• Guest, The rules for the P & N subforum have been updated to prohibit "ad hominem" or personal attacks against other posters. See the full details in the post "Politics and News Rules & Guidelines."

Ross Perot: America could be taken over...

Page 2 - Seeking answers? Join the AnandTech community: where nearly half-a-million members share solutions and discuss the latest tech.

Engineer

Elite Member
Oct 9, 1999
39,255
699
126
What a lot of people do not understand, the factories that were used to "crank up production" have been demolished over the past 30 years.

At least two shipyards closed in southeast Texas during the 1980s. All that is there now is an empty field.
Don't have a clue about military shipping but I just saw a documentary on CNN that showed we have went from 90% of the worlds ship building to 0.5% (yes, 1/2 of a percent) while South Korea has went from 2% to 80%+ over that same time.

I once read that there are 7 steps of life to every empire and step #6 was relying on the slaves and their labor or conquered lands for your goods and services. Step #7 was, or course, fall of the empire.

The foundation is getting weaker....just a matter of time before the building comes down.
 

Texashiker

Lifer
Dec 18, 2010
18,812
192
106
Don't have a clue about military shipping but I just saw a documentary on CNN that showed we have went from 90% of the worlds ship building to 0.5% (yes, 1/2 of a percent) while South Korea has went from 2% to 80%+ over that same time.
This will give you an idea,

http://shipbuildinghistory.com/today/statistics/decline.htm

The shipbuilding industry stayed steady until 1984.

By the time bush sr. took office, we were producing 0 commercial ships. As compared to 20 - 40 ships every year in the previous decades.

The economy of southeast Texas was devastated when our shipyards closed. In all honestly, I doubt we will ever recover from losing those jobs. People went from making $18 to $6 an hour.
 

Leymenaide

Senior member
Feb 16, 2010
596
191
116
US Navy can, no bluster, take on all the world's navies combined. I am really not concerned about any take overs happening.
Chinese subs have surfaced in the middle of our carrier groups and fired a missile off the coast of L.A.
Our Surface fleet could be destroyed in a day or less.
In the 70’s I listened to the Chinese American Friendship Committee defend the extermination of 180 million people to carry out their glorious revolution. They had no regrets.
They have sold us the rope that we will be hung with.
 

Nintendesert

Diamond Member
Mar 28, 2010
7,761
5
0
Chinese subs have surfaced in the middle of our carrier groups and fired a missile off the coast of L.A.
Our Surface fleet could be destroyed in a day or less.
In the 70’s I listened to the Chinese American Friendship Committee defend the extermination of 180 million people to carry out their glorious revolution. They had no regrets.
They have sold us the rope that we will be hung with.


This is true diesel subs are very quiet and are capable of slipping into ship formations unheard. Our Allies have even quieter subs than the Chinese though.

It doesn't matter, diesel subs aren't sunk in a battle and while they are submerged. They are sunk when they come to the surface for air and to run their engines instead of the batteries.

Look at history, submarine warfare isn't all that effective anymore. The purpose of our submarines is to remain hidden off coasts to deliver nuclear weapons quickly. Diesel subs can't do this.
 

Engineer

Elite Member
Oct 9, 1999
39,255
699
126
The economy of southeast Texas was devastated when our shipyards closed. In all honestly, I doubt we will ever recover from losing those jobs. People went from making $18 to $6 an hour.
Can't be true. People, even some on this very forum, have said that the service jobs replacing those are better and it's just like going from agriculture to manufacturing vs manufacturing to service. We're just starting the next BOOM....right!?!? ^_^
 

Leymenaide

Senior member
Feb 16, 2010
596
191
116
This is true diesel subs are very quiet and are capable of slipping into ship formations unheard. Our Allies have even quieter subs than the Chinese though.

It doesn't matter, diesel subs aren't sunk in a battle and while they are submerged. They are sunk when they come to the surface for air and to run their engines instead of the batteries.

Look at history, submarine warfare isn't all that effective anymore. The purpose of our submarines is to remain hidden off coasts to deliver nuclear weapons quickly. Diesel subs can't do this.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Type_093_submarine
The Type 093 (NATO reporting name: Shang, Chinese designation: 09-III) is a nuclear powered attack submarine class deployed by the Chinese People's Liberation Army Navy. These boats are expected to replace the older Type 091 (NATO: Han class) SSNs currently in service. The Type 093 will be armed with various torpedoes and anti-ship missiles.
 

