Miscellaneous News

WASHINGTON, Feb 12 (Reuters) - The Democratic-led U.S. Senate moved towards the final passage of a $95.34 billion aid package for Ukraine, Israel and Taiwan on Monday, amid growing doubts about the legislation's fate in the Republican-controlled House of Representatives.
The lawmakers voted 66-33 to exceed a 60-vote margin and sweep aside the last procedural hurdle before final consideration of the bill. Senate leaders had expected a vote on passage sometime on Wednesday.
But on Monday night, hardline Republicans opposed to further U.S. aid for Ukraine took to the Senate floor for a marathon of speeches that aides said would likely exhaust their debate time early Tuesday morning and allow Senate Majority Leader Chuck Schumer to move to passage later in the day.
Both houses of Congress must approve the legislation before Democratic President Joe Biden can sign it into law.
But the bill could face long odds in the House, where Speaker Mike Johnson said his Republican majority wanted conservative provisions to address a record-level flow of migrants across the U.S.-Mexico border.
"In the absence of having received any single border policy change from the Senate, the House will have to continue to work its own will on these important matters," Johnson said in a statement issued just before the Senate began voting on Monday.
"America deserves better than the Senate's status quo," said Johnson, who has suggested in the past that the House could split the legislation into separate bills.
Senator John Thune, the chamber's No. 2 Republican, said it was not clear what Johnson would do.
"The House, I assume, is going to move on something. Obviously, they're going to address Israel," Thune said.
Senator Ron Johnson, a hardliner opposed to the legislation, offered a more grim outlook, based on what he described only as knowledgeable sources.
"They're saying this goes nowhere in the House," Johnson told reporters.
The legislation includes $61 billion for Ukraine, $14 billion for Israel in its war against Hamas and $4.83 billion to support partners in the Indo-Pacific, including Taiwan, and deter aggression by China.
It would also provide $9.15 billion in humanitarian assistance to civilians in Gaza and the West Bank, Ukraine and other conflict zones around the globe.
Republicans had demanded for months that the foreign aid bill include border restrictions. But a bipartisan border deal, negotiated over the course of months, ran afoul of most Senate Republicans after Donald Trump, the party's leading White House candidate, rejected the agreement.
Schumer stripped the border security language from the bill last week.
Trump, who hopes to use the border issue to unseat Biden in the November election, has since said that aid to U.S. allies should instead take the form of loans.
Biden has been urging Congress to hurry new aid to Ukraine and U.S. partners in the Indo-Pacific, including Taiwan, for months. After Hamas' Oct. 7 attack on Israel, he also requested funds for the U.S. ally, along with humanitarian aid for Palestinians in Gaza.
Ukrainian officials have warned of weapons shortages at a time when Russia is pressing ahead with renewed attacks.

chgough34 said:

It clearly caused gdp to be substantially lower than it otherwise would’ve been. Everyone’s forecasts on China’s GDP growth are now at 3-handles by the end of this decade and even in China, the 2022 gdp target of 5% was meant to be an easy target that China only barely reached

Click to expand...

China reoriented the main growth sector of their economy (real estate) in the past few years, . This is according to Bloomberg's methodology. In the last year it probably resulted in a ~1-2% drag on overall economic growth, and (China's goal for 2023's unemployment rate was around 5.5%, they managed to get the rate to 5%) or a recession that came from this reorientation.

This is because China's policy makers reoriented employment and investment , most likely knowing that they still have a mobile blue collar labour force that can be used to install solar panels instead of building condos and shopping malls, accounting for 40% of GDP growth in 2023. I'll state again, being able to do this policy driven investment and employment reorientation without a huge spike in unemployment or a recession is very impressive. Subjectively speaking, I don't think the US can really match the level of state capacity to enact policy as China can.

chgough34 said:

That operative fact is because of historic and continued good governance in the United States for 2+ centuries of peaceful capitalist development; China having a very late start and being governed by competent individuals (but still humans), and the U.S. being large, productive, geographically isolated, economically isolated, and leading the technological frontier well into the future.

Click to expand...

"Peaceful capitalist development", I thought you had some good points in other threads until I saw this statement. I wouldn't say bombing Yemen in order to defend Israel's ongoing genocide in Gaza is peaceful, and that's really only the most recent example. Even in the last two decades the list of wars the US is/was involved in is impressive,

Besides that,. A large chunk of the US economy is driven by war or selling things meant to be used in war (which is helped by NATO, which is practically and maintain US military hegemony in Afro-Eurasia).

chgough34 said:

You literally brought up SF in reference to your childhood so that comparison was, of course, fair game

Click to expand...

