The difference between owing $30K and $3 trillion

posted at 10:30 am on February 15, 2009 by Ed Morrissey

Yesterday, when King Banaian, Mitch Berg, and I sat in the Green Room waiting for NARN II to start, I pointed out my post on China’s remarks to both.  I especially wanted to get King’s reaction to China’s admission that they had no other option but to stick with US Treasuries, even with the dollar almost certain to depreciate thanks to the enormous debt we’re adding through TARPs and Porkulus. King told me this aphorism:

When you owe the bank $30,000, they own you. When you owe the bank $30 million, you own them.

And if you owe the bank $2 trillion?  King elaborates on that today:

Luo is correct that the dollar will depreciate as new debt hits the market. The decline in the dollar will jack up interest rates. China, of course, currently holds $682 billion in U.S. Treasuries, and if the interest rate rises the country will take a bath on those investments. As the old saw goes, when you borrow $30,000 from the bank the bank owns you, but when you owe the bank $30 million, you own the bank.  So other China observers are thinking the country needs to get guarantees on U.S. fiscal policy, but Luo lets us know the game is up.

In other words, China has no choice but to help keep the value of the debt up.  Otherwise, it risks its own financial collapse.  That doesn’t mean that China is powerless, however, and King explains how the Obama administration will be forced to be a lot more laissez-faire on trade than its populist campaign rhetoric promised last year.  Be sure to read all of King’s analysis.


Related Posts:

Breaking on Hot Air

Blowback

Note from Hot Air management: This section is for comments from Hot Air's community of registered readers. Please don't assume that Hot Air management agrees with or otherwise endorses any particular comment just because we let it stand. A reminder: Anyone who fails to comply with our terms of use may lose their posting privilege.

Trackbacks/Pings

Trackback URL

Comments

Comment pages: 1 2

Why? If their ploy back in September had worked, Russia would be economically destroyed as well.

conservnut on February 15, 2009 at 12:24 PM

My point exactly. They share a large border with Russia. Putin could really screw things up for them. We pose little, if any, military threat to China.

genso on February 15, 2009 at 12:26 PM

i.e put a Mafioso in a ten thousand dollar suit and you still have a Mafioso.

doriangrey on February 15, 2009 at 12:10 PM

China has always been authoritarian, and has always made it’s presence in Asia known. Isn’t today’s China just a variation on a theme?

JiangxiDad on February 15, 2009 at 12:26 PM

Btw, who do you think were the Chinese who got to attend the United States International University in 1986? Most likely all family of loyal party members. Your sample population is suspect.

DarkCurrent on February 15, 2009 at 12:11 PM

My sample population ARE running China today. I wish I could share your optimism regarding China, but I cannot. Please do not misunderstand me. I have a profound respect and admiration for the Chinese people. For the most part the Chinese people themselves are wonderful people.

I also understand the nature of their ruling politicians political ideology. The Chinese people are pawns to be sacrificed at any time and in any fashion as required to achieve the goals of the party elite. Their goals are set in terms of centuries not decades or years.

doriangrey on February 15, 2009 at 12:28 PM

You clearly have no understanding of Chinese culture. If you believe this statement you really shouldn’t be posting about anything related to China.

DarkCurrent on February 15, 2009 at 12:20 PM

That seems to be a stock answer far past its expiration date.

When Cafferty decided to call out the country’s practices with his “thugs and junk” speech, same thing.

When we have called against their human rights record during the Olympics, same speech.

The US has had plenty of time to understand what that country is up to in economics and government.

sethstorm on February 15, 2009 at 12:28 PM

Excellent….I hadn’t though of that. Thanks.

genso on February 15, 2009 at 12:24 PM

You can find genuine Zippo lighters by the thousands for sale in several shops in the mall below my office. They’re quite popular in China, including the ones with Old Glory designs.

