Miscellaneous News

tokenanalyst

Brigadier
Registered Member
PRC does not need justification to raise its budget when they are spending just 1.5% of GDP on defense despite being surrounded by enemies.

If China wanted spend more on the military, they would have done it long time ago. But apparently military strength is not a priority for China at the moment. They are spending huge amounts on infrastructure, industrial upgrade and other economy boosting measures.
They have THREE stealth planes right now, flying, two 5th generation and one 6th generation when most powers are barely getting theirs, they have largest and more diverse military unmanned fleet of any nation, the 3rd largest nuclear arsenal in the world and growing and the largest naval fleet in the world. That is apart from being the largest, one of the most technological armed land army now. And all of that is supported probably with the most largest, diverse and even independent supply chain ever, yes, that include semiconductors. Without relying on greedy, eye gouging "defense" companies.​

Call me crazy, but looks like, at least to me the China is getting more with less, maybe because the don't have to pay for a quadrillion military bases, pointless wars and parasitic military alliances, just maybe.

I cannot imagine what they could get if the rise the Military budget to 2% GDP, IDK a moon base? A death star?
 

tokenanalyst

Brigadier
Registered Member

Sardaukar20

Captain
Registered Member
It all comes down to this: INNATE RACISM.

Here’s a personal story. Whenever I’m in Canada, I visit a gym where I met this Vietnamese guy—a shameless braggart who flaunts his infidelity. He didn’t know I’m a proud, card-carrying Wumao, pegging me instead as one of those self-loathing types, the so-called HANJIANS.

To him:Chinese = troublemakers who won’t adapt to Canadian life
French = a noble language, free of colonial baggage or brutality
Japan = a land of brilliant tech and admirable people
U.S. = flawed yet impressive.

He loves boasting that Vietnam triumphed over America
India = the wave of students and migrants is a strength (Canadians see the irony there)China’s success—despite the stereotypes and racist assumptions—grates on someone like him, raised to despise all things Chinese.

Changing that kind of entrenched bias takes time, and often, it takes something jarring, like war, to force a rethink. Truth is, humans are primal; we’re drawn to power and swayed by force.
Innate Racism + lack of competitiveness.

In the past, they all hate China for being communist and backward. Today they all hate China for being too powerful and rich. Many of the more developed SEA nations like Malaysia, Singapore, Thailand, etc. have many people who dislike China today for being too competitive. China's industries and supply chains operate on a whole different level to theirs. This ruthless competitiveness tends to crush the local entrenched businesses. But for the startups, they see opportunities.

I have a friend in Malaysia who runs a startup signboard business. His business partner wants to bring in Luckin Coffee into Malaysia. After reviewing the costs, they find it cheaper to import the signboards directly from China. Their local workshop just cannot compete in terms of price and quality. Instead of feeling bitter about this, he shifts his business partially to signboard importing and installation. He sold some of his equipment and halted his workshop expansion plan. He didn't really mind pivoting his business this way. Luckin Coffee in Malaysia as of now, imports all the paper cups and packaging from China. Even though there are major Malaysian producers of paper cups and packaging. They just cannot compete with Chinese imports in terms of pricing and quality. To the Malaysian nationalists, this is a classic case of de-industrialization due to Chinese ruthless competitiveness. Its so very easy to blame China for "dumping" and call for tariffs and import restrictions.

But there is another part to this story. McDonald's supply chains are also largely imported. The meats are from the US, the fries are from the US, the paper utensils are from China, some buns are from China, while only certain produce and sauces are from Malaysia. McDonald's have been doing this for decades, so why doesn't it get the same level of hate? Well off course its because McDonald's is a household brand, and a Western brand, so most of the China-haters are too blind to see the irony. This is their innate racism at work.
 

Biscuits

Colonel
Registered Member
They have THREE stealth planes right now, flying, two 5th generation and one 6th generation when most powers are barely getting theirs, they have largest and more diverse military unmanned fleet of any nation, the 3rd largest nuclear arsenal in the world and growing and the largest naval fleet in the world. That is apart from being the largest, one of the most technological armed land army now. And all of that is supported probably with the most largest, diverse and even independent supply chain ever, yes, that include semiconductors. Without relying on greedy, eye gouging "defense" companies.​

Call me crazy, but looks like, at least to me the China is getting more with less, maybe because the don't have to pay for a quadrillion military bases, pointless wars and parasitic military alliances, just maybe.

