Talk-Polywell.org

ee

That's making the rounds.

Consider that Chinese civilization has risen and fallen more than once, so they know more about that than we do.

It probably will again, too, because they have not been very good at facing their own problems. Dr. Bussard had a theory that their population control policies were going to backfire when hundreds of millions of horny young men decide they have the numbers to take what they want.

We went thru something like this with Japan. They came over here and bought up real estate at inflated prices. Trouble was, they could not take it with them, and when their economy declined we got it back, and kept the difference.

I won't defend our economic policy, but by and large the jobs the Chinese are stealing were already overseas. When their labor force reaches a level where they won't work for next to nothing, those jobs will move to the next place where life is cheap.

Meanwhile, as long as we owe them money, they're not going to nuke us.

And as long as we have missile bases wired with Chinese wiring, we probably can't nuke them.

See, the global economy brings world peace!

the article writer states that one of the chinese`s problem is crony capitalism(henceforth known as the triforce), as if that was not prevalent in the western hemisphere also(but perhaps required to some extent?). In china it can`t be called the triforce because the state can override court decision. Am i incorrect?

My impression was that triforce issues were a pretty big problem within our own shores.

One Chinese guy I know once criticised the average American for amassing debt to spend on consumer items while the Chinese saved all the money they made from working in factories. I pointed out that without the Americans going into debt to spend on consumer items made in China there would be no industrial expansion in China and hence no savings by Chinese workers.
Another flaw is the Chinese policy of maintaining an artifically low exchange rate to the dollar, totally unsustainable.
It all goes back to early age conditioning of the population in both countries.

One thing I never understood is the idea that China somehow "needs" dollars. And I don't understand why Americans get so angry at "currency manipulation"

If Chinese are willing to exchange real goods and services for what are essentially paper or digital numbers on a bank account screen more the fools them! The US can print dollars for infinity and chinese can give US citizen the fruits of their hard earned labour in exchange for then.

If you ask me China's "currency manipulation" is actually a form of inflation charity, china gives the US goods, while the US gives china dollar inflation.

I think viewing it that way its fairly clear who needs who in this relationship, all China really needs to do, is takes the products and wealth produced in their factories and give it away to their own population instead of to the US.

But there is one thing the US can provide China that will balance the trade deficit: food the US is a large exporter of agricultural produce and that isn't likely to change anytime soon. This is something that Chinese and Indians may soon find themselves in need of.

In 20 yrs the Chinese are screwed, theywont have enuf young people to take care senior citezens economically speaking. Put your eggs in the indian basket.

Unless the state kills their senior citizens (I wouldn't put it past them)

The video is, of course, a total fiction meant to support a political stance here. It is a cautionary tale, from us, for us. It aired on broadcast TV this morning, I think nationally.

The theme is "failure to stick to your fundamental principles". There is a huge Mao poster to one side of the stage, and the PRC "commie" flag proudly displayed. Mao would be spinning in his grave to see this crew, or any of the leadership in China now. They're heavily engaged in Capitalism. I mean, what else do you call it when someone buys up debt, builds all those factories, etc?

So if the question is, could the US decline by not sticking to its principles? Absolutely.

If the question is, which triumphs, Capitalism or Communism, this particular little fiction makes a very clear prediction: Capitalism. And that much is probably right.

choff wrote:One Chinese guy I know once criticised the average American for amassing debt to spend on consumer items while the Chinese saved all the money they made from working in factories. I pointed out that without the Americans going into debt to spend on consumer items made in China there would be no industrial expansion in China and hence no savings by Chinese workers.
Another flaw is the Chinese policy of maintaining an artifically low exchange rate to the dollar, totally unsustainable.
It all goes back to early age conditioning of the population in both countries.

They sell us stuff at a discount. What is not to like?

MSimon wrote:

choff wrote:One Chinese guy I know once criticised the average American for amassing debt to spend on consumer items while the Chinese saved all the money they made from working in factories. I pointed out that without the Americans going into debt to spend on consumer items made in China there would be no industrial expansion in China and hence no savings by Chinese workers.
Another flaw is the Chinese policy of maintaining an artifically low exchange rate to the dollar, totally unsustainable.
It all goes back to early age conditioning of the population in both countries.

They sell us stuff at a discount. What is not to like?

