Trump will capitulate on the trade war

[Enthalpic + 1,496]

1 hour ago, Rasmus Jorgensen said:

my problem with this is that if I would have made a similar comment about Greta Thunberg I would have been applauded... 

This post is childish!

[Douglas Buckland + 6,308]

2 hours ago, Enthalpic said:

Because he doesn't act like a president, or a decent human being.

Does the end justify the means? Even if, big if, he makes money they still have a classless buffoon for a leader.  Criminals make money and run empires, doesn't mean they are any good for the world.

Pablo Escobar the second for President!  "Plata o plomo World!"

 

Would you rather we had an eloquent, gifted statesman in office who accomplished nothing and freely spent your tax dollars overseas on others?

Give me a classless buffoon who gets things done and puts America as his first priority, any day!

[Enthalpic + 1,496]

8 hours ago, Douglas Buckland said:

Would you rather we had an eloquent, gifted statesman in office who accomplished nothing and freely spent your tax dollars overseas on others?

Yes

[Douglas Buckland + 6,308]

Well then, without putting too fine of a point on it, you deserve inept leadership.

[Guest]

or someone whose personality seems so dull that he's more famous for putting make up on his face years ago than anything else?

 🤣 

wait for it ...... ''ooh not trudeau''

 

Edited October 19, 2019 by Guest

[Enthalpic + 1,496]

3 hours ago, DayTrader said:

or someone whose personality seems so dull that he's more famous for putting make up on his face years ago than anything else?

 

 

Pfff he gave us legal weed. Legendary!

Apparently he is also good looking if you are into that.

[Douglas Buckland + 6,308]

Yep, that legal weed has done a fine job of ruining Colorado. It’s not so much the weed as the completely useless, worthless dregs of society that make the weed their sole goal in life.

Colorado has essentially been Californicated.

[Guest]

hahaha yep, they're so high they haven't realised yet that Mexico comes before them in USMCA  🤣🤣

#priorities    Just sayin'    

Edited October 19, 2019 by Guest

[Guest]

https://www.zerohedge.com/economics/chinas-top-trade-negotiator-says-have-made-substantial-progress-phase-one-trade-deal

China's Top Trade Negotiator Sides With Trump: We "Have Made Substantial Progress" In Trade Deal 

[Tom Kirkman + 8,860]

On 10/18/2019 at 7:04 PM, DayTrader said:

"There is no wall yet'', ''There is no wall yet'', ''There is no wall yet'' 

https://www.trumpwall.construction/

Trump Wall

Miles Built: 89

Miles to be Built: 509+

[Jan van Eck + 7,558]

On 10/17/2019 at 11:18 PM, DayTrader said:

Satellite Images Reveal China's Aircraft Carrier Factory

The Centre for Strategic and International Studies (CSIS) has given Reuters never before seen high-resolution satellite images of China's aircraft carrier factory.

The images were taken last month of the Jiangnan shipyard, located in Shanghai, China. The satellite photos show the progression of China's first domestically built aircraft carrier and the rapid construction of infrastructure at Jiangnan.

CSIS analysts said the aircraft carrier's hull should be completed by fall 2020. The images show pre-fabricated sections, bulkheads, and other parts of the aircraft carrier.

 

 

https://www.zerohedge.com/geopolitical/satellite-images-reveal-chinas-aircraft-carrier-factory

I would make a few observations about the Jiangnan shipyard and the Asian shipbuilding industry.  China has two classes of shipyards, those privately owned and the Government yards.  There is massive and chronic over-capacity in shipbuilding in Asia, where the "Big Three" are Korea, Japan, and China.  The result is predictable:  debilitating price pressure, no margins, and subsidies to keep the yards, which are very large employers, open and running.  In China, the banking industry has been pressured to make loans to what are essentially zombie yards, and even then some of the private ones have been forced into bankruptcy.  SO the Govt yards have been consolidated into mega-corporations, of which two now remain. Jiangnan shipyard is one of them.

The really big player in Asian shipbuilding is the monster yard of Hyundai Heavy Industries in Pusan:

This place can crank out the seriously heavy tonnage.  Want a 300,000-ton VLCC carrier?  Pusan is your place to get one built. 

Korea, and specifically Hyundai at Pusan, probably controls some 40-50% of the Asian capacity alone, and the three nations together likely control some 90A% of world large shipbuilding.   Now what is happening is that the yards are facing dry order-books.  The Chinese cannot have their two big yards contract; they employ too many resources and too many employees.  Those big ships consume lots of Chinese plate steel, and the traditional US market to dump the surplus is closing.  So, seen in that light, this aircraft carrier is a classic "make-work" project, as when you think about it, there is no intrinsic need for China to have one at all.  It is small by US standards, as that yard cannot build anything over 80,000 tons - and US carriers are now over the 100,000-ton mark.  Plus, the Chinese do not have the knowledge to build the sophisticated systems that go into US carriers, notwithstanding all the spying efforts. 

