TJones Posted July 9, 2008 Share Posted July 9, 2008 I am wondering how much these recent earthquakes have cut into China's budget, anyone know ? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
crunchtastic Posted July 9, 2008 Share Posted July 9, 2008 your response was patheticThank you for the speedy and vitriolic reply (which assumes a lot about me, wrongly), complete with unwarranted rudeness-- you have illustrated my point beautifully. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
houstonmacbro Posted July 9, 2008 Share Posted July 9, 2008 If you look at China's progress from 30-40 years ago you can see how they transfromed themselves into a economic power. That does not just happen in a couple of years in takes a long term plan to achieve.And I think the numbers of engineers and Ph.D.s they are educating in the west is not by accident.So while we can't seem to find money for education, they are sending thousands ... I've heard figures (can't verify of course) that it's around 50,000 a year. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
TexasVines Posted July 9, 2008 Share Posted July 9, 2008 Thank you for the speedy and vitriolic reply (which assumes a lot about me, wrongly), complete with unwarranted rudeness-- you have illustrated my point beautifully.what "point" would that be.....that you were wrong about US jobs......that you were wrong about illegal immigration....and you are wrong about the US constitutionI loved the part where you attempt to denigrate people for wanting immigration laws to be enforced (and use as an example of said people a case where two illegal immigrants, one that had been previously deported for crime, were shot while committing a crime)and then in the next paragraph you claim the US in in peril because we do not want to extend the constitution to cover non-citizen enemy combatants housed in another countrywhich one is it.....is the USA in trouble because people want to enforce ALL laws including immigration....or is the USA in trouble because we do not want to try and extend all our laws to cover the entire worldif your point was that people will sometimes read drivel and respond you proved it well......otherwise all you proved is that it is easy to prove you wrong Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
TexasVines Posted July 9, 2008 Share Posted July 9, 2008 And I think the numbers of engineers and Ph.D.s they are educating in the west is not by accident.So while we can't seem to find money for education, they are sending thousands ... I've heard figures (can't verify of course) that it's around 50,000 a year.from this article it looks as though it might be double thathttp://www.nsf.gov/news/news_summ.jsp?cntn_id=111036this is the fallacy tossed up by the liberal university left for years that the USA universities deserve the best and brightest students.....having been to several different universities large and small....I have been told by a number of foreign students that the reason they are in the USA to study is because they could not get into a school in their country.....so much for the "best and brightest" argumentsecond when you go to vote.....who is it that constantly wants more HB-1 visas....why it is the liberal left and their "techie" leftist friends who want a source of cheaper laborthe USA needs to move past the idea that US universities are for the entire world to freeload and make them for US CITIZENS....especially now that so many foreign students are moving home immediately after graduation instead of staying here a few years at least......but having this opinion will often get you branded as xenophobic or worse "racist"I am not saying the second and third place students that come here to study are not smart or they are not better prepared than US students.....I am saying we need to spend our money to prepare our students (it all comes from the same tax payers for high schools and public universities) and we should allow other countries to spend THEIR money to develop their universities instead of crowding ours up.....especially in engineering and science where most university classes are an extremely small minority of US born students....who struggle to get the classes they need because of over crowding and lack of faculty Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
crunchtastic Posted July 9, 2008 Share Posted July 9, 2008 what "point" would that be.....that you were wrong about US jobs......that you were wrong about illegal immigration....and you are wrong about the US constitutionI loved the part where you attempt to denigrate people for wanting immigration laws to be enforced (and use as an example of said people a case where two illegal immigrants, one that had been previously deported for crime, were shot while committing a crime)and then in the next paragraph you claim the US in in peril because we do not want to extend the constitution to cover non-citizen enemy combatants housed in another countrywhich one is it.....is the USA in trouble because people want to enforce ALL laws including immigration....or is the USA in trouble because we do not want to try and extend all our laws to cover the entire worldif your point was that people will sometimes read drivel and respond you proved it well......otherwise all you proved is that it is