Chinese Economics Thread


AssassinsMace

Brigadier
I was watching cable news this morning and they had Ian Bremmer who's a so-called expert of Western/Asian affairs. He said the only two economic players of the world that have a positive outlook are the US and China. He's worried about the rest of the world. This is a guy during the Obama era who said China was headed for trouble and was going to be a problem. All of the sudden when Trump wins the election attitudes on China change. All because Trump is more likely to act on the traditional nonsense meant for American ears only to distract people away from the truth where Americans will find out in the worst possible way when it backfires. Not just Bremmer. Former government officials like Richard Haas was negative on China during Obama's term in office too. Now he's one of those sending out the warnings and consequences of what will happen if Trump acts on what he says he'll do with China. Now you're hearing people stating that the US and allies have to work with China to deal with North Korea unlike what Trump has been tweeting about and also happens to be the same stance of previous Presidents trying to demand China do everything they want without addressing any concerns from China's end.
 

advill

Junior Member
There have been several confusing and forceful statements made by the US President-Elect recently. When the smoke and big sound blasts have cleared, with effect from 20 Jan 2017, the new President's geo-politics, economics and security policies could hopefully be clearer. If there are still confusion, then perhaps economic counter-actions should be considered. China has commenced "sailing" in the direction with One belt - One Road, being friendly with ASEAN and several other countries (Africa included), investing and carrying out infrastructure developments in countries, involvement as an important partner of RECEP with 10 ASEAN countries, India, Japan, Australia, NZ and South Korea. There is no stopping of China's Rising regardless of the spoilers and envious leader/s actions.
 

AssassinsMace

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


I also read somewhere that Obama's tariffs on Chinese solar panels cost Americans 250,000 jobs. But then the people who complain about trade are myopic. Just like with the Made in China label, they automatically think it means it's a Chinese company that makes all the money.
 

Lethe

Senior Member
On December 12, 2016:
Please, Log in or Register to view URLs content!


Then on December 30, 2016:
Please, Log in or Register to view URLs content!


As usual, money talks, bullshit walks.

Really? That is your conclusion from all this? There is a phrase that comes to mind when I think of such sentiments, one that was perhaps more commonly uttered in the past than it is today: "Ugly American."

You will find that there are things in this world that money cannot buy.
 

solarz

Brigadier
Really? That is your conclusion from all this? There is a phrase that comes to mind when I think of such sentiments, one that was perhaps more commonly uttered in the past than it is today: "Ugly American."

You will find that there are things in this world that money cannot buy.

Sounds like you're confusing international relations with personal relations.
 

Lethe

Senior Member
Sounds like you're confusing international relations with personal relations.

In international relations too, there are things money cannot buy. Indeed, most wars would never have occurred if mercantile considerations were the only ones that mattered.

Your own delusions are of little interest to me, but the matter is of some import in the delicate business of relations between nations, where the wrong approach -- such as the arrogant assumption that a nation's policy on a given matter is necessarily for sale -- may not only be unproductive, but may actively hinder future negotiations by reducing how much room the other party has to maneuver whilst preserving national dignity.

There is no conceivable scenario under which China will ever be as wealthy or powerful relative to the rest of the world (even excluding the United States) as the United States was in the generation post-1945. Nonetheless, although the US was able to shape the world greatly over that period, there was still much that eluded its grasp. A little humility is in order.

Donald Trump imagines that he can use Taiwan as leverage in negotiating US trade relations with China. You, apparently, would agree with him -- after all, everything has a price, right?
 
Last edited:

plawolf

Brigadier
In international relations too, there are things money cannot buy. Indeed, most wars would never have occurred if mercantile considerations were the only ones that mattered.

Your own delusions are of little interest to me, but the matter is of some import in the delicate business of relations between nations, where the wrong approach -- such as the arrogant assumption that a nation's policy on a given matter is necessarily for sale -- may not only be unproductive, but may actively hinder future negotiations by reducing how much room the other party has to maneuver whilst preserving national dignity.

There is no conceivable scenario under which China will ever be as wealthy or powerful relative to the rest of the world (even excluding the United States) as the United States was in the generation post-1945. Nonetheless, although the US was able to shape the world greatly over that period, there was still much that eluded its grasp. A little humility is in order.

Donald Trump imagines that he can use Taiwan as leverage in negotiating US trade relations with China. You, apparently, would agree with him -- after all, everything has a price, right?

What sanctimonious logical fallacy nonsense!

China's position with regards to the Dalai Lama is both consistent and well established.

Furthermore, China does not owe Mongolia or anyone else any obligations to give them aid or soft loans.

If Mongolia fuses to accept and respect Chinese interests when it comes to the Dalai Lama, pry tell why China should still be giving it aid or free loans?

China wasn't offering to 'buy' anything. It's the Mongolians who want to borrow money from China, without paying interest either, so it's not a purely commercial transaction they want, but a favour and effective hand out.

What your nonsensical rant is effectively saying is that Mongolia should have the right to totally disregard Chinese interests while flipping China the bird, but China should still bend over backwards to do Mongolia a solid by giving it aid and soft loans.

Utterly nonsensical entitled and superior BS that seems typical of the western media propaganda position on China. That the west and their clients and friends are supposed to be allowed to totally disregard Chinese interests and values, and China is the bully for not doing them favours afterwards.

You also must have some incredible rose tinted glasses and a near superhuman ability to selectively see and remember things that are happening in your lifetime to think that is even on the same level as how America responds when you piss it off.

Look at what the Cubans have had to endure for the unforgivable sin of daring to choose self determination. Or the vast number of sanctions, coups and outright invasions America have launched globally when foreigners dare to defy its will, never mind threaten its core national interests. And that was under 'reasonable' American administrations.

Trump is an entirely different level of arrogance and ignorance.

His threats regarding Taiwan isn't him refusing to do China favours in response to some slight from China, it's him threatening to tear up the founding principle of Sino-US relations if China doesn't do the US favours.

If you honestly think that's the same as China's reaction to Mongolia choosing to let the Daila Lama visit and still expect soft loans from China, then just let me know and we can put each other on ignore lists, as I haven't the time or inclination to argue with someone so far gone.
 

Lethe

Senior Member
What your nonsensical rant is effectively saying is that Mongolia should have the right to totally disregard Chinese interests while flipping China the bird, but China should still bend over backwards to do Mongolia a solid by giving it aid and soft loans.

I didn't say or imply anything of the sort. I was responding to solarz post where he(?) stated that "money talks, bullshit walks". There is no ambiguity in that statement. It is arrogant and offensive, it is wrong, and as an approach to negotiations it is unproductive and even dangerous.
 

t2contra

Major
Mongolia relented only because of economic pressure from China. If Mongolia really cared about the things money cannot buy, e.g. friendship, it would not have invited Dalai Lama, after taking into account its neighbor's opposition to his visits to other countries over the years. If Mongolia was a good neighbor and valued friendship, it should have acceded to its China's request to cancel the visit.

Therefore "money talks, bullshit walks" applies to Mongolia truthfully.
 

Top