Nintendesert

Diamond Member
Mar 28, 2010
7,761
5
0
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Type_093_submarine
The Type 093 (NATO reporting name: Shang, Chinese designation: 09-III) is a nuclear powered attack submarine class deployed by the Chinese People's Liberation Army Navy. These boats are expected to replace the older Type 091 (NATO: Han class) SSNs currently in service. The Type 093 will be armed with various torpedoes and anti-ship missiles.



And?

The fear mongering you posted about their subs are only in relation to their diesel subs. The USA and Russia are very good at tracking nuclear subs. They aren't anywhere near as quiet as diesel ones.

So all the advantages the Chinese had will be gone with the move to a nuclear platform unless their goal is to play brinksmanship and park nuclear missiles off Japan's coast or America's coast.

That however is a completely different topic on the effectiveness of submarines in ship to ship naval warfare.
 

marincounty

Diamond Member
Nov 16, 2005
3,236
5
76
What a lot of people do not understand, the factories that were used to "crank up production" have been demolished over the past 30 years.

At least two shipyards closed in southeast Texas during the 1980s. All that is there now is an empty field.

If you want an example, take a look at this chart

http://shipbuildinghistory.com/today/statistics/deliver1.htm

Merchant ships, 1977, 25 delivered
Merchant ships, 1988, 0 delivered

During the 1980s, the ship building industry was wiped out. The people were laid off, the shipyards were demolished, the trained people that used to build ships 30 years ago are now retiring and dying.
And who was president during the 1980's? Ronald Reagan. Are you saying that Ronald Reagan destroyed the ship building industry? That can't be true, he's an American hero and our greatest president ever.
 

marincounty

Diamond Member
Nov 16, 2005
3,236
5
76
We should have elected Ross Perot 20 years ago.

The man did not become a billionaire by being stupid.
No, he became a billionaire the old-fashioned way, he ripped off the govt with ridiculous contracts he received by lobbying and paying off politicians. Thank goodness he was never elected to anything.
 

feralkid

Lifer
Jan 28, 2002
15,434
2,986
126
No, he became a billionaire the old-fashioned way, he ripped off the govt with ridiculous contracts he received by lobbying and paying off politicians. Thank goodness he was never elected to anything.


This^^

All the charm and finesse of an Oily used car salesman.

Not good for America.

/thread.
 

Anarchist420

Diamond Member
Feb 13, 2010
8,649
0
76
www.facebook.com
I liked him until I took a course on macroeconomics.
He was very independent but Clinton wasn't as bad as Bush was. Perot would be closest to a mercantilist... I always found it odd that he was anti-deficit when he wanted to spend so much, but then almost all politicians are that way. I don't care about deficits, I care about what spending rates are and Obama isn't as bad as Bush was in that regard. From a pro-liberty perspective (as well as to get a measure of how GDP is very much a typical statistic), GDP should probably be redefined as all "production" minus double the govt expenditure since that is what the govt is spending/taxing. Obama's policies are to close to comfort for an Austrian like myself, but he's not as ultra-Keynesian as Romney is, the latter of whom is always talking about GDP and deficit per GDP and removing tax deductions (he probably talks about debt/annual GDP because he thinks central planning (Reaganomics) can alter GDP to always give the govt more... we need way more tax deductions for everyone (like deductions for volunteering, especially at free clinics... like $100 or so per patient seen and my dad wouldn't have to worry about working) and totally exempt all Federal employees (doesn't really matter what the top marginal rate is) from federal income taxation along with a lot less govt spending.

Reaganomics increased GDP for most of the time it was in practice, but it also was because there was more bureaucracy (like when the IRS agents work more to make sure people aren't taking advantage of the tax code) and military spending. His protectionism (as well as that of Bush 41's) against Japan and America was also disastrous. Ross Perot didn't really seem to realize how mercantilist Reagan and Bush 41 really were.
 

yllus

Elite Member & Lifer
Aug 20, 2000
20,583
431
126
Have you been keeping up to date on our infrastructure? We can not even keep our bridges updated, how are we supposed to fight a war with a major world power?

How many power plants have been built in the past 25 years? Not enough to stop rolling blackouts in peak summer months. If we can not even keep the lights on, how are we supposed to fight a war?

How many steel factories have been closed over the past 30 years?

Do we have the capability to make enough steel to build ships?

How many shipyards have been closed in the 1980s? Dozens. Shipyards all along the gulf coast have been closed and demolished over the past 30 years.

