The Plan, not a "theory"

[Kamala Trump]

Worked real well there didn't it, Care?

Worked so well that the same leaders are still in office or their son, and the abuses continue. Even on such a level that people sail across the ocean gap on car doors, desperate to get away from one of the wonderful places our trade sanctions created, and I firmly believe that they don't do it from the other place because that ocean gap is just too wide.

Sanctions very rarely have the actual result we wish, they unnecessarily punish the populace and actually end up keeping the strong in power as the weak have no access to what can make them strong....

They worked in changing apartheid south africa.

We didn't exactly make russia the most favored nation, like we are with china. We let it crumble, with some minor grain trades; we didn't put them on steroids with massive trade contracts.

 

[Kamala Trump]

dixie is willing to send thousands of americans to their death because of human rights abuses in Iraq (oil oil oil) but could give a fuck about human rights abuses in China.

Basically all neocons are irrational. Their reason for doing things is "because jews said".

 

[Kamala Trump]

Some one find me anything where chinese leaders have agreed to give their people western style freedoms. Or find even a statement that they respect those values one iota.

 

[Dixie - In Memoriam]

Some one find me anything where chinese leaders have agreed to give their people western style freedoms. Or find even a statement that they respect those values one iota.

Okay, let's look at this from your perspective. What effect will it have on the Chinese, for the US to refuse any sort of trade or commerce with them? Is this going to make them agree to give their people anything? And if so, explain how that is going to work, because I don't see it happening.

Is your problem, the human rights abuses in China? If so, how is your approach going to solve that problem? (I've explained mine.) Please explain your plan, because it doesn't make sense to me. I can't see how isolationism is supposed to effect a country quite accoustomed and comfortable with isolationism, but maybe you have an explanation.

This quote was interesting to me, because you seem to be demanding that someone show you the Chinese have accepted western values, and respect them, and I think we can all agree this isn't the case. Should we isolate ourselves from China, and snub them in trade, are they magically going to start respecting and promoting western values? If that is your theory, please indicate how it works, because again, I don't see it happening.

 

[Kamala Trump]

Okay, let's look at this from your perspective. What effect will it have on the Chinese, for the US to refuse any sort of trade or commerce with them? Is this going to make them agree to give their people anything? And if so, explain how that is going to work, because I don't see it happening.

I believe it is the job of american leaders to consider the consequences for Americans, moreso than for the chinese, the people engaged in a global arms race with us.

ANy sort of trade? How about we just NOT make them Favored Nation and purposefully try to out source all the worlds' production to them. How about that? Is NOT doing that "no trade of any sort"? Your hyperbole belies your basic irrationality on the matter.

Is your problem, the human rights abuses in China? If so, how is your approach going to solve that problem? (I've explained mine.) Please explain your plan, because it doesn't make sense to me. I can't see how isolationism is supposed to effect a country quite accoustomed and comfortable with isolationism, but maybe you have an explanation.

My problem is more with expecting the rest of the world to compete slave/prison/work camp/child labor. That is a futile effort which will only enslave everyone else to the same level, Based on "neocon certified" tm, "Free market principles". How does driving everyone else down to the level of slaves, help the chinese laborers?

This quote was interesting to me, because you seem to be demanding that someone show you the Chinese have accepted western values, and respect them, and I think we can all agree this isn't the case. Should we isolate ourselves from China, and snub them in trade, are they magically going to start respecting and promoting western values? If that is your theory, please indicate how it works, because again, I don't see it happening.

and abandoning western values is bringing them around in what capacity?

Two can play the snide question game.

 

[Dixie - In Memoriam]

Basically all neocons are irrational. Their reason for doing things is "because jews said".

This is more knee-jerk liberal emotionalism, designed to attack those you disagree with. It is void of substance, and irrelevant to the topic at hand. Why do you persist in acting like a pinhead? I know you are smart enough to realize you are doing it, and you seem to be trying hard to not be a pinhead, but when you say things like this, you demonstrate the classic traits, and it's very difficult to give you any credibility at all.

We didn't exactly make russia the most favored nation, like we are with china. We let it crumble, with some minor grain trades; we didn't put them on steroids with massive trade contracts.

Russia was offered MFN status by Harry Truman in 1947, they declined. Through the 70's, Nixon lobbied for, and eventually got MFN status for the Soviets, and made essentially the same deal with China, and was on the way to granting them MFN status as well, when the Tiananmen Square massacre happened, and China would not become a MFN until Clinton.

We didn't cause the soviets to crumble from lack of US trade dollars. China is not going to change human rights policies because we refuse to trade with them. MFN status doesn't mean we are giving China billions of dollars, it means we allow import/export between countries, without tariffs. Whether US and Chinese companies have to pay tariffs to trade, has no effect on the human rights policies of the Chinese government.

