Reminder: China’s Structural Economic Weakness – Why they Need “One-Belt, One-Road”…

[Originally posted in 2017] To understand the China ‘One-Belt / ‘One-World‘ economic trade strategy it becomes necessary to understand how structurally weak the Chinese economy was when created.

People often talk about the ‘strength’ of China’s economic model; and indeed within a specific part of their economy -manufacturing- they do have economic strength.

However, the underlying critical architecture of the Chinese economic model is structurally flawed and President Trump with his current economic team understand the weakness better than all international adversaries.

Lets take a stroll and lightly discuss.

China is a central planning economy. Meaning it never was an outcropping of natural economic conditions. China was/is controlled as a communist style central-planning government; As such, it is important to reference the basic structural reality that China’s economy was created from the top down.

This construct of government creation is a key big picture distinction that sets the backdrop to understand how weak the economy really is.

Any nations’ economic model is only as stable (or strong) as the underlying architecture or infrastructure of the country’s economic balance.

Think about economic strength and stability this way: If a nation was economically walled off from all other nations, can it survive? …can it sustain itself? …can it grow?

In the big picture – economic strength is an outcome of the ability of a nation, any nation, to support itself first and foremost. If a nations’ economy is dependent on other nation to survive it is less strong than a nation whose economy is more independent.

Most Americans don’t realize it, but China is an extremely dependent nation.

When the central planning for the 21st century Chinese Economy was constructed, there were several critical cultural flaws, dynamics exclusive to China, that needed to be overcome in order to build their economic model. It took China several decades to map out a way to economic growth that could overcome the inherent critical flaws.

Critical Flaws To Exploit:

♦Because of the oppressive nature of the Chinese compliant culture, in the aggregate the citizens within China do not necessarily innovate well or create new innovation.  The “Compliance Mindset” is part of the intellectual DNA strain of a Chinese citizen.

Broadly speaking, the modern era Chinese are not able to think outside the box per se’ because the reference of all civil activity has been a history of box control by government, and compliance to stay (think) only within the approved box. The lack of intellectual thought mapping needed for innovation is why China relies on intellectual theft of innovation created by others.

Historically American culture is based around freedom of thought and severe disdain of government telling us what to do; THAT freedom is necessary for innovation. That freedom actually creates innovation.

Again, broadly speaking Chinese are better students in American schools and universities because the Chinese are culturally compliant. They work well with academics and established formulas, and within established systems, but they cannot create the formula or system themselves.  The modern Chinese strategy has been to compensate for this deficit by having Western universities train and educate their youth.

The Chinese Planning Authority skipped the economic cornerstone. When China planned out their economic entry, they did so from a top-down perspective. They immediately wanted to be manufacturers of stuff. They saw their worker population as a strategic advantage, but they never put the source origination infrastructure into place in order to supply their manufacturing needs. China has no infrastructure for raw material extraction or exploitation.

China relies on: importing raw material, applying their economic skill set (manufacturing), and then exporting finished goods. This is the basic economic structure of the Chinese economy.

See the flaw?

Cut off the raw material, and the China economy slows, contracts, and if nations react severely enough with export material boycotts the entire Chinese economy implodes.

Insert big flashy sign for: “One-Belt / One-Road” HERE

Again, we reference the earlier point: Economic strength is the ability of a nation to sustain itself. [Think about an economy during conflict or war] China cannot independently sustain itself, therefore China is necessarily vulnerable.

China is dependent on Imports (raw materials) AND Exports (finished goods).

♦The 800lb Panda in the room is that China is arguably the least balanced economy in the modern world. Hence, China has to take extraordinary measures to secure their supply chain. This economic dependency is also why China has recently spent so much on military expansion etc., they must protect their vulnerable interests.

Everything important to the Chinese Economy surrounds their critical need to secure a strong global supply chain of raw material to import, and leveraged trade agreements for export.

China’s economy is deep (manufacturing), but China’s economy is also narrow.

China could have spent the time to create a broad-based economy, but the lack of early 1900’s foresight, in conjunction with their communist top-down totalitarian system and a massive population, led to central government decisions to subvert the bottom-up building-out and take short-cuts. Their population controls only worsened their long term ability to ever broaden their economic model.

