Welcome to City-Data.com Forum!
U.S. CitiesCity-Data Forum Index
Go Back   City-Data Forum > World Forums > World
 [Register]
Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
View detailed profile (Advanced) or search
site with Google Custom Search

Search Forums  (Advanced)
Reply Start New Thread
 
Old 03-20-2015, 11:18 AM
 
Location: Victoria TX
42,554 posts, read 86,968,624 times
Reputation: 36644

Advertisements

Royal Bank of Canada is notifying its clients that:



Canada's Department of Finance announced on February 5, 2014 that Canada and the United States have signed an Inter-Governmental Agreement (IGA) to improve international tax compliance and to implement the Foreign Account Tax Compliance Act (FATCA). Canada has since implemented legislative changes to require Canadian financial institutions to become FATCA compliant and this requirement is now part of Canadian tax law.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message

 
Old 03-20-2015, 11:19 AM
 
367 posts, read 409,362 times
Reputation: 377
Quote:
Originally Posted by paull805 View Post
Well you can't win back trust overnight - man, many deaths from his stint.

Obama hasn't contributed to lack of trust from what I see.
And as others have said, plenty of things were done under the present administration to make things far worse than they were, from insalubrious influences exerted via the banking sector, to geopolitical and military endeavors.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 03-20-2015, 12:46 PM
 
13,496 posts, read 18,190,645 times
Reputation: 37885
Quote:
Originally Posted by CTDominion View Post
Yet more foreign policy success for the Obama administration
And in what way did the Republican majority exert its massive influence to get the Obama administration to do other than what it did? There did not appear to be any widespread and vociferous opposition to the administration's stance.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 03-20-2015, 12:49 PM
 
367 posts, read 409,362 times
Reputation: 377
Quote:
Originally Posted by kevxu View Post
And in what way did the Republican majority exert its massive influence to get the Obama administration to do other than what it did? There did not appear to be any widespread and vociferous opposition to the administration's stance.
I'm pretty sure the criticism here is about the China pivot being a symptom of pre-existing failures rather than something provoked by the administration's policy specific to the AIIB.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 03-20-2015, 02:00 PM
 
Location: Mid Atlantic USA
12,623 posts, read 13,927,203 times
Reputation: 5895
Quote:
Originally Posted by MarineBlue View Post
Barely weeks ago, Washington was exerting political pressure to convince its closest allies to refrain from joining the Asian Infrastructure Investment Bank, a global financial institution intended as a competitor to the US-led ADB and to US-dominated institutions such as the World Bank and the IMF.

Last week, the UK rejected Washington's proposals and joined the AIIB seeing it as "an unrivaled opportunity for the UK and Asia to invest and grow together". This outraged senior US officials who accused the UK, to date its closest ally, of "constant accommodation" of China.

From the NY Times:


Washington has expressed reservations about the new institution, on the grounds that it would not meet environmental standards, procurement requirements and other safeguards adopted by the World Bank, the International Monetary Fund and the Asian Development Bank for their lending projects.

But fundamentally, Washington views the Chinese venture as a deliberate challenge to those postwar institutions, which are led by the United States and, to a lesser extent, Japan, and the Obama administration has put pressure on allies not to participate…

South Korea and Australia, both of which count China as their largest trading partner, have seriously considered membership but have held back, largely because of forceful warnings from Washington, including a specific appeal to Australia by President Obama.

...

The Chinese Finance Ministry warmly welcomed the British announcement, saying on its website on Friday that if all went well, Britain would formally become a “prospective founding member” of the bank by the end of March.



Within days of the move by London, Germany, France, Italy announced their interest in joining the AIIB, previously discouraged from this move by US warnings. They were quickly followed by South Korea, Australia and Luxembourg, who openly defied lobbying attempts by the Obama administration and expressed interest in joining. Now, as if to coincide with Michelle Obama's visit to Japan, Tokyo has expressed conditional interest in joining the bank.

