Disgusting falsehoods from Hong Kong's least popular C.E.
Tuesday, June 02, 2020
Carrrie Lam's letter to Hong Kong; disgusting...
https://hongkongfp.com/2020/05/29/letter-to-hong-kong-from-carrie-lam/
Thursday, May 21, 2020
Flexibility of smaller, more fuel efficient planes trump behemoths
I remember, 14 years ago, when I was doing my MBA in Ottawa, I had a discussion with one of my professors; I was convinced that the large planes with 500+ passengers were the way of the future due to the boom in travel.
My point was that these cost so much to that it will be harder for aircraft vendors and airlines to upgrade, and as such, smaller planes would be always beat them on operational efficiency.
Furthermore, travelers are increasingly more interested in exotic destinations which require point-to-point service, something that huge planes are not good at.
Another point he was making was that airports would become the limiting factor as the number of movements would limit their ability to grow and this would therefore support the rationale for larger planes.
I didn't think this was a good argument either as the incentives for larger planes are with the airports, not the airlines and there's no clear reason why the airports would be able to pass the incentives to the airlines in a realistic way .
So, now, almost 15 years later, it seems that history proved me right; airports are much larger, and behemoth planes are on the way out.
Russia was dabling with the idea of a massive Sukhoi KR-860. It would have been a gigantic failure...
U.S. Senate Passes Bill That Could Delist Chinese Companies
May 21st, 2020
(Bloomberg) — The Senate overwhelmingly approved legislation Wednesday that could lead to Chinese companies such as Alibaba Group Holding Ltd. and Baidu Inc. being barred from listing on U.S. stock exchanges amid increasingly tense relations between the world’s two largest economies.
The bill, introduced by Senator John Kennedy, a Republican from Louisiana, and Chris Van Hollen, a Democrat from Maryland, was approved by unanimous consent and would require companies to certify that they are not under the control of a foreign government.
U.S. lawmakers have raised red flags over the billions of dollars flowing into some of China’s largest corporations, much of it from pension funds and college endowments in search of fat investment returns. Alarm has grown in particular that American money is bankrolling efforts by the country’s technology giants to develop leading positions in everything from artificial intelligence and autonomous driving to internet data collection.
Shares in some of the biggest U.S.-listed Chinese firms, including Baidu and Alibaba, slid Thursday in New York while the broader market gained.
If a company can’t show that it is not under such control or the Public Company Accounting Oversight Board, or PCAOB, isn’t able to audit the company for three consecutive years to determine that it is not under the control of a foreign government, the company’s securities would be banned from the exchanges.
“I do not want to get into a new Cold War,” Kennedy said on the Senate floor, adding that he wants “China to play by the rules.”
“Publicly listed companies should all be held to the same standards, and this bill makes common sense changes to level the playing field and give investors the transparency they need to make informed decisions,” Van Hollen said in a statement. “I’m proud that we were able to pass it today with overwhelming bipartisan support, and I urge our House colleagues to act quickly.”
Stricter U.S. oversight could potentially affect the future listing plans of major private Chinese corporations from Jack Ma’s Ant Financial Services Group to SoftBank-backed ByteDance Ltd. But since discussions on increased disclosure requirements began last year, many other Chinese companies have either listed in Hong Kong already or plan to do so, said James Hull, a Beijing-based analyst and portfolio manager with Hullx.
“All Chinese U.S.-listed entities are potentially impacted over the coming years,” he said. “Increased disclosure may hurt some smaller companies, but there’s been risk disclosures around PCAOB for a while now, so it shouldn’t be a shock to anyone.”
In a sign of broad support for the measure, Rep. Brad Sherman, a California Democrat on the House Financial Services Committee, introduced a companion bill in that chamber. Sherman said in a statement that Nasdaq moved this week to delist China-based Luckin Coffee after executives at the company admitted fabricating $310 million in sales between April and December 2019.
“I commend our Senate counterparts for moving to address this critical issue,” Sherman said. “Had this legislation already been signed into law, U.S. investors in Luckin Coffee likely would have avoided billions of dollars in losses.”
House leaders are discussing the legislation — and a separate Senate-passed bill to sanction Chinese officials over human rights abuses against Muslim minorities — with lawmakers and members of the relevant committees, a Democratic aide said.
The Senate measure — S. 945 — is an example of the rising bipartisan pushback against China in Congress that had been building over trade and other issues. It has been amplified especially by Republicans as U.S. President Donald Trump has sought to blame China as the main culprit in the coronavirus pandemic.
Republican lawmakers have in recent weeks unleashed a torrent of legislation aimed at punishing China for not being more forthcoming with information or proactive in restricting travel as the coronavirus began to spread from the city of Wuhan, where it was first detected.
Trump escalated his rhetoric against China on Wednesday night, suggesting that leader Xi Jinping is behind a “disinformation and propaganda attack on the United States and Europe.”
“It all comes from the top,” Trump said in a series of tweets. He added that China was “desperate” to have former Vice President Joe Biden win the presidential race.
Kennedy told Fox Business on Tuesday that the bill would apply to U.S. exchanges such as Nasdaq and the New York Stock Exchange.
“I would not turn my back on the Chinese Communist Party if they were two days dead,” Kennedy said. “They cheat. And I’ve got a bill to stop them from cheating.”
At issue is China’s longstanding refusal to allow the PCAOB to examine audits of firms whose shares trade on the New York Stock Exchange, Nasdaq and other U.S. platforms. The inspections by the little-known agency, which Congress stood up in 2002 in response to the massive Enron Corp. accounting scandal, are meant to prevent fraud and wrongdoing that could wipe out shareholders.
Since then China and the U.S. have been at odds on the issue even as companies including Alibaba and Baidu have raised billions of dollars selling shares in American markets. The long-simmering feud came to the forefront last year as Washington and Beijing clashed over broader trade and economic issues, and some in the White House have been urging Trump to take a harder line on the audit inspections.
Last week, Trump said in an interview on Fox Business that he’s “looking at” Chinese companies that trade on the NYSE and Nasdaq exchanges but do not follow U.S. accounting rules. Still, he said that cracking down could backfire and simply result in the firms moving to exchanges in London or Hong Kong.
While not technically part of the government, the PCAOB is overseen by the Securities and Exchange Commission. The ability to inspect audits of Chinese firms that list in the U.S. is certain to come up at a roundtable that the SEC is holding July 9 on risks of investing in China and other emerging markets.
Senators Kevin Cramer, Tom Cotton, Bob Menendez, Marco Rubio and Rick Scott are also sponsors of the bill. Rubio applauded the passage of the Kennedy-Van Hollen bill and said it incorporated aspects of a similar bill he introduced last year.
“I was proud to work with Senator Kennedy on this important legislation that would protect American retail investors and pensioners from risky investments in fraudulent, opaque Chinese companies that are listed on U.S. exchanges and trade on over-the-counter markets,” Rubio said in a statement. “If Chinese companies want access to the U.S. capital markets, they must comply with American laws and regulations for financial transparency and accountability.”
According to the SEC, 224 U.S.-listed companies representing more than $1.8 trillion in combined market capitalization are located in countries where there are obstacles to PCAOB inspections of the kind this legislation mandates.
Saturday, May 02, 2020
Time to move the factory of the world somewhere else
The Covid-19 pandemic has shown that the Chinese Communist Party:
- Cannot be trusted to be transparent even in times of crisis, thereby threatening the lives of millions of people, not only in China, but also everywhere else in the rest of the world
- Is unwilling to play by the rules of global trade; stealing intellectual property whenever it suits its goals
- Is a global propagandist and disinformation bully
- Is unwilling to consider the introduction of true multi-party and universal suffrage for the citizen of China
- Is leveraging its capitalist, globalization-driven economic gains of the past 30 years to impose its neo-imperialistic rule
Something must be done and the G7 countries would be well positioned to do so.