DarkCurrent on February 15, 2009 at 12:29 PM

If you distrust China, then that’s on you. If you do so for the reasons I’m reading here then I suggest you’re slightly mixed up. Sometimes it pays to revisit the economics 101 class you dropped. Sometimes it is a good idea to consider what worth an item would have if you couldn’t even give it away or could get a payment toward it. Totalitarianism is the turning point towards diminishing returns.

ericdijon on February 15, 2009 at 12:29 PM

If their ploy back in September had worked, Russia would be economically destroyed as well.

conservnut on February 15, 2009 at 12:24 PM

I don’t get why China isn’t buying Russia with all those dollars. Maybe they are. Russia is empty, and has massive nat. resources. China is the opposite, and next door. It seems like a perfect fit. Maybe Putin will be doing the bowing.

JiangxiDad on February 15, 2009 at 12:30 PM

That seems to be a stock answer far past its expiration date.

sethstorm on February 15, 2009 at 12:28 PM

seth, Chinese aren’t about to start shooting their mothers and children en masse. While Chinese are typically nationalistic and patriotic, the family means far more to them than anything. If you’re actually familiar with Chinese culture you will realize this.

DarkCurrent on February 15, 2009 at 12:34 PM

When we have called against their human rights record during the Olympics, same speech.

The US has had plenty of time to understand what that country is up to in economics and government.

sethstorm on February 15, 2009 at 12:28 PM

Human rights? What right do we have to tell them how to treat their citizens? We jump on the “living wage” populist, unionist bandwagon by comparing our wages to theirs when there is no comparison. We try to lecture them on things like the Kyoto treaty when it is not in their best interest to even consider it. We can not make them a “citizen of the world” like the liberals want us to be. That is where our foreign policy as regards to China falls flat. It’s all populist garbage.

genso on February 15, 2009 at 12:34 PM

China has always been authoritarian, and has always made it’s presence in Asia known. Isn’t today’s China just a variation on a theme?

JiangxiDad on February 15, 2009 at 12:26 PM

Actually no. In the past China has always been extremely xenophobic. Preferring to keep others out and only interact with the outside world when necessary. When they adopted Mao’s version of socialism they realized that they could not longer remain xenophobic. In order for socialism to succeed as dictated by Marx and Engels and interrupted by Mao the state needs to expand until it unites the entire worlds population under the control of one single party. Only then can that party guarantee the complete equality of all workers.

doriangrey on February 15, 2009 at 12:36 PM

I don’t get why China isn’t buying Russia with all those dollars. Maybe they are. Russia is empty, and has massive nat. resources. China is the opposite, and next door. It seems like a perfect fit. Maybe Putin will be doing the bowing.

JiangxiDad on February 15, 2009 at 12:30 PM

From what I understand, China is making huge inroads into Africa for their natural resources. Why pinch Putin who has fangs when you can take over an undeveloped continent.

genso on February 15, 2009 at 12:36 PM

In order for socialism to succeed as dictated by Marx and Engels and interrupted by Mao the state needs to expand until it unites the entire worlds population under the control of one single party. Only then can that party guarantee the complete equality of all workers.

doriangrey on February 15, 2009 at 12:36 PM

Then they should worry more about radical Islam, don’t you think?

genso on February 15, 2009 at 12:39 PM

From what I understand, China is making huge inroads into Africa for their natural resources. Why pinch Putin who has fangs when you can take over an undeveloped continent.

genso on February 15, 2009 at 12:36 PM

yeah, I read that too–also in S. America. That being said, Siberia is next door (soon there will be more Chinese in Siberia than Russians, if that hasn’t happened already), and Putin wants money. What does he care whether he sells to Europe or China? Instead of slave-driving the Africans (lots of flack against Chinese in Africa now), why not just buy Lukoil?

JiangxiDad on February 15, 2009 at 12:40 PM

doriangrey on February 15, 2009 at 12:36 PM

I don’t know big D, it’s just not the China I’ve seen.

JiangxiDad on February 15, 2009 at 12:42 PM

Human rights? What right do we have to tell them how to treat their citizens? We jump on the “living wage” populist, unionist bandwagon by comparing our wages to theirs when there is no comparison. We try to lecture them on things like the Kyoto treaty when it is not in their best interest to even consider it. We can not make them a “citizen of the world” like the liberals want us to be. That is where our foreign policy as regards to China falls flat. It’s all populist garbage.

genso on February 15, 2009 at 12:34 PM

If they want to be considered on par with the rest of the world, there are things they can and cannot do.