So what you end up with is a showpiece, something to awe the peasants in Vietnam and the Philippines, something to show the flag, but otherwise militarily basically useless.  Classic government make-work, nothing more. 

[PE Scott + 563]

Thanks for that @Jan van Eck, I would not have considered all of that on my own.

[Jan van Eck + 7,558]

40 minutes ago, PE Scott said:

Thanks for that @Jan van Eck, I would not have considered all of that on my own.

You are entirely welcome.  I try to make my responsive Postings here quite thorough, in order to fully air all aspects of the matters raised. Mikhail may take note  (he is the 23-year-old who continually criticizes me).

[PE Scott + 563]

@footeab@yahoo.com lol, why the downvote on @Jan van Eck's posting? It doesn't attack anyone and it is clearly his opinion based on his observations. It's not even all that confrontational. He's just noting, again in his opinion, that China is less concerned about expanding military presence with those carriers than they are providing work for an otherwise dead sector of the industry. He even says that Asia is the place to go for VLCC, endorsing them as the best in the business. 

Are you just harboring animosity from something else? I can understand where you might refute his point, but it certainly wasn't lambasting the Chinese or anything.

Edited October 20, 2019 by PE Scott

[footeab@yahoo.com + 2,190]

1 hour ago, Jan van Eck said:

I would make a few observations about the Jiangnan shipyard and the Asian shipbuilding industry.  China has two classes of shipyards, those privately owned and the Government yards.  There is massive and chronic over-capacity in shipbuilding in Asia, where the "Big Three" are Korea, Japan, and China.  The result is predictable:  debilitating price pressure, no margins, and subsidies to keep the yards, which are very large employers, open and running.  In China, the banking industry has been pressured to make loans to what are essentially zombie yards, and even then some of the private ones have been forced into bankruptcy.  SO the Govt yards have been consolidated into mega-corporations, of which two now remain. Jiangnan shipyard is one of them.

The really big player in Asian shipbuilding is the monster yard of Hyundai Heavy Industries in Pusan:

This place can crank out the seriously heavy tonnage.  Want a 300,000-ton VLCC carrier?  Pusan is your place to get one built. 

Korea, and specifically Hyundai at Pusan, probably controls some 40-50% of the Asian capacity alone, and the three nations together likely control some 90A% of world large shipbuilding.   Now what is happening is that the yards are facing dry order-books.  The Chinese cannot have their two big yards contract; they employ too many resources and too many employees.  Those big ships consume lots of Chinese plate steel, and the traditional US market to dump the surplus is closing.  So, seen in that light, this aircraft carrier is a classic "make-work" project, as when you think about it, there is no intrinsic need for China to have one at all.  It is small by US standards, as that yard cannot build anything over 80,000 tons - and US carriers are now over the 100,000-ton mark.  Plus, the Chinese do not have the knowledge to build the sophisticated systems that go into US carriers, notwithstanding all the spying efforts. 

So what you end up with is a showpiece, something to awe the peasants in Vietnam and the Philippines, something to show the flag, but otherwise militarily basically useless.  Classic government make-work, nothing more. 

The Chinese tell everyone they want to dominate the world...

No this is not a "make work" program. No more than the British program was in the 1600's after they got tired of being raped from the sea.  No more than the US was a make work program in the 1800's.

The Chinese are building "baby" carriers because you must gain experience

60,000ton-->80,000 ton carriers are exactly what 100,000 ton carriers are if you remove nuclear propulsion and yes they have CATOBAR unlike the pathetic Jump carrier they bought and which the UK made 2 of...

As for the systems, the Chinese are working on them.  Once made...

The Chinese are exactly in the same position as the USA was before/during WWI.  They have the ships + shipyard/manpower capacity to utterly bury the oceans in ships should they so desire, compared to their rivals, but do not have the training acumen of a 1st class navy and their systems on said ships are behind the times in everything except propulsion.  This requires approx 20 years to rectify at most. 

Barring a complete collapse of China, China will have a much larger navy in 20 years, should they so desire, than the USN and be on par, or close enough that quantity makes up for quality and will utterly dominate Japan, unless Japan goes on a massive, massive, massive building spree.... with a terminally declining population

THE deal breaker, which most do not talk about?  Submarines.  Far as I am concerned, every surface combatant currently is nothing but a sitting duck to shore based missiles.  Until the advent of massive lasers(which everyone is working on)...

