Won’t be any winner if a Major Conflict Blows Up,Lord help us.
Won’t be any winner if a Major Conflict Blows Up,Lord help us.
[/quote]
Good post Arkroyal, if the Yanks decide to flex their muscles the nips will run for the hills. Don’t confuse the Chinese for the Japanese. Two completely different beasts.
You mean their Nuclear Bunkers? :ohmy:
Grassy: correct; and that is what the Chinese Communists need to be made to realise in no uncertain terms. They have an obsession with Taiwan, are determined to humiliate and kill Japan, and want to expel the US from the FE. If the latter happens, I promise you Japan and South Korea will develop nuclear weapons and Australia will sign a defence treaty with both nations.
Umm,they would have a fair stash of Artillery themselves you know?!
FMD…between you AR and DD I’m going to live in a tent on the Nullabor. It will never, I repeat never come down to a military solution with China. The Chinese and west are too smart for it to ever get to that. This particular situation is analogous to the Bay of Pigs where the Russians saw better of it and the Chinese will do likewise. It will be resolved through diplomacy like most tet-a-tet’s are…and anyway, DD has fixed the economy and we’re all on the road to prosperity by locking out Australia’s biggest trading partner and foregoing a $100 million trade surplus. When Labor comes back into government DD should be the Treasurer as he has Keynes and the rest of us covered…in fact if Labor’s last couple of Treasurer’s are anything to go by, he’s over qualified.
AR on second thoughts, let’s bend over to the Mayor of Beijing and let them have their way with us so BC can keep his FIFO job otherwise he might have to work a regular job. How would he cope with just 4 weeks annual leave a year? And BC is waiting for the knock on the door from some Chinese investor to pay him overs for his property portfolio. :lol:
hahaha…sorry DD…I’m not a FIFO worker and don’t work in the resources sector. But I guess you don’t either based on your plan to shut down our exports to China of iron ore, LPG, agribusiness and so on. Although I bet there’s plenty who are employed in those industries who would argue with you long and loud, and here you are a rabid socialist and unionist wanting to take jobs off your comrades…go figure.
BC the only country threatening the interruption of trade is China with it antics in the Spratleys; remember, the Americans most definitelly do have a trade imballance with China – having sold-out their working class – and there will be increasing calls to do something about it in Washington. Given that the Chinese, in your eyes, seem to be all seeing, and given the trade surplus China has with the US, for me at least BC, it is a bit strange that China should even remotelly endanger America’s good will through its aggresive policies in the South China Sea. Most people would agree that building artificial islands and placing missiles on them is aggrssive behaviour, or at the very least highly irregular. I noticed that you made the comparison between Cuba and China, which is interesting, as the Americans did take firm measures on that occasion as you know; establishing a blockade as Kennedy, rightlly did, was one step short of war; it is an option the US navy will have in the future.
Although I have written mostly about the trade aspect of this problem, one should not over play the role of trade in geo-strategy, as if trade was the defining factor of foreign policy, Britain and Germany would never have fought each other in 1914.
Finally, BC, think about the nature of China’s policy;
1 the industrialisation of China on the back of the undermining of the manufacturring sector in the West
2 the re-conquest of Taiwan
3 favourable revision of the border with Russia – which comes up for discussion in around twenty years; these treaties were originally signed with Czarist Russia
4 Humiliation of Japan.
5 Pushing the US fleet out of the Pacific
6 regaining imperial sway over SE Asia
I will remind you too that India, for its part in this drama, although it has never been a pro- Western state and basically sided with the SU in the Cold War, accept in name, is keenly behind the anti-China policy. In fact, recentlly, for the first time ever, there were joint naval exercises between the Royal Australian Navy and the Indian Navy. Wonder why that might be?
Great post AR.
The Chinese know Obama won’t do a think.Even the old enemy Vietnam is lobbying the US to do something.
If Trump does half the things he’s talking about if elected the next American President the Chinese economic miracle is over.As you state with the trade inbalance.
Picking a blue with President Putin.Good luck with that 1.Only a crazy man like Adolf Hitler would pick a blue with the Russians.
gtrxuone – thanks. I agree 100 percent with your comments. The Americans need to put a low tariff on China’s products which should concentrate minds in Peking a wee bit and would go a little way to solving America’s budget deficit. As you pointted out, given how much the world order has favoured them in the last forty years, it is amazing that they are rocking the boat. In truth, as well as keeping in mind the American role in China’s ‘economic miracle’ the Chinese should also consider that the Americans rescued them from occupation by Tokyo, facts which together, if they were thoughtful, would discourage them from acting as the regional bully.
AR…the Americans already have a low import duty regime on Chinese goods. Chinese goods don’t get any preferential treatment and attract the “general” rate of duty in the HST. In addition, Chinese goods found to have been dumped in the US get additional tariffs to bring the normal value back to something reasonable.
BC – your right that the Americans already have some sort of tariff regime against China, obviouslly given the trade deficit, it is not strong enough for the US to compete. America’s tariff system needs to be completelly re-vampped to reflect this important factor, changed in such a way, that it encourages import substitution. Lastly, China is such a problem in this respect that, in the UK, they have more or less nationalised what is left of the steel industry to protect local jobs. Bear in mind they have a Tory government too, not a Socialist one in Westminster.
AR…America’s tariff system is exactly the same as every other WTO aligned country. The import tariff is broken down into 97 chapters the same as everyone else. It’s the duty rate applied to particular goods which varies and the US like Australia is reducing rates and entering into free trade agreements such as the TPP. Whether or not they become more protectionist with a Republican President remains to be seen but in saying that, import tariffs will be the least of the US problems if Trump gets up.
Devonleigh simply outrageous those comments of yours.
BC – I hear you; I am not a free trader; it is a nineteenth century ideology which suited Britain well when it was the only industrial nation. Without tariffs, America nor Australia would never have industrialised, that is a simple historical fact which most economists fail to realise. Today, the Western World, in the light of the collapsing industrial sector, is slowly learning this important lesson.
One does not usually quote Bismarck, but on free trade he was correct: ‘free trade is the weapon of the strong’. The silly thing about the West is that it is still apping cliches from the nineteenth century when it is no longer strong in relation to the competition from China.
If Trump gets in, and we only hope that sanity will prevail and H Clinton is elected, we will be at war - World War III.
AR…America’s tariff system is exactly the same as every other WTO aligned country. The import tariff is broken down into 97 chapters the same as everyone else. It’s the duty rate applied to particular goods which varies and the US like Australia is reducing rates and entering into free trade agreements such as the TPP. Whether or not they become more protectionist with a Republican President remains to be seen but in saying that, import tariffs will be the least of the US problems if Trump gets up.
[/quote]
BC we very rarely agree but I certainly concur with your comments if Trump wins in November.
Swan42 it is not simply a matter of Trump it is also a question of Sanders-- he too would adopt a much tougher line with China on trade; any left-winger would.
Sanders is not going to be elected in November.