easy to prove you wrongYour head is about to explode, isn't it? Thanks again!My point, which I clearly set forth as an opinion, was that a) the high level of anger in society is a symptom of fear--fear that our way of life is being threatened, and that fear is powerful enough to drive a quiet old man to kill, and people are, increasingly, not at all bothered by the fact that the executive branch (via 'enemy combatant' status) --contrary to Constitutional principles aimed at preventing the concentration and abuse of power-- attempted to appoint itself judge, jury, and executioner. In our zeal to punish the bad guys, we allow the framework for these tactics to be used injudiciously against citizens. What I did not specifially say before, but will now, is that this willingess to give up one's civil liberties in exchange for protection is a trait more naturally associated with people living under dictatorial regimes, not Americans. At least in my view. I see this as a greater threat to our future way of life than the size of the Chinese economy. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
TexasVines Posted July 9, 2008 Share Posted July 9, 2008 Your head is about to explode, isn't it? Thanks again!My point, which I clearly set forth as an opinion, was that a) the high level of anger in society is a symptom of fear--fear that our way of life is being threatened, and that fear is powerful enough to drive a quiet old man to kill, and people are, increasingly, not at all bothered by the fact that the executive branch (via 'enemy combatant' status) --contrary to Constitutional principles aimed at preventing the concentration and abuse of power-- attempted to appoint itself judge, jury, and executioner. In our zeal to punish the bad guys, we allow the framework for these tactics to be used injudiciously against citizens. What I did not specifically say before, but will now, is that this willingess to give up one's civil liberties in exchange for protection is a trait more naturally associated with people living under dictatorial regimes, not Americans. At least in my view. I see this as a greater threat to our future way of life than the size of the Chinese economy.why would my head explode....I am not the one making myself look sillyour way of life is threatened by people like you that are OK with crime and are ok with criminals flooding in from other countries and criminals born here being let free daily....Joe Horn had no way to know that two people that looked black (to the point that a black rabble rousing fool took up for them) were actually illegals.....so your point was pointless......people are tired of crime and freeloaders in general.....the sympathy showed by the left for crime and criminals is a way bigger threat to this country than anything you can contriveand the people in gitmo are not US citizens so I have nothing to fear about how they are treated...they are not soldiers of a government and are terrorist that ARE NOT US CITIZENS which means the US constitution does not apply to themallowing enemy combatants to be treated a certain way does nothing to diminish my rights as a US citizenand your paranoia over US jobs and manufacturing was just plain silly...and proven completely wrong with just two linksand before you get up in arms over the executive branchmaybe you should be concerned about the lib/dim congresshttp://www.speroforum.com/site/article.asp...ctions+reportedif my head has exploded you should give it a try....then you might make a decent point that can not be so easily dis proventhanks again for making it so easy Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
TJones Posted July 9, 2008 Share Posted July 9, 2008 http://www.speroforum.com/site/article.asp...ctions+reportedI could think of a million reasons WHY Chris Dodd wants this new "transaction amendment" put out there. None of them are good. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
TexasVines Posted July 9, 2008 Share Posted July 9, 2008 I could think of a million reasons WHY Chris Dodd wants this new "transaction amendment" put out there. None of them are good.I find it shocking that the lib/dims do not want to allow spying on calls placed to known foreign terror cells yet they do want to spy on financial transactionsoh wait no I don't Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
TJones Posted July 9, 2008 Share Posted July 9, 2008 I find it shocking that the lib/dims do not want to allow spying on calls placed to known foreign terror cells yet they do want to spy on financial transactionsoh wait no I don'tThey want to know who is spending on what, and how much, and can they get them to contribute to their next campaign ?!? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
TexasVines Posted July 9, 2008 Share Posted July 9, 2008 They want to know who is spending on what, and how much, and can they get them to contribute to their next campaign ?!?more than likely they want to know who is spending so they can take a cut for government because we "all have to sacrifice for the greater good" Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
TJones Posted July 9, 2008 Share Posted July 9, 2008 more than likely they want to know who is spending so they can take a cut for government because we "all have to sacrifice for the greater good"Ok, now that's 2 reasons. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