Majorly invest in upgrading infrastructures, education system, and supporting G7 countries p[rivate investment in India, with the goal of replacing China as the current 'factory of the world' with one which is going to play by the rules, and is a democracy.
(2020-06-06 update)
Seems that India got the message...
'India’s $6.6 Billion Incentive Program Challenges China in Manufacturing, Insiders Say
By He Shujing and Mo Yelin.
India’s new incentive program to entice global smartphone-makers to set up factories there will give it a long-term edge over China in competing for manufacturing, industry observers said.
Earlier this week, India’s government announced that it would set aside 500 billion rupees ($6.6 billion) over the next five years to bring in global companies to set up facilities to make products across the smartphone supply chain.
As part of the program, the government will offer subsidies to qualified companies equal to 4% to 6% of incremental sales of the goods they manufacture in India over the five-year period. It will also offer these companies subsidies on their capital expenditures on an identified list of products including electronics components and semiconductors.
The announcement came against a backdrop in which governments around the world are increasingly calling for their countries to reduce their dependency on China for manufacturing amid the Covid-19 pandemic that exposed risks in key supply chains. It also came as Indian Prime Minister Narendra Modi, who has called for a more self-reliant India, has pushed for additional incentives to create more domestic manufacturing in an effort to create jobs.
The latest programs, which involve direct financial support, are much stronger than past policies that focused on increasing duties on imported goods as a way to support local production, said Tarun Pathak, an India-based analyst at Counterpoint Research. The new programs are also more aggressive, targeting high-value companies like contract manufacturing giant Foxconn and Chinese smartphone-makers such as Oppo and Vivo.
China remains the dominant player in the global supply chain for smartphone manufacturing, as nearly 65% of the world’s smartphones are assembled and directly shipped from the country to buyers around the world, according to Counterpoint.
But analysts said India’s latest programs will give the country a long-term edge over China in competing for manufacturing. India’s manufacturing capabilities in the smartphone industry have greatly improved over the past few years, Pathak said. In 2014, 70% of phones bought in India were imported. Now, 99% of the phones are assembled locally.
Adwait Mardikar, another India-based analyst who works for research group Canalys, said in an online seminar earlier this year that the Indian government’s policy push, along with multinationals’ strategies to mitigate supply chain risk, will make the country an attractive destination for manufacturers. “India will be a major manufacturer and exporter in the coming years,” Mardikar said, “and by the end of this decade, it might even rival China in terms of scale.”
Still, India has several weak spots that stand in the way of its goals, such as poor infrastructure and a lack of workers skilled in manufacturing, Pathak said.
Bloomberg contributed to this report.'
Friday, May 01, 2020
WHO Coronavirus tracking
China delayed releasing coronavirus info, frustrating WHO
Associated Press, June 2nd, 2020
https://apnews.com/3c061794970661042b18d5aeaaed9fae
'Throughout January, the World Health Organization publicly praised China for what it called a speedy response to the new coronavirus. It repeatedly thanked the Chinese government for sharing the genetic map of the virus “immediately,” and said its work and commitment to transparency were “very impressive, and beyond words.”
Associated Press, June 2nd, 2020
https://apnews.com/3c061794970661042b18d5aeaaed9fae
'Throughout January, the World Health Organization publicly praised China for what it called a speedy response to the new coronavirus. It repeatedly thanked the Chinese government for sharing the genetic map of the virus “immediately,” and said its work and commitment to transparency were “very impressive, and beyond words.”
But behind the scenes, it was a much different story, one of significant delays by China and considerable frustration among WHO officials over not getting the information they needed to fight the spread of the deadly virus, The Associated Press has found.
Despite the plaudits, China in fact sat on releasing the genetic map, or genome, of the virus for more than a week after three different government labs had fully decoded the information. Tight controls on information and competition within the Chinese public health system were to blame, according to dozens of interviews and internal documents.'
(...)
The recordings suggest that rather than colluding with China, as Trump declared, WHO was kept in the dark as China gave it the minimal information required by law. However, the agency did try to portray China in the best light, likely as a means to secure more information. And WHO experts genuinely thought Chinese scientists had done “a very good job” in detecting and decoding the virus, despite the lack of transparency from Chinese officials.
WHO staffers debated how to press China for gene sequences and detailed patient data without angering authorities, worried about losing access and getting Chinese scientists into trouble. Under international law, WHO is required to quickly share information and alerts with member countries about an evolving crisis. Galea noted WHO could not indulge China’s wish to sign off on information before telling other countries because “that is not respectful of our responsibilities.”
Reuters, February 3rd, 2020
https://mobile.reuters.com/article/amp/idUSKBN1ZX1H3
'GENEVA (Reuters) - World Health Organization chief Tedros Adhanom Ghebreyesus said on Monday there was no need for measures that "unnecessarily interfere with international travel and trade" in trying to halt the spread of a coronavirus that has killed 361 people in China.
"We call on all countries to implement decisions that are evidence-based and consistent," Tedros told the WHO executive board, reiterating his message from last week when he declared an international emergency.
China is facing increasing international isolation due to restrictions on flights to and from the country, and bans on travelers from China.
There have been 17,238 confirmed infections in China including 361 deaths, as well as 151 confirmed cases in 23 countries and 1 death which was reported from the Philippines on Sunday, Tendros added.
"Because of this strategy and it weren't for China, the number of cases outside China would have been very much higher," he said.
Referring to the virus' spread abroad, he said it was "minimal and slow", while warning that it could worsen.
Tedros, who held talks in Beijing a week ago with Chinese President Xi Jinping and other leaders, coughed and interrupted his speech to take a drink of water, quipping: "Don't worry, it's not corona".
China's delegate took the floor at the WHO Executive Board and denounced measures by "some countries" that have denied entry to people holding passports issued in Hubei province - at the center of the outbreak - and to deny visas and cancel flights.
"All these measures are seriously against recommendation by the WHO," said Li Song, who is China's ambassador for disarmament at the United Nations in Geneva.
China's regular Executive Board representative was unable to attend after her flight from Beijing was canceled, Chinese diplomats told reporters on Friday.
U.S. ambassador Andrew Bremberg said that the outbreak in two dozen countries required focused attention.
"We express our support, prayers, sympathy, and appreciation to the people of China and especially the health responders on the front lines, who are protecting not only their communities, but the world," Bremberg said.
"We are learning more about the virus every day and implementing appropriate public health measures, in keeping with WHO’s recommendations, to minimize the spread based on the best evidence available. The United States is committed to working with all partners to address this outbreak," he added.