I cannot imagine what they could get if the rise the Military budget to 2% GDP, IDK a moon base? A death star?
To be fair I think China doesn't have that budget because:

1. Civilian/dual use projects give better long term return on investment

2. China is limited by staffing issues. If we go up to 3%, it would mean buying a lot of current gen platforms, else we get too many soldiers with no platforms to use, like Polish and German broom gun trainees. But China doesn't want 1500 J-20s or 10 CV-17 when we can wait awhile for 10 Jiangnan max size CVN and 100s of 6th gens.

The true limit on China's military is the amount of next gen warfare certified combatants that can be trained, not money which is functionally infinite since 1.5% of the by far largest economy is way more than anyone else. In this light, the current J-20 and CV fleet (for example) exist to train up a new andre of competent staff that can later staff a 3-5% spending military that will have generational advantages anywhere on the globe. Their ability to defend China is just a bonus.
 

tamsen_ikard

Senior Member
Registered Member
They have THREE stealth planes right now, flying, two 5th generation and one 6th generation when most powers are barely getting theirs, they have largest and more diverse military unmanned fleet of any nation, the 3rd largest nuclear arsenal in the world and growing and the largest naval fleet in the world. That is apart from being the largest, one of the most technological armed land army now. And all of that is supported probably with the most largest, diverse and even independent supply chain ever, yes, that include semiconductors. Without relying on greedy, eye gouging "defense" companies.​

Call me crazy, but looks like, at least to me the China is getting more with less, maybe because the don't have to pay for a quadrillion military bases, pointless wars and parasitic military alliances, just maybe.

I cannot imagine what they could get if the rise the Military budget to 2% GDP, IDK a moon base? A death star?

China maybe catching up in technology but are woefully behind in numbers. They have just 1700 modern 4th Gen+ fighters compared to US 3200. US has like 900 5th gen plane compared to maybe 350 J-20 for China. China has just 50 destroyers+Cruisers compared to US 100+ destroyers+Cruisers. Ofcourse China is extremely behind when it comes to having a carrier fleet (11 vs 3) and carrier air wing. US Navy has like 1000 carrier fighters compared to just 60 on the Chinese side. China also lacks nuclear subs whether its attack or SLBM subs. 12 vs 60 on the US side.

I don't think there is anything wrong with China spending more like 2.5% or 3% of GDP as a potential superpower. They could have easily done it. India does it pretty consistently for the last 10+ years. If China spent like that they could have had a much bigger fighter fleet. They could have easily dominated the first island Chain with their air power.

But they didn't do it, so now US still dreams about fighting China for Taiwan. US vassals like Japan still think they can interfere without any worry. US+Japan+Kora+Taiwan+Australia fighter jet and destroyer numbers are such that even if China wins a war with them somehow, it will be a costly victory. The most likely scenario is still a defeat for China.

This is all because of China's lack of numbers when it comes to fighters, destroyers, carriers, subs all the main fighting instruments. TBH, China as $20 trillion economy should have atleast a couple of bases world wide so that they can project some power and keep their trade partners in line. Right now they are at risk of getting cut off from trade by US and allies. That is not good. China will regret not spending more on the military when actual military crisis comes.
 

siegecrossbow

General
Staff member
Super Moderator
They have THREE stealth planes right now, flying, two 5th generation and one 6th generation when most powers are barely getting theirs, they have largest and more diverse military unmanned fleet of any nation, the 3rd largest nuclear arsenal in the world and growing and the largest naval fleet in the world. That is apart from being the largest, one of the most technological armed land army now. And all of that is supported probably with the most largest, diverse and even independent supply chain ever, yes, that include semiconductors. Without relying on greedy, eye gouging "defense" companies.​

Call me crazy, but looks like, at least to me the China is getting more with less, maybe because the don't have to pay for a quadrillion military bases, pointless wars and parasitic military alliances, just maybe.

I cannot imagine what they could get if the rise the Military budget to 2% GDP, IDK a moon base? A death star?

Two fifth gen, one 5.75 gen (5.5 gen pre F-47) and two sixth gen.
 

FriedButter

Brigadier
Registered Member
Please, Log in or Register to view URLs content!

Trump Adviser Releases Insane List of Demands for Tariffed Countries​

Donald Trump’s chief economic adviser put out a list of outrageous demands Monday for other countries inflicted by the president’s tariffs to start “burden sharing.”

