Likewise, well written Mr. Malachi.
We will agree to disagree, though in many ways we are on the same page. And I am very happy to have an intelligent discussion with you.
The “Trade” article was simply to highlight some areas of globalization. It seemed to touch on some of my points, but it also looked at others and was not biased, so I threw it in there.
And not that other countries (or more specifically their actions) should not influence the election or appointment of US officials, because world events and policies should influence their consciousness. My real point was that these US officials should not dilute the United States Constitution by bringing into US law opinions and laws made by other sovereign nations or global bodies. I would see that the US could do as they wish and Canada do as they wish, regarding, certainly, domestic policy and foreign policy to the fullest extent. Obviously, both would have to make concessions or compromise in a given international agreement, but that is part of the process. My concerns are over world entities limiting US (or Canadian) sovereignty by a slow creep of globalism.
And yes, I would agree that the US has been the best “#1”… and I would also agree that there is a lot we can do to improve. Starting with a worldwide reduction of military presence where it really isn’t necessary and a return to responsible fiscal spending in order to honor our debts and inspire international confidence.
I still think it would be difficult to make sure China is playing by the rules that would be layed out. For one, I really don’t think they care. People are cheap in China, at least that is how many who are in power in China see it. Whatever it takes to do, omit or ignore to make China # 1, they will do.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Environment_in_the_People’s_Republic_of_China
WARNING… the following video is absolutely sickening. I was disturbed for some time after watching this. Still, I think it is important for people to see the truth. Read the article too.
http://www.theblaze.com/stories/sickening-video-two-vans-hit-chinese-toddler-18-passers-by-ignore-her-suffering/
Even though they sign treaties to limit pollution and increase worker safety, only time will tell if they make good on their promises or if they simply throw more bodies under the bus(es) to pursue world dominance… which has been the historical trend for China.
I am just skeptical of the possibilities there. People around the world will still buy their cheap products and China will only change when it wants to. I agree with your sentiment that everyone should play by the rules and violators should be punished, but it is a hard issue.
As for environmental laws, I am quite for them when they serve an intelligent purpose, especially as it relates to water pollutants and invasive species. Don’t get me started on the Great Lakes issues… I have lived in Toledo, Ohio all my life and love the Great Lakes more than any other water in the world. I too used to take trips to Lake Erie with my parents when I was younger (and I still do myself) and back then the water was at least moderately clean. Today, that beach I used to go to has been closed for public use and the water there looks like black sludge, clogged with a crap-load of zebra shells. I hate it man, and for a long time I have considered doing something with a career in looking to reverse the effects. So… I know personally how you feel.
(And like I said, I frequently vacation in Michigan on the Lakes and in Canada on Lake Superior… so I also know how good the Lakes can be if cared for.)
I consider myself an environmentalist too, in the sense that I love the environment and feel the need to protect it and restore it. But like you, I am no tree hugger. I do not support the vast majority of alternative energy initiatives because they are simply wasteful monetarily and pander to an artificial market, both in businesses and individuals.
Back to the Great Lakes… yes a law abou ballast dumping would have been wonderful and I would have supported such a thing, if I had been alive when the problem began. Same with the carp problem. This is an area where it is the governments of both the US and Canada to take measures to protect our most vital freshwater ecosystem. There should be nothing political about it. Keystone is political because it more national and it deals with oil. Most American liberals (and progressive Republicans too) have painted oil as an environmental evil simply for political gain. Keystone will get more attention because it would cut right down the center of the United States, bringing many more states than those in the great lakes area into the equation.
When Canada spars with the US over Great Lakes policy it is not an invasion on US sovereignty. I don’t know how they are represented legally, but the Lakes should not be sovereign US territory (diplomatically in respective waters yes, but not environmentally). We have our side of the waters, sure, but water behaves differently than a land border. Our two countries need to come to an agreement over this issues specifically because the Lakes are the single element that we actually, fully share. The US cannot do what it pleases with its half of Lake Superior, Huron, Erie or Ontario and think that it will not affect the Canadian side. And the same goes for Lake Michigan, to nearly the same extent. Canada has every national right to complain and work out some agreement with the United States over this issue. If the US and Canada successfully came to agreement of acid rain, they should do so even more with the Lakes… but unfortunately, neither you nor I can directly change that.