[footeab@yahoo.com + 2,190]

8 minutes ago, PE Scott said:

@footeab@yahoo.com lol, why the downvote on @Jan van Eck's posting?

Ignorance of history/engineering/logistics combined with arrogance believing the Chinese are stupid and not power hungry like the rest of the world

[PE Scott + 563]

4 minutes ago, footeab@yahoo.com said:

Ignorance of history/engineering/logistics combined with arrogance believing the Chinese are stupid and not power hungry like the rest of the world

I think you're distorting his message a little, but you have a valid viewpoint as well in your follow up posting. I doubt Jan will come downvote your opinion as it's well fleshed out, like his, and is in line with the argument. 

I've given you an upvote, because your post was a decent response and you explain your reasoning. See, not so hard to have an open mind.

[Jan van Eck + 7,558]

21 minutes ago, PE Scott said:

@footeab@yahoo.com lol, why the downvote on @Jan van Eck's posting? It doesn't attack anyone and it is clearly his opinion based on his observations. It's not even all that confrontational. He's just noting, again in his opinion, that China is less concerned about expanding military presence with those carriers than they are providing work for an otherwise dead sector of the industry. He even says that Asia is the place to go for VLCC, endorsing them as the best in the business. 

Are you just harboring animosity from something else? I can understand where you might refute his point, but it certainly wasn't lambasting the Chinese or anything.

Footeab, who hides behind his anagram instead of standing behind his name, has a long and notorious history of placing red-arrow downvotes on whatever I write.  It is utterly immature of him, of course, so I have a policy of ignoring him until he gets expelled from the Board.  The other thing is that he attributes ideas to me for which there is zero foundation, specifically making the claim that "the  Chinese are stupid."  That is precocious fantasy.  He then accuses me of being "ignorant of history."  I would place my in-depth knowledge of history against anyone on this Forum.  He then accuses me of being "ignorant of engineering.'  I have over 40 patents on engineered devices, the first one issued when I was 16.  What this man writes is pure fantasy bullshit and there is nothing you can do about it except ignore him, as the current crop of Moderators refuse to deal with him.  Continuing to interact with someone who is malevolent merely encourages more bad behaviour.

I once had an interesting discussion with a psychiatrist from the University; he made the interesting observation that helplessness, and dependency, fosters rage.  That is applicable to entire populations in the Middle East.  It is also quite applicable to the psychologically impotent.

[Enthalpic + 1,496]

35 minutes ago, Jan van Eck said:

 

I once had an interesting discussion with a psychiatrist from the University; he made the interesting observation that helplessness, and dependency, fosters rage.  That is applicable to entire populations in the Middle East.  It is also quite applicable to the psychologically impotent.

Also, trump supporters

Edited October 20, 2019 by Enthalpic

[Jan van Eck + 7,558]

1 minute ago, Enthalpic said:

Also, trump supporters

Ah, the Canadians have chimed in with their words of wisdom....😎

Life would be incomplete without that!

[Marcin + 519]

43 minutes ago, Jan van Eck said:

Footeab, who hides behind his anagram instead of standing behind his name,

And why ad hominem @Jan van Eck  when arguments are uncovered to be unsubstantiated.

@Jan van Eck you started with good observations: about glut in East Asian shipbuilding and multiplier effect of shipbuilding on the rest of industry, but there your knowledge about the subject ended. China is biggest in shipbuilding by tonnage of ships but Koreans are much more sophisticated so they have majority of market by value. Japan is at distant 3rd place and does not count in China-Korea competition because of much higher costs. Pusan shipyard is a marvel because of efficiences, true envy. China is fast going up the value ladder, but they need another 5-10 years.

And I can confirm @footeab@yahoo.com data are correct and told in a good style.

Chinese had the highest build up in navy tonnage in 2015-2018. In destroyers they are fast approaching US quality, but are really sh*tty in nuclear submarines, noisy monsters, level below 1970's Russian technology. Relatively good at conventional submarines. Chinese much earlier understood the need for high number of fast, nimble small and medium combatants: frigates & corvettes, build over 50 of each, secured East and South China Sea. In aircraft carriers  they will be on par with Forrestal in 2025, so are 70 years behind. Sth like Nimitz will not churn out before early 2030s. So they built thousands of carrier killers. It costs 20 million dollars at present to sunk 10 billion dollars carrier in 5 minutes by swarm attack of sea skimming missiles.

To give you some info about scale they are simultanously building 5 of 055 Type and 10-12 of 052D type as well as 3 helicopter carriers of 075 type.

