Steve Yates (葉望輝)

My sincere thanks to @HouseForeignGOP for inviting me to address this topic of great policy and personal importance.

Think on these things.

China wins. 🇨🇳

Largest inflation decline in over six years. Core inflation comes in at 2.6%. Four years ago with Biden inflation was at 9.1%.

Part of this morning's @FoxFriendsFirst conversation on Iran: Steve Yates: Trump's Strait of Hormuz charge is 'fundamental fairness'. foxnews.com/video/64011042… @NSwithYates @Heritage

Joining @newsnationam with @MarkieMartin at 7:40am ET and 8:40am ET this morning to discuss latest Iran developments. @NSwithYates @Heritage

For early risers, tune in to @FoxFriendsFirst for a conversation on the latest Iran developments. I join ~5:10am ET.

The Other $23.6 Trillion: What Decoupling Would Cost China The Financial Times recently reported an EY-Parthenon estimate that the US, Europe and the UK would need to invest $23.6 trillion over the next 25 years to eliminate their dependence on China in critical industries. Wow. Big number. Wow. Very costly. But presenting only one side of the ledger is disingenuous. It creates the impression that decoupling would impose enormous costs on the West while costing China almost nothing. The obvious follow-up question is: What would decoupling cost China? No equivalent study appears to exist, but the answer is likely to be at least comparable—and potentially greater. The commonly cited figure that roughly 30% of Chinese exports go directly to the US, EU and UK significantly understates China’s true exposure. It excludes the vast amount of Chinese machinery, components and intermediate goods shipped to countries such as Vietnam, Mexico, Malaysia, Thailand and India, where they are processed or assembled before ultimately being sold to Western consumers. The relevant question is therefore not simply where China ships its goods. It is where the final demand comes from. Once these indirect supply chains are included, it is plausible that 40–50% of Chinese export production is ultimately dependent on Western final demand, either directly or through third countries. China is also far more exposed to the consequences of lost industrial demand. It has built its economic model around manufacturing on an unprecedented scale. Manufacturing accounts for about 30% of Chinese GDP—while it’s only 10-11% in the United States. A substantial loss of Western demand would therefore ripple far beyond the export sector. It would leave factories underutilised, depress corporate profits, destroy employment, weaken local-government revenues, increase bad debts in the banking system and strand enormous amounts of industrial capital. On that basis, a genuine and sustained decoupling by the US, Europe and the UK could plausibly impose $15–25 trillion in cumulative economic costs on China over the next 25 years. The total could be considerably higher once slower productivity growth, reduced access to technology and the loss of foreign investment are included. The asymmetry is important. The West’s $23.6 trillion is largely investment. It would create new factories, infrastructure, research capacity, software and supply chains—productive assets that the West would continue to own. China’s cost would take a very different form: lost demand, idle factories, stranded assets, unemployment and permanently slower growth. One side pays to build a new industrial base. The other pays by losing the customers that made its existing industrial base so powerful.

.@SteveYates from @heritage joined @DLoesch on charging fees to use the Strait of Hormuz, skepticism toward the UN's role and the strategy behind letting Saudi Arabia take more responsibility for Middle East security. #DanaRadio Podcast: apple.co/thedanashow

Erling Haaland arrived back in Norway with the most American souvenir possible A stuffed raccoon drinking whiskey

The following statement was released by the Governments of Japan, Australia, Canada, Estonia, Germany, Italy, Latvia, Lithuania, New Zealand, the Philippines, Romania, Slovenia, the United Kingdom, and the United States of America, on the occasion of the tenth anniversary of the Philippines-China South China Sea Arbitral Tribunal Award. mofa.go.jp/press/release/…

This is the Mona Lisa of tourist photos.

BREAKING: Elon Musk just confirmed that SpaceX will begin launching space-based data centers next year.

Contact on a corner that happens nearly every corner kick gets overturned by VAR. A cable literally hits the ball and it’s play on, no review. The inconsistency in how VAR is applied makes it impossible to take this sport seriously at times.

This was the difference between Norway winning in regulation vs England winning in OT. Whether LeBron’s NBA or England’s FIFA, Americans are not gonna root for flops. Poor call by FIFA to buy the flop and reverse the goal.

U.S. Sec. of War Hegseth: “Iran made a poor choice. Now they pay.”

Mick Jagger Says It’s Not His Job to Lecture Rolling Stones’ Fans on Politics NYT: “Bruce Springsteen clearly sees his job as engaging in a meaningful back and forth.” MICK JAGGER: “My job in the live music world is for those people that come to have the best time … And you don't want to lecture them.”

BREAKING: China is worried someone might be spying on THEM. Truly a shocking plot twist for a country whose cyber playbook has spent years starring in headlines about espionage allegations. @mrbcyber @RommelFLopez @SteveYates

The so-called Supreme Leader is hiding in seclusion while his regime crumbles. Treasury will continue using every tool at its disposal to isolate him and other regime elites from the global financial system. We will preserve these assets for the Iranian people.

The US takes out key Iranian military targets and several members of Iran’s revolutionary guard, a controversial AOC-backed candidate is poised to take the Democratic Senate nomination in Michigan, and Democrats scramble to pick up the pieces in Maine after Platner suspends his campaign. Reporting from @bdomenech. Plus, we speak with @SteveYates and @MikeRogersForMI. Get the facts first with Morning Wire.

.@potus allowing Ukraine to build Patriot missiles means security guarantees. And that’s bad news for Putin. National Security Expert @SteveYates explains. youtu.be/4QcPO_QCg5k