Trump's China Strategy: Death By a Thousand Paper Cuts

[Tom Kirkman + 8,860]

Good read.  As I have been saying for months now, Trump has *already won* the trade war against China.

This article explains quite well what is going on:

President Trump China Strategy: Death By a Thousand Paper Cuts

... President Trump is famously impatient in achieving a financial objective.  He is known to have well thought plans, but he is also known to not pause long when executing his plan. This economic impatience may seem to be at odds with the majority of the financial media who say President Trump is playing a long-game with Chairman Xi Jinping.

ERGO the dichotomy is explained thus:  If President Trump is famously impatient, then why is he being so deliberate and painfully slow in achieving a deal with Chairman Xi?…

Here’s the ‘ah-ha’ moment.

….The current status with China was the final objective.

President Trump looks like he’s being stunningly patient because President Trump achieved his goal when no-one was paying attention. We are already past the success point.

The goal is essentially achieved.

There is no actual intent to reach a trade deal with China where the U.S. drops the tariffs and returns to holding hands with a happy panda playing by new rules.  This fictional narrative is a figment of fantasy being sold by a financial media that cannot fathom a U.S. President would be so bold as to just walk away from China.

That ‘walk away’ is exactly what President Trump did when he left all of those meetings in Southeast Asia in 2017; and every moment since has been setting up, and firming up, an entirely new global supply chain without China.

President Trump is not currently engaged in a substantive trade agreement in the formal way people are thinking about it.  Instead “Phase-One” is simply President Trump negotiating the terms of a big Agricultural purchase commitment from Beijing, and also protecting some very specific U.S. business interests (think Apple Co.) in the process.

The actual goal of President Trump’s U.S-China trade reset is a complete decoupling of U.S. critical manufacturing within China.

President Trump does not express angst, frustration, or even disappointment over the U.S-China trade discussions because the decoupling is well underway.  ...

[Tom Kirkman + 8,860]

Related thread from back in August:

 

[Marcin + 519]

Tom,

To both US and China trade war was preludium, not important preludium.

Since April 2018 technology war is the most important, China under current circumstances could not care less about loss of 10% of Chinese exports to US: 0.5% of Chinese GDP at best.

 

 

Edited November 28, 2019 by Marcin
Typo

[Rob Plant + 2,756]

7 hours ago, Marcin said:

Tom,

To both US and China trade war was preludium, not important preludium.

Since April 2018 technology war is the most important, China under current circumstances could not care less about loss of 10% of Chinese exports to US: 0.5% of Chinese GDP at best.

This is probably true currently, not sure the figures you state are accurate but I get your point.

However in the long term this is going to be a serious problem for China as other S.E Asian countries are already picking up this business and will become major competition for Chinese businesses on market share. It will give not only the US another possibly better option to purchase but also all other countries as these countries will become more efficient and invest in their manufacturing capabilities, up-skill their workforce etc. It also makes the GDP of these countries stronger and they then become less beholden to the will of China politically. It is natural that "fair trading" with these countries will lead to stronger ties to the US and the West. Countries such as Vietnam, Philippines, Malaysia, Korea, Taiwan, and the Indian subcontinent will all benefit.

There is also the ongoing subsidies that the Chinese state will need to be offering many manufacturing plants in order to keep them afloat.

All of this to the detriment of China.

I am by no means saying China will collapse or anything like that but it will be a serious set back for their grand plan for hegemony.

I think Trump has played this out very well (not his biggest fan on many things, but he is a good businessman). There are many upsides for the US at present and I see none for China.

I think your average blue collar John Doe living in the US should be shaking Trump's hand right now.

Just my opinion, feel free to disagree.

[Tom Kirkman + 8,860]

My WhatsApp chat with Asia this morning, regarding my repeated assertions that China has lost / Trump has won the trade war.

[Rob Plant + 2,756]

Tom as you have lived in Malaysia for some time until very recently, what are their views on the situation in HK and also on the US v China trade wars?

I would be very interested on the people's perspective (not media bias perspective)

[Tom Kirkman + 8,860]

44 minutes ago, Rob Plant said:

Tom as you have lived in Malaysia for some time until very recently, what are their views on the situation in HK and also on the US v China trade wars?