[Guest]

Who gives a shit? Is this the 'get your ruler out' thread now?

Let's face it, China are bitter about people kicking their ass for years, they can't let it go, and are making up for it now. All they spend their money on seems to be their military, like NK. You do the math.

 

[Jan van Eck + 7,558]

I see that Mr. Marcin, the man who represents that he is from Poland and is an economist, now has chimed in with his words of wisdom on all matters naval  (plus, of course, indulging himself in his petty red-arrow downvoting,  yet another immature second-grader).  Marcin has not owned a navy vessel, has not operated a navy vessel, has not sold a navy vessel, yet he has set himself up as the forum (if not the world) expert on the Chines navy.  I am going to place yet one more descriptive post on this matter and that will be finality, as this is getting ridiculous. 

The so-called "Chinese navy" is a non-entity, and incapable of any semblance of sustained warfare.  The shipyards that build their stuff are also incompetent to build anything resembling a capital ship.  Specifically, that Jaingnan yard has never built anything larger than a lightweight destroyer, at least in the last century.  There is no accumulated industrial knowledge base there to build anything, and that so-called aircraft carrier is a dud right out of the box. 

Now the Chinese understand that their "navy" is a dud, and they already have attempted to make countermeasures by seizing some atolls out in the Spratly Islands and bringing in huge dredges, then dredging an inlet channel into some atoll and piling up vast amounts of sand to create the foundation for a military runway, a port, barracks, and even hangars for the interceptor aircraft they then station on that atoll.  All of this would be pointless if there was a serious navy.  It is precisely that there is no serious navy, and no hope of there ever being one, that obliges all this vst effort to build an actual island out of some sea coral. 

Further, an aircraft carrier does not sail alone; it is one ship of a task force, which includes a screen of destroyers and frigates, typically a cruiser or two, and at least two submarines, plus tenders and supply vessels.  A US task force will be more than a dozen ships, all to support and protect that carrier. The Chinese do not have those ships, have no hope of ever building those ships (at least to an operational sense), and the idea that they can put together a functioning task force is laughable.  As a practical matter, the navies that can do that are the Americans, the Brits, and the French.  Even the Russians have fallen apart as far as a functioning navy is concerned.  

Plus, a Chinese carrier at 80,000 tons does not have either the length of flight deck, nor the clout, nor the arms loading capabilities, of a US or British carrier.  It has no muscle, and cannot go toe to toe with a Western Navy.  So, what good is it?  You cannot use it for invading Taiwan, plus it would not be needed; and that is the only plausible military target. What else do you do with it?  You can go sail it around Vietnam, or possibly the Philippines, but other than for show, and to intimidate these weak countries, it is useless.  

The Philippines have now invited the US Navy back to reposition itself yet once again in Subic Bay, and the Air Force at Clark Field  (after expelling the US in some fit and frenzy of misplaced nationalism).  At least the Filipinos are being realistic:  nothing can touch the US Navy. The idea that some Chines adventurism can be played out with some swarm attack against the US Fleet is ludicrous; American ships were faced with that threat by Iran, with the development of swarms of two-man suicide boats and WIG machines, and have developed effective countermeasures that can knock incoming cruise missiles out of the sky using radar-controlled automatic Gatling guns that spit out 6,000 rounds a minute [that is one hundred rounds a second!] of 20-mm cannon fire.  A burst from one of those guns and you can kiss that cruise missile goodbye. 

An 80,000-thousand-tonner cannot launch the heavy naval fighter aircraft of today, and we are long past the time of the piston-engined Zero.  So just forget the idea that this "Chinese carrier" is anything other than a showpiece and some make-work, there to absorb surplus plate steel and labor.  And I am not going to come back to this thread as what is being spouted here is puerile nonsense, the prattling of the uninformed and the wishful thinkers, especially those that seek to continually denigrate the Americans and belittle their military.  Enough of this absurdity. 

Edited October 20, 2019 by Jan van Eck

[Jan van Eck + 7,558]

14 minutes ago, DayTrader said:

Let's face it, China are bitter about people kicking their ass for years, they can't let it go

And they will continue to get their ass kicked.  Stick around,  The Donald has no intention of letting up.  Watch as the tariff wall goes over 50% across the board. Bye-bye China; they cannot survive as a nation without selling to the USA.  Utterly impossible.  The place will break up into little independent, and squabbling, fiefdoms. Sayonara. 

[Guest]

Finally, back to the thread title instead of this ''get the ruler out'' shite!

Ruler as in measuring device. Not yellow bear v orange man.