This page has been archived and commenting is disabled.
China Flexes Its Muscles
I got a laugh from this Bloomberg story.
The US-China Business Council whose membership includes the likes of
Caterpillar, IBM, Citicorp and Boeing (a total of 200 US multinationals)
is lobbying D.C. to fend off U.S. legislation aimed at forcing the
Chinese to raise the value of their currency.
Hello? China’s global trade surplus has narrowed somewhat of late. But
the most recent reading showed a $20 billion surplus. Guess what? 90% of
that surplus is a result of the trade surplus with the good old USA.
And our major corporations are spending big bucks lobbying Washington to
ease up the pressure on China to accelerate the revaluation of their
currency. Go Figure. From the article:
The
legislation, sponsored by Representatives Tim Ryan, an Ohio Democrat,
and Tim Murphy, a Pennsylvania Republican, would let companies petition
for higher duties on imports from China to compensate for the effect of a
weak currency.
The
measure “is totally counterproductive,” William Lane, government
relations director for Caterpillar, the largest maker of construction
and mining equipment, said in an interview. “Some in Congress want to
start a trade war and undermine our efforts to sell to our
fastest-growing export market.”
Here’s how I think this went down:
China to Citi:
If you want to expand your branches and business in our country you will lean on Congress not to pass this bill.
China to Boeing:
We can buy aircraft from Embraer in Brazil, or Airbus. If you want us to buy some from you, you must appose this law.
China to Caterpillar:
If
you want to open a manufacturing facility in our country you have to do
as we say. And we say you must tell your Congress to drop their effort.
The US-China Business Council to China:
We will do as you wish
The only reason that these global heavyweights are using their muscle to
pressure Congress is that China Inc. has used their muscle on the elite
of US corporations.
This development makes the Administration (in particular Treasury
Secretary Geithner) look pretty stupid. They have been pushing China on
the FX issue since they took over. Now, the big shots that line campaign
coffers are pushing in the opposite direction. Only in America could
this happen.
The year to date trade deficit with China is 145 billion. The article had this to say on that big number:
“In
2010, the trade deficit with China reduces U.S. GDP by more than $400
billion,” Peter Morici, an economist at the University of Maryland in
College Park, wrote this month in a report. “Unemployment would be
falling and the U.S. economy recovering more rapidly, but for the trade
imbalance with China and Beijing’s protectionist policies.”
I
am in the camp of Mr. Morici. China is not a partner. They are a
predator. The have wracked up a nearly $1 trillion reserve position with
the US because they are predators. They are moving whole factories to
their land. They recently announced a massive cutback in rare earth
metals exports (they are 97% of the market, they cut exports by 72%).
Unemployment is higher than it should be and the economy is weaker than
it might have been were it not for the continued imbalance of trade.
Watch for this proposed legislation to die. There are hearings on 9/15
and our boy Timmy G. is set to talk about this to Congress on the 16th.
As the election is near, expect to hear some rhetoric from Tim.
Looking like one is ‘tough on China’ is a vote getter. But beyond the talk there will be no action.
Just to confirm. The small guy in America does not stand a chance. The ‘big interests’ are not aligned with their interests.
»
- advertisements -
Window has source code? I thought it was all quasi-random zeros and ones-which explains its reliability!
"Do you really want to place your customers in the trash?"
If they really did copy Windows (TM), they deserve every problem that running that so-called OS will give them!
I agree that our intellectual property rights are not recognized by the chinese... but, this is some piddly ass shit. Hell, we sold them nuclear secrets... (thanks bubba). In short, they can't take anything we don't give them.
To a certain extent, knowledge is power... and it's neat that they have a core competency of stealing knowledge... the biggest problem with this strategy is that you're perpetually playing catch up... kind of like anti virus software. In the end, you can know an aircraft carrier is off your coast, but knowledge of the fact doesn't help you much... what is knowledge without the ultimate power to wield it? Plus, we're light years beyond them in the propaganda business... push comes to shove, and you'll have a chinese version of baghdad bob talking about how they cleared the whole lot of us... oops, their information was being controlled by us.
They're gonna have a lot of nonperforming assets to liquidate... and while we see the best of their shit, they see none of our good stuff... we save that for the right time... 700b/year gets you some nice toys.
Thanks for the bright outlook. Are you armed and ready?
All the while dreaming at night of global thermonuclear annihilation. Some days it just doesn't pay to go to bed.
I was born ready.
It'll be like those ants that ford rivers making bridges with their own bodies.
I'd have to agree with this point of view, it is way more likely that we'll be the occupied country. Don't forget to catch the movie next year before it happens!!!
http://www.reddawn2010.com/
WOLVERINES!!!!!
Ronald Ebens & Michael Nitz are feeling quite vindicated for their actions.
Sounds like a good idea, and one with no shortage of people in the US willing to help out.
Then tell about every other developing country to look at the devastation, and get in line.
Confiscate? They already have it. When you move tech and capacity to another country you might as well give it to them openly. People may scream that the Chinese cannot innovate, but they don't have to when they are gifted US tech.