I would be very interested on the people's perspective (not media bias perspective)

Mixed bag of responses in SE Asia.  China and Hong Kong are economic engines.  The internal dispute is a major headache for Beijing.

I think many ordinary people in SE Asia just want the HK / Beijing dispute to die down and go away.

And my strong opinion that China has already lost the trade war with the U.S. seems to genuinely perplex some people in SE Asia.  Because my views on the trade war are nowhere near anything that Asian media reports. 

Also, China tends to be the largest trading partner with most countries in SE Asia region, and many people seem to be reluctant to rock the boat, for fear of affecting their own rice bowl.

[Rob Plant + 2,756]

OK thanks Tom 

Seems logical thinking I guess

I presume media bias is pro China in general in most S.E Asia countries for purely economic + political reasons then.

[Tom Kirkman + 8,860]

Yep, mostly.

[Gerry Maddoux + 3,627]

I suppose everyone brings their baggage from the past. The first people to get hurt by a trade war are the farmers and blue-collar workers. I grew up on a farm and ranch. The soybean farmers are committing suicide at such a rapid rate that they now have suicide hotlines in places where no one did that sort of thing. The steel mills are so-so; the greatest demand for steel right now is pipeline steel and it either comes from a Russian-owned subsidiary in Regina, Canada or from China, with a little more each day being made here in the good ole US of A. 

I am a big proponent of democracy, and am pulling for Hong Kong, but not the trade war. Again, I have coffee with my good friend who won the Nobel Prize for coming up with the ratio by which asset classes are rated, and he taught for years at Stanford. He has said a hundred times that no one wins in a trade war. 

Certainly, and importantly since this is an oil and gas site, we have not won anything in this trade war. For US oil and LNG exports to China, this has been a pyrrhic victory only. They have turned increasingly to Russia and Saudi Arabia. 

Okay, so I'm out of synch. I voted for Mr. Trump and will very likely vote for him again, but I have to tell my story like I feel it. 

[ronwagn + 6,290]

22 hours ago, Gerry Maddoux said:

I suppose everyone brings their baggage from the past. The first people to get hurt by a trade war are the farmers and blue-collar workers. I grew up on a farm and ranch. The soybean farmers are committing suicide at such a rapid rate that they now have suicide hotlines in places where no one did that sort of thing. The steel mills are so-so; the greatest demand for steel right now is pipeline steel and it either comes from a Russian-owned subsidiary in Regina, Canada or from China, with a little more each day being made here in the good ole US of A. 

I am a big proponent of democracy, and am pulling for Hong Kong, but not the trade war. Again, I have coffee with my good friend who won the Nobel Prize for coming up with the ratio by which asset classes are rated, and he taught for years at Stanford. He has said a hundred times that no one wins in a trade war. 

Certainly, and importantly since this is an oil and gas site, we have not won anything in this trade war. For US oil and LNG exports to China, this has been a pyrrhic victory only. They have turned increasingly to Russia and Saudi Arabia. 

Okay, so I'm out of synch. I voted for Mr. Trump and will very likely vote for him again, but I have to tell my story like I feel it. 

This is not just a trade war. It is a war for who will lead the world and whether or not the world is run by dictators or by free nations. If China were allowed to continue on its current course their leadership would soon eclipse ours. 

Western Europe already has greatly infringed on the liberties of its people and the leaders in power want to continue on that course. The people still have a chance to reverse course however, but that will be a long range struggle. Socialists have done a good job of undermining countries around the world. The people need to wake up. 

[Boat + 1,323]

Your metrics for winning a trade war are different from what I would call equal. It took until recently for terrifs to be equal. Is our trade balance equal? Not even close. Not much progress at all. 
 

https://www.piie.com/research/piie-charts/us-china-trade-war-tariffs-date-chart

 

This chart shows the US finally achieved equal tarrifs a month ago or so. But when will actual trade balance improve. 

https://tradingeconomics.com/united-states/balance-of-trade

The actual trade balance with the world is still rising. The actual trade balance with China is rising. US never Trumpers will have to see dramatic improvements over time before the loud mouth shmuck gets credit. I hope to praise him on this issue but you don’t get credit while losing.

