Not just Bloomberg.

Stephen Roach: US has basic misunderstanding of how tariffs work (http://en.people.cn/n3/2019/0619/c90000-9589454.html)

In the rush to demonise China over trade, the West has failed to give Beijing enough credit for its green leadership (https://www.scmp.com/comment/opinion/article/3030079/rush-de...)

Dismantling global supply chains would deny a coronavirus-torn world collaborative opportunities (http://www.bjreview.com.cn/Opinion/202004/t20200429_80020252...)

Yale’s Stephen Roach questions why Huawei has been ‘singled out’ for sanctions violation (https://www.cnbc.com/2018/12/14/stephen-roach-asks-why-us-si...)

Wow, thanks for providing this context. Given he is a faculty member at Yale, and publishing a lot of seemingly slanted pro-CCP content; I'm wondering if he's being looked at by the FBI for potential association with the CCP's Thousand Talents program.

https://www.taiwannews.com.tw/en/news/3929496

Yale helped Mao to get into power in the early 1900s. From Yale Daily News:

http://digital.library.yale.edu/cdm/fullbrowser/collection/y...

"William F. Buckley was not the only Yale figure connected with the Presidential trip to China. Without Yale's support Mao Tse Tung may never have risen from obscurity to command China..." (And these guys are bragging about it in 1972, after the despicable "Cultural Revolution" was winding down.)

Also note that Yale was initially funded by the Russels, the most successful family of opium dealers in America. Why is this important? Well, if you're dealing opium at a high level back then, you had a connection with the British powers that defeated China in the Opium wars. What happens after a nation is defeated? You install a new government that does what you want.

Mark my words: the criminals that run this world have a long-term plan and the type of government seen in China is their model for what's coming for everybody after they've concluded their work in causing the decline of the US. It's fucking scary and I really hope I'm wrong.

Wow. mind=blown.

The risks that he mentions are not far fetched, but are probably not the biggest risks the Fed should worry about. It does make me doubt his predictions that in the 2009 financial crisis he also predicted that inflation would pick up, which didn't happen.

In both crisis he mentioned stagflation, which can happen when there is a supply shock (like oil prices increasing) and governments growing the money supply too quickly. Now we are suffering a supply shock but also a big demand shock (just look at oil prices...) which makes the situation different. This doesn't mean that inflation won't increase once the first stage of the crisis is over (specially in food, which will impact developing countries the most), but I think it is far from the most important thing to worry about right now.

Thanks for that link, I found the OP pretty specious and wanted to see what else the author had been up to.

He was the chief economist of Morgan Stanley and his speciality is China. Why is he necessarily a paid operative of one thing or another (that's the absolute implication here). People can believe things. And anyway that's the point of argumentation, right, to have a back-and-forth of ideas? You did see he had an argument with facts, that can be proved or disproven, right?

I assume you mean the article/author, and not the person on HN who submitted the article? OP is understood to refer to the latter.