Comments on: Geithner Lifts Ass For Chinese Masters

By: ktrpf

ktrpf — Wed, 10 Jun 2009 11:19:34 +0000

Dante, you’re just repeating (empirically unfounded) silly trivialities you picked up on TV. The technological superiority of the US over China is still huge, and that gap will probably never close. The output of American industry is still larger than that of China, and way more complex. Most of China’s industrial output is assembling imported components with minimal value added.
The US pumps out way more new patents, research, science publications etc. than China.

Read this: The Chinese Reform Experience, A Critical Assessment

By: Dante

Dante — Wed, 10 Jun 2009 02:25:27 +0000

Paul Yarbles: This allows China to actually produce what the rest of the world wants while America becomes like H.G. Wells’ Eloi.

But Western universities are too busy producing man-hating feminists in “Gender Studies,” and raising good little anti-Western preachers through a thousand different sociology classes, to have time for something so filthy as to learn how to produce goods! Obviously the Chinese haven’t realized how the focus on engineering, mathematics, physics and chemistry only hurts society. Don’t they want progress?

By: hydrogen bomb

hydrogen bomb — Mon, 08 Jun 2009 04:58:42 +0000

Does it make me gay if I find that photoshop job arousing?

By: interesting study on this

interesting study on this — Sat, 06 Jun 2009 23:01:27 +0000

“Moreover, the structure of China’s trade has been undergoing significant change during the 2000s. In 2000, about one third of China’s exports went to Developing Asia, about 53% went to the US, Japan and the European Union and the remaining 14% went to ‘Other Countries’.
However, by 2007, while the share of China’s exports to Developing Asia remained roughly the same, its share going to the US, Japan and the European Union dropped by 15 percentage points to about 38% while its share going to ‘Other Countries’ rose to almost 29%.
The share of China’s exports shipped to the US declined from about 20% in 2000 to about 16% in 2007 (Asian Development Outlook 2009, Table A11). This being the case, the Chinese policy of pegging its renminbi to the dollar does not make a great deal of sense—nor does pumping reserves into US securities in order to abate depreciation of the dollar. China is bound to abandon such an increasingly ineffective and risky strategy, and appears already to have taken steps to do so.”

Will Pinning the Blame on China Help Correct Global Imbalances?

By: coldequation

coldequation — Thu, 04 Jun 2009 15:03:50 +0000

Geithner is lying his ass off. No way is Obama going to cut spending or raise taxes that much, not unless he absolutely has to, like California has to now. But what do you expect him to say? That these bonds are going to be worthless, but keep buying them anyway?

By: ktrpf

ktrpf — Thu, 04 Jun 2009 14:08:27 +0000

First of all, I don’t see what’s so cool about obsessively using anal sex-imagery to describe economic questions. I don’t think it makes your stories more revealing, all I feel is a faint sense of disgust and puzzlement why someone feels compelled to repeat over and over “we’re rock hard” and so on.
why don’t you cut that out? thanks.

On the issue itself: I think there’s a good chance that you get this completely wrong. Who’s in danger with holding all those Treasuries and agency debt? China or the US?
Well, actually, it’s quite possible that neither of them, but if someone’s in trouble it’s rather China, not the US.
China became extremely export-dependent in the last 10 years, exports amounting to 40% of its GDP, but almost all of this is import-reexport stuff, meaning imported components coming in from other Asian countries, assembled in China, reexported to the US and Europe. China has lost control of a large part of its industrial base and technological development in the process. The bulk of its social and health system hs been dismantled, creating a 100-150 million strong migrnat proletariat, deprived of social services, insurance etc., relying on precarious employment in cities, now becoming unemployed by the millions.
The countryside is in turmoil. Environemental destruction is severe, the Pearl River delta has probably become the most polluted area of the world. One could go on.
The point is, China has enormous internal problems, and if the US devalues (i don’t think it will, but who knows), it’s China who’s gonna be screwed, not the US. in per capita terms the US is about ten times richer than China, and could (probably) easily rebuild (in an emergency) the industries that went abroad, however, China has smthng like 500-700 million peasants who still live in premodern conditions etc.

(Check out this article on recent Chinese economic history: The Realities of China Today)

So the premise of this article is probably completely wrong in the first place.
IT IS TRUE however, that Geithner works for Wall Street, and has a ghastly record as an IMF-executioner of East Asia. On that we agree.

By: Asehpe

Asehpe — Thu, 04 Jun 2009 07:53:31 +0000

What the heck? All of this just to say that the US owes money to China, and will go on owing more and more? And that the prospects are bad — the Chinese are getting more power over the US?

No shit Sherlock. Really. So you do have eyes. Gee, if only you didn’t obsess about gay porn photoshopped with politicians’ heads…

Tough times. So be it. Makes the future more interesting.

By: Snarky

Snarky — Thu, 04 Jun 2009 01:29:58 +0000

China has two options:

Option 1: Fuck the US
Option 2: Allow the US to fuck China

Recently in Georgia, “NATO” (read US + crazy European conservative nuts) tried to offer the same choices to Russia. Guess which one Russia picked? I’ll give you guys a hint: The Russian Army wasn’t the one taking it in the ass, and then the pissed off Russians, (thank you western corporate media idiots) exposed all those fancy tactics and pointed out that US-trained armies are very defeatable when fighting actual armies, not tanks driving on a highway.

Can’t the US learn to give better options? I thought Cheney’s not in office anymore. Oh, yeah - I’m going to place $1000000 on China picking Option 1. Anyone want to take that bet? As for nukes, US won’t use them first, because the nuked countries will send their nuclear missiles at those behind the strikes, the Cheneys, and the Cheneys care too much for their lives.

By: Rook Godzirra

Rook Godzirra — Wed, 03 Jun 2009 17:29:05 +0000

That’s not real. If you look closely it is photoshopped.

By: Rob

Rob — Wed, 03 Jun 2009 10:44:56 +0000

The point of the article being? That the US owes money to China? We already knew that. That “Team Exiled” obsesses over gay sex? We already knew that too.