Posted on 01/05/2017 4:51:43 PM PST by Stand Watch Listen
US Middle Class Still Suffering from Rockefeller-Kissinger Industrial Transfer Scheme to China DECEMBER 31, 2016 BY 21WIRE
The Truth Hound
When Henry Kissinger and David Rockefeller met with Zhou Enlai in China in 1973—just after President Richard Nixon had visited China establishing official relations—an understanding was reached whereby the U.S. would supply industrial capital and know-how to China.
In return Kissinger-connected corporations would gain the monopolistic advantage of low-cost labor production which could outcompete all U.S. domestic industry.
The comparative advantage gained was being able to hire Chinese laborers who were ready to work hard at exceedingly low cost—with no drugs, no alcohol, a strong work ethic, no unions, no paid benefits and weak environmental standards. And with such a large labor pool, burned out workers could simply be replaced. This gave the Rockefeller/Kissinger corporations a major edge over their domestic U.S. competitors who had to pay relatively high wages, high regulation costs, deal with union strikes and collective bargaining etc.
Of course, the American consumer did not see greatly lowered prices commensurate with such greatly lowered labor costs. The $19.99 plastic action-figure toy marketed with a Hollywood movie still cost $19.99 even though it cost $12 to $15 to produce in the U.S. but less than $2.00 per copy to produce in China and transport to America’s West Coast container ports for distribution throughout America.
The consumer paid pretty much the old prices but the corporations split the monopoly profit with China’s Princelings since it did not take much of a lowering of prices to drive high-wage, high-benefit, contracted-labor domestic corporations out of business (not to mention the environmental and workplace safety regulations with which domestic companies were saddled). Then, Wal-Mart became a near-monopoly retailer that increased and reinforced the widespread selling of these off-shore manufactures.
Thus, America’s domestic producers were not simply being bested on one or another area of production; they were being bested across the entire spectrum of manufactured goods that American buy. It was anticipated that these domestic firms would fail, and their failure was hastened by the banks maintaining a deflationary domestic economy in the U.S. throughout the post Rockefeller-Kissinger-Zhou buildup of China and the degrading of American domestic manufacturing. Remember, the entire money supply of the U.S. is borrowed—that is, the money co-created with a debt of an even bigger amount (principal plus compound interest) that must in due course be returned to the lender. But money in the domestic economy was going to multinational corporations and to China, while also going to taxes to pay on the national debt that resulted [NOTE: Due to U.S. industrial depletion, federal revenue receipts as well as the tax-take of state and local governments, shrunk, resulting in greater government borrowing and therefore greater public debts—TRUTH HOUND note]. And of course, compound interest was attached to that debt. Rockefeller and Kissinger were (and to some extent still are) at war with middle-class America—with intelligent, self-supporting, self-respecting, ambitious, industrious citizens who always pose the greatest threat in the form of populist politics to the bankers and their Bank-of-England/East-India-Company/Rothschild monetary and trade system, the very system that Rockefeller and Kissinger were representing and expanding when they visited Zhou Enlai.
So here we are in 2016 and newly elected President Donald J. Trump says he intends to place a tariff on goods imported from China, while the media decries the tariff proposal as a violation of “long-standing liberal free-trade policies.”
One more thing in defense of who I believe was a great president and a warning for the new one.
Richard Nixon opened China believing in peaceful co-existence and the fact that if given time for a fair comparison of how free-enterprise and representative government functions in contrast to the communist planned economy, that the U.S. model would win out over a system where each receives what the state deems he needs and where work is ordered by the state. But of course Kissinger and Rockefeller instigated the Watergate coup against Nixon—a frame-up with John Dean and Kissinger as the real “Deep Throats” by my deductions from public information—so that the Rockefeller/Kissinger plans for China’s industrialization and America’s deindustrialization could proceed unopposed, as it certainly did after Nixon resigned to avoid a constitutional crisis that would hinder the proper working of government. Nixon should have fought them because they were about to take a financial axe to this country as soon as Nixon was gone. When Nixon was gone, they first robbed the middle-class of their savings with banker Paul Volcker’s “QE” (quantitative easing) bond purchases at the New York Federal Reserve branch. Then, when that was accomplished, America’s savings-and-loans were cast into crisis (because they had been taking in money short-term at 3% and lending long-term at 6%). This helped force the deregulation of banking to Rockefeller advantage—after which Volcker moved to become Federal Reserve Chairman in control of the discount rate. With that lever of power that sets the interest-rate framework of the nation, Volcker inaugurated the tight-money (deflation) policy that has persisted to this day, making it very hard for firms to invest in automation to combat the cost advantage of Chinese subsistence labor.
Japan was hit with deflation too — they were going to provide us with the robots. THE WHOLE THING WAS A GREAT PLAN AGAINST US, COORDINATED AT EVERY LEVEL, WITH EVERY INSTITUTION, FROM THE NEWS TALKING ABOUT HOW THE LEVERAGED BUY-OUTS OCCURING IN THE DEFLATION WERE MAKING US “LEAN AND MEAN,” WHEN IN FACT THEY WERE TEARING OUT THE GUTS OF AMERICAN PRODUCTION. And the news media and the economics and business administration courses in colleges sung the praises of international free trade and the “efficiency of markets” nonstop.
I watched it all from a pretty good seat on the sidelines, but of course I was marginalized as just another excess white person who needed to stand aside so that blacks and women could have their fair chance. And who could argue with that? So I took to the internet to see what effect I could have simply speaking as a citizen, where I’ve met encountered considerable abuse and ridicule, which certainly makes it unpleasant to try and be the “Paul Revere” awakening the good citizens.
I do wish President Donald Trump the best. But let us make sure that none of the neo-conservatives he is taking into his administration are really “Kissingers” beholden to Goldman-Sachs CEO Lloyd Blankfein. Beware of new Watergates.
