US versus China for world position

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.

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.

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.

You read/watch BBC a lot.

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.

“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.

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.