Comments on: China, new financial superpower …

By: bubbles

bubbles — Sat, 21 Aug 2010 23:42:03 +0000

i would also have to argue, that the Fed/Treasury is in a way really testing china’s statements on “dollar stability”.

By: Rider I

Rider I — Sat, 31 Jul 2010 09:56:39 +0000

Cite for the Secretary of Energy spending 50% more on Foreign creation of High tech green jobs than he did for his own counties interest of creation of jobs and technology here at home. Makes me sad when things cannot be mitigaged. I am the Rider and you are in my scope. I want justice, legally and properly.

http://investigativereportingworkshop.org/investigations/wind-energy-funds-going-overseas/story/renewable-energy-money-still-going-abroad/

By: Rider I

Rider I — Sat, 31 Jul 2010 09:40:04 +0000

We now live in a market-based global financial system where the biggest single actor is a state. I would like to further your statement of the market based global financial system. Glad to see you are moving up in the world. Good to go. These words will probable fall on shallow ears as you have left this site. However, still though, this needs to be said.
The thought that we live in a market based global financial system intrigues me. I have come to find that we truly have allowed the Communist Style Economics that we so defended against during the Cold War to take a huge hold. It has become inherent that your exact statement is true. However, I would have to differ with the world market financing. Currently, it is the Communist Party financing that keeps us dependent on the one single party state and not a properly regulated global market. This state is the Communist party. As such these statements will be made in a vacuum un-present the norms of the power of the free markets that are still left.
The Communist Party has been allowed to get away with huge International Economic cartel abuses. This includes everything from vertical resources acquisition, to the shipping lanes, back to the production, packaging and even the distribution, then leading right into the financing department. They have also been able to pad their economy by using their SOE cartels to look after those who best serve the Political Party. They have inherently been able to sneak around and cloak their ever expanding State Owned Enterprises; which, in the cold war would have been unheard of without proper regulations. But, today we allow them to compete unfairly and we just keep borrowing money to keep paying them our jobs, debts, and allowing them to gain Political and Military advantages through the use of their SOE’s acquiring free market shares and infrastructures like ports and resources.
The idea that it is a world market is starting to be lost. As the American board that was supposed to specifically watch over the Communist Economic Cartels has been lost and spread out to a security review board that has too few workers and not enough funding. We have seen a huge loss in the ability to defend against the Communist Cartel Economics. This has also been seen recently as the WTO Working commission on Interacting and Competition of International Anti-Trust laws in specific Cartel activities has become inactive. At a time when the last part of the Cartel Strategy is becoming more than prevalent on why we do not like Cartel activities. The allowance of the cartel activities really has turned it into a Communist bizar. Allowing Communist Cartels to purchase the very business they crashed because of their unfair competition. Also places like Brazil through huge parties that Capitalism caused the world crash, the Leader of Venezuela just stole 11 American oil rigs even though they had to the money to pay them under the Chinese Communist watchful eye, and the Chinese Communist went around behind Americas back saying it was their fault. Yet, no one had the where with all to say no China no it was your cartel activities that caused this and you need to stop, tell Venezuela to pay our people and stop trying to buy business with your SOE Communist Economic Cartel Political and Military national interests
It was the Communist Economic SOE cartels fault for creating the biggest unfair competition since the threat of the Soviet Union. We have seen countries so dependent on the Communist Cartels for resources and manufacturing that it has become ridiculous to hear politicians keep saying we allow the loss of jobs to the Communist so we can create and keep high technology jobs. But, however, we also are losing the high technological manufacturing jobs too. As a matter of fact our very Secretary of Energy spent about 50% more on financing foreign SOE’s in China to further their technological advancement of green tech manufacturing than he did on his own countries job market. It has become so blatantly abusive that there is no one to report it to, the US and other free world countries did not even stand up to the Communist. Nor do I really think anyone even knows that they are abusing their SOE Cartels.
As such, I write to create an interest I do not see, as we have lost the world free market and gained a Communist Cartel Market. Look at the world, find the countries with the biggest Communist Cartels and you find the state’s that are doing the best. So your comment is true yet at the same time not true; Global market no, state financers yes. Therefore, Globally underdeveloped countries, countries with individuals and corporations avoid of government national interest cannot compete with SOE cartel abuses. Leaving a single country dominance and not a world fair and peaceful marketplace. We have allowed the Communist Cartels to try and overtake the American freedom dollar and place in a selfish government that uses its SOE’s at such a mass level as to destroy foreign markets. They do this so (it, their cartels) can then go and acquire the markets it has destroyed for political and military purposes, whether they know it or not. I would think if this was a global market someone would have Stopped them and regulated them before they were allowed to get this far. The Communist Cartel has 3 out of the top ten world business competing with companies with no government interest. It is my prediction that within the next 10-20 years all the top business will be country owned business causing wars for resource and market shares if we don’t properly regulate the Abusers of SOE cartels and bring back the world market of peace and harmony of business to business instead of country v country as inherently SOE Cartels lead to.
That is why the Communist party has been able to get away with what they have been able to get away with. The Communist party has been using a centralized national and military political interest to compete against countries with individuals and corporations avoid of government ownership. Inherently we have seen millions of jobs lost and not replaced 100,000 of employers had to shut down and could not re-open and yet, we still are allowing the Communist Cartels to be abusive and blame us for their abuse.