Siemens engineers recently reported that
China bought them a 'track', i.e a ' fast metro', being put down,
for center Peking and that the Chinese were busy at night
'reverse-engineering' it..
Obviously, this is not new news. Western companies have been given permission to work in China for years, and usually stay long enough for the Chinese to learn from the technology. Thats all. The companies do it, because if they don't, their competitors will and its a big old market.
The little guy doesn't stand a chance? Yeah, that's generally the case... Occasionally the little guys and gals get up the cajones (or desperation) to do something about it...
Generally only after everything falls apart. However China's successful Authoritarianism... very much assisted by our own corrupted elites... and combined with our inertia in addressing "META"-political issues (i.e. the systems and technologies of political decision) within Enlightenment-based Representative democracies... (not the Republicrat/Democan charade run at the behest of monied interests for the entertainment and confusion of the powerless)...
poses the greatest threat to human progress since the birth of agriculture. The sad truth is that if kept ignorant, isolated, divided and distracted people DO tolerate hideous injustice and oppression... and can do it for centuries.
There's no guarantee that freedom and individual dignity can survive a rapidly entrenching global corporatism... that only sees individuals as resources to be exploited. The machine is coming to dominate its creators.
Now is the time when we find out whether the ideas of the Enlightenment can survive global oligarchy.
Hint: The core of the problem in scaling civilization lies in an inherent conflict produced by the boundaries of biological altruism... and how this affects group decisions. Self-interest scales directly... altruism doesn't.
Ayn Rand & Alan Greenspan: The Altruism Fly in the Objectivist Ointment
http://culturalengineer.blogspot.com/2009/10/ayn-rand-alan-greenspan-alt...
On Creating Communities
http://culturalengineer.blogspot.com/2009/08/on-creating-communities-par...
Empowering the Commons: The Dedicated Account (Part I)
http://culturalengineer.blogspot.com/2010/08/empowering-commons-dedicate...
The Problem in Scaling Altruism: Where's the Intelligent Life
http://culturalengineer.blogspot.com/2010/04/problem-in-scaling-altruism...
Seems overly complicated.
When survival is at stake people will choose individualism or altruism based on what has the greater chance for the survival of their bloodline (the closest and IMO only relevant proximity). Sacrificing oneself to ensure the survival of a social group that protects the bloodline makes sense. Forced sacrifice for the benefit of someone else's bloodline works well for the one doing the forcing, but goes against human nature for the forcee... and is anathema.
When survival is not an issue, individualism seemingly has much greater benefits/utility when compared to altruism and so the social group can be easily divided and will play against itself. However that does not mean that a social group will not loosely band to gether for mutual individual benefit in mock survival combat against other social groups. Also individuals will reform into altruistic social groups when faced with an issue of survival.
Actually it is a little complicated... and dangerously subtle.
The "Altruism boundary problem" distorts the political balance of the two opposing sides of the political spectrum...
Decisions re governance are a constant process of weighing the interests of the individual vs. the group... And its always going to be a balance... there are no one-man solo economies and no Collective utopias...
Traditionally we think of the Right as weighing in on the side of the Individual... and the Left doing the opposite. However, since self-interest scales directly... while altruism does not... the larger group interests take a backseat over time as a rulership class coalesces after an upheaval... and its narrower group interests come to dominate decision.
Oligarchy is all but inevitable in scaled societies.
The larger group interest gets inevitably whittled down with compromise and the insufficient urgency of its advocates...
This is a problem of an elite Left out-of-touch with group interests. It's why Kerry can be of the Left and feel fine about avoiding taxes on his yacht... (he believes he's doing all he can I'm sure...)
Its why they can ignore the real burdens placed on poor Americans by illegal immigration... and leave the immigrants to be blamed for a problem created and fostered by the thereby benefited elites of both parties...
And why we got cheap credit and low-wages along with out-sourcing and erosion of the middle class... (a doubly profitable model for financial sector and the exiting manufacturers)
And why we got a healthcare bill loved by big Pharma and lobbyists... but very few others.
And finreg... and now Basel III...
The thing is... I'm a big believer in Individualism... and know that the only way for inidividualism to thrive is within a healthy GROUP!
BOTH sides need good advocates. The general welfare has been betrayed. And mostly by a failed and spoiled Leftist elite which has lacked the integrity to stand up for much of anything at all.
But then again, I might be crazy... or we all might be.
Political Fundraising: Act Blue, Facebook and the Missing Network Imperative http://culturalengineer.blogspot.com/2010/08/political-fundraising-act-b...
P.S. Just to be even clearer... I'm no great "altruist"... no pollyanna... and hate Kumbayah crap... I'm trying to advance something specific and helpful but also very much in my own self-interest. I want to avoid personal starvation. Its very basic.
The larger group interest gets inevitably whittled down with compromise and the insufficient urgency of its advocates...
I liked that very much, it is the most + spin possible when trying to tone down the accussations of corruption, but ultimately, the lack if urgency you speak of, is the result of corruption, not compromise.