Thursday, April 30, 2020
No Third Person - Christine Loh's turncoat CCP cheerleader?
https://asianreviewofbooks.com/content/abbreviated-press/no-third-person-rewriting-the-hong-kong-story-by-christine-loh-and-richard-cullen/
 |
Loh dances around the main problem; it is
not that Hong Kongers feel “non-Chinese” as much as they see what Xi Jinping has
done. That’s the elephant in the room; a dictatorship with a much lower
standard of living wants to take over political management of the S.A.R.
|
 |
| This is extremely disingenuous; Hong Kongers are extremely proud and do not lack confidence. The facts are that the mainland has failed to show a compelling narrative. So, the CCP is bullying back Hong Kong into the fold of yet another Chinese city, which implies: corruption, pollution, low-level of sanitary/food safety, lower GDP per capita, terrible construction standards, less freedom, lower quality of healthcare, etc |
 |
| The events of 2019-2020 have proven these statements by Loh to be naive at best... |
Thursday, April 23, 2020
The depth of the 2020 depression
2020-04-30
https://www.caixinglobal.com/2020-04-30/chinas-manufacturing-activity-slumps-again-in-april-caixin-pmi-shows-101548780.html
'China’s Manufacturing Activity Slumps Again in April, Caixin PMI Shows
The recovery in China’s manufacturing sector in March appears to have been short lived with a Caixin-sponsored index of activity falling back into contractionary territory in April as the coronavirus pandemic continued to hurt both domestic and international demand
The Caixin China General Manufacturing Purchasing Managers’ Index (PMI), which gives an independent snapshot of the country’s manufacturing sector, fell to 49.4 in April from 50.1 the previous month, a report released Thursday showed. A number above 50 indicates an expansion in activity, while a reading below that signals a contraction. In February, the reading fell to 40.3, the fastest contraction in the index’s 16-year history as the Chinese economy stalled amid the Covid-19 outbreak.'
Although the domestic economy started to recover in March as the virus was brought under control, the rapid spread of the disease across other countries and regions disrupted international business and cratered global consumption, inflicting a further blow to Chinese companies. Although output continued to recover in April, export orders contracted for a fourth straight month and at a faster pace, with the reading at its weakest since December 2008 during the global financial crisis.
The sharp fall in export orders seriously hindered China’s economic recovery in April, although businesses were gradually getting back to work,” said Zhong Zhengsheng, director of macroeconomic analysis at CEBM Group, a subsidiary of Caixin Insight Group. The survey of around 500 manufacturing enterprises was conducted from April 7 to April 22.
“Amid the second shockwave from the pandemic, the problems of low business confidence, shrinking employment and large inventories of industrial raw materials became more serious. A package of macroeconomic policies, as suggested in the April 17 Politburo meeting, must be implemented urgently. It is particularly necessary to aid weak links including small and midsize enterprises and personal incomes,” Zhong said.'
https://edition.cnn.com/2020/04/30/business/oil-bankruptcies-default/index.html
'The oil bankruptcies are just beginning. Here's who could be next
New York (CNN Business)The oil crash is blocking American frackers from accessing the cheap credit that fueled their prolific rise. That reversal of fortunes could prove fatal for overleveraged shale oil companies.
The downturn in the oil industry has laid bare just how much America's rise to superpower status in the energy world was made possible by easy money. Virtually unlimited borrowing allowed shale companies to dramatically ramp up production, whether that oil was needed or not.
Getting locked out of the junk bond market will tip the weakest players into bankruptcy, risking countless US jobs along the way. That's what happened during the last oil crash that began in 2015.
The looming oil patch bankruptcies underscore the fragile state of the boom-to-bust industry even before the coronavirus crisis.
"These companies were in trouble before COVID-19 happened," John Kempf, senior director at Fitch Ratings, told CNN Business. "After 2015 and 2016, they never really got their balance sheets back together. When stress came, they weren't prepared for it."
Despite a recent rebound, US oil prices have imploded by three-quarters since early January, to just $15 a barrel. The crash was driven by excess supply, especially from Russia and Saudi Arabia, and an unprecedented collapse in demand because of the coronavirus pandemic.
There's so much crude that the world is running out of space to store it all. That conundrum caused crude to tumble well below zero last week, marking the first instance of negative oil prices since futures launched in 1983.
$43 billion of energy junk bond defaults
Prices are so weak that Rystad Energy has warned that hundreds of US oil exploration and production companies could file for bankruptcy by the end of 2021.
The bankruptcy wave has already started. Earlier this month Whiting Petroleum (WLL) filed for bankruptcy, marking the first high profile Chapter 11 filing of the current crisis. Diamond Offshore Drilling (DO) joined the bankruptcy club on Sunday. Diamond, which provides offshore drilling rigs for Hess (HES), Occidental (OXY) and BP (BP), was posting losses months before the crisis.
Fitch Ratings is warning that more than $43 billion of high-yield bonds and leveraged loans in the energy sector will default in 2020. For context, that's nearly five times the sector's average level of defaults over the previous dozen years.
Moody's Investors Service cut its near-term oil price assumptions this week, forecasting that US oil prices will now average just $30 per barrel in 2020, a price too low for virtually any US shale oil company to turn a profit. Moody's sees US crude rising to just $40 in 2021.
"Financial risk is rising and likely to remain very high for all but the highest-rated oil and gas issuers," Moody's wrote in the report.'
2020-05-01
Is that dead cat still bouncing? Or maybe that's because there's a disproportionate amount of market capitalization in a few high-tech firms that are benefiting from stay-at-home.
New York Times
'The news is terrible but Wall Street just had its best month in decades.
Stocks fell on Thursday, giving up some of their gains from the day before, after reports that showed millions more Americans applied for weekly unemployment benefits and consumer spending collapsed.
The S&P 500 closed down nearly 1 percent. But it was a small retreat in an otherwise stellar month for Wall Street. Even with Thursday’s decline factored in, the S&P 500 had its best month since January 1987, a gain that came even as it became increasingly clear that the coronavirus crisis was pushing the United States into a dire economic downturn.
The nearly 13 percent gain this month means the S&P 500 is now up roughly 30 percent from its March 23 low. It’s a rally that has surprised even the most ardent bulls.
“Frankly, I’m shocked by the speed of the rally,” said Julian Emanuel, chief equity and derivatives strategist at the brokerage firm BTIG, who has been anticipating a rebound since before the rally began.
The rally, even in the face of crushing economic data, highlights investors’ confidence that things will return to normal sooner than they thought when stocks were collapsing in late February and early March.
Both the Federal government and the central bank have pumped trillions of dollars into the economy and financial markets, lockdown measures appear to be having some success in reducing rates of infection, and some states are laying out the conditions for reopening.
“Instead of now talking about shutting everything down we’re talking about opening it back up again,” said Scott Clemons, chief investment strategist for private banking at Brown Brothers Harriman. “That’s a good change in the conversation.”
Some southern states have begun trying to return to normal, and bigger states such as New York and California have started laying out the conditions for reopening.
That doesn’t mean the economy is suddenly going to be back on track.
Markets tend to rebound far before any actual improvement in economic fundamentals is apparent, as investors buy shares based on expectations for what will happen later in the year, rather than the current climate. During the last recession, the stock market bottomed in March 2009. But the unemployment rate didn’t begin to drop until October of that year.
Top Wall Street economists expect the second-quarter economic data to look, well, cataclysmic. J.P. Morgan economists, for example, believe the American economy will shrink at a previously unthinkable 40 percent annual rate in the second quarter. The Congressional Budget Office thinks unemployment could hit 16 percent by the third quarter.
It’s also important to recognize that the current rally has been relatively narrow, with an outsize part of the gains for the S&P 500 index attributable to a handful of giant technology companies — Microsoft, Apple, Amazon, Alphabet and Facebook. In April, these companies grew to account for roughly 20 percent of the total value of the S&P.
The rebound in shares of technology companies — in part because their businesses are seen as benefiting in various ways from stay-at-home orders — has been most evident in the Nasdaq composite, which has nearly erased all of its losses for 2020.'
'Stymied in Seeking Benefits, Millions of Unemployed Go Uncounted
With a flood of unemployment claims continuing to overwhelm many state agencies, economists say the job losses may be far worse than government tallies indicate.