Please see my website, if you ever read this. It is a currently under construction to become the best Anti-Economic Warfare blog ever and the bright light for the biggest Communist Cartel Abuses since the Soviet Union.
http://rideriantieconomicwarfare.blogspot.com/
Think you can ride with the Rider I?

By: Timer

Timer — Thu, 04 Feb 2010 04:43:26 +0000

Can’t remember where I read this so I can’t give credit.

Amassing 5% to 6% of gobal currency reserves occured in the 1920′s US pre depression era. In Japan just before the lost decade. In China as they are having serious problems with of all things, inflated real estate prices.

The world needs balance and it looks like 6% of global currency reserves is a tipping point.

By: Tourdelance

Tourdelance — Sat, 22 Aug 2009 02:33:11 +0000

What’s China worried about anyway? The US Dollar is ready to rally soon. The trade is overloaded on the short side. Virtually no bulls in the market. The rally should commence in the next month or two. Deflation dictates such.

By: China Rising, Rent-Seeking Version | Innovation Toronto

China Rising, Rent-Seeking Version | Innovation Toronto — Wed, 12 Aug 2009 00:58:41 +0000

[...] China, new financial superpower … (blogs.cfr.org) [...]

By: Twofish

Twofish — Wed, 05 Aug 2009 15:30:48 +0000

Jian Feng: The most important thing for the CCP is to stay in power, as long as possible, if not forever, just like the First Emperor once imagined

I don’t think that is true. Most Party bureaucrats that I’ve met see Party membership as a job. I don’t think many of them would really care if the CCP exists a hundred years from now. They care if *China* exists a hundred years from now, but that’s different. Lot’s of people I know are willing to die for China. I don’t know a single person that is willing to die for the Communist Party, and no one in China that is willing to die for communism.

You can see this sort of in what happened in the Soviet Union. Once it became obvious that the Communist Party was an obstacle to people keeping their personal money and power, people left it.

Jian Feng: Thus, the foreign reserve can be view as China’s financial nuclear weapons.

Which did nothing to help the Soviet Union survive. Nuclear weapons mostly useless. Any weapon that ends up destroying you if you use it is pretty awful.

Huizer: Completely agree here.Control is the name of the game.

It’s not control. Merely supervision. Control doesn’t work. You end up with Stasi like files on everyone, and miss the fact that your economy doesn’t work.

The Communist Party of China doesn’t care what you do as long as it doesn’t think that you have any chance of overthrowing it. By not caring about things that aren’t a threat to its power, it can stomp down more heavily on people and things which it thinks are.

By: Twofish

Twofish — Wed, 05 Aug 2009 15:20:28 +0000

Greg: Back in April 2001, who could’ve dreamt such a dramatic, though never spoken, turn in geo-political desires of the US, let alone back in 1989 during the Tiananmen Square protests when Neocons also fanned the flames of imposing a representative democracy in China?

I did.

By: Rien Huizer

Rien Huizer — Wed, 05 Aug 2009 03:22:43 +0000

Twofish,

“But with things like strengthening the judicial system, SOE and banking reform, death penalty reform. A lot got done in those areas because people were able to do the reforms in ways that didn’t threaten the Party’s grip on power, and in fact increased it.”

Completely agree here.Control is the name of the game. That is why it would be so interesting to see what the Centre makes of the kinds of things in the PIN that have nothing to do with the exchange rate. Those reform ideas could strengthen the Centre (as bank reform did) but there are always unintended consequences. I think that SOE reform has stalled below the level where the Centre likes it to se (look at the spectacle around the steel industry). The judicial etc reforms take a lot of time because of the changes in culture. Just copying the Buergerliches Gesetzbuch and training lots of youg legal professionals does not get you good practice.

By: Rien Huizer

Rien Huizer — Wed, 05 Aug 2009 03:11:28 +0000

Twofish,

“Also why should Americans be particularly concerned over European poor as opposed to the poor in China, India, or Latin America?”

That is a good question with an easy answer. Globalization (rather improvements in logistics control and communications) has made certain types of labor uncompetitive in their local markets. The worst affected by this phenomenon are the Europeans and Americans. I did not suggest that Americans should care for Europeans or vive versa, but that their governments face the same challendge. Of course in their consumer role, residents of these countries have benefited from lower cost goods, and new jobs have been created in transporting, retailing etc that would not have existed otherwise. Given the fact that the people affected are citizens and have political rights (and in Europe they are organized as well, on a class basis via unions and labor parties) there is a risk that this will lead to trade political friction. If we had a world economy closer to arrow-debreu assumptions, markets would simply take care of the problem (and I guess there would be political risks then as well!) but the real world has lots od distortions, asymmeties and protectionisms. That facilitates the formation of reservoirs of (a) unemployable people in the rich countries and (b) the persistance of inexpensive (I mean also taking into account non wage costs and environmental limitations) labor that can be more or less mined. Both are potential issues for populist and ethical audiences respecively.

But pse do not think that my concern is about the lot of the poor, because then I might as well be concerned with the lot of roughly half the world’s population. But most of these people do not count, democratically. My remark aimed at the self interest of Western politicians, following more or less your own principle of motion in politics, and my preference for stability and order over elusive concepts like justice or market perfection.