Skip to comments.
US official: US-China economic relations have never been better
Xinhuanet ^
| 2005-01-10
Posted on 01/10/2005 12:31:07 PM PST by Willie Green
click here to read article
Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first 1-20, 21-27 next last
To: neutrino
2
posted on
01/10/2005 12:31:43 PM PST
by
Willie Green
(Go Pat Go!!!)
To: Willie Green
The Chinese ought to start spending some of the dollars they are getting from us.
3
posted on
01/10/2005 12:33:26 PM PST
by
Brilliant
To: Willie Green
4
posted on
01/10/2005 12:34:22 PM PST
by
Toddsterpatriot
(Protectionism is economic ignorance!)
To: Brilliant
They do. They spend it developing all the weapons systems they stole from our intelligence services during the Clinton Administration.
Bush should yank MFN and, like Reagan, run them till the wheels fall off.
5
posted on
01/10/2005 12:35:58 PM PST
by
nonliberal
(Graduate: Curtis E. LeMay School of International Relations)
To: Willie Green
Our myopic politicians and businessmen are getting very chummy with a communist government whose military and political party still sees America as an enemy.
Just because western businessmen and politicians think the world revolves around the corporate bottom line doesn't mean the Chinese think the same way.
6
posted on
01/10/2005 12:38:29 PM PST
by
Noachian
(A Democrat, by definition, is a Socialist.)
To: Noachian
I guarantee you they are NOT!
To: Brilliant
on what ?......have we started manufacturing anything ?
8
posted on
01/10/2005 12:55:49 PM PST
by
kingattax
To: Willie Green
Thanks for the ping, Willie Greene.
While it is open to debate whether China has a more open economy, it may will be irrelevant. The United States has largely squandered its manufacturing base. How are we to export goods to China if we do not produce any goods?
9
posted on
01/10/2005 1:01:02 PM PST
by
neutrino
(Globalization “is the economic treason that dare not speak its name.” (173))
To: Willie Green
I'm sure Ji Shan who was convicted of having a second live birth and was sentenced to six years of hard labor for the state legcuffed to a laser fabric cutting machine is delighted to hear this.
10
posted on
01/10/2005 1:43:47 PM PST
by
SpaceBar
To: Brilliant
The Chinese ought to start spending some of the dollars they are getting from us.
They do. Pitchblende doesn't grow on trees.
11
posted on
01/10/2005 1:47:47 PM PST
by
SpaceBar
To: neutrino; LowCountryJoe; 1rudeboy
How are we to export goods to China if we do not produce any goods? So, if we don't produce any goods, aren't the Chinese idiots for accepting our dollars?
12
posted on
01/10/2005 3:45:44 PM PST
by
Toddsterpatriot
(Protectionism is economic ignorance!)
To: Toddsterpatriot
So, if we don't produce any goods, aren't the Chinese idiots for accepting our dollars? First they build their manufacturing base. Then, after we've disposed of our manufacturing infrastructure, they have an easy, effective way to control us. Or, to defeat us.
That's the difference between long term thinking (the Chinese), versus those deluded fools who lust for cheap, shoddy goods while simpering about lower prices to consumers.
13
posted on
01/10/2005 3:51:10 PM PST
by
neutrino
(Globalization “is the economic treason that dare not speak its name.” (173))
To: neutrino
First they build their manufacturing base. Then, after we've disposed of our manufacturing infrastructure, they have an easy, effective way to control us. Or, to defeat us. You didn't answer the question. Aren't they idiots for accepting our dollars if we make nothing they would buy?
14
posted on
01/10/2005 4:05:12 PM PST
by
Toddsterpatriot
(Protectionism is economic ignorance!)
To: Toddsterpatriot
You didn't answer the question. Aren't they idiots for accepting our dollars if we make nothing they would buy? On the contrary, I did. It appears my expectations for your understanding were too high. I will, therefore, be careful to spell out my answer.
The Chinese are aiming for a long-term strategy. The decline in the dollar does injure them. However, they are willing to accept this loss to gain a long-term advantage.
Please note that this leads to my earlier answer: First they build their manufacturing base. Then, after we've disposed of our manufacturing infrastructure, they have an easy, effective way to control us. Or, to defeat us.
Further, they can use their collected dollar assets to buy resources; for example, the Wall Street Journal reports that China National Offshore Oil is considering a takeover of Unocal Corp., the ninth-largest oil company in the U.S.
No, the Chinese are not idiots. The free traitors, on the other hand, are.
15
posted on
01/10/2005 4:25:20 PM PST
by
neutrino
(Globalization “is the economic treason that dare not speak its name.” (173))
To: neutrino
So, we need more government regulation to prevent trading, correct?
16
posted on
01/10/2005 4:54:45 PM PST
by
LowCountryJoe
(Many things in moderation, some with conservation, few in immoderation, all because of liberation!)
To: neutrino
So you were wrong, we do make stuff they will buy, oil companies.
17
posted on
01/10/2005 4:57:56 PM PST
by
Toddsterpatriot
(Protectionism is economic ignorance!)
To: kingattax
on what ?......have we started manufacturing anything ? Who is "we?" What country do you live in?
18
posted on
01/10/2005 5:40:46 PM PST
by
1rudeboy
To: neutrino
Boy, the fact that our manufacturing base has been healthy for 19 straight months (or more) must really steam you.
19
posted on
01/10/2005 5:42:50 PM PST
by
1rudeboy
To: LowCountryJoe
Absolutly:
The prototype ME 109 was powered by a British built engine.
The jet engine that made the MiG a threat to US servicemen (read that "us" as in you and I) was powered by a license built copy of the British NENE engine.
Douglas Aircraft sold the complete plans of the DC-3/C47 to the Imperial Japanese Army in the late 30s.
As late as 1939, Douglas aircraft sold a complete DC-4/C-54 to the IJA. These was after they shot up and bombed our gunboats in China. We meekly accepted cash reparations and the people of Japan and their leaders saw us as a people who were totally money driven.
Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first 1-20, 21-27 next last
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.
FreeRepublic.com is powered by software copyright 2000-2008 John Robinson