Posted on 09/02/2019 4:28:18 AM PDT by Eleutheria5
That is it in a nutshell.
The theft of intellectual property is key, as is ownership of factories doing business in China.
If I understand it correctly, it was only recently that certain foreign based businesses were allowed to have more than 49% ownership in their ventures, and I still don’t know if that raising of the ceiling was uniform or only covered certain types of investment such as foreign ownership of joint venture fund management companies.
I don’t know if a tractor company wants to set up a factory in China to build tractors, if they still require a 51% Chinese holding to build and open the factory.
And that “concession” was likely due to Trump. Perhaps some other Freeper has a better understanding of this aspect and could explain it for us.
The more I hear of these intellectuals of our time the more I realize that they are not so intelligent after all. Lord help us all!!!
I agree, which is why I covered such typically unmentioned in Econ 501 elements in my narrative.
The concept of favorable/unfavorable balance of trade involves winners and losers. If one country has an unfavorable balance of trade, it is importing more goods than exporting and is reducing the overall money supply to some other country. The other country is increasing its money supply. Decreasing the money supply has a negative effect on its economy, and increasing the money supply is a stimulus to the economy.
Thomas Sowell has written two great books on this subject: “Intellectuals and Society” and “Intellectuals and Race”...I highly recommend both.
This attitude, he said, is “a large part of our problem.” He added: “The Fed is a professional place with excellent economists.”
If you were making $200,000 per year you and your family would be able to afford lots of nice things. If, all of a sudden, you were cut down to $100,000 per year a lot of those toys you had would have to be gotten rid of.
China has been able to buy with our money divisions of troops, aircraft carriers, nuclear missiles, submarines, bullets and on and on.
Trump knows that if he cuts the 545 billion deficit down to zero that a lot of China’s military toys will have to be gotten rid of. The perfect model for this is what Reagan did to the Soviet Union.
Mr. Fischer is too full of Liberalism to grasp this fact.
If they could bring themselves to understand this, they would understand him.
What they cannot and do not want to believe is that their intelligence is mediocre in comparison to that of President Trump, and, though the intentions of some of them--possibly most of them--are benevolent, the mediocrity of their intelligence prevents them from understanding their limitations and the truth about Trump.
He got the clock by simply taking that year's numbers, and increasing it by current/expected growth rate.
Fischer doesn’t understand Negotiations 101. He should go back to school.
He sees it as only right and just that China should get a bigger military, to atone for the allies short-changing them during WW II. Being liberal, he probably sees it as only right and just that Iran should get the bomb, because the US sent in volunteers to support the Shah in the 1950s, when the new Prime Minister illegally nationalized the oil fields. To remedy past discrimination, let the poor Asians and Africans kill you, so they won’t hate you as much.
Kenny Rogers might help him learn when to hold ‘em and when to fold ‘em.
I think one thing Liberals never seem “to get” is that 3,084 counties out of 3,141 * effectively hate their guts. Instead, every day on talk shows and on the web, they act like they won 3,141 and we won 57.
* Liberal Snopes argues the number of counties Trump won...naturally.
Like many amateur economists on FR (and professional free rangers) they really do not understand the limits of their 'knowledge.'
In the middle of a discussion with another 'expert' here...they do not understand that economics is not just about book learning, it's about people...a subject which, to a person, they display spectacular ignorance.
Not in my experience. free and voluntary trade, by definition, should be win-win.
Somebody wins and somebody loses? True but I think Vince Lombardi, the famous Green Bay Coach said something to the effect: “There is no substitute for Victory.”
The American businessmen who voluntarily sold out for short term gain didn't do our nation any favors.
But good-time Charlie’s got the blues.
It’s not a game if you don’t keep score...
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.