Edited November 30, 2019 by Boat

[Marcin + 519]

On 11/28/2019 at 10:13 AM, Rob Plant said:

This is probably true currently, not sure the figures you state are accurate but I get your point.

However in the long term this is going to be a serious problem for China as other S.E Asian countries are already picking up this business and will become major competition for Chinese businesses on market share. It will give not only the US another possibly better option to purchase but also all other countries as these countries will become more efficient and invest in their manufacturing capabilities, up-skill their workforce etc. It also makes the GDP of these countries stronger and they then become less beholden to the will of China politically. It is natural that "fair trading" with these countries will lead to stronger ties to the US and the West. Countries such as Vietnam, Philippines, Malaysia, Korea, Taiwan, and the Indian subcontinent will all benefit.

There is also the ongoing subsidies that the Chinese state will need to be offering many manufacturing plants in order to keep them afloat.

All of this to the detriment of China.

I am by no means saying China will collapse or anything like that but it will be a serious set back for their grand plan for hegemony.

I think Trump has played this out very well (not his biggest fan on many things, but he is a good businessman). There are many upsides for the US at present and I see none for China.

I think your average blue collar John Doe living in the US should be shaking Trump's hand right now.

Just my opinion, feel free to disagree.

Rob,

I just estimated this 0.5% amount in my mind. This way: China GDP 14 trillion USD, exports of goods to US 500 billion USD: about 4% of Chinese GDP. Decrease of Chinese exports to US this year less than 10% (in CNY terms, most Chinese inputs are in yuan). So about 0.4% but 0.5% looks better. From what I noticed most of people at this forum are employed in oil&gas business or are providing services to this industry or are trading commodities. I have a little bit different background of financial audit/business consulting/financial controlling. So my activities were to analyze companies/industries (also taking under account country background) to help improve efficiency, to take business decisions or help others to take these decisions. So I look at China and US and their relations through the lens/toolset of data of many kinds. I only comment about economic impact of geopolitical tensions because i understand these topics. On the  other hand i know nothing about hydrocarbons or commodity trading. 

Edited November 30, 2019 by Marcin
Typo

[Papillon + 485]

On 11/29/2019 at 8:25 PM, ronwagn said:

This is not just a trade war. It is a war for who will lead the world and whether or not the world is run by dictators or by free nations. If China were allowed to continue on its current course their leadership would soon eclipse ours. 

This is a crux of the matter for me sir and lends itself well to explanations of your continuing references to China. What you actually tend to dislike it seems is your 'leadership of the world being eclipsed by China' and that you feel this need to try and stop their 'current course'. Who, I ask, told you that the United States 'leads the world', or indeed what this even means, is very disconcerting, as is the title of the piece claiming or seeming to wish 'death by paper cuts'. This is not a pleasant image or metaphor to myself and I assume is not meant in the manner it came across to me. 

You mention 'free nations' but I am of the opinion that you should more accurately state 'slightly freer nations than China'. Is it not so, for instance, that all of your major companies, including Facebook, Google, Apple and Amazon, to name merely a few, have all been under vast scrutiny concerning security of users and citizens? This is a 'free nation', a nation seemingly enslaved by its own banking system? A laughable notion sir if I may say so.

I am hesitant to inform and argue that you live in as much of a surveillance state as the Chinese I dare say, the only difference to myself is how you have chosen to label and justify it. Your government is also, from what I have observed atleast, at constant war with itself and involved in one scandal after another, including your own president. If these are the ideals that other countries and indeed the world should be following and 'led' by to use your words then this is deeply worrying sir. How your nation has any right to comment on others' ideals is little more than sheer, misplaced arrogance and utter illusion. 

As previously noted, I am not the number one fan of some Chinese practices by any stretch of the imagination. However I have atleast tried to separate fact from fiction over my many years, especially with regard to national pride and geopolitical events, which seems to sway your no doubt good intent sir. I would argue that the vast majority of our planet holds a pride in their nationality and indeed even place of birth, it is quite a natural element to myself for us to do so. 