It takes a population of young avg-skilled workers to do the hard work of building a raw material infrastructure. Mine workers, dredge builders, roads and railways, bridges and tunnels etc. All of these require young strong bodies. The Chinese cultural/population decisions amid the economic builders precluded this proactive outlook; now they have an aging population and are incapable of doing it.  They also rely on a labor workforce from North Korea that few people ever discuss.

This is why China has now positioned their economic system as dependent on them being an economic bully. They must retain their supply chain: import raw materials – export finished goods, at all costs.

This inherent economic structure is a weakness China must continually address through policies toward other nations. Hence, “One-Belt / One-Road” is essentially their ‘bully plan’ to ensure their supply chain and long-term economic viability.

This economic structure, and the reality of China as a dependent economic model, also puts China at risk from the effects of global economic contraction. But more importantly it puts them at risk from President Trump’s strategic use of geopolitical economic leverage to weaken their economy.

Nuance and subtlety is everything in China. Culturally harsh tones are seen as a sign of weakness and considered intensely impolite in public displays between officials; especially within approved and released statements by officials representing the government.

Historic Chinese cultural policy, the totalitarian control over expressed political sentiment and diplomacy through silence, is evident in the strategic use of the space between carefully chosen words, not just the words themselves.

China has no cultural or political space between peace and war; they are a historic nation based on two points of polarity. They see peace and war as coexisting with each other. China accepts and believes opposite or contrary forces may actually be complementary, interconnected, and interdependent in the natural world, and they may give rise to each other as they interrelate to one another. Flowing between these polar states is a natural dynamic to be used -with serious contemplation- in advancing objectives as needed.

The Chinese objective is to win, to dominate, using economic power.

Peace or war. Win or lose. Yin and Yang. Culturally there is no middle position in dealings with China; they are not constitutionally capable of understanding or valuing the western philosophy of mutual benefit where concession of terms gains a larger outcome. If it does not benefit China, it is not done. The outlook is simply, a polarity of peace or war. In politics or economics the same perspective is true. It is a zero-sum outlook.

Therefore, when you see China publicly use strong language – it indicates a level of internal disposition within Beijing beyond the defined western angst. Big Panda becomes Red Dragon; there is no mid-status or evolutionary phase.

U.S. President Donald Trump and the U.S. economic team fully understand this dynamic and fully understand the inherent needs of China. When you are economically dependent, the ‘bully plan’ only works until you encounter a ‘stronger opponent’. A stronger opponent is an economic opponent with a more broad-based stable economy, that’s US.

President Trump, Commerce Secretary Ross, Treasury Secretary Mnuchin and U.S. Trade Representative Lighthizer, represent the first broad-based national team of economic negotiators who know how to leverage the inherent Chinese economic vulnerability.

Every American associated with investment, economics and China would be well advised to put their interconnected business affairs in order according to their exposure.

President Trump will not back down from his position; the U.S. holds all of the leverage and the geopolitical economics must be addressed. President Donald Trump and his team are entirely prepared for this.

Donald Trump has been discussing this for more than two decades. We are going into economic combat with China!

China’s objective is conquest. China’s tool for conquest is economics. President Trump’s entire geopolitical strategy, using economics in a similar way, is an existential threat to China’s endeavor. Communist Beijing calls the proverbial DPRK shots.

President Trump is putting on a MASSIVE economic squeeze.

♦Squeeze #1. Trump and Mnuchin sanctioned Venezuela and cut off their access to expanded state owned oil revenue. Venezuela now needs more money. China and Russia are already leveraged to the gills in Venezuela and hold 49% of Citgo as collateral for loans outstanding. Now China and Russia will need to loan more, directly.

♦Squeeze #2. China’s geopolitical ally, Russia, is already squeezed with losses in energy revenue because of President Trump’s approach toward oil, LNG and coal. Trump, through allies including Saudi Arabia, EU, France (North Africa energy), and domestic production has driven down energy prices. Meanwhile Russia was bleeding out financially in Syria. Iran is the financial reserve, but they too are energy price dependent.

