Posted on 12/14/2006 3:57:31 PM PST by maui_hawaii
I also agree with the sentiments...but rather obviously the Chi-Comms have gauged their mark...and concluded we are patsies. Hence, they can continue this racket quite a bit longer. And no one quits while they are winning.
And they won't do anything to accomodate until we actually PROVE we have backbone. Until then, such willpower is well understood to be nonexistent. No reason to fear a nonexistent economic superpower.
Until our government once again acts like it really represents the country, instead of a passel of special import interests, the U.S. is merely a big turkey waiting to be plucked, dressed and roasted by whomever can carve it up first.
Too bad we can't wake up the Administration to appoint Americanist pragmatists such as yourself to the USTR.
Where do they get these Quislings and weaklings? [That's a rhetorical question, we already know the answer...]
Basically they are trying to go to heaven without offending the devil.
In order to get something really done, there will have to be an outright smackdown of certain corporate interests--who by the way are extremely powerful.
There are also many interests in the State Department and in the Intel Community that fear what would happen...hell it even extends somewhat to the military.
I would say most of the reasons aren't economic at all.
As for the USTR I think there are surprisingly a lot of people that feel the same way...but they get caught in the crossfire mentioned above.
Seriously, how do you turn the screws on China without cutting off contact and being seen as antagonizing China and possibly sparking some violence?
China vigorously exploits the situation.
I saw a show on CNBC this morning about China and the automotive market.
An interesting statment was the Chinese gov't is MANDATING their automotive manufacturers have 40% of the global car sales (cannot remember by what year).
So much for private enterprise in China. Clearly shows the communist leadship is still pulling the strings. I don't remember our government mandating to our manufacturers that they have so much market share by a certian time.
Thanks, I saw that in another news report today.
So, Wu is her family name and Li is her given name.
I'll have to go back to my translation sources to see how that might change the "meaning" of her name.
Some of the problem is that our Roman alphabet only provides the rough phonetic form of the name, so that we can approximate the sound of the name in our language. But there is often more than one Chinese character identified with the same basic sound, in its spoken form; not counting differences in tone, where a tone may be voiced in a rising, falling or flat manner.
Like "Ma" represents approximately six different Chinese characters, each voiced with a slightly different inflection.
I once started to take Mandarin Chinese language lessons. I had a very active work schedule and found the pursuit was worthless for me unless I could give it my constant and complete focus. It was only intended to be a beginner's class, and there were fifteen of us at the start of the six month, 3-evenings a week program. It ended due to all of us "drop outs" before it reached its fourth month.
It is same name as an ancient kingdom in China...
Yi (not Li) means 'gift' as in 'a righteous gift to society'...
If FR could support Chinese characters I could show you which ones they are.
I once started Chinese classes too... 9 hours a day of solid classroom instruction, plus outside work and practice as well. In total it was about 12 hours a day (at least) of language.
That was my start...then I took it from there. I have been constantly studying for well over a decade.
Nailed it. Bingo.
Here is the reality, if everyone in the US government had your point of view, the actions you would like to see happen would have already happened. But the reality is, Paulson and his team do not have your Hawkish views. If anything, they're going there to press China to change course of action so as to placate those in Congress with similar views as yours in regards to trade (and, in regards to China, many of them are democrats) until the threat of tariffs subsides.
Also, the pressures of globalization, places pressure on those within the US to distribute wages in such a way to reward those who educate themselves. For example, gone are the days when a company has to train a machinist how to convert compound fractions and pay him the same wages as a person who knows how to write computer programs.
It is not uncommon in America when counting overtime wages, for one worker who never got passed algebra to make more money than the guy who had to study calculus (or develop applications using C++).
The last hold outs, are the long shoremen. Of course, it's much harder to subject them to foreign competition than those in manufacturing. Typical long shoremen make over 100k/yr without overtime.
Opportunities in America is significantly more abundant than in most of the world. The key answer is, how hard are you willing to work. Yes, gone are the days that a guy can just stand next to a milling machine and make $40/hr including benefits and then take it easy at the local tavern after work telling fish stories. Those that want to earn a good wage in America (and American's still have the best wages), have to put in alot more sweat. And that my friend, is the reason why those in the administration don't the "backbone" to push for tougher action. They themselves are successful, risen through the ranks through hard work, and can't see why others can't do the same.
Companies like Microsoft pay very good wages.
I would add though that the reason isn't merely to placate anyone.
If we take a stance on China then the very stuff you cite becomes more of a viable reality.
The notion that one can just work harder and make it is a BS argument.
I am not arguing against education or for laziness, but there is more to it.
There has to be a measure of opportunity for entreprenuership. Once in the game then smart and hard work apply...
The answer isn't all in education. I know tons of MBAs who can't get a job to save their life. I know Phds in the same boat.
There is a much larger economic issue at hand.
Bump!
start the tariffs - gentle ones at first - once US industry sees the handwriting on the wall, they will begin to divert investment to places like Vietnam.
Regarding that in particular I believe you haven't the foggiest idea what you are talking about.
The whats and whys (or why nots) are not because its not good economics.
There is a fundamental economic change that needs to take place. Hence they are hounding China because that is where the change needs to take place.