Stephen Miran, chair of the Council of Economic Advisers, delivered a speech at the Hudson Institute complete with a to-do list for other countries looking to lighten the load that “unfair barriers to trade” and “unsustainable trade deficits” have supposedly inflicted on the United States.

Miran said that these factors had led to a “decline of our manufacturing workforce by over a third since its peak and a reduction in our share of world manufacturing production of 40 percent.”

It’s worth noting that while manufacturing employment has gone down, U.S. manufacturing output is up and nearing its all-time high of December 2007. Who exactly will actually work all of these hypothetical manufacturing jobs? No one seems to know! Trump’s own secretary of commerce said earlier this month that he planned to use automation to replace cheap labor, and the treasury secretary suggested Monday that maybe ousted federal workers could pick up some shifts.

Other countries should work to improve “burden sharing” to address the issues, a process that could take many forms, said Miran.

For instance, countries could roll over and accept Trump’s tariffs without retaliation. “Critically, retaliation will exacerbate rather than improve the distribution of burdens and make it even more difficult for us to finance global public goods,” Miran said in his remarks.

Miran said that countries could “stop unfair and harmful trading practices” by buying more American products, specifically noting that countries could boost defense spending and procurement from the U.S. by “taking strain off our servicemembers and creating jobs here.”

He also suggested that countries invest in U.S. manufacturing and open factories in the U.S. “They won’t face tariffs if they make their stuff in this country,” Miran said.

Finally, Miran said that countries could “simply write checks” to the Treasury Department.

The CEA chair did not indicate whether compliance with these suggestions would alleviate the—in some cases—very steep tariffs imposed by Trump.

Miran argued that other countries ought to comply with Trump’s demands for more money because of the “global public goods” that the U.S. provides, including global security and the dollar and other reserve assets, “which make possible the global trading and financial system which has supported the greatest era of prosperity mankind has ever known.

“In my view, to continue providing these twin global public goods, there needs to be improved burden-sharing at the global level,” Miran said. “If other nations want to benefit from the U.S. geopolitical and financial umbrella, then they need to pull their weight, and pay their fair share. The costs cannot be solely borne by everyday Americans who have already given so much.”

But that’s not how public goods work: If you have to pay to use them, then they’re not actually public goods.

Miran singled out China as America’s “biggest adversary” responsible for weakening U.S. manufacturing, and even blamed it for the 2008 financial crisis. Trump is currently mounting a trade war with Beijing, and threatened a new round of tariffs Monday, bringing the total tariff rate on imports from China to 104 percent.

Miran insisted that the U.S. would somehow survive not being able to do business with its largest trading partners. “America has plenty of substitution options: We can make stuff at home, or we can buy from countries that treat us fairly instead of from countries that take advantage of us,” he said. But last week, Trump placed tariffs of at least 10 percent on nearly every country.

Trump said Sunday that he’d told global leaders that he wanted to erase the U.S. trade deficit because he viewed any deficit as a “loss,” though that’s not quite how economics works.
Finally, Miran said that countries could “simply write checks” to the Treasury Department.

The US is demanding payment for them buying from you. Like going to a store, buying groceries, and then demanding the store to repaid you
 

bebops

Junior Member
Registered Member
Thousands of US fighter jets are sitting back home. They dont have enough carriers to put thousands of planes on them. This is their limitation.

My question is Can China mass produced blimps or balloons then equip variety of missiles (ASAT, Antiship, A2A) on them? You can also install a radar or tracking device on them

"I don't think there is anything wrong with China spending more like 2.5% or 3% of GDP as a potential superpower. "

If you include the R&D and wages into the budget, maybe they do add up to 2.5%?
 

siegecrossbow

General
Staff member
Super Moderator
Please, Log in or Register to view URLs content!



The US is demanding payment for them buying from you. Like going to a store, buying groceries, and then demanding the store to repaid you

Trump should wear this at his next “negotiation” just to make sure that his intentions are understood.

1744132158844.jpeg

Serves the cucks right though. You want to kneel? Good luck kneeling after Daddy Trump busted both of your kneecaps.
 

tokenanalyst

Brigadier
Registered Member
"Finally, Miran said that countries could “simply write checks” to the Treasury Department."

They buy US debt,
that the US use to pay for their trillion dollar military spending and for the weapons the Netanyahu use to blow Palestinian children in to pieces.
What more they want?
 
Top