♦Squeeze #3. Trump, Tillerson and now Pompeo put Pakistan on notice they need to get involved in bringing their enabled tribal “extremists” (Taliban) to the table in Afghanistan. Pakistan’s primary investor and economic partner is China. If U.S. pulls or reduces financial support to pressure Pakistan toward a political solution in Afghanistan, China has to fill void.

♦Squeeze #4. China’s primary economic threat (competition) is next door in India. President Trump has just embraced India as leverage over China in trade and pledged ongoing favorable trade deals. The play is MFN (Most Favored Nation) trade status might flip from China to India. That’s a big play.

♦Squeeze #5. President Trump launched a USTR Section 301 Trade Investigation into China’s theft of intellectual property. This encompasses every U.S. entity that does manufacturing business with China, particularly aeronautics and technology, and also reaches into the financial services sector.

♦Squeeze #6. President Trump, Secretary Ross, Secretary Mnuchin and USTR Robert Lighthizer renegotiated NAFTA to create the USMCA. One of the primary objectives of team U.S.A. was to close the 3rd party loopholes, including dumping and origination, that China uses to gain backdoor access to the U.S. market and avoid trade/tariff restrictions. [China sends parts to Mexico and Canada for assembly and then back-door entry into the U.S. via NAFTA.]

♦Squeeze #7. President Trump has been open, visible and vocal about his intention to shift to bilateral trade renegotiation with China and Southeast Asia immediately after Team U.S.A. concluded with NAFTA renegotiation.  Those negotiations are now ongoing.

♦Squeeze #8. President Trump positioned ASEAN (Association of Southeast Asian Nations) as trade benefactors for assistance with North Korea. The relationship between ASEAN nations and the Trump administration is very strong, and getting stronger. Which leads to…

♦Squeeze #9. President Trump has formed an economic and national security alliance with Shinzo Abe of Japan. It is not accidental that North Korea’s Kim Jong-un fired his last missile over the Northern part of Japan. Quite simply, Beijing told him to.

♦Squeeze #10. Tariffs.

Add all of this up and you can see the cumulative impact of President Trump’s geopolitical economic strategy toward China. The best part of all of it – is the likelihood China never saw it, meaning the sum totality of “all of it”, coming… until 2018.

The Olive branch and arrows denote the power of peace and war. The symbol in any figure’s right hand has more significance than one in its left hand. Also important is the direction faced by the symbols central figure. The emphasis on the eagles stare signifies the preferred disposition. An eagle holding an arrow also symbolizes the war for freedom, and its use is commonly referred to the liberation fight of righteous people from abusive influence. The eagle on the original seal created for the Office of the President showed the gaze upon the arrows.

The Eagle and the Arrow – An Aesop’s Fable

An Eagle was soaring through the air. Suddenly it heard the whizz of an Arrow, and felt the dart pierce its breast. Slowly it fluttered down to earth. Its lifeblood pouring out. Looking at the Arrow with which it had been shot, the Eagle realized that the deadly shaft had been feathered with one of its own plumes.

Moral: We often give our enemies the means for our own destruction.

Advertisements
This entry was posted in China, Decepticons, Deep State, Economy, Election 2020, India, media bias, President Trump, propaganda, Russia, Trade Deal, Uncategorized, US dept of agriculture, US Treasury, USA, USMCA. Bookmark the permalink.

44 Responses to Reminder: China’s Structural Economic Weakness – Why they Need “One-Belt, One-Road”…

  1. Derangement Syndrome says:

    “One belt, one road” that multi-billion dollar project would be crippled within the first 5 minutes of a kinetic war. China has to know this.

    That means China needs global stability to succeed. The US has military bases all around China, in the Philippines, South Korea, and Japan. How many military bases does China have near the US? We have most of the Trump cards in these negotiations, pun intended.

    Liked by 1 person

    • Bob says:

      Why tell them of the Chinese of their weaknesses? As a country we continue to blab about everything just to make ourselves feel good.

