Posted on 12/29/2007 7:19:02 AM PST by 1rudeboy
In WWII, both Britain and Japan imported a big chunk of their food. They still do today. I think most people don't make their own furniture or fabricate their own CPU's, but still have professional quality furniture and commercial grade computers in their homes. It's called trade. In fact, the protection of trade routes is why countries have built expeditionary armies and navies throughout history.
These garments used to be made in Malaysia, Hong Kong, Thailand, Singapore, etc. And once Chinese costs go up, they will be made in Tanzania, Pakistan, Madagascar, Cambodia, Vietnam, et al. Like it or not, low skill assembly jobs will migrate to the lowest cost areas. When the rest of the world overtakes the US in industrial output per capita, all of their clothing will have "Made in USA" labels. And Chinese companies will be manufacturing in the USA. That's not a milestone we ought to want to see.
So China has some oil for a while and they figure they can run a navy and some airforce for the time being and they can also let their serfs drive cars on the new 50,000 miles of Interstate Superhighway. So, will they be able to scale down their expectations when the war cuts off their supply completely? They aren’t Japanese who luv the Emperor. .
Many of those corporations were seduced by the prospect of selling to those billion Chinese consumers but that market has not developed for them. Instead China has become a manufacturing center replacing Mexico and some others for products reimported to the USA.
The real problem for China in the future is their present economy was jump-started by U.S. technology, something that would have taken them many years to develop. If they take over and decide to go it on their own it is doubtful they will keep up with the cvhanging tecnology of the futrue.
Creativity flourishes under freedom and withers under central command.
Can the Chinese shoot down low earth orbit satellites with rockets? Yep.
Again, U.S, technology.
Are they building a Blue Water navy? Yep.
U.S. technology via Russia.
Will they take over Taiwan via military invasion after the 2008 Olympics if HRH Clinton is elected el Presidente? Sure—and the U.S. won’t stop them.
The problem (in my opinion), remains however the size of their population. They all have to eat...and if, in the future, they can’t feed everybody then their’s another set of issues they’ll have to deal with as a “superpower”.
Why? When has any Communists country cared about the peasant other than as a ploy to gain power. They will let them starve until they have a balance between needed labor and supply. If it gets too bad they can always let the leftists bleeding hearts in America demand that we feed them.
The faster and trendier don't always apply. Due to shipping times ("slow boat" for low cost) and lead times for design and getting the factories up to speed, India and China aren't always the go-to locales for the latest fashion.
Cheers!
...oh, and Merry Christmas.
Great. So why can't 2harddrive find any Made in USA at the trendy stores to satisfy the buying urge?
Do American Consumers create a market for anything other than cheap? That's what I think the problem is.
I think the market is working just fine. The problem is that the consumer talks the talk, but buys the crap.
Become owing? Try English.
The rise in the U.S. trade deficit with China in the last ten years has displaced production that could have supported 2,166,000 U.S. jobs.
Says who? Pat Buchanan? Or EPI?
Yet, their status as a “developing country” absolves them from the Global Warming fiasco.
Important enough of a point that the writer chooses to finish with it.
But yet they still don’t have democracy, as many people naively thought would happen.
But you sure the heck can dodge giving an answer, that's for sure.
By the way, nice sliming with that Helen Thomas barb -- I bet she's a firm believer in that things -- economically and standard of living wise -- are becoming miserable in, too. I mean, crap, all the job losses and no job gains to offset them. GDP continues to shrink. Unemployment rates are terrible. We need a new New Deal, don't we?
I can almost hear Archie and Edith singing.
Come on, I was making fun of you and your "sky is falling" sentiment. And then of your deflection as though the guy you were debating with was a flaming Leftist when it's you that's buying into the Leftist garbage a fear, doom, and gloom
We are talking about jobs for our children in the future that are not being created.
That's a foolish opinion to have. Here, read this,then comment.
Maybe those kinds of people are just a thing of the past in your perfect socialist utopia but I prefer to keep my grandchildren off welfare.
Perhaps the best way to get what you prefer, then, is to demand less government interference in your life...to include demanding economic liberty for yourself and for your neighbor who has a different attitude toward foreign products than you might have.
You think there won't be a push for more welfare then? Let's not kid ourselves about what the Dems are pushing for. Globalism is right up their ally as well. We don't need to be in bed with their socialist world policies.
The only thing that would change is that Americans decrease their importation of foreign goods and begin manufacturing goods rather than distributing them through supply chains. When that happens, the capital flows that we've been getting (Net Imports are always equal to Net Capital Inflows) will dry up and low rate loans used for business expansion and home ownership (equity building endeavors) will be much costlier. Should we hasten this desired brand of 'Utopia' through government mandates or should we let the market sort this out?
As for the Burger King reference: just slightly over-the-top, don't you think? Perhaps a garment sewing plant is more likely...oh, the fun and joy.
You think there won't be a push for more welfare then?
Hell, there's FRepers right now in the forum who bash capitalism and it's competitive nature. These same people actually come out and express their support for industry subsidies. I kid you not! When I call them on it, I usually get ganged up on by other FREeepers who call me the commie; they're the ones supporting welfare and poo-pooing capitalism! This is happening on this very forum on a daily basis!
Globalism is right up their ally as well.
It depends what you're calling globalization. If you mean a desire for free(er) trade that seeks to knock down barriers and get the government out of planning and controlling economic activity, then hell no, they're not for globalization and you must have your facts wrong.
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.