That said, your rightful love of the United States seems to sway your opinions slightly unjustly if I may be so bold, and they read as if through tainted spectacles of illusion and bias. For instance, as you seem a trifle obsessed with the Chinese way of life being different to your own, you have made reference to your president with regard to Hong Kong, admittedly on a different conversation here. This seems to you a moment of pride, that citizens of Hong Kong asked for intervention from the United States, 'the leaders of the world' in your eyes. May I ask what exactly your great president did when asked for this help? It seems to me that your famous 'land of the free' did precisely nothing whatsoever to aid the situation which has continued for many months since, and indeed is continuing right now? Indeed the only reason this bill was signed by him at all was due to the pressure from others? Again, to yourself, this is a 'free nation', where even your leader has little say in certain areas and acts based on others' votes with little choice? 

Returning to my initial musings, that being your country's 'war for who will rule the world' to quote your good self, may I be so bold as to suggest why, when asked for this aid, you did nothing? The answer is quite plain. Fear. I would argue that the president has an election next year to ponder among many things, including of course trade disputes, and has little intention of conflict anywhere before this occurs, if at all. That said it is certainly not unnoticed, even by yourself surely, that if the situation in Hong Kong were somewhere else, let us say somewhere without such a powerful army that you fear next door, but instead somewhere with vast oil reserves and a weak military, that your country would have been there within days no doubt? It seems your great, 'free' nation insists on these ideals depending on who rulers are at the time in these locations, or how rich they are in certain commodities, or how powerful the opponents' armies are likely to be? Again, these are the 'ideals' that belong to who 'rules the world' in your eyes? A very troubling thought for the future. It is a credit to your current president atleast and his pre-election agenda that unnecessary conflicts have been avoided. With any of your other leaders over the last thirty years it maybe would have been a different outcome no doubt? 

Make no mistake please sir, I have no more against the United States as I do against China. This is not a silly competition and I have no time for trivial matters. I respect both countries, as many others, equally and I am an admirer of the vast majority and spectrum of cultures. What I seem to read here however, rather frequently from several users, not just your good self, is false reasoning of some causes and effects of global events, where in some cases all logic seems to be replaced for a foolish national pride that I tend to view as misplaced, as we are all citizens of the same planet, regardless of our own national leader. As stated above this is not to say all national pride is foolish, far from it, it is natural to me, but in some cases it overrides the more pressing matters, causes an instant bias and goes on to accomplish very little.

Finally I would note that over many centuries the 'leaders of the world', if I understand your meaning of this correctly, have changed hands many, many times. I am sure all of them also believed their reign would last for centuries to come? I would hazard a guess if I may that none of these eras or their finality cause a reaction in you at all? When it comes to your own nation and shall we say 'era' however, which you see as 'ruling the world', it causes a fear and varying emotions, seemingly justified to you as you see your nation as vastly more free than China, and hide beneath this guise of apparent freedom of the planet and its future 'under' American rule. A quick check of your own politics, banking system, leading companies and their trust issues, false news outlets, gun deaths, drug abuse, levels of homelessness and mindless wars to name but a few, will hopefully remind you that you do not live in some ideal wonderland sir, however much you may wish it or believe it. With respect, Papillon. 

Edited December 1, 2019 by Papillon

[Guest]

Gulp.

Biggest mic drop of all time? Yikes. 

Respect Papillon!!  

Happy xmas all.

Edited December 1, 2019 by Guest

[Ward Smith + 6,615]

15 hours ago, Papillon said:

This is a crux of the matter for me sir and lends itself well to explanations of your continuing references to China. What you actually tend to dislike it seems is your 'leadership of the world being eclipsed by China' and that you feel this need to try and stop their 'current course'. Who, I ask, told you that the United States 'leads the world', or indeed what this even means, is very disconcerting, as is the title of the piece claiming or seeming to wish 'death by paper cuts'. This is not a pleasant image or metaphor to myself and I assume is not meant in the manner it came across to me. 

You mention 'free nations' but I am of the opinion that you should more accurately state 'slightly freer nations than China'. Is it not so, for instance, that all of your major companies, including Facebook, Google, Apple and Amazon, to name merely a few, have all been under vast scrutiny concerning security of users and citizens? This is a 'free nation', a nation seemingly enslaved by its own banking system? A laughable notion sir if I may say so.