I'm saying recency bias is good and to be expected in comparing recent trends, which are the most applicable. Yes, San Francisco is a small but very visible group. The fact is homelessness in the US overall has increased in 2023 so while it's not as serious as the encampments in San Fran, the US is getting slumier.

chgough34 said:

By individual households, which obviously include young people. A wealthy family is counted only once in the numerator, no matter how many houses they may own.

Click to expand...

OK, I see. However, home ownership is a very stable number in itself because people keep the homes they buy for decades. The increasing age of new home buyers, however is rising in the US and that does reflect housing becoming more expensive. Although there is almost no point saying it because you already said it's a problem which you hope can be ameliorated by new builds.

chgough34 said:

You originally argued everything was getting worse and crumbling. Now, you’ve modified the argument to say that f’(x) isn’t < 0, how would it; f’(x) obviously is > 0 but not fast enough.

Click to expand...

When I made that original statement, I was talking about recent trends. I didn't mean that the US, through 30 years of technological advances, is going backwards in an absolute fashion. Indeed, some things have gotten worse after COVID, some have improved and some depends on the source of data you believe. I do give you this: the data you've shown me makes me see the US in a more positive light than before, although the starting point was very low.

chgough34 said:

None really exist: of the original issues you’ve brought up: poverty, crime, infrastructure, and overdoses: poverty and infrastructure have gotten better compared to the pre pandemic, crime is flat, and overdoses are up (but largely from adverse selection) - for the supermajority people, population health metrics are better

Click to expand...

They depend on where you draw your data. I had data showing poverty increasing, and homelessness increasing as well. You had some opposite data. You said violent crime is down but your convenient neglect of lesser crimes such as robbery of businesses means that your statistic isn't overall useful. The life expectancy is certainly down since COVID so I don't see how you can say the overall health metrics are better.
So for the most recent few years, I see the US at best being mostly stagnant, perhaps slow progress in some areas but it's definitely not going swimmingly.

chgough34 said:

I’ve never talked about the U.S. in a vacuum; you’ve indeed conceded my point that the U.S. is better governed than Europe.

Click to expand...

I have no need to conceed such a point. I have always compared the US to China. Europe is its vassal; even when Europe is better-governed than the US, the US will throw a monkey wrench in it and they will fall behind. There is no comparison between the scattered small nations of Europe and the US.

chgough34 said:

GDP growth isn’t dispositive to proving China is uniquely well governed (poor countries have faster gdp growth due to catch-up;

Click to expand...

Oh of course it's not the only metric. Lots of countries can grow quickly, especially small ones. But for a country to advance its economy, technology and military at a clip that alarms the US into action and then defeats those actions continuing its own growth, now that is supremely well-governed. No other country than China can do it.

chgough34 said:

COVID death differentials include the fact that Americans are more risk-loving and health policies are endogenous for cultural values)

Click to expand...

Actually, this is completely the fault of US governance. Instead of uniting the people behind a national effort to defeat a virus, the US government let politics get involved and it became a symbol of support for Trump and the Republican party to ignore all guidelines and to live as if there were no danger. Now that is a failure in governance the level of which I've never seen in any other country.

chgough34 said:

Nope. Megacorps don’t on net grow slower than small caps (in fact, the S&P 500 has outperformed the S&P 1500) and the U.S. and China outgrow Europe and SEA (larger vs. smaller country comparisons). Having more people and land allows for greater specialization, economies of scale, and economies of scope. Asian Tigers are a completely fair comparison group: if China is mega competent (compared to the Asian tigers), it should be able to better adapt to shocks including bad relations with the U.S. and thus have the same or better growth numbers

Click to expand...

Completely wrong on all counts. My comparison is not directly of a megacorp vs a small cap; my comparison is a small cap being purposfully lifted by an established megacorp vs a new and hopeful megacorp competing from the get go with established megacorps. And the "competition" is on percentage growth. The Tigers being the former and China being the latter. The Tigers went a route that had no future as independent powers because their growths were tied to a dependence on another power. China's route can be replicated by no other country.

chgough34 said:

Faster than similarly situated Asian tigers.

Click to expand...

