Or, as you know it, go off topic or avoid answering by asking another question. Is that what you mean?show me the actual evidence
Or, as you know it, go off topic or avoid answering by asking another question. Is that what you mean?show me the actual evidence
I posted a fact, sorry you weren't aware. btw there are 20 countries in the euro zone not 30-odd.
Yet again poor old Notchies eyesight failing him and seeing words not actually written .you used the argument that Chinese state subsidies are the reason Chinese goods are cheaper -your argument is based on that applying to everything
I just pointed out it is true for some sectors only, not everything
gas112 admits he is wrong
Please stop squirming its embarrassing for youYet again poor old Notchies eyesight failing him and seeing words not actually written .
I think when Trump is mentioned he is gripping far far too hard and causing his eyes to squint
poor old notchy struggling with his reading and the basics of economics no wonder he cant add up his premium bondsPlease stop squirming its embarrassing for you
you tried to dishonestly claim that Chinese state subsidies are the sole reason Chinese goods are so cheap
but even if those were removed, Chinese goods would still be cheaper than America producing them
poor gas112 cant be honest because he supports the Trump liar
They must be one or the other.twenty or thirty aren't even odd numbers.![]()

Where is the evidence of your claim? - none.predictable lie from Motorbiking
you have posted a link to a study, but youve not provided any quote or evidence it supports your claim
this is one of your commonly used dishonest debating techniques
show me the actual evidence

A fact that nobody argued.TW said "most".
20-odd or 30-odd out of 200 isn't "most".
That's a fact![]()
You suggested the few EU states that are in the Euro to to dispute my use of 'most'.A fact that nobody argued.
There has been a history of countries complaining about other countries subsidies for their manufacturing industries etc since time immemorable.Where is the evidence of your claim? - none.
I see you didn't read the one pager:
“It’s you, not me”: China’s Subsidies and Global Trade Tensions - Australian Institute of International Affairs
China’s extensive use of subsidies is a significant driver of global trade tensions, influencing market dynamics and prompting concerns about a potential “subsidy race” among nations. With more anti-dumping measures being taken out against the nation, China may be required to rethink its...www.internationalaffairs.org.au
A recent working paper published by the International Monetary Fund (IMF) found that subsidies made up 95 percent of all Chinese trade distortive policies between 2009 and 2022. For western observers and politicians who have long complained of the impact of Chinese subsidies on domestic producers, the report provides a degree of vindication. As China continues to file complaints with the WTO for other countries’ supposedly excessive tariff regimes, it raises a crucial question: what role does China’s subsidies play in global trade distortion? These frequent complaints may indicate a defensive posture in response to external pressures, but they reveal a concerning disconnect from the implications of its own subsidy program.

It's actually most EU countries that are in the eurozone. But no, I merely pointed out that those in the Eurozone have no ability to do this. I did not make any point to disagree with your view that most countries can do this. Had I been disagreeing with you, I would have said : incorrect, wrong, nonsense, more boll@x from you etc.You suggested the few EU states that are in the Euro to to dispute my use of 'most'.

China for exampleThere has been a history of countries complaining about other countries subsidies for their manufacturing industries etc since time immemorable.
Youn should take a tip from David Lammy and recognise when you;ve made a mistake.It's actually most EU countries that are in the eurozone. But no, I merely pointed out that those in the Eurozone have no ability to do this. I did not make any point to disagree with your view that most countries can do this. Had I been disagreeing with you, I would have said : incorrect, wrong, nonsense, more boll@x from you etc.