I am hesitant to inform and argue that you live in as much of a surveillance state as the Chinese I dare say, the only difference to myself is how you have chosen to label and justify it. Your government is also, from what I have observed atleast, at constant war with itself and involved in one scandal after another, including your own president. If these are the ideals that other countries and indeed the world should be following and 'led' by to use your words then this is deeply worrying sir. How your nation has any right to comment on others' ideals is little more than sheer, misplaced arrogance and utter illusion. 

As previously noted, I am not the number one fan of some Chinese practices by any stretch of the imagination. However I have atleast tried to separate fact from fiction over my many years, especially with regard to national pride and geopolitical events, which seems to sway your no doubt good intent sir. I would argue that the vast majority of our planet holds a pride in their nationality and indeed even place of birth, it is quite a natural element to myself for us to do so. 

That said, your rightful love of the United States seems to sway your opinions slightly unjustly if I may be so bold, and they read as if through tainted spectacles of illusion and bias. For instance, as you seem a trifle obsessed with the Chinese way of life being different to your own, you have made reference to your president with regard to Hong Kong, admittedly on a different conversation here. This seems to you a moment of pride, that citizens of Hong Kong asked for intervention from the United States, 'the leaders of the world' in your eyes. May I ask what exactly your great president did when asked for this help? It seems to me that your famous 'land of the free' did precisely nothing whatsoever to aid the situation which has continued for many months since, and indeed is continuing right now? Indeed the only reason this bill was signed by him at all was due to the pressure from others? Again, to yourself, this is a 'free nation', where even your leader has little say in certain areas and acts based on others' votes with little choice? 

Returning to my initial musings, that being your country's 'war for who will rule the world' to quote your good self, may I be so bold as to suggest why, when asked for this aid, you did nothing? The answer is quite plain. Fear. I would argue that the president has an election next year to ponder among many things, including of course trade disputes, and has little intention of conflict anywhere before this occurs, if at all. That said it is certainly not unnoticed, even by yourself surely, that if the situation in Hong Kong were somewhere else, let us say somewhere without such a powerful army that you fear next door, but instead somewhere with vast oil reserves and a weak military, that your country would have been there within days no doubt? It seems your great, 'free' nation insists on these ideals depending on who rulers are at the time in these locations, or how rich they are in certain commodities, or how powerful the opponents' armies are likely to be? Again, these are the 'ideals' that belong to who 'rules the world' in your eyes? A very troubling thought for the future. It is a credit to your current president atleast and his pre-election agenda that unnecessary conflicts have been avoided. With any of your other leaders over the last thirty years it maybe would have been a different outcome no doubt? 

Make no mistake please sir, I have no more against the United States as I do against China. This is not a silly competition and I have no time for trivial matters. I respect both countries, as many others, equally and I am an admirer of the vast majority and spectrum of cultures. What I seem to read here however, rather frequently from several users, not just your good self, is false reasoning of some causes and effects of global events, where in some cases all logic seems to be replaced for a foolish national pride that I tend to view as misplaced, as we are all citizens of the same planet, regardless of our own national leader. As stated above this is not to say all national pride is foolish, far from it, it is natural to me, but in some cases it overrides the more pressing matters, causes an instant bias and goes on to accomplish very little.

Finally I would note that over many centuries the 'leaders of the world', if I understand your meaning of this correctly, have changed hands many, many times. I am sure all of them also believed their reign would last for centuries to come? I would hazard a guess if I may that none of these eras or their finality cause a reaction in you at all? When it comes to your own nation and shall we say 'era' however, which you see as 'ruling the world', it causes a fear and varying emotions, seemingly justified to you as you see your nation as vastly more free than China, and hide beneath this guise of apparent freedom of the planet and its future 'under' American rule. A quick check of your own politics, banking system, leading companies and their trust issues, false news outlets, gun deaths, drug abuse, levels of homelessness and mindless wars to name but a few, will hopefully remind you that you do not live in some ideal wonderland sir, however much you may wish it or believe it. With respect, Papillon. 

Super long post, much to unpack. 