 

[Kamala Trump]

Basically all neocons are irrational. Their reason for doing things is "because jews said".

This is more knee-jerk liberal emotionalism, designed to attack those you disagree with. It is void of substance, and irrelevant to the topic at hand. Why do you persist in acting like a pinhead? I know you are smart enough to realize you are doing it, and you seem to be trying hard to not be a pinhead, but when you say things like this, you demonstrate the classic traits, and it's very difficult to give you any credibility at all.

We didn't exactly make russia the most favored nation, like we are with china. We let it crumble, with some minor grain trades; we didn't put them on steroids with massive trade contracts.

Russia was offered MFN status by Harry Truman in 1947, they declined. Through the 70's, Nixon lobbied for, and eventually got MFN status for the Soviets, and made essentially the same deal with China, and was on the way to granting them MFN status as well, when the Tiananmen Square massacre happened, and China would not become a MFN until Clinton.

We didn't cause the soviets to crumble from lack of US trade dollars. China is not going to change human rights policies because we refuse to trade with them. MFN status doesn't mean we are giving China billions of dollars, it means we allow import/export between countries, without tariffs. Whether US and Chinese companies have to pay tariffs to trade, has no effect on the human rights policies of the Chinese government.

I thought we beat the USSR through the superior growth capacity inherent in capitalism. That's the narrative at least. But now that we have given all forseeable growth opportunities to our totalitarian enemies, now that's not how we beat russia? How did we cause russia to crumble?

 

[uscitizen]

Isn't bush giving MFT to Vietnam ?

 

[Kamala Trump]

It's so funny he called me a liberal. If liberals are the ones who "want america to lose", what does that make neocons like dixie, who believe in accepting our inability to prevail against the chinese as a presupposition of all possible arguments, a national hero?

 

[Dixie - In Memoriam]

My problem is more with expecting the rest of the world to compete slave/prison/work camp/child labor. That is a futile effort which will only enslave everyone else to the same level, Based on "neocon certified" tm, "Free market principles". How does driving everyone else down to the level of slaves, help the chinese laborers?

So, you aren't really concerned with the human rights in China, you just don't want to compete with them? Is that your position? Here's a little economic secret, the country who produces the cheapest goods and services, always sells the most. So, while you are ignoring the Chinese, they will be taking the jobs of your 'slave labor' and out-producing you in the market, and instead of competing with 'slave labor' you will be unemployed, wishing you could compete with someone on some level. Where you plan fails, is in not considering we are discussing a global market, and not merely a US market. We can't control what the Russians do, or the Germans, or the Japanese, or any one else who wants to buy China's cheap goods. Therefore, we can include China into the fold and implement a WTO structured to bring overall market stability, which insures we all have a job, or we can ignorantly and stubbornly keep gulping liberal emotionalist koolaid, and thinking with our hearts.

As I said, if you sincerely want to solve the human rights problems in China, if you legitimately want to change the practices of the Chinese, it begins with normalized relations and trade. When our economies have a mutual interest, we can effect political pressure and thus, change, because we have some means of leverage.

If I tell you I want you to go wash my car, what are the odds it will be done? I would say, essentially, zero... right? Now... IF I were your boss, and your next paycheck depended on my happiness, and I told you I want you to go wash my car, I predict the odds would be much higher it would be done.... am I correct? Reason being, I have more leverage as your boss, than as Dixie from the message board, and you have a motivation and incentive to do what I want, if I control your money. The same is true with China, they have no reason or motive to change, and refusing to trade with them is not going to ever change that. If we foster strong trade alliances, we then have an economic connection, a mutual interest, something to motivate and leverage them with... otherwise, we are just mouthing off on a message board, and China will never change, just like you will never come wash my car.

 

[Dixie - In Memoriam]

I thought we beat the USSR through the superior growth capacity inherent in capitalism.

I believe this is true, in part. If it's the case, the same might also happen with China, who knows? My only point was, the Soviet Union did not crumble from lack of US trade, and we did indeed trade with them, well before they ever crumbled. Cuba is the best model for your viewpoint, we have been under embargo with Cuba since 1959, and I'm afraid it has done little to effect a change, they still have the same dictatorial regime. Like Damo says, to keep repeating what hasn't worked, is the definition of insanity.

