China's getting nervous

[ranskaldan]

Originally posted by nationalist


From the Viewpoint of Chinese leadership, that is. Its also good from the viewpoint of the C.E.O.s.

Yes.

Its bad from the viewpoint of the actual Chinese labor.

This is where I disagree. Of course conditions may be appalling by Western standards, but what are the alternatives?

There are hundreds of millions - literally - of migrant workers who come out of the rural areas looking for work in the urban areas. That is with tight control over internal population migrations. Most of those people would have been peasants back home, tilling over-worked, desalinated land and starving. Either that or they have to go into the coal mines. This is not funny at all. Every week there is an explosion in some mine or the other than kills 40 people in a sitting.

In the meantime, there are thousands of laidoff workers milling the streets of Chinese cities looking for work, the victims of privatization who were originally working in outdated, inefficient state-owned enterprises. They often end up selling fruits - or worse (picking batteries and toxic computer parts, for instance). These two taken together - laidoff workers and migrant peasants - is a vast nightmare of hardship, and, together with that, crime.

And you're proposing that we lay off the ones who've actually found work already, in the cities, in textiles factories??

[nationalist]

The Pakistanis have a nuclear weapon. That's also pretty impressive for a backward country. The question is which country did they steal technology from?

[nationalist]

Originally posted by ranskaldan

And you're proposing that we lay off the ones who's actually found work already, in the cities, in textiles factories??

No, I'm proposing that we bring industries back to the U.S. for American Workers. Then the Chinese can open plants to provide goods for their own coutnry.

[S. Kroeze]

Originally posted by Willem
From CNN:

"Of more concern to the LGNS is the perceived expansion of American unilateralism if not neo-imperialism.

As People's Daily commentator Huang Peizhao pointed out last Saturday, U.S. moves in the Middle East "have served the goal of seeking world-wide domination."

State Council think-tank member Tong Gang saw the conflict as the first salvo in Washington's bid to "build a new world order under U.S. domination."

Chinese strategists think particularly if the U.S. can score a relatively quick victory over Baghdad, it will soon turn to Asia -- and begin efforts to "tame" China.

It is understood the LGNS believes the U.S. will take on North Korea -- still deemed a "lips-and-teeth" ally of China's -- as early as this summer."

I understand your concerns; doubtless the Chinese will fell threatened -like the rest of the world.
But the Chinese have one advantage: a stable and capable government that -unlike the Bush administration- doesn't waste its energies by chasing chimeras.

They will never admit it, but my guess is they are secretly overjoyed about this crazy adventure that will destabilise the Middle East and ruin the American economy. They can just wait and see.
China will in the long term be the only power that benefits from the quixotism of the Bushies.

They probably know that before the end of the century -and even sooner when the US has more Reagans and Bushes as president- the centre of the world will be restored to its natural postion: the 'Middle Kingdom'.
In the end one cannot fight gravity.

[ranskaldan]

Originally posted by nationalist


No, I'm proposing that we bring industries back to the U.S. for American Workers. Then the Chinese can open plants to provide goods for their own coutnry.

The trade links between America and China is the only thing keeping a new Cold War from occurring. Currently it is not in China's interest to piss off a country that provides a large chunk of its GDP.

North Korea is big enough a pain. I don't suggest that you create another one.

[nationalist]

Originally posted by ranskaldan


The trade links between America and China is the only thing keeping a new Cold War from occurring.

North Korea is big enough a pain. I don't suggest that you create another one.

Screw a cold war. If we don't try to intimidate China, then there won't be a cold war. The reason that the first cold war happened is because we directly oppossed Soviet expansionism.

[Willem]

Originally posted by S. Kroeze

In the end one cannot fight gravity.

I've been thinking along those lines myself. With such a huge population base of their own, and the market that brings, and their drive towards modernization, it's inevitable that eventually they will become the world's major superpower.

[ranskaldan]

Originally posted by nationalist


Screw a cold war. If we don't try to intimidate China, then there won't be a cold war. The reason that the first cold war happened is because we directly oppossed Soviet expansionism.

Without these trade links, what exactly would prevent China from nipping over to Taiwan tomorrow?

[Willem]

ranskaldan

How are relations between China, Vietnam and India these days?

[nationalist]

Originally posted by ranskaldan


Without these trade links, what exactly would prevent China from nipping over to Taiwan tomorrow?

Who cares? So what if China takes Taiwan? Its not as if they're taking Nebraska or something. They're not going to come for Hawaii, because of something called Nuclear Deterrance. If we have our industries in the U.S., then we wouldn't need to import the tons goods that are made in Tawian. If our economy didn't depend on their goods, then it wouldn't be important for us to ensure their independence. We could allow China to take Taiwan over and be rid of a political headache.

[ranskaldan]

Wary.

China and India are too preoccupied with their current spheres to bother with each other right now though.

However, since China and India are busy flooding each other's markets, I don't foresee any major concerns.

[Lawrence of Arabia]

It is the chinese governments job to protect its workers from exploitation. SEcond of all, I want my goods as cheap and reliable as possible. Labor costs in the US are just too high.

[ranskaldan]

Originally posted by nationalist


Who cares? So what if China takes Taiwan? Its not as if they're taking Nebraska or something. They're not going to come for Hawaii, because of something called Nuclear Deterrance. If we have our industries in the U.S., then we wouldn't need to import the tons goods that are made in Tawian. If our economy didn't depend on their goods, then it wouldn't be important for us to ensure their independence. We could allow China to take Taiwan over and be rid of a political headache.