They can't hope to keep it up forever, sooner or later it starts to hurt their economy, plus as we're seeing other countries are retaliating by reducing the value of their own money, by printing more. It's a screwed up global economy where China does the saving, America does the consumer spending, Europe does the government spending.

MSimon wrote:

choff wrote:One Chinese guy I know once criticised the average American for amassing debt to spend on consumer items while the Chinese saved all the money they made from working in factories. I pointed out that without the Americans going into debt to spend on consumer items made in China there would be no industrial expansion in China and hence no savings by Chinese workers.
Another flaw is the Chinese policy of maintaining an artifically low exchange rate to the dollar, totally unsustainable.
It all goes back to early age conditioning of the population in both countries.

They sell us stuff at a discount. What is not to like?

Ask the last guy to mine rare earth metals in the U.S. that question. Or the last textile manufacturer. Or the last electronic manufacturer.

Buying things for a discount only works while the money holds out. If you aren't selling things too you're in trouble.

vankirkc wrote:They sell us stuff at a discount. What is not to like?

Ask the last guy to mine rare earth metals in the U.S. that question. Or the last textile manufacturer. Or the last electronic manufacturer.

Buying things for a discount only works while the money holds out. If you aren't selling things too you're in trouble.[/quote]
Its not like we don't know how to manufacture stuff. By and large, American companies are the ones setting up and running the plants in foreign countries. Which is why we stopped using GNP and switched to GDP - GNP wasn't telling us what was happening to our people here.

Which is better for America: A Japanese car company making a car in Indiana and selling it here, or an American car company making a car in Mexico and selling it here? The answer depends on how much of the sale price is profit, and how much is labor.

WizWom wrote:Its not like we don't know how to manufacture stuff. By and large, American companies are the ones setting up and running the plants in foreign countries. Which is why we stopped using GNP and switched to GDP - GNP wasn't telling us what was happening to our people here.

Which is better for America: A Japanese car company making a car in Indiana and selling it here, or an American car company making a car in Mexico and selling it here? The answer depends on how much of the sale price is profit, and how much is labor.

Let's say that the two cases actually exist, and the payroll and sales tax benefits of car company A are exactly equal to the profit and sales/income tax benefits of car company B.

Car company A is going to benefit the lower class more, and car company B is going to benefit the upper class more. Why? Because the lower class are collecting the payroll, but are very unlikely to be holding shares. The shareholders conversely are very likely to be upper middle to upper class, but are unlikely to be auto workers themselves.

I would argue in that case that car company A is better value because it keep the auto workers employed and off the streets.

vankirkc wrote: Ask the last guy to mine rare earth metals in the U.S. that question. Or the last textile manufacturer. Or the last electronic manufacturer.

Buying things for a discount only works while the money holds out. If you aren't selling things too you're in trouble.

Well, remember, gains from trade benefit both sides -- that's why they're called "gains." Things like textiles that require unskilled labor are a poor use of our highly productive society. Mining is out of favor here because people get killed in mines, and so in our society U.S. safety requirements make it cheaper to mine elsewhere, in places where productive work is so dear it may mean the difference between eating or not, so that death in a mine is a more acceptable risk. We've probably outsourced at least 10,000 mining deaths, which is balanced by the fact that we've also forgone maybe a trillion dollars. Is it the right balance? That's what societies have to decide. But for a corporation, the decisions are all ultimately made by the consumer.

'The captain is the consumer…the consumers determine precisely what should be produced, in what quality, and in what quantities…They are merciless egoistic bosses, full of whims and fancies, changeable and unpredictable. For them nothing counts other than their own satisfaction…In their capacity as buyers and consumers they are hard-hearted and callous, without consideration for other people…Capitalists…can only preserve and increase their wealth by filling best the orders of the consumers… In the conduct of their business affairs they must be unfeeling and stony-hearted because the consumers, their bosses, are themselves unfeeling and stony-hearted.'

They sell us stuff at a discount. What is not to like?

I think it's important to realize what exactly is happening in this relationship. They are sacrificing living standards for employment and growth, and their producers are becoming dependent on our consumers. They're addicted to loose currency the same way Japan was, but with far less efficiencies. At some point they too will run into the end of currency-driven expansion, probably at much lower GDP per capita than Japan did. Instead of becoming the richest country in the world, Japan looks to be stuck with living standards about 20% below ours on a PPP basis.

Realize that all that American debt the Chinese own is an asset they can never sell, at least not without reversing the effects of buying it -- which were the whole point of buying it in the first place.