There is a fundamental change that needs to take place, but at the same time there are many other issues at hand. The government wants the change. The people want the change. Even many in corporate America and even many who heavily invest in China want the change.
On the flip side there are other issues such as security and political concerns. China is a very unstable country hence they are being handled with kid gloves.
The US government sees its interests in changing the way China does stuff. At the same time they don't see it in their interests to spark a riot in the process and create substantial political or military problem.
Somewhere in between point A and B is where they sit. No one is talking about 'cutting off China', at least not entirely, but not very many are satisfied with the situation either.
They are not taking this hard line with China because all of the above are the package we are dealing with.
China trade relations are the worm in our apple. How to get the worm out of the apple without demolishing the apple is the trick.
Over the next 20 years Vietnam will experience a most massive boom.
I am saying this as they WILL. They are going to be the next big destination.
I am saying that tarriffs or not... but I agree... slowly turn up the heat in certain sectors...Increase tarriffs each year by 1% until US industry diversifies away from the black hole (China)... and until we experience the kind of fundamental changes we want out of China.
exactly right - we don't need to bludgeon china, that would hurt us as well - we just need to start making the turn, the amount of US investment relocating to china - that has to be slowed down.
bookmark ping-a-ling , and THANKS maui_hawaii
All in all though let me sum up my own idea of a master plan...
Get lots of FTA agreements in place.... as many who are willing and able to abide will be entertained...
If we have FTA agreements with almost 100% reciprocal treatment in place, with numerous countries willing to trust and open up to us....I say then work it like an HMO.
Tax the holy hell out of every country not in the network.
Cut restrictions and taxes on those willing to do the same for us...and for those who don't put up barriers to 'encourage' companies to use those countries with FTAs...
Eventually the bleeding will stop.
That is still not good enough though.
We need to create markets for our goods and services. Which sending capacity to, and buying stuff from China doesn't do.
The economic make up of China doesn't--and won't-- create a viable place where we can sell goods...
We are missing out on major potential by wasting our money on China.
So... why are we sending our jobs to asians again? plenty of unemployed people in this country, we only need to scrap minimum wage and welfare to make them work.
Yes, but only because they are corrupt...and devoid of American patriotism.
I can retract that word. What I meant was that they may not feel as strongly as others within Congress that have a more Hawkish view of China and press beyond what they themselves would do so as to satisfy some back home. But yes, I would agree the delegation themselves have genuine concerns.
If we take a stance on China then the very stuff you cite becomes more of a viable reality.
The notion that one can just work harder and make it is a BS argument.
Well, I've been unemployed before, so I'm not unfamilar with the difficulties of trying to find employment.
I am not arguing against education or for laziness, but there is more to it.
There has to be a measure of opportunity for entreprenuership. Once in the game then smart and hard work apply...
I agree, but did you know, that people leave their own country (like India, France, Russia and yes even hard charging China) to establish their high tech start ups here in America? A place where wages are high. And when they settle in silicon valley, they are not only paying wages higher than the countries they left but paying for wages that are some of the highest in America.
So, despite the cheap labor in other countries, entrepreneurs from other countries still come to America and set up shop and thrive. And if someone who struggles with the English language can themselves make it in America, why can't the average American?
The answer isn't all in education. I know tons of MBAs who can't get a job to save their life. I know Phds in the same boat.
Well, yes and no. It depends on where you want to chase the opportunities. I know of someone who has a PhD and tried to get his tenured position at the local University. Things didn't work out and those positions are far and few between. He went to Microsoft instead and is working hard and making good money.
I took a programming class once where the instructor talked of someone who managed a bakery. He went as far as he could as a baker and wanted to get farther in life and decided to take up programming. To make a long story short, he completed his two year certificate, got his foot in the door at Microsoft and manages a team there.
There is a much larger economic issue at hand.
Well, again, yes and no. In a sense that cheap labor from foreign countries take away jobs (not just China) from those who may not have the EMOTIONAL strength, or the family structure to support those pursuits that I just discussed above (high tech).
China is evolving from a society like rural South Dakota to a manufacturing society Ohio and America is evolving from a manufacturing Ohio to a financial centerlike Manhattan or a high tech center like San Jose. HOWEVER, not everyone in Ohio can handle the rigors of working in either Manhattan or San Jose, but the opportunities are there fore them if they want it.
When those options exist within a country, then people can just move. Those who are more energetic can go from Ohio to Manhattan, and those who find it tough to compete in Silicon Valley can move to Ohio (or anywhere else there is manufacturing). But with globalization, people can't cross borders that easily. So a strain begins to happen within each group. In the developed countries, labor begins to feel the pinch. In the developing countries, those who have the entrepenuerial spirit feel the pinch of their own governments weighing down the entrepeneurial spirit (and many come to America to invest).
America's total net worth is estimated around 50-60 TRILLION DOLLARS. That's roughly 200K for every man woman and child. But what is happening in America, is that the distribution of wealth is shifting where the bottom 30% owns less than 1% of America's wealth and the top 1% owns 30-50%.
There are no perfect economic systems in the world. Even though capitalism is efficient, the very wealthiest enjoys the bulk of the spoils. What needs to happen, is that the wealthiest needs to practice domestic philanthropy.
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.