      Like

    • SmurfetteX says:

      Why is the immediate jump to solution always war? It puts able-bodied Americans at risk for outcomes that end up serving dubious bankers or CEO headquarters and puts the country into evergrowing runaway debt. Americans are indentured since 1914 or maybe even earlier with the 1863 nationalizing of banks post WWI to pay off loans, the country has set of books not too different from a corporation where liabilities far exceed assets. It won’t really matter if China excels at the Belt Road if the US ends up owned by a globalist entity which won’t ultimately be China since it’s not the country calling the USA it’s Golden Calf.

      Like

    • mike says:

      Chinese bases, Cuba and Venezuela if we are not careful….

      Like

  2. Pokey says:

    There is a questionable flaw in one of your premises. I don’t see the Chinese lacking the infrastructure for raw materials exploration and exploitation. While I have been out of the oil and gas business for most of a decade, I recall that the Chinese were one of the first groups to see the advantages of anisotropic resolution of seismic data in exploration. They had no problem stealing and understanding every bit of what we knew and implementing it for themselves. Now they are leaders in the science of geophysics and in exploration for hydrocarbon reserves.

    Like

    • Orville R. Bacher says:

      Put simply, China is a Totalitarian State. It has a history of top down, fear laced, social control. Avert eyes, contain your thoughts, you AND your family are expendable without trial. It would take many generations to rinse that disease out of the Chinese Culture and Chinese mindset.
      It is very late to contain the dangerous Monster that is today’s China. But it is not too late.
      FREE CHINA, remove the Communist Party.

      Like

  3. simicharmed says:

    Very well stated and clearly exemplified.

    THIS>>> “”Peace or war. Win or lose. Yin and Yang. Culturally there is no middle position in dealings with China; they are not constitutionally capable of understanding or valuing the western philosophy of mutual benefit where concession of terms gains a larger outcome. If it does not benefit China, it is not done. The outlook is simply, a polarity of peace or war. In politics or economics the same perspective is true. It is a zero-sum outlook.””

    For those doubting the President Trump Tariff strategy, well, they need to read this article and do some research in the matter-at-hand.

    Pathetically hilarious listening to these fake-journalists knocking tariffs over the past several months when every one of them has zero comprehension of the matter…even the ones who parade as economists, etc…

    Liked by 1 person

  4. mr. deacon says:

    Good cover. I believe squeeze #2 was the main cause of the Obama/Clinton/ Global Elite meltdown and Spygate, Mueller, and sedition to infinity and beyond. Look closely at what most of the ones spied on that were related to Trump had in common. Flynn, PapaD, Carter Page, Manafort (energy consultants, right of ways, and contract negotiators, lobbyists). Climate change puts control in U.N. Government hands and hamstrings U.S. production. (Soros invests heavily in Climate Change cons but even more in fossil fuels?) Obama and his Muslim Bros.cronies put their money in with Iran et al and a certain part of Saudi Arabia. Russia selling energy products to EU via Ukraine. LPG to Japan. Obama, Muslim Bros. and Turkey whacking at Israel and U.S. oil bidnezz. (Noble energy). Trump went with Israel and closed borders and no climate change. Israel exports through Suez and Mediterranean to EU, not through Ukraine or Turkey or any Muslim Bro. U.N. bunch. Trumps first move? Saudi Arabia. Second move? Israel. Working on freeing Venezuela.

    Liked by 1 person

  5. Lou Zimmer says:

    Great article. Following on what you said, in 20 to30 years China is totally screwed. The 1 baby rule will leave China with an aging work force that they cannot possibly pay for. Robots won’t be compensated, therefore will not contribute to paying for an aging workforce. China’s window to dominate this world is thankfully very small.

    Like

  6. Curt says:

    China is the grand prize! Yes, Trump realizes the US has all the economic leverage. If China is smart they will negotiate a mutual agreement which causes them as little economic damage as possible. Time will tell. They will NOT snooker this administration as the have the last three administrations. China may be hoping for political help from American politicians; i.e., Democrats. However, if President Trump is re-elected in 2020 their economic problems magnify if they have not come to an agreement before then. If you’re President Xi, you pray for future Democrat control in the US politics and the destructive economic policies that will bring for America.
    President Xi would do well not to underestimate President Trump…. I know I don’t.

