1. Welcome to Religious Forums, a friendly forum to discuss all religions in a friendly surrounding.

    Your voice is missing! You will need to register to get access to the following site features:
    • Reply to discussions and create your own threads.
    • Our modern chat room. No add-ons or extensions required, just login and start chatting!
    • Access to private conversations with other members.

    We hope to see you as a part of our community soon!

The racial equality battle is still ongoing

Discussion in 'Political Debates' started by Terrywoodenpic, Jun 1, 2020.

  1. Vinayaka

    Vinayaka devotee
    Premium Member

    Joined:
    Feb 10, 2011
    Messages:
    30,218
    Ratings:
    +14,165
    Religion:
    Saivite Hindu
    I honestly don't know about China. I haven't lived there, in some small town, or city, and experienced it for myself. I hear lots of other people's opinions which are usually based on other people's opinions. We traveled through once, overnighting in Beijing, because of fog in Delhi. On the flight home some passenger, a fellow Canadian, talked my ear off of how much he loved the place. His business was thriving, he found a spouse, and couldn't wait to get back. Yes it was his opinion. But his opinion wasn't based on someone else's opinion.

    In short, it's complicated, and I'll go with 'I don't know' because well ... I don't know. I might very well hate the place if I had to move there, or I might love it.

    I wonder just where everyone who seems to be experts gets their information some days.
     
    • Like Like x 2
  2. Stevicus

    Stevicus Veteran Member
    Premium Member

    Joined:
    Sep 26, 2011
    Messages:
    12,783
    Ratings:
    +6,437
    Religion:
    Agnostic
    It looks like you're addressing several issues here: Trade, China, US relationship with China, Hong Kong, US domestic politics, US racial issues, and the UK relationship with China and the US. I'm not sure if there's a central point that ties this all together or what you're trying to say.

    As for the battle for racial equality, I agree that's still ongoing. I think that has gotten more complicated due to political forces pushing for class inequality, along with other abuses and injustices. As long as the elite continue to contrive ways to keep the masses impoverished and divided against each other, then racism and malignant nationalism will be some of the consequences.

    As for China, we've discussed that quite a bit lately. You seem to take a special interest in China. I don't know what kind of racial equality they have in China, although I've heard Africans who visited there complain of racist treatment. Overall, the Chinese government seems to be embracing the principles of malignant nationalism, which overlaps with racism quite a bit.

    I think we can try to get this whole trade situation straightened out at some point, but the main problem (as I've mentioned before) is not in China; it's in the U.S. Both political parties and the capitalist overseers have jumped on the free trade bandwagon with reckless abandon, and this is why we're in a bad spot today. The people were warned about the consequences of this decades ago, but people didn't listen (and many still won't listen even now). This is a problem of corruption and greed, along with extremely entrenched special interests.

    At least for this problem, we might actually learn from China and follow the example they set back in 1949, when they had similar problems with a government entrenched with greedy and corrupt interests. I think there is much we can learn from the Chinese.

    I don't know if I'd compare the Hong Kong protests with the riots in the U.S. In the U.S., the riots were triggered by an egregious and horrific murder by a police officer. Initially, it was just about wanting justice and the immediate arrest of all the officers who were involved.

    They dragged their feet on making the arrest, which was a serious mistake, but all in all, the government is still expected to do their job and ensure justice. A lot of times they don't do it, but if you asked any government official if they approve of racism in the police departments of the country, they would most certainly say "No." So, the rioters are against racist police, and the government is against racist police (or so they say).

    In Hong Kong, it's different, since the protesters want Hong Kong to remain free, while the Chinese government is apparently against that. So, the Chinese government doesn't agree with the protesters and is going against what their own people want. To be comparable to the U.S., Trump would have to give a full pardon to Derek Chauvin and immediately appoint him Director of the FBI. Since Trump hasn't done that, I can't see any basis for comparison.
     