We do not even have enough skilled people that could be put to work building tanks, ships, trucks, guns, planes,,,, if we needed them. Most of todays young people have no idea what its like to work with their hands.
Give me a break. Your complaint is that you might not today be able to build as many machines of war as during the 80s?

News flash: The Cold War is over. We won!

We had to buy bullets from Europe during the Iraq war because we ran out (or low). Not a good thing.
Well, you were engaged in two simultaneous wars. I think the supply dipping low during that is likely the exception and not the rule.

There's plenty to dislike about what Lithium381 calls chain migration - we need a lot of study in how to avoid it. In particular, I'm curious as to how South Korea has continuously expanded its economy - I suspect the reason is a very large amount of government intervention and bullying anytime a foreign buyer came sniffing at the door of Samsung or Hyundai.

But silly slogans like "America could be taken over" only serve to stir up xenophobic sentiment. Everyone in America will not wake up to a Chinese boss in a decade's time, or even ten decades'. And if they do, so what? Will they idle the plants, keep all the real knowledge to themselves and make all Americans destitute? Hardly. China is far more dependent on the U.S. than the other way around, and even in a future where that's not so, why would they do anything to hurt an enormous customer and trade partner? There's no sense to this scenario at all.
 

Engineer

Elite Member
Oct 9, 1999
39,255
699
126
There's plenty to dislike about what Lithium381 calls chain migration - we need a lot of study in how to avoid it. In particular, I'm curious as to how South Korea has continuously expanded its economy - I suspect the reason is a very large amount of government intervention and bullying anytime a foreign buyer came sniffing at the door of Samsung or Hyundai.
South Korea invested heavily (government) in the infrastructure of the ship and automotive industries (i.e. more ship building ports, etc) and it's paid off nicely.


But silly slogans like "America could be taken over" only serve to stir up xenophobic sentiment. Everyone in America will not wake up to a Chinese boss in a decade's time, or even ten decades'. And if they do, so what? Will they idle the plants, keep all the real knowledge to themselves and make all Americans destitute? Hardly. China is far more dependent on the U.S. than the other way around, and even in a future where that's not so, why would they do anything to hurt an enormous customer and trade partner? There's no sense to this scenario at all.
I'm not saying that I think that we will be overrun and RULED by the likes of the Chinese, but I do feel that there a very large portion of the population that's going downward and will be meeting the Chinese at the low end of the wage scale soon enough. As for hurting a trade partner, I don't put anything past a communist country like China.

Regardless, we're moving in the wrong direction, IMO, as the general economy indicates. We don't get our ship right, it will soon be assembled and run in somebody else's port. The foundation is crumbling and the building will soon fall. Those at the top with helicopters and parachutes (golden) will be the only ones standing in the rubble (from an offshore land to avoid getting dirty in the wandering masses left in the rubble).
 

Texashiker

Lifer
Dec 18, 2010
18,812
192
106
Give me a break. Your complaint is that you might not today be able to build as many machines of war as during the 80s?

News flash: The Cold War is over. We won!
And Rome defeated the Gauls, so what? Rome still fell.
 

Engineer

Elite Member
Oct 9, 1999
39,255
699
126
Give me a break. Your complaint is that you might not today be able to build as many machines of war as during the 80s?
We've lost our ability to build most machines, including nuclear power plants (i.e. have to get Japanese assistance to build one now if we needed it). A co-workers says it best, if we ever get in a war with China, we'll be naked and shoeless and I doubt that we have enough know how to get a plant off the ground quick enough to fix anything.

Not to mention that good paying jobs that CREATE something (wealth) leaving the country for shitty service jobs (would you like fries with your new, 4 year degree)?


A'murica....fuck yea! :colbert:
 

sportage

Diamond Member
Feb 1, 2008
9,570
1,524
126
You can't "take over" your self.
They are we and we are they.
Land can be illustrated on a map, but economy is global.
What happens here happens there, and vice versa.
The idea of taking over in a physical sense is so 1940's.
China doesn't want our dirt and we don't want theirs.
And our economies are as one, so that take-over argument is moot.
The map might be labeled United States, or China, or Mexico with pretty colors, but beyond that there is really nothing to take-over.
Land grab went out with Hitler and WWII.
Todays world, the only physical take-over would be occupying based on religious beliefs.
I don't believe Israel has any desire to relocate the Holy City to Chicago.
 

ASK THE COMMUNITY