The Labor Department said Thursday that 3.8 million workers filed for unemployment benefits last week, bringing the six-week total to 30 million. But researchers say that as the economy staggers under the weight of the coronavirus pandemic, millions of others have lost jobs but have yet to see benefits.
A study by the Economic Policy Institute found that roughly 50 percent more people than counted as filing claims in a recent four-week period may have qualified for benefits — with the difference representing those who were stymied in applying or didn’t even try because the process was too formidable.
“The problem is even bigger than the data suggest,” said Elise Gould, a senior economist with the institute, a left-leaning research group. “We’re undercounting the economic pain.”
Alexander Bick of Arizona State University and Adam Blandin of Virginia Commonwealth University found that 42 percent of those working in February had lost their jobs or suffered a reduction in earnings. By April 18, they found, up to eight million workers were unemployed but not reflected in the weekly claims data.
The difficulties at the state level largely flow from the sheer volume of claims, which few agencies were prepared to handle. Many were burdened by aging computer systems that were hard to reconfigure for new federal guidelines.
“We’ve known that the state unemployment insurance systems were not up to the task, yet those investments were not made,” Ms. Gould said. “The result is that the state systems are buckling under the weight of these claims.”
The crush of claims is a major reason — but not the only one — that states are backlogged. Frustrated applicants who refile their applications, some as many as 20 times, slow the system as processors weed out duplicates.
Millions who have managed to keep their jobs face salary cuts or furloughs, a sign of employers’ uncertainty. Given the trillions spent, “we would have hoped that federal efforts would have been more effective at stemming job losses,” said Michael Gapen, chief U.S. economist at Barclays.
Mr. Gapen said he expected the unemployment rate to hit 19.5 percent in April, a level unseen since the Depression.
The federal stimulus efforts include an additional $600 in weekly unemployment benefits through one program, known as Federal Pandemic Unemployment Compensation. Another, Pandemic Unemployment Assistance, is aimed at independent contractors and so-called gig workers who don’t qualify for traditional unemployment coverage. Washington is also paying for 13 weeks of benefits once state payments run out, an initiative called Pandemic Emergency Unemployment Compensation.
According to the Labor Department, all 50 states are paying the $600 weekly supplement, but only 23 have begun benefits under the program for independent contractors, and only nine have started the 13-week extended payments.'
2020-04-23
'Prior to this five-week stretch of 26.5 million initial jobless claims, there were already 7.1 million unemployed Americans as of March 13, according to the U.S. Bureau of Labor Statistics. When the figures are combined, it would equal more than 33 million unemployed, or a real unemployment rate of 20.6%—which would be the highest level since 1934.'
https://fortune.com/2020/04/23/us-unemployment-rate-numbers-claims-this-week-total-job-losses-april-23-2020-benefits-claims/
'Bank of England warns of worst contraction in centuries, as economic activity slumps - as it happened
UK purchasing managers’ index (PMI) data showed that Britain’s economy is shrinking at an unprecedented rate.
It was a similar tale in the eurozone data.'
https://www.theguardian.com/business/live/2020/apr/23/uk-government-borrowing-covid-19-recession-pmi-us-jobless-claims-business-live
2020-04-02
SCMP
'In February, friends Jay Wang and Zhou Ping were among the millions of Chinese manufacturers battling to resume production after the coronavirus outbreak shuttered key industrial sectors across the economy.
But when the pair finally managed to restart their separate operations last month, after rigorous quarantining of workers and disinfection of factory floors, they encountered an even bigger problem: clients from Europe and the United States were suspending orders as the pandemic spread throughout the rest of the world.
“In late February, I took orders for more than 90,000 pairs of shoes, but 80,000 were cancelled last week,” said Wang, who like Zhou has run a factory in the industrial and export hub Dongguan in southern China for about a decade.
Both companies will ask most of their workforce to take leave on minimum wage in mid-April or May because of the worsening situation overseas.
“Many factories like us had already paid in advance to buy raw materials, and the current trend of increasing cancellations and postponements of orders increases risk and uncertainty,” Zhou said.
Dongguan, once a centre of labour-intensive manufacturers from shoes to electronics, started to lose its shine following the global financial crisis in 2008-2009 and it is no longer so appealing to China’s estimated 290 million rural migrant workers.
While the industrial hub was once thriving with commerce, rows of empty stores and restaurants, peppered with for lease and sale signs, are common features of the cityscape today.
(...)
The early impact of the virus on China’s economy was laid bare in recent economic data, which showed industrial production, investment and exports plunged in the double digits in the first two months of the year.
President Xi Jinping has said China, which exported US$2.5 trillion worth of products in 2019 – making it the world’s largest exporter – needs to work hard to ensure its position in the global value chain.
Xu Xiaonian, a professor of economics and finance at China Europe International Business School, said last week that China was headed for a severe economic downturn due to its reliance on overseas markets.
China not only lacks food and oil but also a market for orders. Our per capita [gross domestic product] is about a fifth of that in the US and a quarter of Europe. China’s domestic purchasing power just cannot support our huge manufacturing capacity,” said Xu in a speech.
Slumping overseas demand is already beginning to ripple through Dongguan’s job market.
Li Dian and Zhang Qing – both in their 20s – arrived in the city from Hunan province, some eight hours drive to the north, to look for a “good factory” job offering a monthly salary of at least 4,000 yuan (US$563), a day off a week and free food and accommodation
As they stood in line at a recruitment agency office, they said they had already found wages were lower than last year, but they wanted to start work as soon as possible.'
Sunday, April 19, 2020
Why Hong Kong Matters
Understanding the importance
of the city to China and the world
https://www.hongkongwatch.org/s/Why-Hong-Kong-matters_web.pdf
2019, Hong Kong Watch
Executive Summary
The protest movement has drawn many prophesies from commentators about the end of Hong Kong, but little robust analysis of the city’s ongoing geopolitical importance, and its significance as China’s pre-eminent international financial hub has been produced.
Although Hong Kong’s economic output is less significant to China than it was in 1997, it still plays a key role both for the mainland and the world as the Asia Pacific region’s pre-eminent financial and professional services centre. Chapter 1 considers evidence for this in detail. Key insights include:
Hong Kong is a key source of capital for corporate China
• Hong Kong was home of 73% of the initial public offerings of mainland Chinese
companies between 2010 and 2018. Since 1997, Chinese companies have raised $335
billion in Hong Kong.
• The Hong Kong Stock Connect is increasingly the preferred route for Western investors
seeking to access the Mainland Chinese market. $95 billion flowed into Mainland
Chinese capital markets via Hong Kong between 2016 and September 2019.
• Hong Kong is the largest offshore centre for bond sales by Chinese companies, and
the largest recipient of foreign direct investment from China. It has a vital role in trade
finance and is the top hub for Renminbi internationalisation
• Hong Kong plays a key role as a private wealth management centre for high-net worth
individuals from Mainland China, including many members of the Chinese Communist
Party.
Hong Kong is critical to the interests of foreign firms and investors
• The city is a key regional hub for firms seeking to access China and other Asia Pacific
markets. 1530 multinationals have their regional headquarters in Hong Kong, an
increase of two-thirds since 1997.
• US outbound FDI to Hong Kong came to approximately $82.5 billion at the end of 2018,
and there are 1300 US companies in Hong Kong. Hong Kong is the United Kingdom’s
second largest trading partner in Asia.
Can another Chinese city replace Hong Kong?