Nope, look above.

chgough34 said:

If China is the most competent country in the history of the world, it should deliver the fastest growth in the history of the world, conditional on GDPPC. It hasn’t.

Click to expand...

What is the specific reference to GDPPC? China has for decades delivered the fastest growth in global history and now, it is transitioning that fast growth into high quality high tech growth. All of this is/was done amid the backdrop of hostile Western powers in a highly international world. This feat is unequalled anywhere, not by nations growing under the support of larger players and not by nations allowed to develop unharrassed in an isolated environment. Fast and high quality high tech growth under enemy suppression is something only China can do.

chgough34 said:

It would be in the high 80% with toilets since ~30-40% of China is rural. Besides, you’ve conceded my point. Cross-sections; i.e., f(x), of nearly every variable are worse in China - if cross-sections of U.S. data (ex., infrastructure and population health) are supposed to be evidence of failure; then China is even worse (of course, that’s silly, you need the time-series).

Click to expand...

No, your point is moot and logic incorrect. The trend of growth shows a nation's governance, not its absolute number at the current time. Toilet availability and every other metric improves every year in China. These metrics (toilet availability being on that generally does not decline since people don't go back to holes after toilets) are sometimes dropping a bit, sometimes rising a bit, overall stagnant with growth only in the long term in the US. But they all grow strongly all the time in China. That is far superior governance. And the CCP only started in 1949 with a couple decades of teething issues. How old is the US government?

chgough34 said:

It clearly caused gdp to be substantially lower than it otherwise would’ve been.

Click to expand...

A good cushion is not perfect insulation. So many things in the US (and every other country) caused GDP to be substantially lower than it would have been had they been taken care of better, it means nothing to say this.

chgough34 said:

Everyone’s forecasts on China’s GDP growth are now at 3-handles by the end of this decade

Click to expand...

You like decade-long forecasts? LOL Western long term forecasts on China's economy have panned out real well over the last few decades, eh?

chgough34 said:

and even in China, the 2022 gdp target of 5% was meant to be an easy target that China only barely reached

Click to expand...

So China surpassed its 5% target and... what was America's number? I think 2.5%, right? Another classic American headline, "China's economy sputters out of steam barely registering 5.2% while America is firing on all cylinders and roars to a bustling 2.5%!!"

chgough34 said:

Everything? There’s a lot of scope left: plain vanilla foreign direct investment controls, broader sweeps of portfolio investment, and applying extraterritoriality of US tariffs/export/investment controls using dollar sanctions.

Click to expand...

Everything they could do. You look at the dumbasses you have for presidents and politicians and you're trying to tell me that they were holding back and going soft on China?

chgough34 said:

The U.S. trade/GDP ratio is the lowest among G20 countries.

Click to expand...

That's good? If you weren't so bad at making things, maybe it wouldn't be so.

chgough34 said:

Not really: the U.S. will be able to substantially frustrate Chinese plans for decades into the future

Click to expand...

And what plans are these? I say we'll take the ROC; you tell me to keep that crap and take Japan and Korea too! I say Europe will see this and move out of your dying orbit and you respond they can all F off cus America would be great just isolated by itself! LOLOL The most aggressive Chinese plans don't push the US back that far! What about our plans in technology? We're moving faster in every field than the US regardless of if we are ahead or behind. Without America, China wouldn't even have thought to become the only country in the world to have its own self-sufficient advanced lithography line. America doesn't have that and doesn't have plans to have that. Or do you think that our plans are to overtake you economically? We already have; PPP is the true measure of economic activity. Nominal GDP is only for the small percentage of the GDP made in internationl trade and even that can be easily manipulated by conversion rates. Plus, our economy is real and not propped up by exorbitant education and healthcare fees and imaginary levels of imputed rent.

chgough34 said:

, at minimal cost, assuming a 2% growth rate in the U.S. and a (highly questionable) 5% in perpetuity in China; the decades stretch out even longer if China grows at 3-5% instead (for any sort of shock - a trade shock, a financial crisis, etc). China can grow at the 90th-95th percentile of historic growth outcomes conditional on gdppc for decades into the future and still have a gdp <150% of the U.S. level.

Click to expand...

What are you talking about? Nominal? China is already heads and shoulders over the US in PPP.

chgough34 said:

That operative fact is because of historic and continued good governance in the United States for 2+ centuries of peaceful capitalist development; China having a very late start and being governed by competent individuals (but still humans), and the U.S. being large, productive, geographically isolated, economically isolated,

Click to expand...

