Lest you think I am unjustly singling out China for special treatment out of the 190 or so countries in the world, just remember these facts:

1.   They are the biggest country, by population;

2.   They cause trade deficits for more countries than any other;

3.   They are our biggest geopolitical rival;

4.   They are one-third of our trade deficit;

5.   They manipulate currency;

6.   They own most of the economy, and are owning more;

7.   They are the most problematic spying country.

8.    They ship the most poisonous and adulterated food, toys and other products.  Even Chinese shoppers avoid Chinese toys. 

9.    They have passed the U.S. in global carbon emissions with much inefficiency with high growth and few regulations. 

Myanmar and Sudan, for example, have bad governments that do bad things to people.  But they don't affect our economy, our world environment, our national security, and our safety like this. 

If any other country wants to apply for special attention, they can.  But they have to beat these factors.

Why any hog producer is a member of any affiliate of the National Pork Producers Council is beyond me.  They are the packer lobby killing the industry. 

The Vice President of the NPPC is a Smithfield Foods lobbyist.  This from the NPPC website last March, 2007:

Don Butler, director government relations and public affairs with Murphy-Brown LLC – the livestock-production subsidiary of Smithfield Foods Inc. – was elected vice president.

And another board member is a Tyson executive:

Todd Neff, vice president of pork pricing with Tyson Fresh Meats, was elected to the board for a two-year term

The packers are integrated in NPPC with the "the NPPC Packer Processor Industry Council".

AFL-CIO Secretary Richard Trumka:

This is not an academic exercise.  The difference between currency manipulation and a fair exchange rate is the difference between having a job and watching your factory shut its gates.  It is the difference between having health insurance for your kids – or not.  And, for our country, it may be the difference between having a healthy middle class – or sitting back and watching as economic divisions tear us apart. 

Currency manipulation by any definition is not fair trade.  There is no reason that nations engaging in these practices should have free and easy access to the American market.  Limiting access to that market is our big stick.  We should speak softly and be prepared to use it.   We urge Congress to act now.

That about covers it. 

Christopher Cox, SEC chairman, has been speaking about Sovereign Wealth Funds, and avoiding action. 

Let's be clear.  The question is how the Sovereign Wealth Funds can be used for foreign policy reasons to gain geopolitical strength, or reduce our geopolitical strength. Cox makes good points on SWF influence, but uses quotes from important, but dead, people from the past, chants some rhetorical bromides and leaps to optimistic conclusions to justify doing nothing.

This is an astounding fact.

Today, the world’s sovereign wealth funds are significantly larger than all of the world’s hedge funds combined. According to some estimates, they could grow as large as $12 trillion over the next eight years.

Hedge funds.  They're really big.  But not as big as the massive oil-pumped funds of the Middle East (and Norway and Peru) and the trade-surplus funds of Asia.

The problems with government ownership of investment:

Another issue is the conflicts of interest that arise when government is both the regulator and the regulated. When the government becomes both referee and player, the game changes rather dramatically for every other participant. Rules that might be rigorously applied to private sector competitors will not necessarily be applied in the same way to the sovereign who makes the rules.

And corruption:

 the opportunity for political corruption increases. Graft, bribery, and other forms of financial corruption by governments and political figures is an unfortunate fact of life throughout the world — as the Commission’s enforcement responsibilities under the Foreign Corrupt Practices Act remind us on a daily basis. When individuals with government power also possess enormous commercial power and exercise control over large amounts of investable assets, the risk of misuse of those assets, and of their conversion for personal gain, rises markedly.

Is it really "market forces"?  What are "market forces" anyway?

Another equally pressing concern is market efficiency.  As Harvard economist and former Treasury Secretary Larry Summers recently wrote, "The logic of the capitalist system depends on shareholders causing companies to act so as to maximize the value of their shares. It is far from obvious that this will over time be the only motivation of governments as shareholders."  

Transparency:

A fourth issue is transparency. In many industrial countries today, the ability of journalists and citizens to inquire into government affairs, or to criticize the conduct of government, is severely limited. In some countries, criticism of government policies lands you in jail, or worse. Is it reasonable to expect that these same governments will be magically forthcoming with investors?

Information disparities:

If ordinary investors — an estimated 100 million retail customers in America own more than $10 trillion in equities and stock funds in U.S. markets — come to believe that they are at an information disadvantage when they compete head to head in markets with government, confidence in our capital markets could collapse, and along with it, the market itself.

So Cox then asks a less pressing question as if it was the most important question, before justifying his continuing decision to do nothing.

 Could the rise of sovereign business ultimately change the character of U.S. markets? It is an interesting question.

Yes, Chairman Cox, it is an interesting question.  "Will it rain tomorrow?" is an interesting question.  But the pressing question is how the Sovereign Wealth Funds can be used for foreign policy reasons to gain geopolitical strength.