What do you think of these developments? Do you think they reflect a deterioration of the USA's political influence abroad?

Good for those countries for seeking their own best self interest. I'm tired of the US policing and bullying the world. Maybe we should join the bank as well. We need all the help we can get with the crumbling infrastructure and debt we have.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 03-20-2015, 02:58 PM
 
13,496 posts, read 18,190,645 times
Reputation: 37885
Quote:
Originally Posted by MarineBlue View Post
I'm pretty sure the criticism here is about the China pivot being a symptom of pre-existing failures rather than something provoked by the administration's policy specific to the AIIB.
And my point in response to that particular posting was that the perceived China bank blooper can't have been a failure of the administration alone if the opposition sat on its hands. It would appear to have been a failure of the American political establishment as a whole.

As is clear from the Netanyahu visit, for one example, the Republican majority is quite capable of making its own dramatic foreign policy gestures when it does not agree with administration positions. The lack of any such GOP blip of the political radar screen on this issue tells me that the American failure vis-a-vis the new China bank was a failure across the political spectrum.

I find that far more significant than a one-sided screw-up on the part of the present administration.

Last edited by kevxu; 03-20-2015 at 03:10 PM..
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 03-20-2015, 03:34 PM
 
367 posts, read 409,362 times
Reputation: 377
Quote:
Originally Posted by kevxu View Post
And my point in response to that particular posting was that the perceived China bank blooper can't have been a failure of the administration alone if the opposition sat on its hands. It would appear to have been a failure of the American political establishment as a whole.

As is clear from the Netanyahu visit, for one example, the Republican majority is quite capable of making its own dramatic foreign policy gestures when it does not agree with administration positions. The lack of any such GOP blip of the political radar screen on this issue tells me that the American failure vis-a-vis the new China bank was a failure across the political spectrum.

I find that far more significant than a one-sided screw-up on the part of the present administration.
The concern is not that this is a self-contained "blooper" stemming from the US government overstepping its bounds regarding the AIID (setting de facto prohibitions for its allies). The concern is that it stems from accrued foreign policy failures over a longer period.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 03-20-2015, 07:37 PM
 
Location: Singapore
653 posts, read 743,805 times
Reputation: 302
I was following the AIIB development for quite some time; in fact, for more than a year.

The US did exert a lot of pressure on UK, Australia, South korea not to join. I was waiting to see if either UK or Australia would fold first or not fold at all.

In the end, the UK joined, which gave the signal to France, Germany and italy to join in. Australia, Japan and south korea are also considering to join in as well.

I am not really surprised about South Korea;China imports 25% of South Korean exports compared to 12% exports to US.

Only time would tell if the AIIB would prove to be a contender or just a hype.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 03-20-2015, 11:59 PM
 
Location: Metro Phoenix
11,039 posts, read 16,861,688 times
Reputation: 12950
Quote:
Originally Posted by jtur88 View Post
The USA has, in recent years, become increasingly shrill about global banking. US policies like Fatca and FinCen are forcing the banking interests in almost every country, as well as goverments that regulate them, to become virtual puppets of regulatory US money policy, through compliance withf force-fed treaties. It should surprise anyone that nations and their bnks do not want the USA to be leading them around by the nose, and probably welcome the opportunity to align themselves with an alternative global banking structure.

More and more, US Banking is being seen as Economic Imperialism, and some countries are Just Saying No. If there is to be a Third World War, no doubt the two sides will be aligned along banking interests. If American Banking cannot get voluntary world domination, resorting to arms might be the only option. Remember Vietnam.

These US banking policies have already forced Switzerland to abandon it bank secrecy tradition, and Swiss banks are informing their clients (even non-Americans) to take their business elsewhere if they don't want the rest of the world to know about their accounts. And China is the only "elsewhere". In Canada, Toronto Dominion Bank says it will cost them $100-million to comply with reporting regulations forced on them by Canadian compliance with US banking hegemony. An expense they would be spared if they aligned with Chinese banking, a fact which many banks have certainly noticed.
^ This is entirely true. I think that if anything, this move should be a wake-up call to US policy makers.