Yeah, all the Republican candidates are flawed. I cannot say I am entirely pleased with any single one of them, but on the whole I feel much more comfortable with any one of them than I do with current leadership. But that is a sidenote.
Sorry to take your thread a bit off topic, but I think we have come to a better understanding of the issues and each other.
A good conversation meanders, I have to keep checking to see what the heading is myself!
About the US military presence in many and varied places. It would seem to me that bring back most of the boys from Germany and Europe would be an easy choice. Korea has come along way since 100K was the norm, you can make an argument for a few guys in Korea but the south really can more than pay its way.
I do understand the military doctrine of being so tough nobody will even think about attacking. One can make the argument it saves money in the long run to prevent war. Well it worked against the soviets. I am not sure if it can work long term against a future economic powerhouse.
I think you might find this website interesting. You can only view 7 articles a month. Trick then, use a version of a browser for only that site. I normally use chrome, so I use firefox for this site only. If you clear your history, specifically the cookie for this site, then you can view unlimited documents.
The site is:
http://www.globalsecurity.org/
Two articles that brings home current US military supremacy compared to the rest of the world.
http://www.globalsecurity.org/military/world/carriers.htm
http://www.globalsecurity.org/military/world/destroyers.htm
How many Nimitz type carriers will a future China be ‘allowed’ to have? Yes the old soviet carrier China is playing with is interesting, but for awhile western news media seemed in a frenzy. I find the language of some US pundits interesting when they contemplate China having some measure of parity with the US military. On the other hand, it scares the heck out of me (and the south china sea area) when China makes claims like these:
Very cool website, and articles. I didn’t know about it.
It has been said that the United States will never be defeated or overcome by an outside (military) force. But it is only nefarious internal dissention which can defeat us.
I believe that is true. So I am less concerned with the US maintaining military might. I know we will. My concerns are over what our country and its people are becoming. Those who advocate globalism (through social justice, environmentalism, etc…), are anti-military, anti-capitalist… the list goes on… this i what will overcome the US standing in the world. Not another country’s military.
It all goes back to my statements on retaining sovereignty and respect. We are currently losing those characteristics from within. Again, not political, just an observation of the change.
But I really liked those articles… my kind of reading!
I read mostly interesting comments posted so far on this topic,
so let me add a few.
Communist China spys on the USA and other countries.
China has ambitions to avenge and retake other parts of Asia, including Japan and many former Japanese colonies that hold significant percentages of ethnic Chinese, like the Taiwan, Singapore, and the Philippines.
China rise has fruitioned from the seeds of US policies since the Nixon era.
Nixon visited the Great wall because he wanted to isolate the USSR.
Saigon fell to the USSR supported communists a few years later.
Carter granted Communist PROC China the ROC (now Taiwan) UN seat.
Reagan left it mostly alone. But he was generally anti-communist.
GHW Bush (former ambassador) counted China as part of the post Gulf War New World Order after the Tiananmen massacre (1989).
Clinton granted China Most Favored Trading Nation despite many human injustices. There was some sort of orange robed religious group campaign contribution scandal during his re-election campaign that was linked to China
GW Bush ramped down on anti-China policies after our planes collided and China never returned our surveillance plane.
BHO runs up massive daily overspending debt, which China seemed happy to buy until 2010. BHO DOE policy also restricts US oil firms from drilling, but allows foreign firms, including those from China, to gain permits to drill for our gulf resources.
As an anti-communist ranter, the only halfway decent thing I can say about the rise of China is that they are currently not spreading more communism. They are actually rising via mercantilistic capitalism.
There was a Bloomberg article about Steve Wynn saying that China’s real estate policies and other regulations were more stable than what he gets in the USA, leading him to open more resorts on that side of the ocean.
Good points Linkon. Careful about anything that can be remotely connected to politics. I know merely commenting on what NATO does is enough to get a topic closed by moderators for talking politics so we must be treading close to the line now.
I think you would agree the only thing communist about China is perhaps some letterheads here and there! As for the Chinese real estate market. I wouldn’t count it immune from market corrections. I was watching a recent documentary (probably BBC) showing a mall with pretty much no tenants. A massive mall that would hold 100s and 100s of tenants pretty much a ghost town. I think China has its own problem with real estate speculation. But that tends to happen when you have more money than god and don’t know where to invest it.