    • Useful Useful x 1
  3. Augustus

    Augustus the Unreasonable

    Joined:
    Dec 27, 2014
    Messages:
    11,084
    Ratings:
    +9,665
    Religion:
    none
    Trump's response was incompetent. Not sure how that absolves China though, unless by 'my enemy's enemy is my friend'

    In that case why do you believe they have learned their lesson when they didn't learn it last time?

    The COVID-19 crisis that first took hold in Wuhan in central China exposed the Chinese authorities’ consistent lack of transparency in acknowledging any disease outbreaks threatening public health. Local and national authorities’ unwillingness to report the onset of the outbreak as well as their failure to acknowledge the resulting tragedy in Wuhan turned it into as much a man-made catastrophe as a biological one. More importantly China’s reluctance to share uncensored information with international communities has led some of its Western critics to condemn Beijing.

    Investigating China: COVID-19 and the CCP

    Other than arresting people who tried to publicise the virus, and trying to cover up the extent of the problem, and Long after they knew of the virus' danger, China was also putting pressure on countries not to ban flights from China.
     
    • Useful Useful x 1
  4. Terrywoodenpic

    Terrywoodenpic Oldest Heretic

    Joined:
    Jun 4, 2005
    Messages:
    15,879
    Ratings:
    +3,418
    Religion:
    Anglican...heretic
    I have no illusions about the difficulties that advent of Covid19 have caused both to the Chinese Authorities and to the world.
    However the "blame Game" will not solve any of them.
    China has a devolved health system that is often at odds with itself, never-the less has done a good job of containing the Virus with in its own borders.
    It has handed to WHO and individual countries a high level of statistical and medical data necessary to fight the outbreak.
    Other countries have handled their individual situations from brilliantly to almost impossibly badly.
    The USA and the UK fall towards the bottom of that list, if measured either by death rate or damage to their economies.

    It has become clear that The USA is conflating Covid19 with their distrust and envy toward China's trade success. and fear of its domination of the telecommunications field, and the possibility of using it to breach Americas security. Trumps recent moves against Huawei are an attempt to destroy that company completely.
    This conflation of the "Chinese" problem, has clearly brought the two nations on to a collision course amounting.
    To a trade war, based on the ownership of Hi tech assets and their denial to Chinese companies.

    This will inevitably backfire... because China has already indicated that any gaps will be filled by home grown investment and production. it seems certain that China will have the ability to manufacture its own 3nm chips by next year. Huawei has purchased $20 billion of stock to see it through the next 18 months.

    This war on China will inevitably cost the USA dearly in terms of scientific, industrial and political leadership in the world.
    Who could possibly trust a nation who would use their political power to attack and attempt to destroy another's industries.? simply because they can not compete industrially or scientifically.
     
    • Like Like x 3
  5. Nowhere Man

    Nowhere Man Bompu Zen Man with a little bit of Bushido.

    Joined:
    Mar 7, 2009
    Messages:
    28,513
    Ratings:
    +11,241
    Religion:
    Bompu Zen Buddhism
    As bleak as things seem here atm I've learned from life so far that the grass is never greener on the other side.
     
    • Like Like x 1
  6. Terrywoodenpic

    Terrywoodenpic Oldest Heretic

    Joined:
    Jun 4, 2005
    Messages:
    15,879
    Ratings:
    +3,418
    Religion:
    Anglican...heretic
    While I do not agree with the slant you have put on China's handling of the situation.
    The link you gave to the article in THE DIPLOMAT is both useful and reasonably balanced.
    The Diplomat Covers the far east and especially China very well, with well researched articles.
    it is critical of both the USA and China as appropriate.
    It recognises the seriousness of the present geopolitical situation and inevitable consequences.
     
  7. Terrywoodenpic

    Terrywoodenpic Oldest Heretic

    Joined:
    Jun 4, 2005
    Messages:
    15,879
    Ratings:
    +3,418
    Religion:
    Anglican...heretic
    Absolutely I would not wish to live in either China nor America.
    Even though there is a lot to dislike in the UK at the present time.

    There is a lot to be said for live and let live.
     
