Join In On The Action "Register Here" To View The Forums

Already a Member Login Here

Board index Forum Index
User avatar
Ambassador
 
Posts: 21062
Joined: 15 Jun 2002, 6:53 am

Post 14 Feb 2011, 1:51 pm

rickyp wrote:steve

As usual for you, an unsupported and unsupportable conclusion.

Gawd you're an idiot.


Hmm, let's find out which of us is lacking in intelligence, since you've thrown down the challenge:

In March 1984, US trade talks with Japan over the issue of semi-conductors being "dumped" in the US stale mated. Over the next few years a number of US chip makers closed shop and 100,000 Americans lost their jobs.


Wow. Good point. Next thing you know, you'll be citing trade friction in the 30's between Japan and the US. Why did you post this? Oh yeah, in response to this:

rickyp wrote:
Steve is largely right about the Chinese eating the US's lunch in trade deals. Of course he's only recognized it because its happening under Obama.


As usual for you, an unsupported and unsupportable conclusion.


Um, let's see, so I say you are jumping to a conclusion that I'm complaining about China because Obama is President and you respond with a trade story from the 1980's. And, that proves that I'm an idiot?

Either the THC is really effecting your reasoning capacity or it never really existed.--like most of your so-called "facts."
User avatar
Ambassador
 
Posts: 15994
Joined: 15 Apr 2004, 6:29 am

Post 16 Feb 2011, 2:24 pm

Doctor Fate wrote:Only a socialist, like yourself, would call industrial espionage and intellectual property theft "free trade."
Nope. Although unfettered capitalism is hardly free from such issues.

But free trade does mean people being able to buy whatever they want. Including knowhow, or just the results that they can try to reverse-engineer.

I love you blaming Obama though. Wasn't it Nixon who gave China MFN status?


No, it wasn't. It was Carter, then continued on temporarily until made permanent under Clinton. Close though. :rolleyes:
So when Reagan and Bush I renewed it every single year in between (including shortly after Tienanmen Square), I guess that was Carter's fault too? Just like it was his fault that Mubarak was backed by the USA (even though Mubarak didn't succeed Sadat until late in 1981, months after Carter was sent back to the peanut farm)?

But you are right. I was confusing it with the 1972 Nixon visit, within a few years of the horrific 'Cultural Revolution' which sought to exploit the divisions since the Sino-Soviet split and open trade relations with the PRC. Not quite up to MFN, but if you look at the trend towards greater trade and friendship with the Chinese, it starts with Nixon.

Luckily, your favourite Presidents in the last 30 years did all they could to reverse such foolishness, right?

The real issue is that the world is catching you up, tech-wise, and there are more competitors than ever. The only way to stop that is to go protectionist. As it benefits your international competitors to cheat, they will, but that is just a short-cut to the inevitable. And what can you do about it? Not much, if you want to trade.
User avatar
Ambassador
 
Posts: 21062
Joined: 15 Jun 2002, 6:53 am

Post 16 Feb 2011, 3:05 pm

danivon wrote:But you are right.


I might have to bookmark this.

The real issue is that the world is catching you up, tech-wise, and there are more competitors than ever. The only way to stop that is to go protectionist.


Which is going to become increasingly likely if China continues its neo-mercantilism. We are going to eventually see someone with Trump's view of China come to power.
User avatar
Ambassador
 
Posts: 15994
Joined: 15 Apr 2004, 6:29 am

Post 16 Feb 2011, 3:30 pm

Which is down to how China is behaving, not so much what the US is doing. It's not just China, by the way. The other BRIC nations are also catching up in their own ways.

It's what happened to the UK in the 19th Century. We were the leaders of the Industrial Revolution, and we were fairly strong on Free Trade towards the end of the century. But by WWI we'd been overtaken by you and Germany, and France and Italy were on our heels.

Sure, we made some bad decisions along the way, but in reality it would have happened eventually. The next wave can learn from the mistakes of the innovators, can cut out all that development time and go straight to improving production methods.

But it's interesting to note you see the success of China's system. It is indeed internally anything by free trade, but it is aided by moves toward international free trade.