Hong Kong has a critical role to play in the region as a financial conduit between China and the West. This statement begs a second question: can these global powers easily replace Hong Kong? The third chapter of the report argues that China cannot easily replace Hong Kong.
Shanghai, Shenzhen and Beijing are growing in importance domestically, but they are nowhere near being able to replace Hong Kong’s unique function. Studies show that the relationship between Hong Kong and other financial centres should not be viewed primarily as one of competition, but
rather as a collaborative relationship with the different centres carrying different strengths.
7 reasons Hong Kong has the upper hand over other Chinese cities (Chapter 3)
1. Simpler and lower taxes
2. Deregulated economy and lack of capital controls
3. Strongest stock market
4. Unique connections, English is one of the official languages
5. Common law system is more transparent and reliable
6. Freedom information gives Hong Kong the upper hand
7. Hong Kong’s separate customs status brings unique access to the US and other markets
The Chinese government is unable to force international banks to relocate to Shanghai or Beijing. In an interview with a Hong Kong Watch researcher, one financial analyst said: ‘China cannot just move their international financial hub to Shanghai. The international investment banks and investors are the ones who decide where the Asian financial centre is.’
Could another offshore financial centre replace Hong Kong?
A greater challenge to Hong Kong is Singapore. Banks could move their human capital to Singapore without too much difficulty, although visa restrictions on foreigners generally have been tightening in Singapore. But, while it might be possible, the access that Hong Kong gives to China is unparalleled and Singapore would struggle to immediately act as a replacement. Situated in a different part of the region, without the local knowledge, a weaker stock market, and with less close access to the Chinese government, its state apparatus and businesses, Singapore is at a disadvantage.
Recent geopolitical tensions, particularly the US-China trade war, increase Hong Kong’s advantage. The ‘decoupling’ between the US and China means that the risks for Chinese firms of becoming too dependent on access to capital in New York, or even London, has increased, along with China’s desire to have a trusted and controllable financial hub. The result for Hong Kong has been that Alibaba and others have listed in the city despite the protests.
Some analysts think China might go into deficit in future years as the ageing population brings a lower savings ratio. But even with a small surplus, China is more reliant on attracting capital inflows from foreigners than in the past. This will mean that Hong Kong’s capacity to raise capital will matter more than ever.
The rule of law and fundamental freedoms are vital to the city’s success
As part of the research, we interviewed business leaders and analysed key business sentiment through surveys to understand what it was that attracts people to Hong Kong. Rule of law was consistently cited as a priority. One senior executive of a British bank said: ‘The Rule of Law is the most important reason for Hong Kong’s financial centre status’.
This sentiment is echoed in major business sentiment surveys. Both the American Chamber of Commerce and the Hong Kong government business sentiment survey find that the rule of law, independent judiciary, free information flows and the integrity of the ‘one-country, two systems’ framework are paramount to businesses choosing Hong Kong.
Rule of law and freedoms under threat
Events of recent years have placed these qualities under threat. In recent years Hong Kong has seen core freedoms being eroded at speed. Booksellers have been abducted, student protestors have been imprisoned, political candidates have been disqualified from running for election and legislators have been barred from the city’s legislature. Press freedom, academic freedom and the rule of law are all facing pressures in an atmosphere where Xi Jinping’s authoritarian rule increasingly limits freedom.
The rule of law has by and large remained intact, but the increasing interference of Beijing through ‘interpretations’ of the Basic Law, and then the proposed extradition and mutual legal assistance legislation which sparked the mass protests in 2019 provided ominous signs. The retired Court of Final Appeal Judge, Kemal Bokhary, recently said that Hong Kong’s legal system was facing a ‘storm of unprecedented ferocity.’
The erosion of freedom and the rule of law in Hong Kong has further implications, as these qualities are widely seen to be a proxy for the city’s autonomy under the one-country, two-systems framework.
Evidence that the city is insufficiently autonomous places Hong Kong’s special treatment by the United States under the US-Hong Kong Policy Act at risk.
In a valedictory op-ed for Bloomberg, Kurt Tong, the former Consul General in Hong Kong wrote: ‘Hong Kong’s high degree of autonomy is the necessary ingredient for this success. China’s growing encroachments on that autonomy, however, pose a very real threat to the city’s special status and future competitiveness.’
Pressures from the protests on Hong Kong as an international financial centre
The protests, and particularly the authorities’ reaction to them, have intensified the pressures on the rule of law, freedom and autonomy. Beijing’s response to protests has exposed the limits of Carrie Lam’s autonomy, and the limits to their willingness to abide by international human rights norms. The use of the Emergency Regulations Ordinance and the impunity granted to police officers has stretched the rule of law to its limits.
Political instability seems permanent. This has seen Hong Kong downgraded by prominent rating agencies, and leading business leaders raise concerns about the impact of this instability for Hong Kong’s long-term image.
Businesses have come under political pressure from both sides, which increases the political risk of domiciling in Hong Kong, again undermining the city’s attractiveness.
Conclusion
The report explores what business leaders find valuable in Hong Kong, and the threat that the city’s unique characteristics currently face. Repeatedly they point to the rule of law and fundamental freedoms, alongside low tax and deregulation, as being fundamental to the city. It is in nobody’s interests for the city to lose its uniqueness. The Hong Kong government, their counterparts in Beijing, and international governments should recognise that the preservation of the rule of law and fundamental freedoms is not only morally right, it is in their interests.
Recommendations
To the Government of the People’s Republic of China
• Prioritise the freedoms and rule of law which allow Hong Kong to be a major
international financial centre;
• Encourage the government of Hong Kong to introduce political reforms and universal
suffrage in order to tackle the root cause of unrest, and combat political instability;
• Encourage the government of Hong Kong to initiate an independent inquiry into the
events of recent months in order to begin reconciliation;
To the Government of Hong Kong
• Uphold rule of law and fundamental freedoms;
• Introduce political reforms, including reforms of public order legislation and the
introduction of universal suffrage;
• Establish an independent inquiry into the protests;
To the international business community
• Use research and advocacy capacity to encourage the Chinese government and
international governments to recognise the importance of the sustainability of Hong
Kong’s one-country, two-systems arrangement;
To international governments
• Research the role of Hong Kong in the region to understand the significance of the
city’s freedoms and rule of law;
• Work collaboratively with like-minded countries to monitor and defend freedom and
the rule of law in Hong Kong, as established under the one-country, two-systems
principle;
• Work with the Hong Kong SAR government to provide expertise and knowledge
required to build sustainable institutions and promote reconciliation.
Acknowledgements
Hong Kong Watch would like to thank the economists and other experts who helped to proof and inform the findings of this report. We are grateful to Calum Muirhead for his role in proofing a number of the chapters.
of the city to China and the world
https://www.hongkongwatch.org/s/Why-Hong-Kong-matters_web.pdf
2019, Hong Kong Watch
Executive Summary
The protest movement has drawn many prophesies from commentators about the end of Hong Kong, but little robust analysis of the city’s ongoing geopolitical importance, and its significance as China’s pre-eminent international financial hub has been produced.
Although Hong Kong’s economic output is less significant to China than it was in 1997, it still plays a key role both for the mainland and the world as the Asia Pacific region’s pre-eminent financial and professional services centre. Chapter 1 considers evidence for this in detail. Key insights include:
Hong Kong is a key source of capital for corporate China
• Hong Kong was home of 73% of the initial public offerings of mainland Chinese
companies between 2010 and 2018. Since 1997, Chinese companies have raised $335
billion in Hong Kong.