    #27 Terrywoodenpic, Jun 2, 2020
    Last edited: Jun 2, 2020
    • Like Like x 2
  8. Augustus

    Augustus the Unreasonable

    Joined:
    Dec 27, 2014
    Messages:
    11,084
    Ratings:
    +9,665
    Religion:
    none
    Sounds more like the Chinese PR spin.

    Is it really surprising that a country notoriously obsessive over secrecy and trying to limit information flows did precisely this in the face of a potentially damaging crisis?

    No doubt Trump aims to make political capital out of it, this hardly means China is beyond reproach though.

    It hardly requires 'envy' to find issues with Chinese trade policy

    This seems very one sided as that's what China has been doing for the past few decades in order to build up its economic strength. China has developed its power precisely by using protectionism and aggressive economic practices to boost their own industry and, consequently, damage the industries of others.

    It has been using currency manipulation to undercut competition which is combined with low worker protections to make it very hard for even developing countries to compete.

    Added to this are tariffs and restrictions on importing products to boost domestic commerce, and minimal restrictions on IP theft.

    The West has accepted this as it likes the subsidised products, but this has played into the hands of Chinese policy of economic nationalism that has been ongoing since the 1990s.

    There is no measure by which you can blame America for 'attacking China's industries' which even comes close to the degree by which China has attacked other countries industries.
     
  9. Terrywoodenpic

    Terrywoodenpic Oldest Heretic

    Joined:
    Jun 4, 2005
    Messages:
    15,879
    Ratings:
    +3,418
    Religion:
    Anglican...heretic
    All countries are highly protective of their secrets China is no different.
    America spends vast sums to that effect. and takes every legal opportunity to do so.

    Do you suppose that The USA maintains the largest Embassies in each country throughout the world for just show?
    Or that it is not fully engaged in political and economic espionage on a grand scale. it reaps whatever advantage it can from whoever it can... as do all other countries.


    No one is suggesting that China is faultless. however its trade policies are what they are, and free for every one to see. Anyone trading with China knows exactly what the terms of that deal are. the choice is theirs.
    China does not come knocking on our doors we knock on theirs.


    China is perfectly open about what it wishes to trade and the terms of those deals. if our companies do not do their due diligence when agreeing those terms then that is their problem.
    However few if any companies have done anything but very well out of those deals.
    Both sides work to the trade agreements set out by both countries.
    It is trade between equals.

    The value of currency is ultimately set by the market place not governments.
    wage levels have risen steeply in China and throughout the entire far East region.
    They seem to have more respect for the cost of living of their poor rural regions than America has for theirs.
    Regional imbalances are problematic world wide. no less the USA. Perhaps America needs to address its own regional imbalances.


    Tariffs are agreed for the most part at World level. China is no different in this. Every country is free to decide in what areas it wishes to trade. No one can be forced to buy what they do not want to buy, or sell what they do not want to sell. Countries do this as a national policy level. what is actually traded is down to individual companies.

    Like in America IP theft is at an individual level, at a trading level it is not a problem.
    However in a war situation. IP is disregarded by all sides, in the same way that The USA appropriated German IP both during and after WW2.


    What on earth is economic nationalism? and how do you think it applies to China that is any different to other countries economic policies.?
    China has no need to subsidise its products, they have difficulty keeping up with demand as it is.


    China is not on record as having attacked any other countries industries, nor limited their ability to trade world wide.
    Of course like other Countries it has strategic plans for the development of all its industries.
    That they have had better success than many others, is down to their own abilities and efforts.

    In a similar way South Korea and Taiwan have also been highly successful.

    You can not blame these countries for the failings of American Companies and national policies or the greed of its conglomerates and financial sectors.

    That America has let down so many of its own people is a problem for America.
    This will not be solved by a trade war.
    International trade is essential for every country America and China included.
     
  10. Augustus

    Augustus the Unreasonable

    Joined:
    Dec 27, 2014
    Messages:
    11,084
    Ratings:
    +9,665
    Religion:
    none
    You are conflating different types of information to make China's practices seem 'normal' (by Western standards). This wasn't espionage of high level intelligence, it was a doctor reporting what they saw at work.