With respect to that the ball is in their court.

sethstorm on February 15, 2009 at 12:43 PM

JiangxiDad on February 15, 2009 at 12:40 PM

I think Putin would rather own Europe than deal with the Chinese. He has leveraged energy to Europe. I think that’s his brass ring.

genso on February 15, 2009 at 12:43 PM

With respect to that the ball is in their court.

sethstorm on February 15, 2009 at 12:43 PM

They have close to 1/5th of the world’s population to worry about. And I do believe they are not very motivated to play the liberal game the world wants to play.

genso on February 15, 2009 at 12:45 PM

If true, that will be bad news, the ‘rats will use it as an excuse to inflict America with TARP’s II through X and never-ending Disastrulous Bill’s.

Bishop on February 15, 2009 at 11:14 AM

When I said I was relieved that our level of national debt has not reached DEFCON 5, my hope was completely predicated on the certainty that democrats would be removed from power and that actual Americans would retake the reins of power in 2010.

With democrats in control, all bets are off. Yep, I agree with you, we’d be doomed.

jeff_from_mpls on February 15, 2009 at 12:45 PM

You clearly have no understanding of Chinese culture. If you believe this statement you really shouldn’t be posting about anything related to China.

DarkCurrent on February 15, 2009 at 12:20 PM

On the contrary I have a pretty damned good understanding of Chinese culture. I also have an exceptional understanding of Maoists ideology. Do not fool yourself into thinking that the Chinese military will not follow the orders of the party leaders to the letter should the order to crush any dissent be given.

As you say, the Chinese people are indeed profoundly family orientated. But they are orientated to their own families, not the families of far distant towns and villages. Make no mistake about it, the ruling party members are intensely aware of this distinction.

doriangrey on February 15, 2009 at 12:47 PM

As you say, the Chinese people are indeed profoundly family orientated. But they are orientated to their own families, not the families of far distant towns and villages. Make no mistake about it, the ruling party members are intensely aware of this distinction.

doriangrey on February 15, 2009 at 12:47 PM

They understand that while they are holding arms against someone’s family in a distant part of the country, someone else is holding arms against their family. We may not be that far gone here, but you’d better hope our military understands that, too, if martial law is declared here.

genso on February 15, 2009 at 12:50 PM

Then they should worry more about radical Islam, don’t you think?

genso on February 15, 2009 at 12:39 PM

Radical Islam is a paper tiger. Yes, they are a threat to democracies but democracies play by the rules and concern themselves with political correctness.

Radical Islam has been contained in the past when the British Empire had teeth and the will to contain it.

I have no doubt that China will be able to control it, as would we if we had the political will to do so.

conservnut on February 15, 2009 at 12:53 PM

When I said I was relieved that our level of national debt has not reached DEFCON 5, my hope was completely predicated on the certainty that democrats would be removed from power and that actual Americans would retake the reins of power in 2010.

jeff_from_mpls on February 15, 2009 at 12:45 PM

…who would promptly sell off our nation to China and India. They’re not “actual Americans”, just Arnold Benedicts in new clothing.

With democrats in control, all bets are off. Yep, I agree with you, we’d be doomed.

jeff_from_mpls on February 15, 2009 at 12:45 PM

Perhaps you could have thought of it during all that abuse of skilled worker immigration law, courtesy of the GOP.

sethstorm on February 15, 2009 at 12:55 PM

On the contrary I have a pretty damned good understanding of Chinese culture.

doriangrey on February 15, 2009 at 12:47 PM

How have you come to your understanding of Chinese culture, other than mingling with some party member’s kids in Africa 20+ years ago?

As you say, the Chinese people are indeed profoundly family orientated. But they are orientated to their own families, not the families of far distant towns and villages.

I’ll have to grant, you’re right on this. But what happens when one group of soldiers stars shooting one villiage, and another group starts shooting theirs? Do you think the army will remain loyal to the party in such circumstances?