webdude Posted July 10, 2008 Share Posted July 10, 2008 All the ball stroking isn't is going to distract voters from the gas prices, war, economy, low dollar, crap international standing, thrown civil liberties with six years of absolute power of repubs.If you want to put the blame on dems, you are just going to look stupid. Dems who had control of congress for one and half years, vs the absolute kind the repubs has, with both houses and the executive for solid six years. Continue distracting, voters may be stupid, but not that stupid. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
TexasVines Posted July 10, 2008 Share Posted July 10, 2008 All the ball stroking isn't is going to distract voters from the gas prices, war, economy, low dollar, crap international standing, thrown civil liberties with six years of absolute power of repubs.If you want to put the blame on dems, you are just going to look stupid. Dems who had control of congress for one and half years, vs the absolute kind the repubs has, with both houses and the executive for solid six years. Continue distracting, voters may be stupid, but not that stupid. you are right....."change" speaks so loudly first in the 1.5 years the lib dims have been in control of congress gas has risen more and faster than at any time in history....can't deny the facts....so there goes that strawman the economy goes through cycles......it is better recently and possibly now than the last months of clinton.....look it up....so there goes that argument war is the right thing...even the lib dims have given that up as a campaign platform.....see recent obama flip flopping on the withdrawal to kill that argument the low dollar is helping exports and US jobs.....but it does make oil more expensive.....all the more reason to drill at home....but the lib dims are against that....except for the ones flip flopping because they realize they have a single digit approval rating as of this week who cares about "international standing"......if you care about what a bunch of tin pot dictators and third world despots think.....move there stop trying to trash the USA to be like them.....even the French voted in a person that likes Bush personally civil liberties were trampled upon under clinton as well.....but you forget that because he is not Bush and he was a lib dim who went around the world saying sorry for things the USA did not even do but yea "change" is all it will take get me to vote for obama Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
RedScare Posted July 10, 2008 Share Posted July 10, 2008 I think this dude actually believes what he's typing. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
webdude Posted July 10, 2008 Share Posted July 10, 2008 I should have added our increase in national debt, crazy budget deficit, more americans in poverty, more uninsured americans, higher consumer credit debt, decrease in median household income, all since jan 26, 2001, so he can write more and spin away the mess. In fact, he can still do it now. I kind of enjoy the humor in his attempts to spin away the mess. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
TexasVines Posted July 10, 2008 Share Posted July 10, 2008 I think this dude actually believes what he's typing. I know who could possibly believe in a thread about the massive growth of China (and India) and the huge demand they have for resources that someone would not want to blame Bush for the rise in price of a comodity that we import a vast majority of (close to 60%+) from countries that hate us while the liberals block drilling "because it wont help" yet they call for the strategic reserve to be opened up because that trickle of oil will help and who could believe Iraq was a mistake when so many lib dims supported the war and their votes show it as does their flip flopping on the withdrawal and their passing of funding for it time and again and who could believe that a low dollar makes exports increase across a broad sector of the economy just crazy!! who can not believe in "change" because that is so convincing Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
TexasVines Posted July 10, 2008 Share Posted July 10, 2008 I should have added our increase in national debt, crazy budget deficit, more americans in poverty, more uninsured americans, higher consumer credit debt, decrease in median household income, all since jan 26, 2001, so he can write more and spin away the mess. In fact, he can still do it now. I kind of enjoy the humor in his attempts to spin away the mess.the national debt as a % of budget is not at a level near its all time highagain in a thread about the growth of the economy of China one would think people might understand basic economicslike the idea if you make 50K a year and owe 25K that is a problembut if you make 500K and owe 50K that is probably not a problemand does Bush really make people abuse credit cards and buy outside their means....you know like people on welfare with a car and a 2K stereo in itcan you show any statistics that actually PROVE more americans are in poverty nowcan you PROVE more uninsuredand what about record home ownership even with the forclosures.....you forgot about that....so convenient of you.....that can be proven......your poverty and insured can notand list for us all what the lib dims have done about the budget, health care, credit crunch, and health care in 1.5 years"change" at its finest!!!! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