    Do you believe that a doctor in a western country that mentioned a new type of virus would be rounded up and threatened by the authorities? Do you think the government would go around deleting social media posts that related to it? Are you concerned about posting something online that contradicts Boris' official narrative?

    If not, why are you trying to rationalise China's policies by saying 'everyone does it'?

    China's approach to information is not remotely comparable to Western countries as there is massive scale censorship and surveillance of information that would not be remotely controversial in liberal democratic nations.

    You must acknowledge this surely?

    Economic nationalism, also called economic patriotism and economic populism, is an ideology that favors state interventionism over other market mechanisms, with policies such as domestic control of the economy, labor, and capital formation, even if this requires the imposition of tariffs and other restrictions on the movement of labor, goods and capital.[1]

    Economic nationalists oppose globalization or at least question the benefits of unrestricted free trade, favoring protectionism. To economic nationalists, markets are subordinate to the state, and should serve the interests of the state (such as providing national security and accumulating military power).

    Look at the history of Chinese currency manipulation.

    For example: Most economists agree that China manipulated its currency, with negative effects for the United States, for long periods from roughly 2003 to 2013.
    The U.S. Labeled China a Currency Manipulator. Here’s What It Means


    This simply isn't true, currency values can be manipulated in many way, especially those that are subject to far more restrictions than Western currencies are.

    Increased control over currency is also the reason why China has 2 currencies, one domestic and one for forex.

    Long-term manipulation of currency is attacking other countries' industries.

    It's the same concept as predatory pricing of a product: it's designed to put others out of business as they can't compete due to the uneven playing field.

    But damning America for doing what China has been doing for decades while praising China is not an even-handed analysis.

    You said you can't trust countries who seek to damage the industry of other nations, yet this is exactly what China have been doing. They have just been quiet about it rather than shouting it from the rooftops.

    These are not Trump talking points, but things that have been known and discussed by scholars and experts for years.
     
  11. Terrywoodenpic

    Terrywoodenpic Oldest Heretic

    Joined:
    Jun 4, 2005
    Messages:
    15,879
    Ratings:
    +3,418
    Religion:
    Anglican...heretic
    We agree on very little.

    Which ever way you examine these things it take two to tango.
    At every point trade has been mutual.
    All sides have benefited.
    All sides could have pulled out at any stage.
    Hind sight is a wonderful thing.
    Perhaps the west are not very competent traders.

    China South Korea, and Taiwan and India have all followed much the same path that Japan took before them.

    It is entirely wrong to conflate this with their respective social or political systems.

    If you believe that China's hybrid systems give it an unfair advantage, that is of course something that the USA could emulate. But you no doubt believe that the American political and capitalist system is superior to all others.
    How then has it failed to deliver in the face of a hybrid capatilist- Communist entity?
    Surely you do not believe that China forced it to make incompent decisions.

    The fact of the matter is that we are where we are, it will not help matters to throw the baby out with the bath water,In a trumpish Twitter like manner.

    Trade wars damage every one....China is far better positioned to benefit from one in the long term. And has far greater resources to manage the effects in the short term.
    I do not take sides in this, but I am horrified by the American stance, which will damage all those countries, like the UK, who depend on stable world trade.
     
  12. Augustus

    Augustus the Unreasonable

    Joined:
    Dec 27, 2014
    Messages:
    11,084
    Ratings:
    +9,665
    Religion:
    none
    Every country that has industrialised successfully has done so by utilising some degree of protectionism.

    My issue was that you accept this as admirable, yet also criticise America using protectionist policies as being despicable.

    My point was that holding both these views is inconsistent.

    What I believe is that 'America bad, China good' narratives about the trade dispute are more about whether one likes Trump or not than any objective analysis of the 2 countries' actions.