For instance, it is an undisputed fact that PRC money and it's agents had access to the Clinton White House, where compromises were made vis a vis MFN trading status. Ask yourself if worker and environmental advocates were insufficiently urgent or Clinton was corrupt.
Then there was NAFTA. Ross Perot was sufficiently urgent wouldn't you say. Yet, who's interests triumphed ?.
I am thinking that you are looking at this from the top and I am looking at it from the bottom.
I do not believe that oligarchs have any altruistic tendencies, otherwise they would not be oligarchs. The only time they would even think of doing anything for the benefit of others is when they feel threatened.
What kind of Right/Left "tradition" is that? The past 30 years in the US only, I suspect.
Liberalism, with foundations during the late medieval period, was primarily concerned with the primacy of the individual over and above the dominant social institutions--the Church, the Monarchy, etc.
Collectivist liberalism as backlash against economic subjugation of the masses by the aristocracy is a very *recent* development historically. Mao, Castro, etc.
Really, though, the "individual" vs. the "group" isn't a Left/Right conflict. It's an Authoritarian/Anarchist conflict. Both "Left" and "Right" as currently designated in the USA public discourse are profoundly authoritarian, and the adherents to one side or the other usually describe the other as "anti-individual" if they want to espouse talking points, but it doesn't do much to bring the more important Authoritarian problem into focus.
There's nothing "individualist" about many currently-espoused Right themes in the USA. A strong military and commitment to religion, anti-behavioral legislation on drugs/abortion/sexual-preference, etc. And any shred of individualist tendency the American Left may once have possessed has been thoroughly overshadowed by hate-speech policy/gun-control/environmental protection, etc.
The good news is that more people appear to realizing that there's not much of a real-world correlate to the mental category of "authority," and power (as traditionally associated with authority) only exists insofar as it can be exerted.
The government doesn't possess the power to enslave the US population. Once 20% of the population has fully grokked this fact, we'll see meaningful change.
That's fine... the individual vs. group dynamic is a fundamental consideration for any group decision whether you call it Left/Right or Authoritarian/Anarchist.
And I absolutely agree that many positions of both parties are not consistent with either end of that spectrum. (And it should be remembered that both ends of that spectrum are disastrous regardless.)
I'm with you and also get angry at how the Right can claim a support for "individualism" while building empire and attempting to enforce narrow views of religion and 'appropriate' social norms.
And also angry at how the Left can claim to support the "Commons" while turning the poor and middle class into permanent debtors.
SO you're absolutely right!
In fact... in a way that's the point that I didn't make but should have.
The view that the Republicans are for the "John Gault" Individual and the Democrats all about the 'little people vs powerful forces" are two dangerously misleading MYTHS!
But they are myths these parties intentionally cultivate.
And these myths have power! They've lumped the necessary 'granularity' of political opinion into two confused 'Buckets of Platitudes' that have led to an amazingly simple-minded political discourse.
And I agree change is coming.
Because oligarchies are for the oligarchy... and most of us aren't members.
A spate of good, old fashioned anarchy (not the modern perversion) could work wonders in shaking a few squirrels out of the trees.
The very notion scares the shit out of TPTB.
Who knows, weirder things have transpired over the ages.
I would love change like you two, however in my neck of the woods when i go to wally mart i am typically the skinniest person in the building - i'm 5'9" 170, in decent shape. Change is not coming any time soon. We are going to have to live with the gelatinous masses who vote for whichever candidate the tv tells them to vote for quite a while longer. Change is not ready yet, the feeling in our country is still of fear not of strength. Only when you can wake these people up to the fact that they have strength inside can you truly affect change. I don't see it from the give me three big macs an extra large fry and a diet coke crowd yet.
Status quo is here to stay.
Even simpler: What puts money in my pocket -- today?
Yes, but survival is not an issue TODAY. Tomorrow if survival is an issue for you, for your family, for you nation (and as a result your family) or your species (and as a result your family) you may care less about what puts money in your pocket today.
I think the poster has made the ASSUMPTION that ultimately the human civilzation is limited by an inability to create a global society. This assumption is based on an assumed natural societal limit and assumed natural societal interactions. To have a global society then one has to either find a way to break through the barrier of assumed natural size or decrease the population to an assumed stable size.
My assumption is that because of human nature the only way for people to create a stable global society is to create the society willingly. It cannot be forced and be stable at the same time. For people to willingly agree to a global society then, it must meet the needs of every individual (ummm ... not likely, rule of law or not) or it must be in a time where survival is at stake (and the global warming farce was survival ultra-lite). However, as soon as time of in-doubt survival passes it is natural for people to migrate from altruistic aims to individual aims.
I was speaking primarily to the industrial complex approach to world conditions.
The personal level is much more nuanced as you splendidly point out.
Thank you BK.
China is a cancer growing on America, fed by currency manipulation and debt addiction.
Corporate America created this monster and now dance to the tune of this monster.
So, let's make the choice, do we "save" Caterpillar or do we save America. I say let the corporate traitors move their head offices to China.
"Everybody's gotta plan, until they get hit in the face". --- Mike Tyson