Just an interesting point about China-US trade. I had made the point somewhere that the ‘West’ ought to put taxes on Chinese products that are cheaper due to labour and environmental standards we would not tolerate in our own countries. This in order to help ‘even the playing field’.
We the ‘West’ don’t seem able to bring ourselves to doing something like that. But the Chinese have no problem doing that to the ‘West’, so why are we so impotent to balancing the playing field?
Of particular interest is this in following article:
Car wars
In the continuing trade spat between the US and China, the Commerce Ministry said it would impose an anti-subsidy and anti-dumping duty on small US cars.The tariff will range from 2% to 21.5% and will affect General Motors, Chrysler, Ford and other US-based foreign car makers.
http://posts.people.com.cn/bbs_new/filepool/htdoc/html/e871ec4e1b711b141ac5b82eab062e2d6220b1bb/b4390821/l_4390821_1.html
http://english.people.com.cn/90780/91344/7580316.html
Here if you ever heard of Japan’s lost decade, read these. They’re suggesting China might repeat it.
An interesting article, but the author doesn’t believe China is actually going to follow Japan. What is really interesting about that page is when you hover the pointer over a word you get the original chinese word and dictionary page for it.
We do not accept the viewpoint that China is stepping into a lost decade, but we must never evade or cover the economic issues facing China
I saw this BBC documentary on a mall in China were for the last few years since construction only 1-2% of it is occupied. A quick google and I found the documentary here, 14 minutes, pretty cool.
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=rPILhiTJv7E
That clip certainly seems to add weight to the ‘For bubble argument’ found here:
You read/watch BBC a lot.
Actually, the BBC is but a minority of what I watch. It does however represent the largest source of relevant articles to me anyways. That documentary was re-aired on the CBC when I first saw it.
Wow, I wish I had time to catch up on every word of every post. This is one of the most thoughtful discussions by folks that don’t agree that I have come across on the Internet.
I’m going to simply start by saying that I think I am the most conservative fellow that has waded into this so far. Regrettably I won’t be providing a full response due to time.
Concerning the admonition early on that we not throw politics into this, I don’t think that is possible. From my vantage point, the larger business intrests have to be involved in the political process behind the scenes so the two are inseperable. For this reason, and because I don’t have time to down it in a round about way, I can’t provide a real response to several points above.
MrCrunch … It pains me to see you write that the US is holding up the Keystone deal for political reasons. There is one party that is doing that, not the US playing international political games.
I really can’t go on because the politics are too intertwined in the subject.
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=NX3pGX9-7uE&feature=BFp&list=FLvq5PTYbMvzM8HgTeor70Fw
Hey check out this video.
Our government has been blaming China for ruining the recent green energy initiatives.
I believe throwing money at risky ventures, energy or otherwise should be done by the private sector. After all, they get a write off if they fail, and they get taxed when they succeed. And the success may require them to hire more employees, who will also pay taxes (hopefully here instead of China).
Now when we study China’s rise, its like the study of the rise of naval air power that any A&A will easily grasp. Nobody here would question that carrier, proper aircraft useage, or the nullification of your opponents such utilization, would be key to winning any given game of A&A.
Eventually, such a winning strategy gets copied and refined.
Think of Compaq in the late 80’s , who copied IBM, and refined the computer into a bulky travel suitcase version.
Think of Apple, who copied many other mobile device makers like Blackberry , Palm, Nokia, Motorola, Samsung, Panasonic, etc, and refined it for Iphones and Ipads.
China has technologically done it to our manufacturing industries. They currently hold the advantage in solar.
I humbly suggest that our solar manufacturors study what china’s firms and doing so they can refine and develop improved market share gaining products for mass production and consumption.
I believe throwing money at risky ventures, energy or otherwise should be done by the private sector.
Like the internet? Oh wait, DARPANET was a US government creation, the internet is a direct result of the US DARPANET investment. I think private business in the US has done quite well with the internet. The US basically controls it and prospers from it.