DarkCurrent on February 15, 2009 at 12:56 PM

sethstorm on February 15, 2009 at 12:55 PM

Describe your US in 2016 after 8 years of democrat control. Protectionist trade policies? A flat stock market? A loss of freedoms? What is your endgame?

genso on February 15, 2009 at 12:58 PM

I think Putin would rather own Europe than deal with the Chinese. He has leveraged energy to Europe. I think that’s his brass ring.

genso on February 15, 2009 at 12:43 PM

Honestly, I think Putin will fall if the oil market doesn’t recover. Also, winter is ending and gas usage will fall. The ruble does appear to have momentarily stabilized, but I’ve read that half of Russia’s reserves have been used-up defending it. I’m not really sure Russia’s prospects have improved all that much from how they were described by Steyn, i.e. disastorously falling and aging. population. I think the rapid rise in oil prices in ’06-’08 obscured some of Russia’s serious problems. I even think Putin has a chance of going the way Chavez is about to go. Admittedly, much of this is a hunch. But for some reason, I see Russia these days as mostly a kleptocracy, and whoever keeps the money flowing( hence, my idea about China) will be welcomed with open arms. Maybe I’m all wet on this, but if I was China, I’d be eyeing money-hungry Russia.

JiangxiDad on February 15, 2009 at 12:59 PM

DarkCurrent on February 15, 2009 at 12:56 PM

That is a mighty big weakness for such a country.

sethstorm on February 15, 2009 at 1:01 PM

They understand that while they are holding arms against someone’s family in a distant part of the country, someone else is holding arms against their family. We may not be that far gone here, but you’d better hope our military understands that, too, if martial law is declared here.

genso on February 15, 2009 at 12:50 PM

I do indeed pray that you are correct on both counts. It is not my intention to denigrate or malign the character of the Chinese people. The vast majority of whom I genuinely believe to be truly moral and ethical people.

As I said I spent a couple of years debating political ideology with members of the party and have listened to and read papers by several Chinese dissidents. It is not the Chinese people themselves that worry me. It is the ruling elite and the staggering degree of control they have over the Chinese people and their vision of the future that worries me.

doriangrey on February 15, 2009 at 1:02 PM

I’ll have to grant, you’re right on this. But what happens when one group of soldiers stars shooting one villiage, and another group starts shooting theirs? Do you think the army will remain loyal to the party in such circumstances?

DarkCurrent on February 15, 2009 at 12:56 PM

For that scenario to play out we would be talking about a widespread uprising throughout the country. Most of China is still rural and lives like they always have. Only in a few urban areas have the Chinese people enjoyed the fruits of a more capitalistic system and would be prone to revolt during an economic collapse. I think that would be easily contained and dealt with.

conservnut on February 15, 2009 at 1:02 PM

Some of you won’t deal well with the next sentence I’m going to write, but I think it to be accurate. Authoritarianism saved China and its land area from collapse, thereby saving its peoples from self annihilation. The Chinese are not of one singular culture. There is no other area of the world that has changed rule http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/File:Territories_of_Dynasties_in_China.gif and redistricting like China. Communism has united the land, including Tibet, for the greater good of the people. I think it would have been a much greater mess than we have seen occur in Southeast Asia for the last 58 years.

Today the Authoritarian government realizes that they must learn to play well with others but they can’t turn it around on a dime. If you visit a village or city in China for one hour, you would be hard pressed to point to something that is communistic (except for the airwave media.) It is still a land that is sorting out a common unified language. Mandarin Chinese has many accents creating verbal impasses from people that have spent their entire lives in the same city.

If you visit a museum in China, tell me you aren’t struck by the dating of and beauty of Chinese artifacts. If it is a problem appreciating it, think about how much of America goes farther back than a butter-churn or cultivator.

ericdijon on February 15, 2009 at 1:04 PM

JiangxiDad on February 15, 2009 at 12:59 PM

Perhaps you are correct from the Russian POV. I don’t think China will want to either buy Russian debt, which is very high risk, nor buy Russian industries for fear of further nationalism there and the resulting problems of protecting their interests. I also believe that oil will recover in price for a variety of reasons. I still say that Russia can get a failing Europe more easily than dealing with the Chinese. Obama’s military policies will help in that, as well.

genso on February 15, 2009 at 1:05 PM

How have you come to your understanding of Chinese culture, other than mingling with some party member’s kids in Africa 20+ years ago?

