How to spot a shill, by John Michael Greer: "What you watch for is (a) a brand new commenter who (b) has nothing to say about the topic under discussion but (c) trots out a smoothly written opinion piece that (d) hits all the standard talking points currently being used by a specific political or corporate interest, while (e) avoiding any other points anyone else has made on that subject."
"If the shoe fits..." The Grey Badger.
Sinosphere described (Scroll down).
Hmm... according to pizal, the protests occurring in China started out as the government sponsored ones that happen every September to spur patriotic pride for the upcoming Communist Party meetings in October. Apparently they've since gotten out of hand. I share the link he shared with me:
~Chas'88
"There have always been people who say: "The war will be over someday." I say there's no guarantee the war will ever be over. Naturally a brief intermission is conceivable. Maybe the war needs a breather, a war can even break its neck, so to speak. But the kings and emperors, not to mention the pope, will always come to its help in adversity. ON the whole, I'd say this war has very little to worry about, it'll live to a ripe old age."
From: http://www.zerohedge.com/news/bond-w...nese-bond-dump
Nuke buttons seem out of date. All China needs to do is push a few keystrokes to vaporize Japan's bond market. As for the US, oops, there's a problem. Both combatants in the keystroke war have US bonds in mass quantity. So will Japan do a bond dump if we snub them, of if China forces the issue. Or will China do a bond dump if we snub them? If so, then QEinfinity will get to be a really big number.Originally Posted by zerohedge
MBTI step II type : Expressive INTP
There's an annual contest at Bond University, Australia, calling for the most appropriate definition of a contemporary term:
The winning student wrote:
"Political correctness is a doctrine, fostered by a delusional, illogical minority, and promoted by mainstream media, which holds forth the proposition that it is entirely possible to pick up a piece of shit by the clean end."
Interesting comments regarding China. One thing we can now forget about is G2-U.S./Chinese cooperation.
Another comment from the same forum was that China never makes concessions...and concessions by other countries triggers increased demands by China.
You think concessions from China will ever come, Tim? -Not in this lifetime. Evidence thus far points that the government in China will lie, cheat, and steal its way to getting whatever it wants and still sees itself as Jung Kuo; by my reckoning hundreds of years as the Middle Kingdom gave them the false sense that the natural order of things is where China is the center of the universe and all shalt bow down....or else. The CCP is just the latest incarnation of a long line of autocrats and their princelings and underestimating them is dangerous. Thus far it would appear that they are stroking the bellies and egos of the worst of Wall Street, academia, and business minded people, unaware that the CCP has every intention of sucking them dry. China's ultimate goal is to replace Japan as a regional hegemon, and, to their thinking, go back to being the global hegemon.
Read these blurbs:
http://www.businessweek.com/articles...o-check-it-out
The business wonk in the article tells his reader to "trust his eyes." Not a word gets written about how that maglev technology was stolen from Europe some years ago, there are no laws regarding safety in its design (and where they are, they are ignored for the price of a bribe; look what happened to the high speed train crash some months ago) and worst of all, the wonk does not realize that the hotel he stays in is well out of the price range of the average Chinese factory worker or the rural Chinese farmer, slowly being poisoned by the smog.
http://www.usatoday.com/story/tech/2...yping/1930307/
Let us take a headcount. A few years back, it got caught trying to sleaze its way into Google. Google responded by moving to Hong Kong, and there was an item about some Chinese bigwig being blacklisted because thus far it has hacked the New York Times, the Wall Street Journal, Facebook, Twitter, and Apple. It has also been caught going after Lockheed Martin and Coca-Cola, and if I had to make an educated guess, it has likely tried to get into Microsoft, Disney, and (in the government sector) NASA.