• The Hong Kong Stock Connect is increasingly the preferred route for Western investors
seeking to access the Mainland Chinese market. $95 billion flowed into Mainland
Chinese capital markets via Hong Kong between 2016 and September 2019.
• Hong Kong is the largest offshore centre for bond sales by Chinese companies, and
the largest recipient of foreign direct investment from China. It has a vital role in trade
finance and is the top hub for Renminbi internationalisation
• Hong Kong plays a key role as a private wealth management centre for high-net worth
individuals from Mainland China, including many members of the Chinese Communist
Party.
Hong Kong is critical to the interests of foreign firms and investors
• The city is a key regional hub for firms seeking to access China and other Asia Pacific
markets. 1530 multinationals have their regional headquarters in Hong Kong, an
increase of two-thirds since 1997.
• US outbound FDI to Hong Kong came to approximately $82.5 billion at the end of 2018,
and there are 1300 US companies in Hong Kong. Hong Kong is the United Kingdom’s
second largest trading partner in Asia.
Can another Chinese city replace Hong Kong?
Hong Kong has a critical role to play in the region as a financial conduit between China and the West. This statement begs a second question: can these global powers easily replace Hong Kong? The third chapter of the report argues that China cannot easily replace Hong Kong.
Shanghai, Shenzhen and Beijing are growing in importance domestically, but they are nowhere near being able to replace Hong Kong’s unique function. Studies show that the relationship between Hong Kong and other financial centres should not be viewed primarily as one of competition, but
rather as a collaborative relationship with the different centres carrying different strengths.
7 reasons Hong Kong has the upper hand over other Chinese cities (Chapter 3)
1. Simpler and lower taxes
2. Deregulated economy and lack of capital controls
3. Strongest stock market
4. Unique connections, English is one of the official languages
5. Common law system is more transparent and reliable
6. Freedom information gives Hong Kong the upper hand
7. Hong Kong’s separate customs status brings unique access to the US and other markets
The Chinese government is unable to force international banks to relocate to Shanghai or Beijing. In an interview with a Hong Kong Watch researcher, one financial analyst said: ‘China cannot just move their international financial hub to Shanghai. The international investment banks and investors are the ones who decide where the Asian financial centre is.’
Could another offshore financial centre replace Hong Kong?
A greater challenge to Hong Kong is Singapore. Banks could move their human capital to Singapore without too much difficulty, although visa restrictions on foreigners generally have been tightening in Singapore. But, while it might be possible, the access that Hong Kong gives to China is unparalleled and Singapore would struggle to immediately act as a replacement. Situated in a different part of the region, without the local knowledge, a weaker stock market, and with less close access to the Chinese government, its state apparatus and businesses, Singapore is at a disadvantage.
Recent geopolitical tensions, particularly the US-China trade war, increase Hong Kong’s advantage. The ‘decoupling’ between the US and China means that the risks for Chinese firms of becoming too dependent on access to capital in New York, or even London, has increased, along with China’s desire to have a trusted and controllable financial hub. The result for Hong Kong has been that Alibaba and others have listed in the city despite the protests.
Some analysts think China might go into deficit in future years as the ageing population brings a lower savings ratio. But even with a small surplus, China is more reliant on attracting capital inflows from foreigners than in the past. This will mean that Hong Kong’s capacity to raise capital will matter more than ever.
The rule of law and fundamental freedoms are vital to the city’s success
As part of the research, we interviewed business leaders and analysed key business sentiment through surveys to understand what it was that attracts people to Hong Kong. Rule of law was consistently cited as a priority. One senior executive of a British bank said: ‘The Rule of Law is the most important reason for Hong Kong’s financial centre status’.
This sentiment is echoed in major business sentiment surveys. Both the American Chamber of Commerce and the Hong Kong government business sentiment survey find that the rule of law, independent judiciary, free information flows and the integrity of the ‘one-country, two systems’ framework are paramount to businesses choosing Hong Kong.
Rule of law and freedoms under threat
Events of recent years have placed these qualities under threat. In recent years Hong Kong has seen core freedoms being eroded at speed. Booksellers have been abducted, student protestors have been imprisoned, political candidates have been disqualified from running for election and legislators have been barred from the city’s legislature. Press freedom, academic freedom and the rule of law are all facing pressures in an atmosphere where Xi Jinping’s authoritarian rule increasingly limits freedom.
The rule of law has by and large remained intact, but the increasing interference of Beijing through ‘interpretations’ of the Basic Law, and then the proposed extradition and mutual legal assistance legislation which sparked the mass protests in 2019 provided ominous signs. The retired Court of Final Appeal Judge, Kemal Bokhary, recently said that Hong Kong’s legal system was facing a ‘storm of unprecedented ferocity.’
The erosion of freedom and the rule of law in Hong Kong has further implications, as these qualities are widely seen to be a proxy for the city’s autonomy under the one-country, two-systems framework.
Evidence that the city is insufficiently autonomous places Hong Kong’s special treatment by the United States under the US-Hong Kong Policy Act at risk.
In a valedictory op-ed for Bloomberg, Kurt Tong, the former Consul General in Hong Kong wrote: ‘Hong Kong’s high degree of autonomy is the necessary ingredient for this success. China’s growing encroachments on that autonomy, however, pose a very real threat to the city’s special status and future competitiveness.’
Pressures from the protests on Hong Kong as an international financial centre
The protests, and particularly the authorities’ reaction to them, have intensified the pressures on the rule of law, freedom and autonomy. Beijing’s response to protests has exposed the limits of Carrie Lam’s autonomy, and the limits to their willingness to abide by international human rights norms. The use of the Emergency Regulations Ordinance and the impunity granted to police officers has stretched the rule of law to its limits.
Political instability seems permanent. This has seen Hong Kong downgraded by prominent rating agencies, and leading business leaders raise concerns about the impact of this instability for Hong Kong’s long-term image.
Businesses have come under political pressure from both sides, which increases the political risk of domiciling in Hong Kong, again undermining the city’s attractiveness.
Conclusion
The report explores what business leaders find valuable in Hong Kong, and the threat that the city’s unique characteristics currently face. Repeatedly they point to the rule of law and fundamental freedoms, alongside low tax and deregulation, as being fundamental to the city. It is in nobody’s interests for the city to lose its uniqueness. The Hong Kong government, their counterparts in Beijing, and international governments should recognise that the preservation of the rule of law and fundamental freedoms is not only morally right, it is in their interests.
Recommendations
To the Government of the People’s Republic of China
• Prioritise the freedoms and rule of law which allow Hong Kong to be a major
international financial centre;
• Encourage the government of Hong Kong to introduce political reforms and universal
suffrage in order to tackle the root cause of unrest, and combat political instability;
• Encourage the government of Hong Kong to initiate an independent inquiry into the
events of recent months in order to begin reconciliation;
To the Government of Hong Kong
• Uphold rule of law and fundamental freedoms;
• Introduce political reforms, including reforms of public order legislation and the
introduction of universal suffrage;
• Establish an independent inquiry into the protests;
To the international business community
• Use research and advocacy capacity to encourage the Chinese government and
international governments to recognise the importance of the sustainability of Hong
Kong’s one-country, two-systems arrangement;
To international governments
• Research the role of Hong Kong in the region to understand the significance of the
city’s freedoms and rule of law;
• Work collaboratively with like-minded countries to monitor and defend freedom and
the rule of law in Hong Kong, as established under the one-country, two-systems
principle;
• Work with the Hong Kong SAR government to provide expertise and knowledge
required to build sustainable institutions and promote reconciliation.