China is the epitome of state directed capitalism. The state of China does not micro manage industry in many cases, but their state control of rare earth metals is why China is winning the solar panel war. Well, that and they can pollute the hell out of their country and if you don’t like it then roll over and die.
China has its challenges, watch for a possible collapse in real estate values there. China state control is working to fix this problem, can they do it?
“state control of rare earth metals”
That is a credit to their governmental foresight that is severely lacking here.
I bet it would not have cost so much if the USA figured out the potential and started investing for the rare metals shortage back in the mid-90’s.
That is something our government should be encouraging a scientific breakthrough workaround for.
If only our US government can project which will be the likely key raw materials and technolgies will be needed 12-20 years from now and prepare.
China also have a severe limitations on higher learning, yet graduate way more engineers and scientists than the USA.
India too.
The main limitation here is price. And the value of higher ed here is diluted by feel good learning topics and binge drinking rather than hard sciences. The bulk of our graduates will soon be lifetime indebted, unable to compete in the modern world.
The US used to produce the majority of rare earth minerals actually. Contrary to the name, the minerals are not that rare, but they are hard to extract. High concentrations that are profitable to remove are rare. The only reason that China now produces 95% of the world supply is that it is an enormously hideous and large process to extract. Since China is willing to pollute the snot out of vast areas of their country and imprison and or kill anyone who speaks out against the practice and grind up their workers in the extraction process they have an unfair trading advantage.
Now if the US was willing to sacrifice a few 100 workers per year in unsafe working conditions, pay the workers 2 bucks an hour with no benefits and imprison land owners who complained about their land being stolen or ruined via pollution, perhaps destroy vast swathes of land with pollution we would have an even playing field.
Hopefully the day comes soon when ordinary Chinese citizens can demand better conditions and even the playing field.
I agree with you on education. Most of the brightest and hardest working hard science students I meet at the local university are foreign exchange students, many many of them from China. I think most engineer types could use a bit of ‘feel good’ liberal arts courses to round them out however. Engineers are often boring and don’t advance far past the head of the local engineering or research department. It’s the history major who started out in the mail room who 20 years later becomes the CEO not the computer science nerd who got hired at the same time at twice the wage.
I just came across this article and thought of this thread. I have known China’s economy has been growing at about 10% a year for a long time and have been watching the rise of China for decades. I guess I am getting old, it’s been 3 decades now I have been watching China grow at 10%. I thought it was a fluke, that it was easy to grow something from near nothing to a bit more than near nothing. But compounding it 30 times at 10% turns a puny economy into a real economy. I knew in my lifetime China would have a larger GDP than the US but didn’t see that year coming after just one more US presidential election after this one……
An interesting article on the differences in Western and Chinese cultures and the role of the ‘state’. Yeah, in 6 years China will overtake the US in GDP, albeit they will have to divide it 4-5 more ways being 4-5 times larger in population. That will take another 15-20 years to have the same per person GDP, still in our lifetimes.
A Point Of View: Is China more legitimate than the West?
http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/magazine-20178655
This article is about the Chinese economy specifically:
http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/world-asia-china-20069627
The problem with the US and to a lessor extent Canada (being blessed with lots of natural resources per person) is that we stopped making things other than paper wealth with banking shenanigans. If we held China to the same labour and environmental laws that we in North America rightfully enjoy things would be much better and its doable, certainly more so than agreeing with the other political side. If we add to that holding them to intellectual ownership laws and penalize them for state supported industrial/commercial quasi-warfare then we would be fighting a much more fair fight.
Enacting tariffs (supportable by the WTO) seriously ought to be easier than convincing the other guy to raise/lower taxes and decrease/maintain spending.
Looks like you’d love enforcing restrictions to China to have a “fair” treatnent. Oh look you did! For around 100 years! Google or Wiki “unfair treaties” plus china or japan, also say hi to commodore Perry.
Looks like you’d love enforcing restrictions to China to have a “fair” treatnent.
You enforce the restrictions by simply not buying their products, don’t need a military to not buy things.
Oh look you did! For around 100 years!
I’m not sure who you are referring to. The west in general?
As for Commodore Perry, that was in relation to Japan and he opened up Japan for trade but didn’t exploit Japan the same way China was….So not sure how that relates, if anything, it strengthened Japan.