webdude Posted July 10, 2008 Share Posted July 10, 2008 Those are actually from United States Census Bureau which publishes the insured and poverty for different years.http://www.census.gov/prod/2007pubs/p60-233.pdfPlease try spinning it some more, it would make sense if you blame both sides, but you keep on blaming the 1.5 years of dems, which BTW controls only congress, and purposely neglect the absolute power that repubs had, which for six solid years, controlled both houses and also executive. I wonder how common sense would dictate which one shoulders more blame. Not expecting you to ponder that though. Thanks for the humor anyway. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
livincinco Posted July 10, 2008 Share Posted July 10, 2008 the national debt as a % of budget is not at a level near its all time highagain in a thread about the growth of the economy of China one would think people might understand basic economicslike the idea if you make 50K a year and owe 25K that is a problembut if you make 500K and owe 50K that is probably not a problemand does Bush really make people abuse credit cards and buy outside their means....you know like people on welfare with a car and a 2K stereo in itcan you show any statistics that actually PROVE more americans are in poverty nowcan you PROVE more uninsuredand what about record home ownership even with the forclosures.....you forgot about that....so convenient of you.....that can be proven......your poverty and insured can notand list for us all what the lib dims have done about the budget, health care, credit crunch, and health care in 1.5 years"change" at its finest!!!!The issue is less the amount of the deficit, and more the financing of it. Significant amounts of the national debt are now being financed by China. This discussion is similar to the political discussions on China, you're trying to take an extremely complicated relationship between our two countries and reduce it to soundbites. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
TexasVines Posted July 10, 2008 Share Posted July 10, 2008 Those are actually from United States Census Bureau which publishes the insured and poverty for different years.http://www.census.gov/prod/2007pubs/p60-233.pdf Please try spinning it some more, it would make sense if you blame both sides, but you keep on blaming the 1.5 years of dems, which BTW controls only congress, and purposely neglect the absolute power that repubs had, which for six solid years, controlled both houses and also executive. I wonder how common sense would dictate which one shoulders more blame. Not expecting you to ponder that though. Thanks for the humor anyway. did you actually look at that data it looks as if the rate of poverty and uninsured has grown about 2% max and is actually trending down again following a pattern that is historically evident from the charts hardly the panic you and others would make it out to be and similar to economics as population grows so will total numbers of all types of income level....on a % basis it looks as though Bush is in a pattern that has been in place since 1970 and is again trending down so I guess blocking drilling (and US jobs and US controlled oil) and passing a bloated farm bill and bailing out irresponsible home buyers will solve the VERY small increase in the numbers in that report The issue is less the amount of the deficit, and more the financing of it. Significant amounts of the national debt are now being financed by China. This discussion is similar to the political discussions on China, you're trying to take an extremely complicated relationship between our two countries and reduce it to soundbites. so it some how matters who you owe money to....so it would be better for the USA to owe this "massive amount of out of control crippling debt that it will never pay off" to US citizens....VS the Chinese that we can tell to piss off you really think who we borrow from matters....if the terms are the same the terms are the same...and since it is treasury debt the terms are the same and again as a % of budget the debt is very manageable as has been proven in the past with higher % of debt to budget being paid down....but wait we paid that to Germany and Japan and England....not China so that makes a difference Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
webdude Posted July 10, 2008 Share Posted July 10, 2008 sure, speculating it will go down helps your argument, and blaming it on patterns, nice.It is fun to see you speculating and spinning, now go ahead and spin this too, will you?The 8 years before bush vs the last 7 years of bush.Higher cost of college from $3,164 per year to $5,192 per year,lower personal savings rate from +2.5% to -0.5%,the double jump in annual total insurance premium cost from $6,230 to $12,106,the decrease in medium household income from $49,163, a $6,000 Increase in 8 Years to $48,023, a $1,100 Decrease in 6 Years,the decrease in job growth, from 1.76 Million Jobs Per Year over 8 years to 369,000 Jobs Per Year the last 7 years.http://www.hecb.wa.gov/quickfacts/documents/Costs.pdfhttp://www.census.gov/prod/2007pubs/p60-233.pdf Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