DarkCurrent on February 15, 2009 at 12:56 PM

Nope, never been to Africa. Attended the San Diego California campus of USIU. Where I dated two women from Taiwan and two from mainland China. Yes I do likes me some Chinese women… ;)

doriangrey on February 15, 2009 at 1:07 PM

Describe your US in 2016 after 8 years of democrat control. Protectionist trade policies? A flat stock market? A loss of freedoms? What is your endgame?

genso on February 15, 2009 at 12:58 PM

You asked, I deliver.

1. States like Ohio/Michigan/Indiana/Illinois/Kentucky regain a certain respect and capability that they lost in the last 30-40 years.

2. US Citizenship is not a penalty when looking for work, it is a benefit.

3. A return to the practice of a business being a responsible steward of the (national) community.

4. Border control that makes Israel ask us how we’re keeping Mexico out.

sethstorm on February 15, 2009 at 1:08 PM

ericdijon on February 15, 2009 at 1:04 PM

Given the current trajectory of the world economy, I agree that the Mao era may have been a sort of blessing in disguise for the Chinese, though those who felt the misery of it might disagree. To be sure, from those with whom I have discussed this with, the parents and grandparents who lived through Mao are very happy to see their children and grandchildren having greater opportunities and freedoms.

genso on February 15, 2009 at 1:10 PM

If you visit a museum in China, tell me you aren’t struck by the dating of and beauty of Chinese artifacts. If it is a problem appreciating it, think about how much of America goes farther back than a butter-churn or cultivator.

ericdijon on February 15, 2009 at 1:04 PM

I have never had the honor of visiting a Chinese museum, but have seen many examples of Chinese artistry and technology. Yes indeed I am always awestruck by what they have achieved.

doriangrey on February 15, 2009 at 1:11 PM

sethstorm on February 15, 2009 at 1:08 PM

You didn’t address my specific points. Beyond that, WTF are you blathering about?

genso on February 15, 2009 at 1:12 PM

For that scenario to play out we would be talking about a widespread uprising throughout the country. Most of China is still rural and lives like they always have. Only in a few urban areas have the Chinese people enjoyed the fruits of a more capitalistic system and would be prone to revolt during an economic collapse. I think that would be easily contained and dealt with.

conservnut on February 15, 2009 at 1:02 PM

While most of China is still rural, they don’t exactly live like they always have. I’ve been in the rural areas, and there are plenty of small private businesses. The standard of living is rising for everyone.

You are right in that any significant instability would have to rise in the urban areas first, but those are big urban areas. It would not be easily dealt with.

In my view the ruling party is more interested in being the ruling party and having a career within it than they are about any particular ideology. Whatever keeps things as stable as possible is what’s most likely to happen. At this point that means staying on the free market course.

DarkCurrent on February 15, 2009 at 1:12 PM

Yes I do likes me some Chinese women… ;)

doriangrey on February 15, 2009 at 1:07 PM

You dog. Now I know what you meant about Chinese culture.

conservnut on February 15, 2009 at 1:14 PM

In my view the ruling party is more interested in being the ruling party and having a career within it than they are about any particular ideology. Whatever keeps things as stable as possible is what’s most likely to happen. At this point that means staying on the free market course.

DarkCurrent on February 15, 2009 at 1:12 PM

Though my sample is only one member of the CCP, I would say that you have described his feelings perfectly. To him, membership is a means to and end and not an ideological stance.

genso on February 15, 2009 at 1:15 PM

Yes I do likes me some Chinese women… ;)

doriangrey on February 15, 2009 at 1:07 PM

We share a common interest ;-)

DarkCurrent on February 15, 2009 at 1:16 PM

You dog. Now I know what you meant about Chinese culture.

conservnut on February 15, 2009 at 1:14 PM

Not a broad immersion, but a deep one.