Washington writer Dick Eastman taught economics at Texas A & M University and also studied the behavorial sciences.
I don’t think trade with China has to be viewed bad in total.
If we aren’t demanded to give up our patents, and trade goes both ways, it can be good.
I think we have totally gotten hosed by this point though.
In some ways it does. The living accommodations in Japan are very small. I’ve heard some troubling comments on the way marriage and relationships work there, at least in part.
I find some of the society to be worthy of admiration, but I also find parts of it to be troubling.
Worth the read. I will return to this info.
Nothing to do with Rockefeller. Its the fault of two Bushes, Clinton, and of course Obama.
“Rockefeller=Tri-Lateral Commission!!!”
Yep. Quoting Rockefeller from his 1973 article “From A China traveler” -
“One is impressed immediately by the sense of national harmony. From the loud patriotic music at the border onward, there is very real and pervasive dedication to Chairman Mao and Maoist principles. Whatever the price of the Chinese Revolution, it has obviously succeeded not only in producing more efficient and dedicated administration, but also in fostering high morale and community of purpose.”
“The social experiment in China under Chairman Mao’s leadership is one of the most important and successful in human history.”
Got proof?
How can you possible say that?!!! It wasn't brilliant it was monumentally stupid. It has resulted in a weak de industrialized USA. Our "relationship" with China didn't hasten the slit up of the USSR by one day.
Fixed it.
Those shipping containers also prove toe fungus: there is more of it.
Kissenger and his ilk basically sold out their country. I thought so then, and I still think they did.
> “ The $19.99 plastic action-figure toy marketed with a Hollywood movie still cost $19.99 even though it cost $12 to $15 to produce in the U.S. but less than $2.00 per copy to produce in China and transport to America’s West Coast container ports for distribution throughout America.”
This is so true.
I remember being in Taiwan seeing a dial tone phone manufactured for less than 50 cents with the same phone sitting on a KMart shelf for $9.99.
The Taiwan Chinese ‘manufacturing’ comprised an ‘assembly line’ that was made up of picnic-like tables lined up end to end with cheap hand tools hanging overhead from coiled lanyards.
I was told the packaging and shipping accounted for 13 cents of every phone.
This was in the early 1980s.
I was told later that such shops were springing up all over the PRC but the rule of law was so absent that any tools, equipment, products in transit to/from the sweat shops would disappear in shipment.
And that’s why Japan didn’t go whole hog after the Almighty Foreign Dollar like China did.
I’m actually feeling somewhat sad about China here, not just the USA. I think you’re intelligent enough to recognize, as most Christians do, that money worship leads to “all kinds of evil.” Japan wouldn’t embrace some of these evils, even at the cost of halting the money train. If it had, we probably would have seen the results of Japan abjectly sacrificing itself too.
The answer is to try harder to bring a Christian perspective to trade with China. If I may put it this way: Dear China, please stop worshiping our money. We aren’t God and certainly our money isn’t God, although our money does say In God We Trust. Let’s look to heaven and hammer out a better solution to our mutual situation, where you’re prosperous but you aren’t depending on our money for that to be the case. Where you will rise in a real sense, because God did it, rather than in a faux sense, because man willed it no matter what violence happens to God’s creation.
There are two phases of the China equation.
In 1973 Kissinger went to China an opened up the country to the outside.
Twenty years later trade policies were implemented that saw the U.S. gutted.
China didn’t surpass Japan as our largest trade deficit partner until 2000, 27 years after Kissinger went to China.
Opening up China was brilliant.
Executing the trade polices in the 1990s that saw our jobs, methods, infrastructure, and patents go to China, absolutely the dumbest things ever done by a nation to itself.
all I want is a fair deal....fair taxes....
I want the federal govt and the state govts to serve the citizens, not the other way around...
I expect that when I pay into SS for 40 yrs that money will be there for me to take....same for Medicare...
I don't expect for illegals to be getting huge tax refunds at my expense...
the rich will always get richer, but the other classes need to see a rise in their prosperity too....
CUT TAXES!
I don’t see these things in quite the terms you do. I’ll explain.
China to my way of thinking is doing what a nation trying to bring itself into the 21st Century should do.
It had a massive populace with a very sub-par standard of living. Marketing itself as a place to manufacture things for a lot less costs in wages, was a decent thing to do.
Over the years it’s business climate grew and paid for a complete overhaul of the nation. I don’t think it necessarily evil for the standard of living of it’s residents to be propelled forward four or five decades in a couple of decades.
One could make the case that China would have been evil not to implement policies that could improve the lives of it’s people.
My big beef with China, is that it offered too good a deal to our businesses, and they couldn’t resist.
It didn’t matter to our businesses if they were giving away our patent and knowledge base that gave us an edge. It didn’t matter if these contributed to China becoming more of a global threat. It didn’t matter if destroying families and lives in the U.S. resulted.
I see much more evil on the part of the U.S. players who willingly went along with it. IMO, the time will come when they stand before God, and they have to explain why it was a good idea to benefit themselves on the backs of their fellow man. Good luck with that.
I don’t see this as China seeking to sell itself for an almighty buck. I see it as China realizing that business would finance it’s needs. It did.
As long as business is not destructive, I have no problem with it. What we did to ourselves was destructive, and I think it was pure evil.
We have 95 able bodied people out of work in this nation. Some say that includes the retired, so I’ll stick with the 45 million figure that are of a working age and being unfulfilled because our businesses relocated overseas.
Once again, that is vile and evil IMO.
We need to take care of our own citizen/workers. It is evil not to.
The USA was sold out by the globalists, all push started by Bush the Elder who can rot in hell for all I care one day.
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.