TexasVines Posted July 10, 2008 Share Posted July 10, 2008 sure, speculating it will go down helps your argument, and blaming it on patterns, nice.It is fun to see you speculating and spinning, now go ahead and spin this too, will you?The 8 years before bush vs the last 7 years of bush.Higher cost of college from $3,164 per year to $5,192 per year,lower personal savings rate from +2.5% to -0.5%,the double jump in annual total insurance premium cost from $6,230 to $12,106,the decrease in medium household income from $49,163, a $6,000 Increase in 8 Years to $48,023, a $1,100 Decrease in 6 Years,the decrease in job growth, from 1.76 Million Jobs Per Year over 8 years to 369,000 Jobs Per Year the last 7 years.hard to say it is speculation when the trend lines on page 19 and below SHOW it going down....and the economy goes in cycles....or is obama going to "change that too"Bush does not control college cost....that is state government.....cutting funding....look at what states cut the most and get back to me....and what have the lib dims done in 1.5 years to help thisBush does not control health care cost....but he is in favor of tort reform....lib dims are notperhaps if we could drill for oil in the USA people would be able to work drilling and building that infrastructure....but lib dims will not give that a chance....and maybe we need less government regulations....lib dims will not try that as wellBush does not make people spend beyond their means....that is the libs telling everyone the government will bail them out....like their home mortgageswhat have the lib dims done in 1.5 years to solve any of that.....bloated farm bill. blocked drilling, and home mortgage give awayscertianly a way to make people spend responsibly Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
livincinco Posted July 10, 2008 Share Posted July 10, 2008 did you actually look at that datait looks as if the rate of poverty and uninsured has grown about 2% max and is actually trending down again following a pattern that is historically evident from the charts hardly the panic you and others would make it out to be and similar to economics as population grows so will total numbers of all types of income level....on a % basis it looks as though Bush is in a pattern that has been in place since 1970 and is again trending down so I guess blocking drilling (and US jobs and US controlled oil) and passing a bloated farm bill and bailing out irresponsible home buyers will solve the VERY small increase in the numbers in that report so it some how matters who you owe money to....so it would be better for the USA to owe this "massive amount of out of control crippling debt that it will never pay off" to US citizens....VS the Chinese that we can tell to piss off you really think who we borrow from matters....if the terms are the same the terms are the same...and since it is treasury debt the terms are the same and again as a % of budget the debt is very manageable as has been proven in the past with higher % of debt to budget being paid down....but wait we paid that to Germany and Japan and England....not China so that makes a difference By that logic, it makes no difference whether you owe money to the Bank of America or a loan shark. It absolutely makes a difference who we owe money to because of the loss of leverage that occurs with a significant debt. The fact that the majority of US bonds are owned by foreign governments gives them the ability to sell those bonds and impact currency valuation. Even if they don't do it, they have increased leverage because they control the ability to do that. I agree with your earlier point that China has massive internal issues to deal with, but even with those issues they are capable of creating a competitive economy to the US in the coastal areas while grappling with the issues that they will face in the rural areas. I don't see this necessarily as a setback for the US because those issues create significant opportunity for US companies to import services and knowledge to China to deal with those challenges. Yes, debt is only important as it relates to GDP, but this thread is about China's economy, not US economic policy. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
TexasVines Posted July 10, 2008 Share Posted July 10, 2008 By that logic, it makes no difference whether you owe money to the Bank of America or a loan shark. It absolutely makes a difference who we owe money to because of the loss of leverage that occurs with a significant debt. The fact that the majority of US bonds are owned by foreign governments gives them the ability to sell those bonds and impact currency valuation. Even if they don't do it, they have increased leverage because they control the ability to do that.I agree with your earlier point that China has massive internal issues to deal with, but even with those issues they are capable of creating a competitive economy to the US in the coastal areas while grappling with the issues that they will face in the rural areas. I don't see this necessarily as a setback for the US because those issues create significant opportunity for US companies to import services and knowledge to China to deal with those challenges.Yes, debt is only important as it relates to GDP, but this thread is about China's economy, not US economic policy.as stated treasury notes are sold on the same terms so there is no loan sharkingand with increased amounts of holding our debt comes increased amount of concern for how our economy does especially when China is now a net importer of food while the USA is a massive exporter and giver of food and the USA only imports dollar store crap for the most part from China or a great deal of products we could all live without Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