    Liked by 2 people

  7. bertdilbert says:

    I wonder how much of Toyota’s 13 billion investment in the US will end up building military machines. Moving manufacturing back to the US can also be preparations for war.

    Like

    • snellvillebob says:

      The last thing China wants is war. They depend on foreign resources which would be cut off in a war. Look at how we starved Japan in WWII. We cut off so many of their resources we had to give the food shipped to the Pacific for our planned invasion of Japan, to feed their people after they surrendered. It is estimated we saved 10 million Japanese civilians from starvation.

      Like

      • Steve Herman says:

        China is probably more capitalist than the USA. They have a large and growing middle class. In light of their middle class, China does not want an economic/trade war with the USA. In a similar manner, the Chinese middle class does not want a military war with the USA. The 1989 Tienanmen Square protest was the rise of the middle class. The protest took the lives of thousands, prob 10s of thousands of China’s middle class. The protest made the case for economic power that the middle class was willing to die for. IOW, the Old Guard has the political power, the middle class has the economic power and proved they are willing to die to keep the economy flowing. Their middle class do not want to return to the farms. If the Old Guard screws up and escalates a trade war that depresses, or God forbid, collapses their econ, then the Old Guard realizes this could tear the country apart with the real possibility/probability of taking down the Old Guard.

        Like

        • The Old Guard has the guns and will happily use them if the Middle Class gets out of line. The Middle Class are primarily managers and managers can be replaced. There will be NO tearing apart of China, as long as the military supports the Old Guard.

          Like

          • Steve Herman says:

            My reference to “Old Guard” is to the Old Guard political class, those who own the SOEs, banks, etc.

            The military is a wild card. The middle class doesn’t want a shooting war bec it will destroy industry and their way of life. The military wants a shooting war even less bec even though their leaders (Generals/Admirals) bluster and boast, the Generals/Admirals know their military does have to Command and Control structure to manage even a limited US strike force.

            Like

  8. Bill says:

    It sounds like Donald is on a path of Winnamins to Winfinity and beyond!

    Like

  9. Bill says:

    It sounds like Donald is on a path of Winnamins to Winfinity and beyond!

    MAGA is getting nicely started and picking up speed.

    Like

  10. • Squeeze #11: President Trump is developing a Bilateral Hemisphere Alliance with Brazil covering Defense, Energy and Agriculture … IMO specifically the 90% of China’s Soybean Imports they need to source from our future Soybean Export Alliance.

    Liked by 2 people

    • GB Bari says:

      And those who whine about our “meddling” in Venezuela would do well to understand that country’s resources are quite the prize for China (as well as Russia) if the Chinese could woo them into cooperation…which would soon become being bullied into capitulation. The Russians were already on their way trying to do just that when Guaido suddenyl appeared….

      Liked by 1 person

    • Bill Henslee says:

      The new Trumpista in Brazil is equally willing to starve the Chinese of their soybean requirements. Apparently it never occurred to the central planers in China that they can’t eat televisions and we can stop their 5G domination with a simple Presidential order that their company is a security risk for us and close our markets for their phones.
      The Chinese love a board game whose object is to surround the enemy player with subtle moves that eventually immobilizes him. I’m thinking Trump is making a lot of very good moves to get the Chinese to restructure or lose.

      Liked by 3 people

    • Steve Herman says:

      If been saying since the new Brazilian prez was inaugurated – SOYPEC (Soybean Producing Exporting Cartel) w/ USA and Brazil we would control 70% of world soy production. If Argentina and India joins, SOYPEC is at 75-80% of world production.
      This is leverage on an epic scale.

      Liked by 1 person

  11. Perot Conservative says:

    Ghost cities.

    Liked by 1 person

  12. thedoc00 says:

    For that strategy to really be effective, the US government has to overtly commit to NOT protecting its skilled workers, key industries and technologies. That was the path NAFTA and the TPP had put in place with respect to the US protecting its skilled workers and industries. Technology out flow relied upon a State Department willing grant export licenses for critical technology, which the President still has not publicly addressed. China has stolen very little of the technology gained from US companies, but has actually legally obtained via licenses granted over the past 30 years.