You don't catch up and overtake from a very late start by being roughly equal in governance. That China started so late it's on America's heels in every area that it's not already ahead in is proof of China's far superior governance.

chgough34 said:

and leading the technological frontier well into the future.

Click to expand...

Puahaha it's already behind in so many places it's trying to drink Taiwan's blood on semiconducters. America's technological lead has been overcome in most areas by China's massive STEM population and in other remaining areas, it is looking at a China chasing behind it like a plane trying to outrun a missile.

ACuriousPLAFan said:

#WeAreProudLunarians

https://twitter.com/i/web/status/1757155379778363617

https://twitter.com/i/web/status/1757248699632415144

Click to expand...

If lunisolar sounds too technical, why don't we call it the Celestial New Year instead, named after the Celestial Empire of course.

chgough34 has made some good points, but the statement "2 + centuries of peaceful capitalist development" betrayed his delusions and fundamental misunderstanding of the history of the USA. He is no different from those Americans who say that Iraq and Afghanistan were just "mistakes." I think it's time to put this guy on the ignore list.

azn_cyniq said:

chgough34 has made some good points, but the statement "2 + centuries of peaceful capitalist development" betrayed his delusions and fundamental misunderstanding of the history of the USA. He is no different from those Americans who say that Iraq and Afghanistan were just "mistakes." I think it's time to put this guy on the ignore list.

Click to expand...

What good points? The only thing he said that wasn't either shaky (using disputable data) or just wrong is that America's better off now in absolute terms than it was several decades ago, which is a stupid comparison to make in the first place because you'd have to be a corpse of a country for that not to be true. Well, he also did concede that US is moving backwards relative to China so I guess that's another good point? It's just that, like his first one, no one is arguing against that "point".

azn_cyniq said:

chgough34 has made some good points, but the statement "2 + centuries of peaceful capitalist development" betrayed his delusions and fundamental misunderstanding of the history of the USA. He is no different from those Americans who say that Iraq and Afghanistan were just "mistakes." I think it's time to put this guy on the ignore list.

Click to expand...

Obvious troll is obvious. I can't believe after tens of pages of pointless banter with chgough34, people still don't understand.

manqiangrexue said:

What good points? The only thing he said that wasn't either shaky (using disputable data) or just wrong is that America's better off now in absolute terms than it was several decades ago, which is a stupid comparison to make in the first place because you'd have to be a corpse of a country for that not to be true. Well, he also did concede that US is moving backwards relative to China so I guess that's another good point? It's just that, like his first one, no one is arguing against that.

Click to expand...

He made some good points in the economics thread about equity financing being preferable for asset-light companies but I disagree with most of the things he's said recently. I don't think any of us should waste any more time arguing with him. Clearly, he is confident in the future of the USA, and I can kind of see where he's coming from. On the other hand, most of us here, including me, are more confident in China's future and don't really see how any country aside from China itself could derail China's ascent. We could argue about this for a thousand more pages and it won't really change reality so I'm just going to ignore that guy.

azn_cyniq said:

He made some good points in the economics thread about equity financing being preferable for asset-light companies but I disagree with most of the things he's said recently. I don't think any of us should waste any more time arguing with him.

Click to expand...

Oh ok, I wasn't in that convo.

azn_cyniq said:

Clearly, he is confident in the future of the USA, and I can kind of see where he's coming from.

Click to expand...

Is he confident? I said we'll take Taiwan and instead of fighting, he says he'll throw in Japan and Korea too. I say Europeans will go and he says America can lose those too! The US just needs to be home alone. This is the most defeatist outlook I've seen of any American. To be honest, it's kinda pissing me off. It's like you've trained years to meet Tyson in the ring and beat that belt off of him and he's just like, "You want the belt? You can take it. The title? I don't need that either; I'll abdicate. I just wanna be left alone. I'm happy just knowing that I'm stronger than I was when I just started boxing." You're standing there like, "WTF, I trained for this??!"

azn_cyniq said:

On the other hand, most of us here, including me, are more confident in China's future and don't really see how any country aside from China itself could derail China's ascent. We could argue about this for a thousand more pages and it won't really change reality so I'm just going to ignore that guy.

Click to expand...

Well, you know, can't argue with the facts of China's current rise... except when arguing in bad faith.