What does this tell us? China does not like freedom of the press, or more accurately, its vain leaders cannot bear to have anyone write nasty things about them; government white papers constantly blare that "harmony is better than instability and voicing one's opinion" (read: harmony here is just code for silence.) The New York Times fairly recently investigated the financial dealings of Wen Jianbo and Xi Jinping, with much of their money being hidden in the accounts of relatives, wives, and mistresses. Looks like the princelings in China did not like that (the information was available in the Chinese edition.) The Wall Street Journal also reported it. It is also interesting that the attacks appear to be sustained and long term, possibly suggesting that China sees US as a rogue territory. (Check the history books, and snoop around the fact that China largely behaved like a loanshark with its tribute system.)
Normally I would not be so paranoid, but I know of a case where one of their engineers on an H1B visa was caught by a colleague. IT was as if the mask had just fallen away. Dispassionately the Chinese engineer said "we are here to extract your resources." The engineer went back to China, and no matter how many times the American guy tried to tell his boss that he had been had, the boss did not believe him.
Of course they're here to extract our resources. They've been an empire for so many millennia, they have never stopped behaving like one, certainly not under Emperor Mao, and that's what empires do. And they seem to consider that to be a law of nature, or the natural order of things.
Be very afraid, and hope they fall of their own weight when they've squandered all the resources that allow them to industrialize. Because their record in that area puts Stalinist Russia to shame, from all I've read.
How to spot a shill, by John Michael Greer: "What you watch for is (a) a brand new commenter who (b) has nothing to say about the topic under discussion but (c) trots out a smoothly written opinion piece that (d) hits all the standard talking points currently being used by a specific political or corporate interest, while (e) avoiding any other points anyone else has made on that subject."
"If the shoe fits..." The Grey Badger.
Could an invasion of Vietname create a quagmire for China. Could this become China's version of The Vietnam War?
DVD-Napoleon Soldier*Emperor*Lover*Statesman Checked out this biography of Napoleon Bonaparte. A revolutionary regime was succeeded by Napoleon. Before his coronation, Napoleon played the part of benign dictator, so long as you toed the line. Under Napoleon, France went from being a revolutionary power to being a revisionist power. In a general way, I see parallels between Napoleon and the China of recent years.
Last edited by TimWalker; 03-31-2014 at 03:21 PM.
I think I get what you're saying, but the analogy seems a little strained.
An interesting perspective on the political unrest in Taiwan, and how it could aggravate regional tensions.
I've been making this analogy for years:
http://nationalinterest.org/feature/...possible-10754
...It might be more helpful to contrast America and China today with a strategic competition that did not lead to war. This sort of comparison encourages us to test our dynamics against similar forces within an historical situation that—however strategically alarming at the time—did not end in war. Is our situation similarly stable (at a deep level), or should we really be worried? Happily, there is a startlingly familiar—if mostly forgotten—historical counterpoint. Here the United States is the British Empire, and China is the United States...
Normally, a nation only rises to superpower status by being friends of the old superpower: Spain to Portugal; England to the Netherlands; the USA to Britain. Those who try to replace the old superpower: France (repeatedly); Germany to Britain (twice); the USSR to the USA usually become histories losers.
The rest of the article? Maybe, although I'll point out that the USS Monitor wasn't ready until MAR 1862 (and only used 11" Dahlgrens), and Passaic class monitors didn't come out until later. Everyone was developing far more powerful armor-piercing shot. Meanwhile the HMS Warriors 4" armor was enough to stop an 11" round (as the CSS Virginia's did).
I have heard that China today gets a Double F for its environmental policies, and that areas around Beijing have such bad smog that the fabled LA smog seems like a few dust particles by comparison. And we all know that they have usurped so many of our jobs, and almost all the merchandise you may find at Wal-Mart says "Made in China" on it. And that in their factories they use the continuing productive thrust to get as much done as possible, taking advantage of the still strongly grounded lack of labor laws such as in the US. (Even though we know that our labor laws are so often flouted).
China is now the world's largest economy.
Hang on to your hats, America. And throw away that big, fat styrofoam finger while you're about it. There's no easy way to say this, so I'll just say it. We're no longer No. 1. Today we're No. 2. Yes, it's official. The Chinese economy just overtook the United States economy to become the largest in the world. For the first time since Ulysses S. Grant was president, America is no longer the leading economic power on the planet.