You're letting powerful enemies who have no common interest with you to form. This will seriously endanger the security of America and all other nations.

[nationalist]

Originally posted by Lawrence of Arabia
I want my goods as cheap and reliable as possible. Labor costs in the US are just too high.

I want a country where someone who didn't go to Grad school has the ability to get a job in which he can support himself and gets insurance, and I want an economy that can produce enough clothing and Steel so we could be self sufficient in case of an emergency.

[nationalist]

Originally posted by ranskaldan

You're letting powerful enemies who have no common interest with you to form. This will seriously endanger the security of America and all other nations.

No it won't, because attacking the U.S. would mean the total and utter destruction of their country. The world seems to be tired of us trying to police it. I say that we should cut our expenses and let someone else do it for a while while we set backunder our comfortable nuclear umbrella. Maybe the Europeans could step up and do something instead of complaining about U.S. leadership.

[Willem]

Originally posted by ranskaldan
Wary.

China and India are too preoccupied with their current spheres to bother with each other right now though.

However, since China and India are busy flooding each other's markets, I don't foresee any major concerns.

How about Vietnam? I know you had a border skirmish at one time long ago, shortly after the Vietnam war, have they resolved their differences? And what was that all about anyway?

[Lawrence of Arabia]

the more integrated the economies are the less you have to worry about war. two countries who depend on each other will not go to war. the less you are integrated (aka less trade, more import substitution) the more likely the countries are to go to war.

[ranskaldan]

Originally posted by nationalist


I want a country where someone who didn't go to Grad school has the ability to get a job in which he can support himself and gets insurance, and I want an economy that can produce enough clothing and Steel so we could be self sufficient in case of an emergency.

You're creating a world where each nation is an individual bubble. In this case there would be no reason why nations wouldn't go to war with each other.

(- other than Nuclear Deterrence, which may become obsolete due to technology.)

[nationalist]

What would we have to go to war about?

[Sandman]

They probably know that before the end of the century -and even sooner when the US has more Reagans and Bushes as president- the centre of the world will be restored to its natural postion: the 'Middle Kingdom'.

There's India as well. It should be almost a powerful as China now, on paper, but it's currently lagging behind.

[nationalist]

Originally posted by ranskaldan


You're creating a world where each nation is an individual bubble. In this case there would be no reason why nations wouldn't go to war with each other.

(- other than Nuclear Deterrence, which may become obsolete due to technology.)

No , I'm creating a world where the U.S. is in its individual bubble. The rest of the world can do what it wants.

[ranskaldan]

What would we have to go to war about?

Land, resources, labour.

Currently you can get these things without the messiness and risk of war - and without pissing other countries off and making them want to exact revenge.

[Lawrence of Arabia]

over land, over resources which arnt being traded, over religion and all of these wars will not create shortages at home because the countries are already self sufficient, so they are more likley to go to war because there is less cost to the economy.

[ranskaldan]

Originally posted by nationalist


No , I'm creating a world where the U.S. is in its individual bubble. The rest of the world can do what it wants.

Then the U.S. will quickly and hopelessly lag behind in economic development, technology, and living standards.

You are also providing an enormous incentive for the rest of the world to gang up on America and open it up by force or coercion.

[nationalist]

What terretorial aspirations does the U.S. have? We have plenty of land right now. Religiously, the U.S. has no official religion, China is athiest. We could still trade for needed resources, and we could try to synthesize them as well.

[nationalist]

Originally posted by ranskaldan


Then the U.S. will quickly and hopelessly lag behind in economic development, technology, and living standards.

You are also providing an enormous incentive for the rest of the world to gang up on America and open it up by force or coercion.

Force and coercion won't work. Competetion will still exist inside of the U.S.

[Six Thousand Year Old Man]

Originally posted by nationalist


No, I'm proposing that we bring industries back to the U.S. for American Workers. Then the Chinese can open plants to provide goods for their own coutnry.

Enjoy your new pair of $500 Nikes

('Cause that's what they'll cost if they have to pay US wages to the workers who make 'em )

[Ned]

I have said this before: we cannot do anything in or to N. Korea without Chinese, let alone, South Korea or Japans's consent if not support. I think I have heard Bush actually say this a number of times. If everyone cooperates, NK may comply. If they do not, then the UN will impose sanctions. That is whay I see happening.

It is still amazing to me that the anti-Americans, from the European left to the Islamic right actually believe their own propaganda.

After we settle with Saddam, our short-term goal will be to establish a democratic government there with their own military. As soon as that is done, Bush has stated that we shall withdraw. I believe him.

(Maybe, at the same time, we can get our troops out of Bosnia and Kosovo. Bush tried last year, but the Europeans insisted that we stay!)

[Lawrence of Arabia]

why won't force and coercion work? it worked in china during the 19th century. competition doesnt necessairly make a country advance. you need a lot of it, and sometimes even then, deveoplment doesnt advance.

[nationalist]

Originally posted by Six Thousand Year Old Man

Enjoy your new pair of $500 Nikes

('Cause that's what they'll cost if they have to pay US wages to the workers who make 'em )

Hey, that's almost double what they cost now

I'd put in wage and price ceilings.