Obama In China: Taking Candy From A Baby

[Svnla]

What do ya'll think? Too late to right the ship?

http://www.forbes.com/sites/eamonnf...na-taking-candy-from-a-baby/?partner=yahootix

 

[theeedude]

Yeah, too late to right the Forbes ship.

 

[IronWing]

Not sure why the author titled the piece that way but the issue isn't Obama, the issue is that the American people refuse to look out for thier self-interests. Protectionism works great, but for the wrong people.

 

[fskimospy]

Well anyone who wrote Blindside: Why Japan Is Still on Track to Overtake the U.S. by the Year 2000 must really be an expert on US/East Asian relationships.

 

[Svnla]

Not sure why the author titled the piece that way but the issue isn't Obama, the issue is that the American people refuse to look out for thier self-interests. Protectionism works great, but for the wrong people.

Agree with your comment about the tittle. In the article, he did say the problems go way back years ago (after WWII), not just recently.

 

[CottonRabbit]

Well anyone who wrote Blindside: Why Japan Is Still on Track to Overtake the U.S. by the Year 2000 must really be an expert on US/East Asian relationships.

I needed a good laugh.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Eamonn_Fingleton

 

[werepossum]

Not sure why the author titled the piece that way but the issue isn't Obama, the issue is that the American people refuse to look out for thier self-interests. Protectionism works great, but for the wrong people.

Either because Obama is the current example of American Presidents rushing over to give away the farm, or because the article will generate more hits with Obama in the title.

Well anyone who wrote Blindside: Why Japan Is Still on Track to Overtake the U.S. by the Year 2000 must really be an expert on US/East Asian relationships.

He was actually correct in concept, he merely failed to predict that China would out-Japan Japan and push that nation aside. Is that really so surprising of a book published in 1995? Remember than President Clinton only gave MFN status (by Executive Order) to China in June 1993, only began giving Loral Space and Communications and Hughes Electronics technology transfer waivers in November 1993, abolished transfer bans on supercomputers, satellites, and missile technology (first with waivers but soon wholesale) beginning in November 1993, only decoupled China's MFN status from its supposed human rights requirements (again by Executive Order) in May 1995, and didn't really finish completely dismantling our technology transfer bans until mid-1996.

I don't think anyone (outside of ChiCom leadership, of course) in mid-1995 could have predicted just how quickly China could embrace the principles Fingleton details and come to dominate our import market - and the world high technology market.

 

[Engineer]

What do ya'll think? Too late to right the ship?

http://www.forbes.com/sites/eamonnf...na-taking-candy-from-a-baby/?partner=yahootix

Yes, it's too late.

 

[werepossum]

Yes, it's too late.

I agree. However, there's one thing the author got wrong. Implying that China took from Obama as a thief would take from a baby ignores that Obama, like every President starting with Eisenhower, gave up what he wanted to give up.

 

[Engineer]

I agree. However, there's one thing the author got wrong. Implying that China took from Obama as a thief would take from a baby ignores that Obama, like every President starting with Eisenhower, gave up what he wanted to give up.

Doesn't matter what Obama did or didn't do. This train wreck was started long ago. Hell, we started tearing up the train tracks so there isn't even a chance of putting the train back on them.

I once read that there are 7 stages of every empire in world history. Step #6 was to use the slave labor or conquered lands for your goods and services. I think we are at Defcon 6.

 

[fskimospy]

Either because Obama is the current example of American Presidents rushing over to give away the farm, or because the article will generate more hits with Obama in the title.


He was actually correct in concept, he merely failed to predict that China would out-Japan Japan and push that nation aside. Is that really so surprising of a book published in 1995? Remember than President Clinton only gave MFN status (by Executive Order) to China in June 1993, only began giving Loral Space and Communications and Hughes Electronics technology transfer waivers in November 1993, abolished transfer bans on supercomputers, satellites, and missile technology (first with waivers but soon wholesale) beginning in November 1993, only decoupled China's MFN status from its supposed human rights requirements (again by Executive Order) in May 1995, and didn't really finish completely dismantling our technology transfer bans until mid-1996.

I don't think anyone (outside of ChiCom leadership, of course) in mid-1995 could have predicted just how quickly China could embrace the principles Fingleton details and come to dominate our import market - and the world high technology market.

Oh, so he failed to see that one country was engaged in an unsustainable path but he was right that another country on an unsustainable path would take its place.

Or, he was just totally wrong. Your choice.

 

[LegendKiller]

The American people were sold down the river by the political and investing class. They sold everybody on Trickle Down and Offshoring, only to eliminate the very jobs that drove higher profitability and thus higher consumption. We haven't learned our lesson still and won't till its too late.

It keeps going too. Look at the fucking morons trying to shut down the ExIm bank. Really? *EVERY* fucking country has one, either directly or by proxy. Yet our naive thought of "fair play" and "free markets" says to shut it down. Nobody else has shut their's down.