DarkCurrent on February 15, 2009 at 1:17 PM

In my view the ruling party is more interested in being the ruling party and having a career within it than they are about any particular ideology. Whatever keeps things as stable as possible is what’s most likely to happen. At this point that means staying on the free market course.

DarkCurrent on February 15, 2009 at 1:12 PM

I hope and pray you are right, in the past retaining power was always achieved by ruthlessly crushing dissent. As I see the current ruling parties strategy it is a combination of carrot and stick. Do what we want you to and we will reward you with some small trinket, oppose us and we’ll just kill you.

doriangrey on February 15, 2009 at 1:19 PM

Though my sample is only one member of the CCP, I would say that you have described his feelings perfectly. To him, membership is a means to and end and not an ideological stance.

genso on February 15, 2009 at 1:15 PM

My mother-in-law is supposedly a member of the CCP, also supposedly a Christian. As far as I can tell she just joins things for the social events.

DarkCurrent on February 15, 2009 at 1:22 PM

genso on February 15, 2009 at 1:10 PM

I agree with you about the Maoists that had to suffer. I know of no one Chinese that has less than the highest regard for their suffering. Most anyone in industrialized districts older than 40 years can clearly recall the days of food shortages, but not the most severe punishments a soul has to accept. Keep in mind it was a period that was supposed to serve the greater good (as horrible as it manifested itself) and now is the day to depart from Mao.

ericdijon on February 15, 2009 at 1:23 PM

doriangrey on February 15, 2009 at 1:19 PM

I think the manner in which they deal with corrupt bureaucrats whose actions have raised the ire of the public, thereby causing the Party to lose face, is an example of the balance. But it has taken a move away from the Maoists, who did not publicly admit to wrongdoing, to achieve that balance.

genso on February 15, 2009 at 1:23 PM

Not a broad immersion, but a deep one.

DarkCurrent on February 15, 2009 at 1:17 PM

Chinese women are like having dinner with a Chinese family. Course after course of wonderful exotic food, no two dishes exactly the same but always featuring a basic theme. And always sooo much to eat… ;)

doriangrey on February 15, 2009 at 1:23 PM

I’m reminded of a political cartoon from the 80′s. A large New York bank–Chase (I think)–was shown talking to a pauper representing Latin America. The Chase teller says “He’s our best customer. He owes us billions.”

thuja on February 15, 2009 at 1:24 PM

DarkCurrent on February 15, 2009 at 1:22 PM

My friend joined for the business connections. Kind of like how some people join churches here.

genso on February 15, 2009 at 1:25 PM

and now is the day to depart from Mao.

ericdijon on February 15, 2009 at 1:23 PM

Exactly why I think they are more stable than us and will recover better than we do.

genso on February 15, 2009 at 1:26 PM

doriangrey on February 15, 2009 at 1:23 PM

But, like Chinese food, does it leave you hungry again two hours later?

genso on February 15, 2009 at 1:27 PM

Some of you won’t deal well with the next sentence I’m going to write, but I think it to be accurate. Authoritarianism saved China and its land area from collapse, thereby saving its peoples from self annihilation.
ericdijon on February 15, 2009 at 1:04 PM

Well, yes. And some here are wondering, I think, if the liberals push us nearer the edge, whether this will be our future as well, or whether we will simply fall off.

JiangxiDad on February 15, 2009 at 1:29 PM

But, like Chinese food, does it leave you hungry again two hours later?

genso on February 15, 2009 at 1:27 PM

ROTFLMAO…. As a matter of fact yes… But in a very good way… ;)

doriangrey on February 15, 2009 at 1:29 PM

conservnut on February 15, 2009 at 1:02 PM

Rural areas are industrialized. They usually have some one industry that the entire community supports. You can compare it to the days the chicken growers from the US north began relocating to the US South. If the workers in the south ever used the word union in a sentence, the chicken company would relocate overnight to another town and not miss a beat.

ericdijon on February 15, 2009 at 1:29 PM

Chinese women are like having dinner with a Chinese family. Course after course of wonderful exotic food, no two dishes exactly the same but always featuring a basic theme. And always sooo much to eat… ;)

doriangrey on February 15, 2009 at 1:23 PM

I’ll accept that you might know something about Chinese women, but obviously never had dinner with a Chinese family in China ;-)

It’s well past bed time in Shanghai. Good night all!

