China this year, more than in the United States.
But tripwires abound. The Treasury Department just submitted one of its many required reports to Congress, this one on currency and the Chinese currency especially. The Treasury, Secretary Geithner and by extension the Obama administration decided not to label China a currency manipulator, though the report did express serious concerns that the value of the Chinese currency pegged to the dollar left it undervalued and hence responsible for continued global imbalances.
These reports are dry in nature and are nothing if not wonky. But make no mistake: this was a delicate decision and a consequential one. If the Obama administration had labeled China a manipulator, the next step would be automatic sanctions. That in turn might have generated a domino effect of epic proportions. And given how entwined the U.S. and Chinese economies have become, any negative ripples threaten to halt what is for now a very delicate and incomplete global economic recovery.
For now, the relationship between the two economies is symbiotic, and is providing a degree of stability to both societies. In the absence of Chinese money, the Obama administration could not be spending its way out of recession, and without American companies operating in China and without Americans purchasing Chinese goods, China wouldn’t have the money to lend and spend. But no country likes to see its sovereignty eroded and its ability to be master of its own fate undermined – and that is precisely what the economic relationship between the China and the United States does to their respective governments. National sentiment in both countries is also strongly suspicious, and that is likely to intensify.
But for now and for many years to come, we are joined at the hip, China and the United States, and how that relationship is managed by both will determine whether the world ahead is one of increased prosperity or ever-more conflict between winners and losers, between haves and have-nots, and between powers on the rise and powers on the decline.
For a look at additional blogs and other writings of mine, feel free to visit River Twice Research.



10 Comments







Robert Triffin covers the root conditions that underly these kinds of economic relationships in his book “Gold and the Dollar Crisis: the Future of Convertibility.”
The disequilibria, highlighted most aptly today by the economic relationship between the U.S. and China, isn’t particularly novel. It just so happens that China is the largest fastest growing economic actor, so the magnitude of the problems underwritten by the Triffin Dilemma, and exacerbated by the Nixon Shock, appear so intensely as to make them seem especially anomalous.
Or at least that’s what I gathered from asking myself, “How did the Dollar become the world reserve currency, and what effects has that had on global trade, and American markets.”
Looking forward to reading your new book.
I’ll also await the book. Although I know the Republicans regularly used Taiwan and Red China as the whipping boys during the Clinton era it was pretty clear that there were many Republican corporate supporters integrating their links with the mainland Chinese. That included the Bush brothers, uncles and cousins, who seem to have used the connections built when Pappy was Ambassador.
I’ve only somewhat facetiously wondered if the Chinese didn’t catch Dubya in some illicit sex act in the year he went on his little jaunt to stay with Pappy in Beijing. He’s admitted his primary interest was “getting dates” with Chinese girls [he claims he failed to hook up with any] until his Dad assigned him the task of running the Embassy’s 4th of July BBQ. But what if, like his brother, he got caught up in some sort of sex-blackmail scheme run by Chinese intelligence…which would really be the only way that someone from the embassy would meet a Chinese girl? AThe roguish American son of the top diplomat with a bit of a sex and alcohol problem…an easy mark for the oldest method in the world at turning someone into an informant.
It would go a long ways to explain the 180-degree turnabout in how Dubya treated Chinese investments in the US, his back-down in the force-down of the US spy plane, etc.
You see GREED took over the day, and we sold ourselves out to the Communist Chinese. Our Government and our Corporate interests thought the slave wages the Chinese paid their workers, was a chance for us to use them to make untold trillions.
They were smarter than us they let us invest in their Country to supposedly get cheap manufactured goods. What we taught them is how to use other people including us. We assumed they would play by the rules, but they know rules are made to be broken. They took everything we gave them and used it against us. They now have our money they are loaning back to us. Our technology they are forging ahead with. Our jobs making the stuff to sell us back. On top of that they have our future in the palm of their hands. Soon they may have our Country, to play with as their toy.
One thing they’re discovering: That letting US CEOs use China as a dumping ground is not in their best long-term interests. They’re starting to crack down on polluters and are working like mad to wean themselves from coal.
Niall Ferguson and Moritz Schularick coined the term Chimerica to describe this relationship. It was never sustainable and the question is what comes next. Since the meltdown, the interests of the two countries are diverging.
Thanks hugh, beat me to the comment about ‘chimerica’;
For a more pessimistic take on the China-US relationship, see http://chinastudygroup.net/2009/10/china-pessimists-and-optimists/ and http://chinastudygroup.net/2009/10/the-great-chinese-bubble/ at the new China Study Group website.
Superdrivel. Superstupid. I´m having trouble pigeon-holing this piece. For starters, the EU is the world´s largest economy…and I dunna get how talking about a de facto currency peg is wonky.
The US China economic relationship is yet another bubble, an asymmetrical economic relationship which contains the mechanisms of its own decline. Given the trajectories, the Chinese can eat the $2t in US paper, the price of a reasonable investment in a massive industrial capacity and infrastructure. What China did not send into treasuries they invested in hard commodities, that which can serve as inputs to their own industrial capacity or can be sold in a market of increasing scarcity for higher prices.
What comes next is that the plug gets pulled on the dollar as world reserve currency, the US will need to actually produce goods that others want to purchase, and will need to rely on that hard currency in order to purchase things outside the dollar zone, such as petroleum. The “Wal-Mart” race to the bottom ideology that so characterizes the US-China economic relationship will, as Marx correctly predicted (I’m no Marxist, but he got this one right first), express the contradictions in economic sharia in due time.
Imagine the economic, social and political disruption should the effective price of petroleum triple internationally for those with dollars, and become so scarce domestically that for all practical purposes, it is not available…