    I believe that some degree of protectionism is essential to the global economy. We have just had great evidence about the problem of relying on global supply chains of critical products. Especially if those global supply chains rely on countries that don't necessarily have your best interests at heart.

    China very much leverages its economic power to promote its national interest, why is it wrong for America to do likewise (other than you don't like its leader)?

    It's highly debatable that all sides have benefitted.

    You are criticising America for trying redress the imbalance though.

    I imagine you would have a much more favourable view had it been framed differently and carried out by a figure such as Bernie Sanders.

    I'd say that the past few years have given a textbook case as to why unfettered globalisation has run its course and needs to be trimmed back.

    The fact that moderates still want to play the 'business as usual' card is the main reason why people like Trump get into power in the first place.

    The modern world is too complex for large-scale, one-size-fits-all to governance, 20th C approaches no longer work and the sooner people realise this the better, otherwise it's going to get much uglier than it is now.
     
  13. Tambourine

    Tambourine Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Mar 30, 2020
    Messages:
    1,050
    Ratings:
    +362
    Religion:
    none
    Sounds like they are upholding Western values.
     
    • Like Like x 1
    • Funny Funny x 1
  14. Revoltingest

    Revoltingest Hihg Intellajence Kwoshunt.
    Premium Member

    Joined:
    Mar 25, 2010
    Messages:
    166,565
    Ratings:
    +51,544
    Religion:
    Bokononist Atheism
    Hardly. Chinese society is very much about brutal enforcement of conformity.
    Yes, western society has difficulty enacting its values. But this doesn't make
    it the same as China, which has very different values.
     
  15. Terrywoodenpic

    Terrywoodenpic Oldest Heretic

    Joined:
    Jun 4, 2005
    Messages:
    15,879
    Ratings:
    +3,418
    Religion:
    Anglican...heretic
    I come from a Liberal (UK) point of view. I have no particular brief for either the USA or China.
    The free trade discussion has been at the forefront of political thought since the 18th century.
    However it has rarely been implemented with out some minimal degree of protectionism covering minority interests. This is usually in some Form of taxation., levy, duty, or quantitative restriction.
    This is most effective when time limited, to allow for a catching up and levelling up of the subordinate party.

    Globalisation has been different in kind, and has been negotiated for the benefit of the stronger countries not the weaker ones but mostly for international corporations. At the start it definitely favoured strong markets like the USA and Europe.

    However it was negotiated from the position that the the USA would be able to maintain its position at the top of the pile. This did not take into account two main factors.
    Firstly the greed of the corporations to buy cheap and sell high, with no account of what that might have on home markets or jobs.
    And secondly, it took no account of the eventual levelling up of the wealth, technical, scientific and manufacturing of the "Junior countries" which has been achieved far more quickly than expected.

    In coming to these agreements, and at no time, did the American government give sufficient consideration to the effect that this would have on its own people and home based industries.

    This has resulted in Jobs, wealth and trade balances moving between countries. However the corporations continue to benefit unhindered.
    Corporations have become country less, moving their home registrations as needed, to minimise their taxation. whilst moving their assets and profits to more sympathetic locations. Few corporations pay anything like a fair tax on their returns, to any country, including to that of their origin.

    The beneficiaries of this Globalisation have mainly been in Asia, especially Japan, South Korea, Taiwan, China and India. It has resulted in them becoming amongst the most highly educated, industrialised and most technically advanced in the world.

    From a purely "World" point of view this equalling up, can only be viewed as beneficial.
    however it has changed the world pecking order and affected previous world leaders like the USA and the UK negatively. Where their relative wealth and influence has fallen to a more realistic level.

    There is no way that this change can be reversed. These new technological giants are not going to relinquish their gains. Those countries that have fallen behind are going to have to make greater efforts to keep up. their people will need to raise their standard of education, their productivity and work ethic. and their industries must invest, update and plan long term.

    Some business in the west are still world leaders. In all cases they have already made these adjustments, it can be done, they have proved that it is possible to compete with the East at what ever level.