Acknowledgements
Hong Kong Watch would like to thank the economists and other experts who helped to proof and inform the findings of this report. We are grateful to Calum Muirhead for his role in proofing a number of the chapters.
Friday, April 17, 2020
The Taiwan Wuhan virus containment miracle explained
Success criteria:
1. Distrust China and the WHO's recommendations; capture data, act on information early
2. Be open and transparent
3.
Why Coronavirus Cases Have Spiked
in Hong Kong, Singapore and Taiwan
The New York Times, April 9th, 2020
https://www.nytimes.com/interactive/2020/04/09/world/asia/coronavirus-hong-kong-singapore-taiwan.html
Taiwan can help us
https://taiwancanhelp.us/
Response to COVID-19 in Taiwan: Big Data Analytics, New Technology, and Proactive Testing
Author: Wang, C. Jason; Ng, Chun Y.
Publication: JAMA
Publisher: American Medical Association
Date: Apr 14, 2020
https://jamanetwork.com/journals/jama/fullarticle/2762689
'Taiwan is 81 miles off the coast of mainland China and was expected to have the second highest number of cases of coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) due to its proximity to and number of flights between China.1 The country has 23 million citizens of which 850 000 reside in and 404 000 work in China.2,3 In 2019, 2.71 million visitors from the mainland traveled to Taiwan.4 As such, Taiwan has been on constant alert and ready to act on epidemics arising from China ever since the severe acute respiratory syndrome (SARS) epidemic in 2003. Given the continual spread of COVID-19 around the world, understanding the action items that were implemented quickly in Taiwan and assessing the effectiveness of these actions in preventing a large-scale epidemic may be instructive for other countries.
(...)
On December 31, 2019, when the World Health Organization was notified of pneumonia of unknown cause in Wuhan, China, Taiwanese officials began to board planes and assess passengers on direct flights from Wuhan for fever and pneumonia symptoms before passengers could deplane. As early as January 5, 2020, notification was expanded to include any individual who had traveled to Wuhan in the past 14 days and had a fever or symptoms of upper respiratory tract infection at the point of entry; suspected cases were screened for 26 viruses including SARS and Middle East respiratory syndrome (MERS). Passengers displaying symptoms of fever and coughing were quarantined at home and assessed whether medical attention at a hospital was necessary. On January 20, while sporadic cases were reported from China, the Taiwan Centers for Disease Control (CDC) officially activated the CECC for severe special infectious pneumonia under NHCC, with the minister of health and welfare as the designated commander. The CECC coordinated efforts by various ministries, including the ministries of transportation, economics, labor, and education and the Environmental Protection Administration, among others, in a comprehensive effort to counteract the emerging public health crisis.
(...)
For the past 5 weeks (January 20-February 24), the CECC has rapidly produced and implemented a list of at least 124 action items (eTable in the Supplement) including border control from the air and sea, case identification (using new data and technology), quarantine of suspicious cases, proactive case finding, resource allocation (assessing and managing capacity), reassurance and education of the public while fighting misinformation, negotiation with other countries and regions, formulation of policies toward schools and childcare, and relief to businesses.
(...)
Conclusions
Taiwan’s government learned from its 2003 SARS experience and established a public health response mechanism for enabling rapid actions for the next crisis. Well-trained and experienced teams of officials were quick to recognize the crisis and activated emergency management structures to address the emerging outbreak.
In a crisis, governments often make difficult decisions under uncertainty and time constraints. These decisions must be both culturally appropriate and sensitive to the population. Through early recognition of the crisis, daily briefings to the public, and simple health messaging, the government was able to reassure the public by delivering timely, accurate, and transparent information regarding the evolving epidemic. Taiwan is an example of how a society can respond quickly to a crisis and protect the interests of its citizens.'
How has Taiwan kept its coronavirus infection rate so low?
April 9th, 2020
https://p.dw.com/p/3ZE3X
'Taiwan's number of COVID-19 infections is currently below 400, despite the island's proximity to the outbreak's origin on mainland China. Experts say early intervention has helped stop a public health crisis.
More than two months after a new virulent coronavirus emerged from the Chinese city of Wuhan, more than 1.4 million people in dozens of countries around the world have been infected.
The COVID-19 infection, however, has largely spared Taiwan, despite the island's relative proximity to the virus's origin.
When the outbreak first started in January, some experts predicted that Taiwan would have the highest number of cases outside of mainland China.
However, while mainland China has had over 80,000 COVID-19 cases to date, Taiwan has kept its number of confirmed cases below 400. Some international health experts credit this to Taiwan's quick preparation and early intervention.
Taiwan took early action
"Due to the hard lessons that Taiwan learned during the SARS epidemic in 2003, it is more prepared for the coronavirus outbreak than many other countries," said Dr. Chunhuei Chi, a public health professor at the Oregon State University in the US.
Taiwan's government introduced a travel ban on visitors from China, Hong Kong and Macau soon after the number of coronavirus cases began to rise in mainland China.
Anticipating the high demand for masks in late January, the Taiwanese government started rationing the existing supply of masks. Taiwanese citizens can now go to designated drug stores across the island to line up and buy a specific amount of masks on a weekly basis. Chi pointed out that this policy has also been duplicated in other countries like South Korea and France.
"Taiwan leveraged the strength of its manufacturing sector and invested approximately $6.8 million (€ 6 million) to create 60 new mask production lines," said Chi.
"This increased Taiwan's daily mask pro production capacity from 1.8 million masks to 8 million masks. This has been called 'Taiwan’s Mask Miracle.'"
Technology for early detection
The Taiwanese government has also used data technology to help medical personnel identify and trace suspected patients and high-risk individuals.
In a paper published in the Journal of the American Medical Association, Dr. Jason Wang, a public health policy expert at Stanford University in the US, highlighted Taiwan's use of technology to track the whereabouts of those under quarantine.
"The government will call you and try to figure out where you are," said Wang. "They can track people with their phone, which allows them to make sure all individuals who are supposed to go through the mandatory 14-day quarantine and are not violating the rules by sneaking out of their quarantine locations."
The Taiwanese government also provides support for those put under quarantine. Local village leaders will bring a bag of basic supplies like food or books to quarantined individuals. Since most quarantines are enforced, the Taiwanese government also rolled out a welfare program that provides a $30 daily allowance to those affected by the quarantine during the two-week period.
"This gives Taiwanese people more incentive to report their symptoms honestly," Wang said.
"That's the way democracies are handling quarantine during the coronavirus outbreak, and it's very different from authoritarian governments. I think this is a case where democracies should leverage their data and technologies appropriately, so they can triage people to the right place and follow up with appropriate care."
Taiwan fights off Chinese disinformation
While the Taiwanese government was busy containing the coronavirus outbreak, the island also witnessed a surge of coronavirus disinformation on popular social media platforms.
Mixed with simplified Mandarin characters typically used in mainland China, and phrases that are mostly unfamiliar to social media users in Taiwan, researchers quickly concluded that these disinformation campaigns originated from mainland China.
Taiwan FactCheck Center, a nonprofit organization that focuses on debunking disinformation in Taiwan, quickly informed the general public of these disinformation campaigns, which were mostly aimed at the Taiwanese government.
"This wave of disinformation campaign is a new vector for an old form of attack, using a health crisis as a new way of attacking Taiwan," said Nick Monaco, director of the digital intelligence lab at the Institute for the Future.
Monaco said that transparent communication between the government and civil society in Taiwan helps fend off disinformation campaigns.
