Miscellaneous News

Stierlitz

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

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.
 

fishrubber99

Just Hatched
Registered Member
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
China reoriented the main growth sector of their economy (real estate) in the past few years,
Please, Log in or Register to view URLs content!
. This is according to Bloomberg's methodology. In the last year it probably resulted in a ~1-2% drag on overall economic growth, and
Please, Log in or Register to view URLs content!
(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
Please, Log in or Register to view URLs content!
, 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.
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.
"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,
Please, Log in or Register to view URLs content!


Besides that,
Please, Log in or Register to view URLs content!
. 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
Please, Log in or Register to view URLs content!
and maintain US military hegemony in Afro-Eurasia).
 

manqiangrexue

Brigadier
You literally brought up SF in reference to your childhood so that comparison was, of course, fair game
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.
Please, Log in or Register to view URLs content!
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.
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.
Please, Log in or Register to view URLs content!
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.
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.
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
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.
Please, Log in or Register to view URLs content!
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.
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.
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.
GDP growth isn’t dispositive to proving China is uniquely well governed (poor countries have faster gdp growth due to catch-up;
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.
COVID death differentials include the fact that Americans are more risk-loving and health policies are endogenous for cultural values)
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.
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
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.
Faster than similarly situated Asian tigers.
Nope, look above.
 
Last edited:

manqiangrexue

Brigadier
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.
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.
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).
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?
It clearly caused gdp to be substantially lower than it otherwise would’ve been.
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.
Everyone’s forecasts on China’s GDP growth are now at 3-handles by the end of this decade
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?
and even in China, the 2022 gdp target of 5% was meant to be an easy target that China only barely reached
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%!!"
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.
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?
The U.S. trade/GDP ratio is the lowest among G20 countries.
That's good? If you weren't so bad at making things, maybe it wouldn't be so.
Not really: the U.S. will be able to substantially frustrate Chinese plans for decades into the future
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.
, 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.
What are you talking about? Nominal? China is already heads and shoulders over the US in PPP.
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,
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.
and leading the technological frontier well into the future.
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.
 
Last edited:

azn_cyniq

Junior Member
Registered Member
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.
 

manqiangrexue

Brigadier
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.
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".
 
Last edited:

coolgod

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

azn_cyniq

Junior Member
Registered Member
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.
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.
 

manqiangrexue

Brigadier
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.
Oh ok, I wasn't in that convo.
Clearly, he is confident in the future of the USA, and I can kind of see where he's coming from.
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??!"
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.
Well, you know, can't argue with the facts of China's current rise... except when arguing in bad faith.
 
Last edited:
Top