DarkCurrent on February 15, 2009 at 1:30 PM

Rural areas are industrialized. They usually have some one industry that the entire community supports. You can compare it to the days the chicken growers from the US north began relocating to the US South. If the workers in the south ever used the word union in a sentence, the chicken company would relocate overnight to another town and not miss a beat.

ericdijon on February 15, 2009 at 1:29 PM

That’s a problem that can be solved by making no part of the US more union-hostile than the other.

sethstorm on February 15, 2009 at 1:34 PM

DarkCurrent on February 15, 2009 at 1:30 PM

Good night Dark, good discussion.

conservnut on February 15, 2009 at 1:35 PM

That’s a problem that can be solved by making no part of the US more union-hostile than the other.

sethstorm on February 15, 2009 at 1:34 PM

That is a problem that can only be solved by letting states keep right to work laws.

genso on February 15, 2009 at 1:35 PM

That is a problem that can only be solved by letting states keep right to work laws.

genso on February 15, 2009 at 1:35 PM

Bingo!

conservnut on February 15, 2009 at 1:37 PM

Well, yes. And some here are wondering, I think, if the liberals push us nearer the edge, whether this will be our future as well, or whether we will simply fall off.

JiangxiDad on February 15, 2009 at 1:29 PM

Or bail out. Passport restrictions and closed borders are the tipping point. Not saying it will happen, but a bit worried it might.

genso on February 15, 2009 at 1:38 PM

Well, yes. And some here are wondering, I think, if the liberals push us nearer the edge, whether this will be our future as well, or whether we will simply fall off.

JiangxiDad on February 15, 2009 at 1:29 PM

The Dem’s are pressing this, but for irrational and self-serving reasons, not for economic freedoms and solidarity of a nation that elects its leaders for short periods of time. The Chinese are much better at understanding concepts like this than the sheep of the US.

ericdijon on February 15, 2009 at 1:38 PM

ericdijon on February 15, 2009 at 1:38 PM

To my point earlier that we would be fortunate to have the spirit of the Chinese people now as we deal with this shift toward socialism.

genso on February 15, 2009 at 1:40 PM

genso on February 15, 2009 at 1:40 PM

In the past it required the bombing of a Pacific Naval installation or the razing of two financial towers. Forget it – I’m wrong again – we can’t embrace events like that long enough.

ericdijon on February 15, 2009 at 1:44 PM

ericdijon on February 15, 2009 at 1:44 PM

My mother lived through both and is very sad to see the direction of this country. And scared about how it will change her life.

genso on February 15, 2009 at 1:46 PM

That is a problem that can only be solved by letting states keep right to work laws.

genso on February 15, 2009 at 1:35 PM

That’s why we have our current government – the anger that went through Detroit got a national voice when offshoring took off.

That is the consequence for angering both Detroit and non-union folks on the wrong side of H1/L1 abuse.

sethstorm on February 15, 2009 at 2:27 PM

That’s why we have our current government – the anger that went through Detroit got a national voice when offshoring took off.

That is the consequence for angering both Detroit and non-union folks on the wrong side of H1/L1 abuse.

sethstorm on February 15, 2009 at 2:27 PM

Wrong. We have our current government not to support unions, but because Bush and capitalism have been demonized by a Socialist Democrat party and a compliant media. Spin it anyway you want to fit your ideology, but the hope and change that people voted for was not FOR anything but, instead, AGAINST your made up evils. But, I have a feeling that even you will regret what we all receive. This country will not be better off in the end.

genso on February 15, 2009 at 2:39 PM

genso on February 15, 2009 at 2:39 PM

Then explain the happiness in the Manufacturing Belt that McCain wasn’t elected? Those “made up evils” are quite real in a region that has been attacked constantly for its ways. Now they have a chance to correct what has happened to them over such a time.