It just happened -- and almost nobody noticed.
The International Monetary Fund recently released the latest numbers for the world economy. And when you measure national economic output in "real" terms of goods and services, China will this year produce $17.6 trillion -- compared to $17.4 trillion for the U.S.A.
As recently as 2000, we produced nearly three times as much as the Chinese.
To put the numbers slightly differently, China now accounts for 16.5% of the global economy when measured in real purchasing power terms, compared to 16.3% for the U.S.
This latest economic earthquake follows the development last year when China surpassed the U.S. for the first time in terms of global trade.
I first reported this looming development over two years ago, but the moment came sooner than I or anyone else had predicted. China's recent decision to bring gross domestic product calculations in line with international standards has revealed activity that had previously gone uncounted.
These calculations are based on a well-established and widely used economic measure known as "purchasing power parity" (or PPP), which measures the actual output as opposed to fluctuations in foreign exchange rates. So a Starbucks Venti Frappucino served in Beijing counts the same as a Venti Frappucino served in Minneapolis, regardless of what happens to be going on among foreign exchange traders.
PPP is the real way of comparing economies. It is one reported by the IMF and was, for example, the one used by McKinsey & Co. consultants back in the 1990s when they undertook a study of economic productivity on behalf of the British government.
Yes, when you look at mere international exchange rates the U.S. economy remains bigger than that of China, allegedly by almost 70%. But such measures, although they are widely followed, are largely meaningless. Does the U.S. economy really shrink if the dollar falls 10% on international currency markets? Does the recent plunge in the yen mean the Japanese economy is vanishing before our eyes?
Back in 2012, when I first reported on these figures, the IMF tried to challenge the importance of PPP. I was not surprised. It is not in anyone's interest at the IMF that people in the western world start focusing too much on the sheer extent of China's power. But the PPP data come from the IMF, not from me. And it is noteworthy that when the IMF's official World Economic Outlook compares countries by their share of world output, it does so using PPP, not mere exchange rates.
Yes, all statistics are open to various quibbles. It is perfectly possible China's latest numbers overstate output -- or understate them. That may also be true of U.S. GDP figures. But the IMF data are the best we have.
Make no mistake. This is a geopolitical earthquake with a high reading on the Richter scale. Throughout history, political and military power have always depended on economic power. Britain was the workshop of the world before she ruled the waves. And it was Britain's relative economic decline that preceded the collapse of her power.
And it was a similar story with previous hegemonic powers such as France and Spain.
This will not change anything tomorrow or next week, but it will change almost everything longer term. We have lived in a world dominated by the U.S. since at least 1945, and in many ways since the late 19th century. And we have lived for 200 years -- since the Battle of Waterloo in 1815 -- in a world dominated by two reasonably democratic, constitutional countries in Great Britain and the U.S.A. For all their flaws, the two countries have been in the vanguard worldwide in terms of civil liberties, democratic processes, and constitutional rights.
To recommend thrift to the poor is both grotesque and insulting. It is like advising a man who is starving to eat less.
-Oscar Wilde, The Soul of Man under Socialism
"There have always been people who say: "The war will be over someday." I say there's no guarantee the war will ever be over. Naturally a brief intermission is conceivable. Maybe the war needs a breather, a war can even break its neck, so to speak. But the kings and emperors, not to mention the pope, will always come to its help in adversity. ON the whole, I'd say this war has very little to worry about, it'll live to a ripe old age."
Even though I didn't post on it, I too thought about that. Specifically, though the US may have surpassed the UK in GNP by the early 1870's, the Brits remained the de facto hegemon with the official currency for another cycle. However, due to the unreliable numbers from China, it is rumored that the true vacantcy rate of Shanghi skyscrapers is over 50%, I suspect that the crash will be sooner than a simple extrapolation would suggest. But I don't feel comfortable trying to pin it down to an exact year.