"All these things combined make the danger of mass rumors being spread in a situation like this pretty improbable," Monaco told DW. "Before rumors like this become widespread, they are already debunked by the Taiwan Fact Check Center and the Taiwanese government."'
1. Distrust China and the WHO's recommendations; capture data, act on information early
2. Be open and transparent
3.
Why Coronavirus Cases Have Spiked
in Hong Kong, Singapore and Taiwan
The New York Times, April 9th, 2020
https://www.nytimes.com/interactive/2020/04/09/world/asia/coronavirus-hong-kong-singapore-taiwan.html
Taiwan can help us
https://taiwancanhelp.us/
Response to COVID-19 in Taiwan: Big Data Analytics, New Technology, and Proactive Testing
Author: Wang, C. Jason; Ng, Chun Y.
Publication: JAMA
Publisher: American Medical Association
Date: Apr 14, 2020
https://jamanetwork.com/journals/jama/fullarticle/2762689
'Taiwan is 81 miles off the coast of mainland China and was expected to have the second highest number of cases of coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) due to its proximity to and number of flights between China.1 The country has 23 million citizens of which 850 000 reside in and 404 000 work in China.2,3 In 2019, 2.71 million visitors from the mainland traveled to Taiwan.4 As such, Taiwan has been on constant alert and ready to act on epidemics arising from China ever since the severe acute respiratory syndrome (SARS) epidemic in 2003. Given the continual spread of COVID-19 around the world, understanding the action items that were implemented quickly in Taiwan and assessing the effectiveness of these actions in preventing a large-scale epidemic may be instructive for other countries.
(...)
On December 31, 2019, when the World Health Organization was notified of pneumonia of unknown cause in Wuhan, China, Taiwanese officials began to board planes and assess passengers on direct flights from Wuhan for fever and pneumonia symptoms before passengers could deplane. As early as January 5, 2020, notification was expanded to include any individual who had traveled to Wuhan in the past 14 days and had a fever or symptoms of upper respiratory tract infection at the point of entry; suspected cases were screened for 26 viruses including SARS and Middle East respiratory syndrome (MERS). Passengers displaying symptoms of fever and coughing were quarantined at home and assessed whether medical attention at a hospital was necessary. On January 20, while sporadic cases were reported from China, the Taiwan Centers for Disease Control (CDC) officially activated the CECC for severe special infectious pneumonia under NHCC, with the minister of health and welfare as the designated commander. The CECC coordinated efforts by various ministries, including the ministries of transportation, economics, labor, and education and the Environmental Protection Administration, among others, in a comprehensive effort to counteract the emerging public health crisis.
(...)
For the past 5 weeks (January 20-February 24), the CECC has rapidly produced and implemented a list of at least 124 action items (eTable in the Supplement) including border control from the air and sea, case identification (using new data and technology), quarantine of suspicious cases, proactive case finding, resource allocation (assessing and managing capacity), reassurance and education of the public while fighting misinformation, negotiation with other countries and regions, formulation of policies toward schools and childcare, and relief to businesses.
(...)
Conclusions
Taiwan’s government learned from its 2003 SARS experience and established a public health response mechanism for enabling rapid actions for the next crisis. Well-trained and experienced teams of officials were quick to recognize the crisis and activated emergency management structures to address the emerging outbreak.
In a crisis, governments often make difficult decisions under uncertainty and time constraints. These decisions must be both culturally appropriate and sensitive to the population. Through early recognition of the crisis, daily briefings to the public, and simple health messaging, the government was able to reassure the public by delivering timely, accurate, and transparent information regarding the evolving epidemic. Taiwan is an example of how a society can respond quickly to a crisis and protect the interests of its citizens.'
How has Taiwan kept its coronavirus infection rate so low?
April 9th, 2020
https://p.dw.com/p/3ZE3X
'Taiwan's number of COVID-19 infections is currently below 400, despite the island's proximity to the outbreak's origin on mainland China. Experts say early intervention has helped stop a public health crisis.
More than two months after a new virulent coronavirus emerged from the Chinese city of Wuhan, more than 1.4 million people in dozens of countries around the world have been infected.
The COVID-19 infection, however, has largely spared Taiwan, despite the island's relative proximity to the virus's origin.
When the outbreak first started in January, some experts predicted that Taiwan would have the highest number of cases outside of mainland China.
However, while mainland China has had over 80,000 COVID-19 cases to date, Taiwan has kept its number of confirmed cases below 400. Some international health experts credit this to Taiwan's quick preparation and early intervention.
Taiwan took early action
"Due to the hard lessons that Taiwan learned during the SARS epidemic in 2003, it is more prepared for the coronavirus outbreak than many other countries," said Dr. Chunhuei Chi, a public health professor at the Oregon State University in the US.
Taiwan's government introduced a travel ban on visitors from China, Hong Kong and Macau soon after the number of coronavirus cases began to rise in mainland China.
Anticipating the high demand for masks in late January, the Taiwanese government started rationing the existing supply of masks. Taiwanese citizens can now go to designated drug stores across the island to line up and buy a specific amount of masks on a weekly basis. Chi pointed out that this policy has also been duplicated in other countries like South Korea and France.
"Taiwan leveraged the strength of its manufacturing sector and invested approximately $6.8 million (€ 6 million) to create 60 new mask production lines," said Chi.
"This increased Taiwan's daily mask pro production capacity from 1.8 million masks to 8 million masks. This has been called 'Taiwan’s Mask Miracle.'"
Technology for early detection
The Taiwanese government has also used data technology to help medical personnel identify and trace suspected patients and high-risk individuals.
In a paper published in the Journal of the American Medical Association, Dr. Jason Wang, a public health policy expert at Stanford University in the US, highlighted Taiwan's use of technology to track the whereabouts of those under quarantine.
"The government will call you and try to figure out where you are," said Wang. "They can track people with their phone, which allows them to make sure all individuals who are supposed to go through the mandatory 14-day quarantine and are not violating the rules by sneaking out of their quarantine locations."
The Taiwanese government also provides support for those put under quarantine. Local village leaders will bring a bag of basic supplies like food or books to quarantined individuals. Since most quarantines are enforced, the Taiwanese government also rolled out a welfare program that provides a $30 daily allowance to those affected by the quarantine during the two-week period.
"This gives Taiwanese people more incentive to report their symptoms honestly," Wang said.
"That's the way democracies are handling quarantine during the coronavirus outbreak, and it's very different from authoritarian governments. I think this is a case where democracies should leverage their data and technologies appropriately, so they can triage people to the right place and follow up with appropriate care."
Taiwan fights off Chinese disinformation
While the Taiwanese government was busy containing the coronavirus outbreak, the island also witnessed a surge of coronavirus disinformation on popular social media platforms.
Mixed with simplified Mandarin characters typically used in mainland China, and phrases that are mostly unfamiliar to social media users in Taiwan, researchers quickly concluded that these disinformation campaigns originated from mainland China.
Taiwan FactCheck Center, a nonprofit organization that focuses on debunking disinformation in Taiwan, quickly informed the general public of these disinformation campaigns, which were mostly aimed at the Taiwanese government.
"This wave of disinformation campaign is a new vector for an old form of attack, using a health crisis as a new way of attacking Taiwan," said Nick Monaco, director of the digital intelligence lab at the Institute for the Future.
Monaco said that transparent communication between the government and civil society in Taiwan helps fend off disinformation campaigns.
"All these things combined make the danger of mass rumors being spread in a situation like this pretty improbable," Monaco told DW. "Before rumors like this become widespread, they are already debunked by the Taiwan Fact Check Center and the Taiwanese government."'
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)