It’s hard to pin it on “but but overpaid socialist union workers” when non-union folk were the target.

sethstorm on February 15, 2009 at 2:53 PM

sethstorm on February 15, 2009 at 2:53 PM

We had the same thing here in the textile belt when companies moved overseas. We also felt the brunt of the destruction of the tobacco market. You adapt and move on. You do not go begging to government to create artificial wealth. And you don’t force others who have adapted and succeeded to give their wealth to those who can not adapt. It is immoral and criminal. Life offers no guarantees and the government, though it can promise it, can not pull it off. You are advocating the destruction of resilient system of fair opportunities for all for a system that ultimately will benefit few. You probably believe in evolution. You are destroying the natural evolution of economic growth and prosperity for a theory whose practical applications have never worked in the real world, all because you have sold the notion that life owes you something.

genso on February 15, 2009 at 3:11 PM

I seem to remember that when our economy was doing well we asked that the Chinese to appreciate their currency it fell on deaf ears.

danking70 on February 15, 2009 at 4:01 PM

danking70 on February 15, 2009 at 4:01 PM

They saw the writing on the wall, unlike some over here.

genso on February 15, 2009 at 4:17 PM

That’s a problem that can be solved by making no part of the US more union-hostile than the other.

sethstorm on February 15, 2009 at 1:34 PM

Why, yes, if unions were properly prosecuted as monopolies and illegal in all fifty states, that would pretty much solve the problem. Quite nicely, too.

Count to 10 on February 15, 2009 at 4:26 PM

Count to 10 on February 15, 2009 at 4:26 PM

Ha. But you see what we’re up against.

genso on February 15, 2009 at 4:28 PM

I thought it was more that the Chinese did what they thought was best for themselves, all others be damned.

danking70 on February 15, 2009 at 4:29 PM

I thought it was more that the Chinese did what they thought was best for themselves, all others be damned.

danking70 on February 15, 2009 at 4:29 PM

Perhaps, but what would you do to protect your family, even if everyone else had gone stupid?

genso on February 15, 2009 at 4:35 PM

Well, as China has between 30% to 60% of its economy built on Non-Performing Loans, about twice to four times that of what the US is experiencing right now…. no… probably higher than that, actually as it is in the industrial and commercial sector for China… it is trying to patch up its boat while the termites are eating more holes in it. The termites are winning. The storm brought about by a US banking implosion or other problems in the world market will swamp China as its loans can not be repaid by anyone and the debt will mount up in the government’s banks. If you think the US has it bad, just wait until China folds has its house of cards fall out from under it. Remember one of its largest customers is now not only not buying like they used to, but threatening the investment the Chinese have in anything close to a stable economy.

That is what they wanted: a regular investment with good returns. And pulling out the amount they did will in no way cover their bad debt which is highly structural in the manufacturing sector. Threaten China? By having the US economy tank on them? Why we are already doing that… and they can’t really do a helluva lot to stop it, either.

Remember in 1898 China was the world’s second largest economy, too… notice what world beaters they became? Same problem now as then: horrific poverty and inefficient manufacturing. Doesn’t matter how cheap the labor is if it is not that skilled and you need lots of it. So if you think things are bad *now* wait a few months: the fun is just beginning and no amount of bailing and putting TARPs over things will protect us.

ajacksonian on February 15, 2009 at 5:37 PM

The administration is playing a dangerous game of wanting to trash the economy enough to install a “fair” economy yet still keep it from totally collapsing. I don’t think they can maintain that balance.

genso on February 15, 2009 at 10:54 AM

Never attribute to intent that which can also be attributed to incompetence.

unclesmrgol on February 15, 2009 at 5:45 PM

Misery acquaints a man with strange bedfellows.
Shakespeare, William

Speakup on February 15, 2009 at 9:17 PM

The Chinese American People are pawns to be sacrificed at any time and in any fashion as required to achieve the goals of the Democrat/Socialist party elite.

doriangrey on February 15, 2009 at 12:28 PM

Your point was good, but here’s another.

Christian Conservative on February 16, 2009 at 12:13 AM

Comment pages: 1 2