I'll start with this. My wife of almost 40 years is Chinese. I used to be fairly fluent in Mandarin, out of practice now but still understand much more than I can speak. Unfortunately I learned phonetic style not Pinyin so can't type it properly in English. I have been friends with several hundred Chinese over the decades. I can only name two who moved back (while they could have stayed), and they went to Hong Kong. Others couldn't get green cards etc. We even had 3 Chinese over for Thanksgiving dinner. I love Chinese people, not so much the 0.1% who rule the country as if it is their personal fiefdom. You've heard of "Princelings" I'm sure. Children of senior party members, who when they show up in the news are usually dead from crashing a Lamborghini. Half million dollar car for a kid with no job whose parents "earn" $40,000 a year? 

Xi can "pretend" he's rooting out corruption, but it's baked into the system. All he accomplished was a change of the guard of who gets to collect the red envelopes. 

And there's the rub. For all our warts in the West, since we've allowed for a free press, it (used to) do a great of catching and publicizing the corrupt politicians. Not always and not everywhere, but often enough. Now we have Joe Biden, who figured out a way around the emoluments clause by using his neer do well son to collect the bribes, but because over the past 50 years the press has been taken over by DNC agents, no one was any the wiser. Until Trump made a call. Now everyone gets to act Shocked, Shocked about Trump asking for an investigation while "pretending" that there was NOTHING to investigate! Luckily there's this little thing called the Internet (invented here BTW) and everyone who wants to get informed, can. 

Last, and not because I don't have more to say, but because my post is getting too long, I want to clarify the difference between America being a military superpower and being an economic superpower. We happen to be both, and there are those who will say the one causes the other. The question is, which one? I for one believe the economy supports the military, not the other way around. Unfortunately there are countless fools in and around government who believe it's the other way around. Given that "it's the economy, stupid", Trump is correct that losing millions of manufacturing jobs and industries to China was going to destroy us in the long run. Hence the "trade war", which Tom is correct quoting an author who says we already won, which was never about winning "the trade war", but about reshuffling a crooked deck. China bribed Clinton and got most favored nation status, then leveraged that into building their manufacturing at the Direct expense of ours. Damage done, Trump is doing what he can to fix it. Obama said, "What are you going to do, wave a magic wand? Those jobs are never coming back". Whoops they Are coming back, which is why China is trying to interfere in This election to get Trump out of office, to be replaced by someone easier to manipulate. 

 

[ronwagn + 6,290]

A very nice argument Papillon, but you make some false assumptions.

1. I think that America is somewhat flawless and has great policies. In fact I dislike the attempts by big government elements to restrict many of the rights of Americans.

The rights to bear arms protect all the other rights in our constitution. This right is, in fact, being widely infringed upon. 

The right to life is restricted by abortion..

The right to privacy is not specified discretely in our constitution but the lack of privacy is something that must be inferred and dealt with fairly.

Our government (and many govt. levels} is too large and the rules are overwhelming.

Our legal system does not treat the wealthy and famous as harshly as the ordinary person.

Our judicial system is being abused by rogue judges who make unconstitutional rulings which take a long time to fully be resolved. This also takes a lot of money. The ordinary citizen must turn to private organizations to get free legal help for justice.

2. It is a false statement to say that Americans are only slightly freer than Chinese. I wonder what percentage of Americans would want to live in China and vice versa. Feel free to speculate.

3. What nation provides more leadership to the world, or has to this point of recent history? I am not predicting the future, just stating facts. I am also not speaking of all history.

4. You compare privacy in America to that in China as if it were close. I really don't think it is close, but admit it is getting closer. Our government is just as interested in knowing everything we are doing as the Chinese government. The difference is that our domestic surveillance system doesn't compare. China has 91 million card carrying members of their Communist Party. They are all spies or willing to be spies at a moments notice. More importantly our government is restrained by our American Constitution and Bill of Rights which are carefully guarded by all wise citizens and honest judges. 

5. I think that every person has a right to be proud of whatever nation they are a citizen of or any other nation they choose to be proud of. That does not mean that some do not have more to boas about however. I admire many things about China and its history. Its government is not one of them primarily because it is not democratic and has an Emperor for Life. 