    Banning, restricting and trade wars, will only cause further damage to those that engage in it.
    This will be paid for by their people. It will be worse still of Trump's insular polices continue, they are a recipe for a long downward spiral.

    It is not what China may or may not do, that is important to the future of America, it is what the American people choose to do, they will decide their own fate.

    America is dependant on the world for its trade.
    China as a major world leader, is an important part of that future.
    It would be a mistake not to recognise that.
     
    #35 Terrywoodenpic, Jun 3, 2020
    Last edited: Jun 3, 2020
  16. Stevicus

    Stevicus Veteran Member
    Premium Member

    Joined:
    Sep 26, 2011
    Messages:
    12,783
    Ratings:
    +6,437
    Religion:
    Agnostic
    I'm not sure I agree with your point about this being beneficial from a "world point of view." Even assuming that the USA and UK go down and are no longer a factor or very high on the world pecking order, I don't see any evidence that anything more "honorable," "noble," or "decent" will take its place. It'll probably be even more of the same - cold, bloodless corporate greed and amorality on a global scale.

    It'll probably end up something like corporatized feudalism with the characteristics of organized crime - not too dissimilar to what we have now. Although, instead of Western-style Mafia families running things, it'll be Chinese warlords.

    I look at it as being analogous to a drug addict quitting cold turkey. There may be a rough withdrawal period in the short-term, but in the long-term, a person is better off being drug-free rather than still wallowing in addiction.

    So, yes, banning or restricting free trade and moving away from globalist policies might produce some temporary difficulties, but we will be far better off in the long run if we relearn how to be more independent and self-reliant. It really shouldn't matter where we rank in some global "pecking order," as that should never have been a priority in the first place.
     
  17. Tambourine

    Tambourine Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Mar 30, 2020
    Messages:
    1,050
    Ratings:
    +362
    Religion:
    none
    As far as I can tell, the beneficiaries of Globalization have mostly been millionaires and billionaires all over the world.
     
  18. Augustus

    Augustus the Unreasonable

    Joined:
    Dec 27, 2014
    Messages:
    11,084
    Ratings:
    +9,665
    Religion:
    none
    Can you specifically explain what you believe the US is doing that is qualitatively different from what China has done? What are the actual, specific policies and actions that make the US mendacious, yet China worthy of praise?

    By any measure China is more protectionist and more insular than the US yet you praise them while criticising the US for protectionism and insularity.

    Why China Won’t Abandon Its Controversial Trade Policies

    Don't you think that some attempts to redress this imbalance are therefore a good thing?

    Would you prefer fewer jobs be outsourced/offshored from the UK, or would you prefer higher profits for corporations registered in tax havens?


    And it would be a mistake to believe that unfettered globalisation is desirable in the modern world.

    The global economy is built for efficiency and optimisation. This makes the system very fragile to shocks. Break any one of the links and you generate serious problems as there is minimal excess capacity. Robust systems rely on excess capacity which is 'inefficient' when times are good, but doesn't break down so easily in a crisis.

    The UK gets 50% of its food from overseas, they also currently have great difficultly in acquiring basic necessities for the healthcare system.

    When we get hit by a much worse pandemic sometime in the future would you prefer this still to be the case, or would you prefer a higher degree of self-sufficiency?
     
  19. Terrywoodenpic

    Terrywoodenpic Oldest Heretic

    Joined:
    Jun 4, 2005
    Messages:
    15,879
    Ratings:
    +3,418
    Religion:
    Anglican...heretic
    I could not agree more that something needs to be done about the "Globalised" Corporations.
    At the moment they are largely above the law and answerable to no one.
    "what to do" is going to be more controversial. For a start I would make them subject to the laws of where ever the operate, and pay taxes where ever they employ people and wherever they make sales. In both cases equivalent to the levels that apply locally. That might be complicated costly and inconvenient for them. but tough.

    There have not been Chines war lords since before the first Emperor Unified China. That is long before the USA even existed.
    A larger majority of Global enterprises have western origins. However their ultimate ownership and all shareholders should be in the public domain. and subject to the laws of where ever they operate both collectively and individually, so that there is no means of avoiding laws, taxes or regulations.