For quite some time but especially with earnest after 9/11, the government has functioned on a very punitive and intrusive platform; more and more and more regulations, more and more and more warrantless intrusions, and a general assumption of guilt, that everyone is doing something to subvert the law. It's started to move these punitive practices from its citizens to its allies, with international banks being forced to comply with US regulations if they want to do business not just in America, but with Americans, in their own countries. This can put Americans engaged overseas (such as myself) in a tricky position, where suddenly no banks can work with me, even if they want to.

The US has, for some time, packaged its economic partnership and assistance with a long trail of what could best be called "***** work." Getting roped into long-standing deals where US companies are given one-sided, exclusive opportunities to exploit that nation; limitations as to who they are allowed to trade with and what trade they are allowed to do, etc. Also, increasingly, the US has shown its willingness to turn on or abandon former allies as the wind blows; this is a reality brought on by the US' completely-broken political system, where elected officials think in their own best interest in four-year blocks. "What can I get done for myself inbetween elections?"

For some time, the US was seen by many developing and post-colonial nations as the answer to the colonialism and imperialism of European nations like Britain, France, and Spain, but as the US became the proverbial "800-lb gorilla" of the 20th century, it sat where it wanted, so to speak, just as many nations had before it - indeed, many of them the same ones that are now signing with China. Globalization has decentralized international economics and politics, and rather than getting with the times, the US has hunkered down, hoping to use its still-existent but waning global hegemony to gain its will and stay on top. Nations like the UK and France have already lost their global hegemony and so it benefits them to pivot to whomever offers them the best deals.

All this said, it's worth noting that none of these nations are doing this in place of their relationships and agreements with the US; the UK didn't say, "the hell with the US, the IMF, the World Bank - we're working with China now!" Not hardly, they still have massive stakes in these institutions... they are simply diversifying their portfolio
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 03-22-2015, 09:49 AM
 
367 posts, read 409,362 times
Reputation: 377
It looks like the IMF itself is on board, along with Switzerland, India, Indonesia, and New Zealand, all following the UK's lead in joining for membership with the AIIB. From the BBC:

International Monetary Fund chief Christine Lagarde has said the IMF would be "delighted" to co-operate with the China-led Asian Infrastructure Investment Bank (AIIB). The AIIB has more than 30 members and is envisaged as a development bank similar to the World Bank. Mrs Lagarde said there was "massive" room for IMF co-operation with the AIIB on infrastructure financing.

The US has criticised the UK and other allies for supporting the bank.

The US sees the AIIB as a rival to the World Bank, and as a lever for Beijing to extend its influence in the region. The White House has also said it hopes the UK will use "its voice to push for adoption of high standards".


The interesting thing to see now is if the USA will risk losing face to also join up.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
Please register to post and access all features of our very popular forum. It is free and quick. Over $68,000 in prizes has already been given out to active posters on our forum. Additional giveaways are planned.

Detailed information about all U.S. cities, counties, and zip codes on our site: City-data.com.


Reply
Please update this thread with any new information or opinions. This open thread is still read by thousands of people, so we encourage all additional points of view.

Quick Reply
Message:


Over $104,000 in prizes was already given out to active posters on our forum and additional giveaways are planned!

Go Back   City-Data Forum > World Forums > World
Similar Threads

All times are GMT -6.

© 2005-2024, Advameg, Inc. · Please obey Forum Rules · Terms of Use and Privacy Policy · Bug Bounty

City-Data.com - Contact Us - Archive 1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6, 7, 8, 9, 10, 11, 12, 13, 14, 15, 16, 17, 18, 19, 20, 21, 22, 23, 24, 25, 26, 27, 28, 29, 30, 31, 32, 33, 34, 35, 36, 37 - Top