    That is why the President can really rip Wall Street, the big tech companies and China by pulling back the covers on the export license scam. He needs to stop protecting big tech and State Department Professionals. That is one of the major reasons Flynn was roasted alive as was and still is in position to expose it. Obama, the Clintons, many politicians, etc. are at risk if the export license list is ever exposed.

    SD very accurately describes the infrastructure, execution plan and weaknesses but the actual enabler required is a totally feckless and pliant US Government. That is the critical element President Trump is disrupting and is costing Wall Street, China and EU billions due to sunk costs made over 30 years and anticipation of a Clinton Presidency continuing the trend of a feckless US defense of its economic environment.

    Like

  13. Beigun says:

    First premise is wrong.

    China is not the only central-command economy in Asia.

    Ever heard of Japan Inc? Japanese economic miracle, or Korea and Taiwan? How ‘bout Raffles?

    Same story, different era, with China, no?

    Look at the numbers. ‘Bout same, ‘cept Japan has held the longer trade surplus in years over America by forty over China.

    Comprende?

    China is an economic newcomer in the Asian scene, like your analysis. Tread carefully with the Panda and Dragon hypothesis—sounds like “Pocorn on the Ginza.”

    Panda/Dragon has no basis in the Chinese language like Japanese “Tatemae” and “Honne” unless you are referring some Sung or Tang Classical term? Or this a borrowed term?

    Bret Baier BS from Bunker Buddy Shinzo Abe?

    Batter up, or shut up with the faul balls.

    Watch out for spoon feeding by MOFA.

    Like

  14. farinc says:

    Can you imagine for one minute any of the media channels taking the time to speak to the administration’s brilliance in negotiating with the 800 Pound Panda and it’s importance to our national
    Security, much less asking any of the Democratic candidates what their thoughts are on our trade negotiations with China? Abominable decisions by the broadcast hierarchy who feel a need to serve up pablum everyday to the weak minded populous.

    Like

  15. farinc says:

    Thank God that Bolsanaro is a trumpist where China is concerned. Looks like the Chinese may have to change their diet to NRPK dirt.

    Like

  16. Esperanza says:

    There’s movement going on with Macron. China is hedging its bets with Yurpia. Just thought I’d put that out there.

    Like

  17. GSparrow says:

    I’m not an economist but this article made me wonder how much national debts are a factor.
    According to a Forbes article: “China’s biggest problem isn’t the trade war. It’s the growing debt problem, which finances bubbles at home and abroad. The USA has a debt to GDP ratio of 105.40%, according to Tradingeconomic.com. & Japan’s debt to GDP ratio is 250%.” Note-“The U.S. debt to China is $1.13 trillion as of Jan. 2019. That’s 28% of the $3.97 trillion in Treasury bills, notes, and bonds held by foreign countries.” (Kimberley Amadeo Updated 27 Mar 2019)

    China’s ‘official debt is 47.60%. But according to the Forbes article, unofficially, it’s difficult to figure it out though some estimates place it at or near 300%. “The government is both the lender and the borrower which concentrates rather than disperses credit risks creating the potential of a systemic collapse. One branch of the government lends money to another branch of government, Government-owned banks, for instance, lend money to State Owned Enterprises (SOEs) and Town Village Enterprises (TVEs)”

    My non-economist limited knowledge tells me China and the USA would both be wise to negotiate a fair deal for both sides soon regardless about what the debt to GDP ratios actually are.

    Like

  18. William Schneider says:

    Sundance, your vision is highly plausible to this old man’s mental eyes. thanks for giving further insight into the chinese infrastructure and economy in gereral. I will invest accordingly-as hopefully all treepers will. I pray for the sake of our economy and the worlds that China comes to its senses and negotiates a fair trade deal with US . If no recession looms for sure.

    Like

  19. Pyrthroes says:

    “Commerce follows the flag”, but when the trumpet-call is hesitant, weak, who will gird himself for the battle? Sense here is that Trump’s geopolitical strategy, leveraging the highly innovative but long-neglected U.S. economy, is not only clear-sighted but peaceably prudent, very wise.