6. Regarding Hong Kong. I think that it is sad that its residents are placed in a position where they feel the need to revolt against the overwhelming power of China which lies on its doorstep and is a legal claimant of its land. I feel very sad for them. They are brave people as I think most Chinese are. I see no good end for the people of Hong Kong. I think that China will develop Schenzen and move any crucial systems there as it pacifies Hong Kong. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Shenzhen America would be foolish to interfere directly in Hong Kong. All we can do is support them indirectly,  ideologically, and with our prayers. 

7. About who rules the world. What that means is globalism versus free nations and free people. You cannot have national freedoms with an overarching global government. China wants a global government that will accedes to all its desires and values. Many in the Western World want the same thing. I am diametrically opposed to that. President Trump is also. Emperor Xi is a big fan of the United Nations and Globalism as long as it suits his needs. 

My Globalism Topic https://docs.google.com/document/d/1k8kNhtZJLuN66TpDuo67WBV1U2JhhZIvAefxeMNK0ls/edit

8. You compare problems that America has with homelessness, drugs, crime etc. with problems in China. China tries to hide its internal problems. America is happy to let everyone know what is bad so that it may become better. China would also be better off it allowed free discourse. Yet we too have a mass media that wants to hide the evils of our own government but fortunately we can still work around it if we try hard enough.

https://www.scmp.com/news/china/politics/article/3040048/support-hong-kong-protests-china-has-consequences-some

Papillon, I thank you for the effort you put into your response. It sounds to me that we are not too far away from each other in our beliefs and might gain from further debate. 

 

 

Edited December 2, 2019 by ronwagn
added reference

[Enthalpic + 1,496]

57 minutes ago, Ward Smith said:

And there's the rub. For all our warts in the West, since we've allowed for a free press, it (used to) do a great of catching and publicizing the corrupt politicians. Not always and not everywhere, but often enough. Now we have Joe Biden, who figured out a way around the emoluments clause by using his neer do well son to collect the bribes, but because over the past 50 years the press has been taken over by DNC agents, no one was any the wiser. Until Trump made a call. Now everyone gets to act Shocked, Shocked about Trump asking for an investigation while "pretending" that there was NOTHING to investigate! Luckily there's this little thing called the Internet (invented here BTW) and everyone who wants to get informed, can. 

Last, and not because I don't have more to say, but because my post is getting too long, I want to clarify the difference between America being a military superpower and being an economic superpower. We happen to be both, and there are those who will say the one causes the other. The question is, which one? I for one believe the economy supports the military, not the other way around. Unfortunately there are countless fools in and around government who believe it's the other way around. Given that "it's the economy, stupid", Trump is correct that losing millions of manufacturing jobs and industries to China was going to destroy us in the long run. Hence the "trade war", which Tom is correct quoting an author who says we already won, which was never about winning "the trade war", but about reshuffling a crooked deck. China bribed Clinton and got most favored nation status, then leveraged that into building their manufacturing at the Direct expense of ours. Damage done, Trump is doing what he can to fix it. Obama said, "What are you going to do, wave a magic wand? Those jobs are never coming back". Whoops they Are coming back, which is why China is trying to interfere in This election to get Trump out of office, to be replaced by someone easier to manipulate. 

 

Everyone one on Oil Price loves Al Gore Haha.

The military and economic strength obviously go hand in hand and can't really be separated.  If you're super rich you should probably have bodyguards and a strong vault... but fighter jets and super bombs aren't cheap either (USA's largest non-nuke bomb is 16 million each) and going super in debt to buy yet another bomb is not a great idea.

Or course US companies sell a lot of weaponry and make money off that. 

There is also post war "humanitarian aid" that isn't that altruistic.  Your Port was destroyed? We will "give" your nation enough money to rebuild it with the caveat that it is built by a US company using US materials.  Yes, they get a "free" dock but all the aid money really stays in the US.

Edited December 2, 2019 by Enthalpic

[Ward Smith + 6,615]

6 minutes ago, ronwagn said:

The right to privacy is not specified discretely in our constitution but the lack of privacy is something that must be inferred and dealt with fairly.

