page 2 is crazy man, crazy

7/17/2005 10:19:04 PM

Quote :

"China's exports are a far larger share of its overall GNP than us."

That's just because it's a producer right now.

Quote :

"Yes, fucking everything up would cause a massive recession in the US, but it would devastate China."

It would fuck us both over.

Quote :

"If China wanted to devalue our currency and sold all its dollars, what would it sell them for? Whatever devaluing impact was done on the dollar would be tempered by the rabid rise in whatever it was buying with them."

They could buy Euros and yen too curb the subsequent inflation of that currency.

Quote :

"everything else is held in Treasury Bonds which cannot be "called in" because they have mandatory mature dates on each one. All it can do is flood the secondary market which might inhibit our ability to borrow further money momentarily."

Simply cutting their US investement would screw us over.

7/17/2005 10:22:41 PM

you know

the "terrorists" do not have nuclear weapons

WHO YOU SCARED OF NOW?

7/17/2005 10:22:53 PM

BUT THE TERRORISTS HATE OUR FREEDOMS

7/17/2005 10:45:08 PM

Quote :

"BECAUSE COMPARISONS FROM NAPOLEONIC WARS REALLY MAKE SENSE hell, the right won't even allow liberals to draw comparisons to wars that were faught in the 1970s AND YOU WANT TO BRING UP NAPOLEON?"

the first thing you learn when you look back through the history of wars and conflicts is that everything previous to the topic you are looking at applies. where do you think military strategies come from? the only thing thats changed since the beginning of recorded history is the distances at which these wars are fought. that was my point, that's all. if hitler had studied history at all he would have never bothered attacking britain and france would probably be part of germany today. no one has ever been able to completely conquer the british isles, not the romans, not the vikings, not spain, not napolean.

i'm guessing you missed the point of my first post, which was to learn from history, we learned alot from our fuck ups in the '70s and early '80s and as a result our military leaders are doing their damnest not to repeat those mistakes.

that is all, have a nice day.

7/17/2005 11:32:26 PM

his point wasn't that you can't draw correlations between two wars, his point was you can't say that you are allowed to draw comparisons from one war and not another.

7/17/2005 11:41:22 PM

Quote :

"Simply cutting their US investement would screw us over."

In what way? I think the US economy could withstand slightly higher interest rates, don't you?
Money is just money, if there isn't enough going around we'll just print more!

7/18/2005 12:49:45 AM

economically, we are living outside our means right now, and this is thanks to chinese investment, they stop that, we are forced to stop spending and growing so fast.

7/18/2005 12:55:31 AM

they'll kill themselves with smog and acid rain before we have to worry too much.

7/18/2005 1:00:46 AM

Quote :

"we are forced to stop spending and growing so fast."

A reduced growth rate does not equal "Fucked" in any way shape or form.

Raise interest rates just a little bit and investment will flow in from the rest of the world to fill China's vacume.

7/18/2005 1:05:37 AM

You really have no idea when you type do you?

7/18/2005 5:55:04 PM

Quote :

"You really have no idea when you type do you?"

I think I am typing when I sit in front of the computer and press my fingers down on the keyboard.

Nevertheless, I am sure you didn't ask the question you intended to ask...

So, SandSanta, what makes you SOO certain that no one else on Earth would purchase a US Treasury Bond except for China, even at higher rates of return?

7/18/2005 6:38:48 PM

Because if China stop it's investment it would hurt the US economy, this would lead to fewer people investing in it, etc.

7/18/2005 6:40:28 PM

Because T-Bond values would be shit, the Dollar dropping like a Al-Qaeda Air 747, the government facing massive amounts of debt and no credit to borrow.

Then you say

"RAISE INTEREST RATES !!111!"

Good Idea. Except you'd have to do this several times over a long period.

Higher short term interest rates and devaluating dollar mean consumers won't be able to borrow excessively as they have up to this point and the "resiliant American Consumer" which kept the economy modest despite a tanking Tech sector will no longer have the capital to continue impulse buys. I don't have to draw picture for what happens after this.

Furthermore, another caveat of higher short term interest rates would be that long term interest rates on mortages and big ticket loans would finally creep to the level they should be at now, and then take off like a rocket.

Whats that mean for our current housing bubble? Doom and Gloom.

You see sir, we are in fact in a wide and deep bucket of shit and poobahs in Washington are just now realizing this.

[Edited on July 18, 2005 at 9:42 PM. Reason : .]

7/18/2005 9:41:53 PM

^It'll all be tied back to being Clinton's fault somehow.

7/18/2005 10:19:30 PM

http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2005/07/20/AR2005072000461_pf.html

Quote :