livincinco Posted July 10, 2008 Share Posted July 10, 2008 as stated treasury notes are sold on the same terms so there is no loan sharkingand with increased amounts of holding our debt comes increased amount of concern for how our economy does especially when China is now a net importer of food while the USA is a massive exporter and giver of food and the USA only imports dollar store crap for the most part from China or a great deal of products we could all live withoutThe reference to loan sharking was to illustrate that there is a difference in who owns debt, not specific to treasury notes. Increased concern for the US economy does not eliminate leverage gained by holding debt. There is still an implied threat that exists.China is an importer of food, but it does not rely on the US for those imports. The primary US export to China is soybeans and the second largest producer of soybeans is Brazil. China has been very proactive in solidifying their relationship with Brazil.It's a gross simplification to say that the US only imports dollar store crap from China, and I don't think that you mean to imply that the US could easily stop importing from China without seriously impacting our standard of living.Both countries are reliant on each other. That's a good thing. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
BryanS Posted July 10, 2008 Share Posted July 10, 2008 If China ever did want to take out Taiwan... we'd sell Taiwan up the river so fast it wouldn't be funny.Isn't it amazing how much of our American way of life... is built upon the Communist Chinese? Their country, their legal system, their human rights and environmentalist values. We just keep buying more, more, more...They will take over, ahead of western economies, because they are making the "cheap stuff" - for all those economies. A lot of cheap stuff, adds up. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
TheNiche Posted July 10, 2008 Share Posted July 10, 2008 Isn't it amazing how much of our American way of life... is built upon the Communist Chinese? Their country, their legal system, their human rights and environmentalist values. We just keep buying more, more, more...They aren't Communists anymore. That didn't work for them.Their official government structure is still of the old sort--almost anachronistic, yet apparently stable--but the nature of their economy is more capitalistic than communistic; the people are driven by the need to better themselves. They are just like us. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
TJones Posted July 10, 2008 Share Posted July 10, 2008 They aren't Communists anymore. That didn't work for them.Their official government structure is still of the old sort--almost anachronistic, yet apparently stable--but the nature of their economy is more capitalistic than communistic; the people are driven by the need to better themselves. They are just like us.Well, almost, the Chinese REALLY liked the way HONG KONG turned out for them, so they have decided to try it out all over the country. You won't hear anyone who is actually IN the Chinese Govt. declare that they are just like us though. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Deut28Thirteen Posted July 10, 2008 Author Share Posted July 10, 2008 sure, speculating it will go down helps your argument, and blaming it on patterns, nice.It is fun to see you speculating and spinning, now go ahead and spin this too, will you?The 8 years before bush vs the last 7 years of bush.Higher cost of college from $3,164 per year to $5,192 per year,lower personal savings rate from +2.5% to -0.5%,the double jump in annual total insurance premium cost from $6,230 to $12,106,the decrease in medium household income from $49,163, a $6,000 Increase in 8 Years to $48,023, a $1,100 Decrease in 6 Years,the decrease in job growth, from 1.76 Million Jobs Per Year over 8 years to 369,000 Jobs Per Year the last 7 years.http://www.hecb.wa.gov/quickfacts/documents/Costs.pdfhttp://www.census.gov/prod/2007pubs/p60-233.pdfI am about to enter college along with my twin, and my older bother who is there now, for my family thats over a $6000 increase. Thankfully my family can pay for collage but so many other families cant. I am worried about China passing us because America is slowing not just because their growing. I dont know if we are in a slow time or in a decline but from 1.76 to less than 400,000 jobs is crazy!! I was half sleep when I was watching CNN today but some airline is going to cut 8% of their workforce I think it was about 2500 job cuts. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Archived
This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.