Well a supposed right to privacy was created out of whole cloth so some activist judges could create the "right" to have an abortion in Roe vs Wade. Too bad the gutless wonders can't carry that to its logical conclusion elsewhere but we know they only do what furthers their agendas. 

[Enthalpic + 1,496]

Women's rights to their own body.... what a travesty.

Abortions suck - but the body of evidence supports at least allowing some.  Total prohibition just forces abortions underground and cause more damage.  You may not want your daughter to have an abortion but would you prefer she died of bleeding from a coat hanger, poison, or falling down a flight of steps on purpose?

If you read Freakconomics there is also compelling evidence that abortion reduces crime (majority of aborted babies come from poor neighborhoods where criminality is almost systemic), it's essentially killing off future criminals. Facts can be distasteful. 

Edited December 2, 2019 by Enthalpic

[remake it + 288]

1 hour ago, Ward Smith said:

Luckily there's this little thing called the Internet (invented here BTW) and everyone who wants to get informed, can. 

Then why do folk like you continue to believe rubbish claims when there is no basis to support them?

[Ward Smith + 6,615]

4 hours ago, Enthalpic said:

Everyone one on Oil Price loves Al Gore Haha.

The military and economic strength obviously go hand in hand and can't really be separated.  If you're super rich you should probably have bodyguards and a strong vault... but fighter jets and super bombs aren't cheap either (USA's largest non-nuke bomb is 16 million each) and going super in debt to buy yet another bomb is not a great idea.

Or course US companies sell a lot of weaponry and make money off that. 

There is also post war "humanitarian aid" that isn't that altruistic.  Your Port was destroyed? We will "give" your nation enough money to rebuild it with the caveat that it is built by a US company using US materials.  Yes, they get a "free" dock but all the aid money really stays in the US.

AI had Nothing to do with the internet, but you already knew that. Thanks for playing. 

Unlike the Russians, US arms sales are militarily and politically restricted. Furthermore as you've pointed out, our military goods are prohibitively expensive. So what happens is "lobbyists" work the Congress critters and the hapless taxpayer gets to finance the sales to various miscreants around the world. Some folks like the Commonwealth countries buy some things with their own money. 

The port example isn't that accurate. Some money stays home, but all that labor is local, and as any of the dozens of globe trotting engineers here can tell you, labor is at least half the cost. Not "stays in the US" after all. 

[Ward Smith + 6,615]

4 hours ago, Enthalpic said:

Women's rights to their own body.... what a travesty.

Abortions suck - but the body of evidence supports at least allowing some.  Total prohibition just forces abortions underground and cause more damage.  You may not want your daughter to have an abortion but would you prefer she died of bleeding from a coat hanger, poison, or falling down a flight of steps on purpose?

If you read Freakconomics there is also compelling evidence that abortion reduces crime (majority of aborted babies come from poor neighborhoods where criminality is almost systemic), it's essentially killing off future criminals. Facts can be distasteful. 

The judges didn't couch it as women's rights, but as a privacy issue. Fundamentally flawed logic and the perfect example of legislating from the bench. States could have debated and voted on it, they were denied the opportunity. 

Margaret Sanger, the founder of Planned Parenthood was a known racist who planned on using those facilities to rid the country of those nuisance colored people. Hilarious that the (still racist) democrats are such fanatic supporters of Planned Parenthood. 

[Ward Smith + 6,615]

3 hours ago, remake it said:

Then why do folk like you continue to believe rubbish claims when there is no basis to support them?

I have toe jam more informed than you buckwheat

[remake it + 288]

19 minutes ago, Ward Smith said:

I have toe jam more informed than you buckwheat

 

5 hours ago, Ward Smith said:

Now we have Joe Biden, who figured out a way around the emoluments clause by using his neer do well son to collect the bribes, but because over the past 50 years the press has been taken over by DNC agents, no one was any the wiser. Until Trump made a call. Now everyone gets to act Shocked, Shocked about Trump asking for an investigation while "pretending" that there was NOTHING to investigate! Luckily there's this little thing called the Internet (invented here BTW) and everyone who wants to get informed, can. 

So provide the evidence toe jam, because these claims have been repeatedly debunked and you still peddle conspiracy theories.