"China blasts U.S. concerns on its military rise BEIJING (Reuters) - China on Wednesday blasted a Pentagon report asserting that its fast-modernizing military could pose a threat to the region, saying that the United States, the world's biggest defense spender, had no ground to stand on. The U.S. Department of Defense report, made public on Tuesday, reflects concern in Washington over China's growing military and economic might, and in particular the fear that a changing balance of power in Asia could threaten Taiwan, the self-governing island Beijing claims as its own. "The report groundlessly attacks China's military modernization and makes unwarranted charges about China's normal national defense building and military deployments," Vice Foreign Minister Yang Jiechi said in a statement. It "ignores the facts, spares no effort to spread the 'China threat theory', rudely interferes in China's internal affairs," Yang was quoted as saying on the Foreign Ministry's Web site, http://www.fmprc.gov.cn. The Pentagon report said Beijing's military buildup had already begun to change the regional balance of power but added that its ability to project conventional power was limited and that China lacked the capability to re-take Taiwan by force. Beijing considers Taiwan a part of China. In March it passed an anti-secession law authorizing the use of "non-peaceful means" to bring it back into the fold should the island democracy of 23 million move toward formal independence. The Taiwan issue puts the United States in a quandary, with Washington having vowed to help the island defend itself, but also recognizing Beijing as China's sole legitimate government. Yang noted that the U.S. military budget was almost 18 times that of Beijing's official military budget of about $26 billion. Outside analysts say China's actual outlay is far higher, and the Pentagon has put 2003 military spending as high as $65 billion. "What authority does the United States have to gesticulate about and make improper comments on China's defensive national defense policy and measures?" he said. He called on the United States to "respect the facts, correct its errors, stop gratuitously attacking China, stop interfering in China's internal affairs, stop its words and deeds that damage Sino-U.S. relations." Foreign Minister Li Zhaoxing dismissed the Pentagon report and said China's rise would be peaceful. "China, remember, will continue to pursue a path of peaceful development," Li said at a ceremony to establish the offices of the International Committee of the Red Cross in Beijing. "China not only poses no threat to anyone, we also are willing to establish friendship and all kinds of win-win cooperation with other countries to push forward cooperative development," he said in response to a question about the report. Last week, a Chinese general was quoted as saying China was ready to use nuclear weapons against the United States should Washington attack over Taiwan, remarks U.S. officials criticized as "irresponsible." China also shrugged off on Wednesday an agreement earlier this week in which Washington promised India full cooperation in developing its civilian nuclear power program without demanding that it sign the nuclear Non-proliferation Treaty. The agreement was seen as a counterbalance to China's rise, but the Foreign Ministry had little reaction. "We hope the relevant cooperation between China and India will benefit the safeguarding of peace and stability in the Asian region," it said in a statement faxed to Reuters."

7/20/2005 10:14:06 AM

Quote :

"Can we live with China as it moves to become a great power? Here's a country with 1.3 billion people that has moved from the bicycle age to the Audi age in two decades. Along the way it sucked Europe and the United States into dependence on its cheap labor and the promise of its huge internal markets. We buy their cheap goods. They return the favor by buying our T-bills, thus subsidizing our huge foreign debt. We need them, and they know it -- to the point where they demand, and get access to, more and more sophisticated Western technology. Such dependency promises an uneasy relationship as Chinese power grows, and our power inevitably wanes."

http://www.mercurynews.com/mld/mercurynews/news/opinion/12804455.htm

I'm curious. What do you think will happen when China invades Taiwan?

10/4/2005 11:59:16 PM

Taiwan has failed to take its own defense seriously. As such, when the war comes America will be left floating at sea looking upon a wholely occupied island. Would we really launch an amphibious assault upon Taiwan to restore the Taiwanese Government which failed to put forth even the minimum effort towards self defense? Probably not. We'll pick up refugees, sue for restoration, make a motion on the Security Council (China will veto), and go home. Once the island is taken there is little we could do to take it back.

Your real question is, what if Taiwan takes the necessary steps to survive long enough for our fleet to arrive, what then? Do we engage the Chinese?

I would argue yes. The main reason being "We Can." With our technological superiority even one of our carrier groups could easily hold off the whole of the Chinese navy and airforce. This strategy would work simply because Taiwan is an island which we can easily isolate, allowing the Taiwanese to defeat any Chinese troops remaining on the Island.

10/5/2005 1:35:06 AM

wait
google tells me that taiwan is part of china

why would they have to invade it?

10/5/2005 9:17:35 AM

^^^I don't think we'll do shit. I don't think China will do that though, the current arrangement benefits them and they probably won't want to risk it. Of course, that won't always be the case, and then Taiwan is fucked.

Quote :

" For example, if China sold all its dollars for RNBs, all we would see is a rediculously high price for the RNB and an overall mild drop in the dollar. "

it would be more than a mild drop. This is what happened when they only said they were going to "trim their purchase of U.S. Treasuries":

http://www.businessweek.com/magazine/content/04_50/b3912067.htmnull

Quote :

"All it can do is flood the secondary market which might inhibit our ability to borrow further money momentarily."

yea, but we can't pass a balanced budget. We definitly wouldn't be able to pass one if we were trying to mobilize for a war with china.

Quote :

"economically, we are living outside our means right now, and this is thanks to chinese investment, they stop that, we are forced to stop spending and growing so fast."

this scenario probably won't occur because then we wouldn't be able to afford a huge trade deficit with China. When we can't afford to do that anymore, we'll be screwed though.

[Edited on October 5, 2005 at 10:36 AM. Reason : ^^^]

10/5/2005 10:36:11 AM

I don't see the problem. If China stops loaning our government money it will just borrow from its citizens. If the dollar falls our citizens sure aren't going to be investing overseas, nor are they going to be purchasing Chinese goods. There is lots of money in America just lying around. At the right interest rate I'm sure the government could get ahold of it.

That said, for the RNB to rise, wouldn't it have to break its relatively fixed exchange rate with the dollar?

[Edited on October 5, 2005 at 11:11 AM. Reason : .]

10/5/2005 11:10:34 AM

CHINER

8/13/2019 4:11:00 PM

10/10

8/13/2019 11:25:12 PM