China's restrictions on exporting rare metals are reasonable and legal

The European Union issued a statement on the 23rd saying that the United States and the European Union filed a lawsuit against the World Trade Organization (WTO) on China’s restrictions on exporting rare metals. I have seen some experts' views that the requirements for protecting resources and protecting the environment are reasonable. Not only are China protecting its natural resources, but countries around the world, including the United States, are protecting their own resources. In this regard, I fully agree that in addition to being reasonable, I have to add a legal one.

However, my thoughts may not be limited to this. I believe that the rational use of mineral resources is largely like the lives of ordinary people. It is necessary to talk about the long-term flow of water. It is not possible to eat and drink at the beginning of the month. At the end of the month, it can only rely on “famine”. In fact, China now properly controls the export rhythm of certain mineral resources, especially rare metals, to a large extent to live for the world. If mineral resources are dug up, not only will China's economic development be unsustainable in the future, but economic development in many countries will not be sustainable in the future.

As we all know, the world's mineral resources are more and less digging, so it is scarce. In contrast, in the case of rare metals, not only the problem of digging less and less, but also the problem of not digging and less, in this sense, China is now restricting the export of rare metals appropriately for the benefit of all mankind. Greater. What I don't understand is that, in such a simple way, the housewives in Europe and the United States can understand that the governments of Europe and the United States are actually stupid, which is really incredible. In fact, the governments of Europe and the United States do not have to make a big fuss about this matter, and they will complain to the World Trade Organization. If honesty is to solve the problem, you may wish to take your own knife first. How much resources does the world consume in the economic development of your country? Why should the mineral resources buried under the land of the people be given priority to meet your use? In fact, this problem is not difficult to solve. It is a very effective way for these countries to change their industrial structure and reduce their dependence on existing metals.

In recent years, I have noticed that China has exported more things. People say that you dumped, and exports are less. People say that your government has interfered too much. In the past few years, China’s export of coke trade was like this. In short, the development of China's export trade seems to have been pruned by others. It is not good enough, and it is not good. It is really difficult for a good person.

We have seen that in terms of China's restrictions on the export of rare metals, the basis for complaints from the United States and the European Union to the World Trade Organization is nominally based on the market economy and against the excessive interference of Chinese government departments in economic activities. It sounds like there is only one kind of state official who set fire to the taste of the people.

Think about it. In recent years, whether it is buying products or buying property rights, China has “enjoyed” the intervention of these government departments in other countries. To date, the US government has imposed many restrictions on the export of high-tech products to China. China needs to import a lot of iron ore from India. The iron ore miners in India also sell more iron ore to China. This kind of willingness to buy and sell in India is also subject to many restrictions by local government departments, not only to find excuses to increase the port. Transportation costs, but also increase the tax burden. What's more, China's overseas acquisition of property rights in other countries has been repeatedly blocked by these governments. In the past few years, the US government has publicly blocked CNOOC's acquisition of US Unocal, and now the Australian government secretly prevents Chinalco from acquiring Rio Tinto. It is a living example of the government intervention in the economy of these “market economy countries”.

As the saying goes: Do not do what you want. It seems that the practice of the European and American governments is what they want, and others are not effective. In fact, what I want is different from what he wants to be. At this stage, China appropriately restricts the export of rare metals in order to improve the global optimization and allocation efficiency of existing mineral resources. It should be regarded that the market economy concept is embodied in the high-end international economic relations level, and fundamentally it is not related to the World Trade Organization. Related information. Isn't the World Trade Organization pursuing resource optimization? That's good. Excessive use of rare metals in Europe and the United States may not be able to achieve optimal resource allocation. If you consider it over time, it will be buried in the ground for a few days, and mining may be more efficient in the future.

This is the intertemporal optimization of resources, which is true for China and for European and American countries. Conversely, if the European and American governments restrict China from purchasing certain products and property rights, the psychology may not be very “open”. In all likelihood, it is the small exposure of the Cold War mentality and the government’s manufacturing “small abacus”. .
Now, the United States and the European Union have filed lawsuits against the World Trade Organization (WTO) on China's restrictions on exporting rare metals. We must be resolutely refuted. Whether the government intervenes in the economy or not must be measured by the same ruler. If some people do not agree that "this can be", or simply come to a package to solve, it is better to stop some countries from restricting the sale of products and property rights to China. I think China may not suffer. European and American countries, do you dare to take over? If you dare not face up to the non-market economy practices that exist, European and American countries are better off. Something, sit down and talk slowly.

In short, no matter how European and American countries look at it, at this stage China's restrictions on exporting rare metals are both reasonable, reasonable and legal.