Powell Reassures India on Technology Jobs

New York Times ^ | March 17, 2004 | STEVEN R. WEISMAN

[ninenot]

Sorry. Your "imports will increase" did not specify that the "PRICE of imports will increase."

"Increased imports" doesn't have quite the same meaning.

[MissouriForBush]

I find your outlook to be naive and simplistic. The intricate protectionist trade barriers the Chinese have in place are designed not to help American or other Western companies in the long run.

Unfair trade opens up China solely on Chinese terms, i.e. under the purview of the Chinese government and those with a vested interest in maintaining its power base and goals for world domination. As much as we all wish to see more democratic tendencies result there, be on the lookout down the road for a corrupt oligarchy (with "old-school" ties) flirting with fascism.

[WilliamofCarmichael]

RE: ketchup?

The article (#136) I commented on reaffirms what I have googled time and time again. To wit, the price of doing business in China is your technology and intellectual property. Those items are then used against you, first in domestic competition in Red China and finally in global competition.

The article also reports that the Bush administration has acted to stop WTO violations by the Chi-coms. Earlier efforts to get the Chi-coms to allow their currency to seek its true level failed.

Could you or your talk radio buddies puleeze(!) provide sources to back up your rosy assessment of "free" trade with the government of China? Like, when will all areas of China be allowed to benefit?

"banking services?" China has banking service already -- almost half their value is consumed by nonperforming loans to keep state owned people's "factories" open in areas outside the "capitalist" zones and to fund surplus construction projects. The nonperforming loans are estimated by some to be 40 percent of GDP.

[dirtboy]

These newly successful countries have the one thing that used to be our strength - homogenous workforces.

India is homogenous? That's probably news to them.

[WilliamofCarmichael]

RE: "naive and simplistic" view of the Chinese government

Your post is a great description of matters. "The Chinese government and those with a vested interest in maintaining its power base. . . ."

IMO it's Lenin's New Economic Plan (NEP) at work here, the Chi-com version. The 1920s Russia allowed individual Russians freedom to earn (nepmen). When they started to outperform the Communist system, within hours :>), they were stopped and executed, I believe.

Meanwhile Armand Hammer, et al. set up Bank of the Useful Idiots and Useful Idiots Shipping to accommodate American corporations' lust to transfer wealth to Russia and have a shot at Russia's emerging "middle class."

The Chi-coms did it right, they are the "capitalists."

Something new: the best of both worlds, personal wealth from capitalism and absolute power from Communism.

Something old: useful idiots.

[MissouriForBush]

I fully agree with your assessment. What's sad is that the useful idiots dominate BOTH of our major political parties here.

[YankeeReb]

This issue is Bush's Achilles heel, he'd better get serious and start at least addressing this or the dims will win the issue by default. John 'effing Kerry has no idea how to handle this either, but Bush is the man in charge so the blame will fall on him.

[AM2000]

I'm "Indian-American", as they say, and these (expletive deleted) do not stand for me.

They stand for Indians. They're (expletive deleted) "Indian-Americans" like me right up the (expletive deleted).

And real "Indian-Americans" realize this. It's the "Indian-American" business folk who own companies that are profiting from outsourcing who fund this PAC. Not IT grunts like me. (Expletive deleted) them.

[templar]

This WILL be the downfall of the Bush Administration.

The strongest advantage Bush has going for him this election year is Kerry. It's going to be really hard to offset that, no matter what he does.

[Fledermaus]

The century already turned...it's already happening.

[Fledermaus]

I find your outlook to be totall absent of fact and full of nothing by hyperbole.

Simplistic would be too generous.

[Fledermaus]

Oh, so we should deny ourselves markets because you don't want our companies to build plants in other places around the world to service them.

Yeah, that makes a lot of sense...NOT!

You'll have to stock up on Depends once China gets more and more democratic and entrepreneurial and we have to compete globally with 1.2 billion of them vs. 350 million of us. Personally, I think we have more to offer and we'll both see mutual benefit.

But go ahead and live in your short term world whining about small particulars in this WTO agreement or that World Bank argument.

I'm sure your ancestors said they same thing when the automobile replaced the horse drawn carriage and the hand held calculator wiped out slide rules.

[WilliamofCarmichael]

RE: "I think we have more to offer and we'll both see mutual benefit."

You are capable of making a statement without insults! That's good.

Now if only we could get you to read and respond to what we actually said.