    Either China’s claptrap dirigistes with their extraordinarily counter-productive “social credit” peonage-surveillance drivel will evolve to free market, entrepreneurial risk/reward (see Joseph Needham’s multi-volume compendium, “Science and Civilization in China” from the mid-1950s) or like T.S. Eliot’s Growl Tiger the regime wlll go “kerflip-kerflop” (“Old Possum’s Book of Practical Cats”, 1939).

    For all their strutting chauvinism, thinly masked by O-so-subtle debt subreption, Hsi et al. are on-track to become a 21st backwater– no intrasolar space industries, no quantum-leap robotics/AI “Singularity”, most certainly no bottom-up, competitive, rags-to-riches sagas such as America’s crude-and- vulgar mass-commercial culture coughs up regular as clockwork every 36 – 72 years.

    Ossified elites, Enarque clerisy infesting Brussels and DC, virtually all non-Western cultures from Africa and Araby to Latin America and Inja’s sunny clime, would rather “die on the gallows or perish of the pox” (Edmund Burke) than give this country’s wide-ranging freebooters aka “bloated capitalists” a halfway-even break. Too bad they’ll have to die.

    Like

    • Beigun says:

      TS was a wise man.

      Don’t be so full of doom and gloom before a new voyage….it only takes brains and a band of brothers and gals to prevent calamity.

      Like

  20. Robster says:

    It’s a little hard to envision China as vulnerable when the US has massive trade deficits with China and, while we were once the world’s largest creditor nation, we’re now the worlds largest debtor nation. From a trade point-of-view the US is more-like a colony of China, were we send them raw materials and agricultural products and they send us manufactured goods. Indeed we need our manufacturing back, but Chinese labor at $8/hour (or whatever) plus their lack of regulation, environmental standards…we still have a long way to go to be competitive..

    Like

  21. farrier105 says:

    China’s economy is a Military Economy. It is the supply arm of the Peoples’ Liberation Army. It exists to maintain China’s superpower status. The building up of China by US-based corporations, the State Department, the Commerce Department, and the CIA is nothing new. They did this with Stalin’s Russia in the 1930s, and continued it all the way through to the end of the Cold War. It was just limited to dual use factories (military and RUSSIAN civilian), while China has factories that make consumer goods mostly for America. The foreign exchange earned in the sales, and from partnerships with US corporations, is used to build up their military. Everyone in the DC knows this is how a military-industrial complex is built. That was the game from Day One with the Wall Street and DC elite.

    Like

  22. An informative but incomplete analysis. It’s true that China imports critical amounts of mineral fuels-related products and ores. See: http://www.worldstopexports.com/chinas-top-10-imports/
    What the author leaves out is the US trade imbalance and China’s possible/probable reaction to restricting critical imports. See WWII and Japan’s reaction to the US embargo of oil to it. The author argues that the Chinese know only peace of war then advocates a policy that pushes China toward war. Even if the Chinese decline to go to war (something their military is preparing for) restricting China’s ability to export goods WILL SEVERELY impact the US economy… so it’s a fine line between too much and not enough. The way to prevent China from seriously contemplating going to war is to continue to hold and increase technological and military superiority. The Chinese leadership is not suicidal and won’t start a fight it believes it can’t win.

    Like

    • Beigun says:

      The biggest winner in a China-US is Japan.

      What comes next after that Quagmire? Who benefits?

      “Big Boy” Bannon and the LDP “handler” in a Youtube Hokkaido Lovefest two weeks ago. Who is Mr. Kawai? English and Japanese Wiki says all. Kawai told Corker FON in SCS is not enough?

      And Kawai is from Hiroshima? Kishimoto is the Dove of Hiroshima, who is Kawai? His family?

      Who permitted General Tamagomi to deliver three consecutive “We Must Have Nukes” speeches in Hiroshima on the Anniversaries?
      Mr. Kawai? What does he say about Comfort Women Statues in America as the “brains” of Abe and “Handler” of US-Japan “Alliance” Caucus??? Too bad foreign policy dies in darkness.

      Like

Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in:

WordPress.com Logo

You are commenting using your WordPress.com account. Log Out /  Change )

Google photo

You are commenting using your Google account. Log Out /  Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out /  Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out /  Change )

Connecting to %s