    The Chines set up operating companies in the countries that they operate in, with a full local company structures. eg. Huawei UK is an example with a local managing director subject to UK law.
    China also requires foreign companies that invest and set up in China to have Chinese partners, so as to be accountable to the Chinese state.


    There is absolutely no need to destroy international trade, it just needs to be properly regulated as above. This would remove the advantages that they now hold. It would make them accountable to every country the operate in. rather than no one as at present.
    No doubt they would squeal very loudly, and fight very hard against it.

    In the long run the USA needs to stop looking backward to the few years after WW2 when it was fabulously wealthy on the back of its war efforts. And look to the future of its people by building up its education system and modern industries. The heavy industries are all but gone all around the world. They only survive in a few places where all the raw materials, energy and transport links coexist. The people that operate them are almost always migrants from many different countries who have the necessary skills.

    America has historically depleted its resources not conserved them. Its dominance of the world leather trade ended with the total destruction of the Bison herds and Fur animals. Its agricultural bonanza ended with the Dust bowl. Its oil fields were depleted to their present levels in 150 years of exploitation. And its gas and shale oil are going on much the same trajectory. Its war resourced steel industry was unsustainable in peace time.
    and its strip coal mines then had insufficient demand to keep it sustainable.
    Its car industry lost its way and was out sold by more modern, far more reliable and more economic to run and service imports from Europe and the far East. Who were prepared to offer what the customers wanted, rather than what the domestic motor companies wanted to sell them.

    All the while the country stopped investing in the infrastructure and the educated workforce necessary to to keep moving forward.
    Only a few liberal minded places like silicone valley held the torch high to show the way. but that never happened.

    Is it any wonder that all these newly developing countries have shown how it should be done and surged ahead. they have invested in education infrastructure research and development, and developed the necessary tooling and built the factories and trained the staff to make it happen.
    Nothing that they have done could not have been done in America.

    Globalisation was not the cause of America's woes, it was the symptom.
    Entrepreneurs as always saw their opportunity and invested where their money was safe from governments and invented Global corporations.

    As a byproduct, Globalisation enabled the new tiger economies to flourish. and raised the level of world trade massively.
    America should be taking advantage of that trade. it is not. it no longer knows how.

    It has proved incapable of investing in its own future, its own people, it is no longer capable of even keeping up, it does not have the will or the supply of skills and educated people to do so.

    China is not your problem. China has its own problems.

    Your problem is one of inertia, bad politics, and bad leadership.
    The USA has neither the long term plans nor infrastructure, nor the necessary employable skilled people to make it happen.

    The UK is doing its best to follow you into that abyss.

    Our future is in our own hands
    we gain nothing by damaging the futures of anyone else.

    If you want to know where your infrastructure and future has gone.
    Look first at your uniforms, the oceans and the sky's.
    You have invested in death.
     
    • Like Like x 1
  20. Terrywoodenpic

    Terrywoodenpic Oldest Heretic

    Joined:
    Jun 4, 2005
    Messages:
    15,879
    Ratings:
    +3,418
    Religion:
    Anglican...heretic

    Your points are adequately covered in my post above.

    As to the UK we do not have an employment problem Or rather it it is one of of shortages of suitably skilled workers. and at the other end suitably skilled agricultural workers.
    Since the 18th century we have relied heavily on imported food supplies. that is not likely to ever change as we need seasonal fruit and vegetables year round. even during WW2 we needed help with food supplies. though every available plot was under cultivation.
    The Drug industry which operates mainly under the global umbrella of the USA is a source of contention. with India and to a lesser extent China the main suppliers of generic medications.
    we do have a healthy medical supply structure in the uk but it has never had sufficient capacity. some of our larger and more famous companies have been acquired bu American conglomerates and now have their supplies outsourced.

    I would like to see far better planning for pandemics, the actual sources have not been a problem.
     
Loading...