You are seeking to 'punish' China by withholding US trade dollars, and the thing is... China doesn't care, they have very little US trade dollars anyway, and can make boat loads off the Europeans and Russia! They had just as soon sell to them, and not have to deal with the human rights issues. So, what happens is, the EU and Russia benefit from the cheap Chinese goods, and we suffer. This is your 'solution' to the problem, and it is just idiotic. It doesn't 'help' us, it doesn't 'hurt' them! ...and it never actually addresses the problem of human rights in China, does it???? Funny how you keep avoiding that point, isn't it?

 

[Kamala Trump]

My problem is more with expecting the rest of the world to compete slave/prison/work camp/child labor. That is a futile effort which will only enslave everyone else to the same level, Based on "neocon certified" tm, "Free market principles". How does driving everyone else down to the level of slaves, help the chinese laborers?

So, you aren't really concerned with the human rights in China, you just don't want to compete with them? Is that your position?

Profitting from their slave labor only makes their servitude profitable for their captors. You don't help them.

Here's a little economic secret, the country who produces the cheapest goods and services, always sells the most.

But i believe it should be a moral sticking point in any integrated world economy that slave labor or prisoner labor is not legitimate and not available. It's a moral choice. Like when we outlawed slavery here, or wouldn't import ivory.

So, while you are ignoring the Chinese, they will be taking the jobs of your 'slave labor' and out-producing you in the market, and instead of competing with 'slave labor' you will be unemployed, wishing you could compete with someone on some level.

I believe america could do just fine picking up any production slack in the market. We are hard workers, just not slaves. We might maintain some sort of tangible skill too! Bonus. Specialization isnt the end all be all. DId you ever think anyone could ever be "that crazy"?

Where you plan fails, is in not considering we are discussing a global market, and not merely a US market. We can't control what the Russians do, or the Germans, or the Japanese, or any one else who wants to buy China's cheap goods.

We can do much more to influence behavior in this arena, we just choose not to. OUr leaders have chosen to validate slave labor, regardless of the long term effect on the world of such an atrocious action.

Therefore, we can include China into the fold and implement a WTO structured to bring overall market stability, which insures we all have a job, or we can ignorantly and stubbornly keep gulping liberal emotionalist koolaid, and thinking with our hearts.

Or we can make some key changes a precondition of entry into the world economic system. You know, it's actually a BAD idea for the sheep to lay down with the wolves.

As I said, if you sincerely want to solve the human rights problems in China, if you legitimately want to change the practices of the Chinese, it begins with normalized relations and trade. When our economies have a mutual interest, we can effect political pressure and thus, change, because we have some means of leverage.

No. The gazillions of dollars the communists skim off the top is somehow not "dissuading them" from their totalitarianism. Sorry. I know that's the spiel, but it's just NOT OCCURING.

If I tell you I want you to go wash my car, what are the odds it will be done? I would say, essentially, zero... right? Now... IF I were your boss, and your next paycheck depended on my happiness, and I told you I want you to go wash my car, I predict the odds would be much higher it would be done.... am I correct? Reason being, I have more leverage as your boss, than as Dixie from the message board, and you have a motivation and incentive to do what I want, if I control your money. The same is true with China, they have no reason or motive to change, and refusing to trade with them is not going to ever change that. If we foster strong trade alliances, we then have an economic connection, a mutual interest, something to motivate and leverage them with... otherwise, we are just mouthing off on a message board, and China will never change, just like you will never come wash my car.

I think you're a brainwashed fool.

I think they might change if they were more desperate, less rich, less fattened on trade agreements, if their people were rioting and resisting and plotting against them, and if we were ACTUALLY on the side of freedom. Dixie, you make me physically ill with the fetid blackness of your soul.

 

[Kamala Trump]

Extension of neocon logic: If you don't pimp out your mom, other people WILL pimp out their mom, and they will have that much more revenue every week, and in a couple years, they will be able to buy more interest bearing assets than you, and have more money, and have more power, and the ability to use undue influence to rub you out, so you better go pimp out your mom.

 

[Dixie - In Memoriam]

We can do much more to influence behavior in this arena, we just choose not to.

Such as??? We've already been through this! We can continue to ignore them and refuse to trade with them for another 100 years, but how is that going to solve the problem? It hasn't worked so far, and there is no indication it would ever work, because there is no motivation for China to do anything differently. We could drop about 20 500 megaton nuclear bombs on China... that would effect a change.... is that what you think we should do to influence behavior? The way I see it, those are the options... become friendly in trade and commerce, and try to diplomatically pressure them by dangling the carrot of trade dollars, or blow them to hell and back. The only other option, is to isolate ourselves, and ignore them, which has not worked, and has only served to strengthen the totalitarian regime, as well as providing the European markets with cheap goods, at our expense.

No. The gazillions of dollars the communists skim off the top is somehow not "dissuading them" from their totalitarianism. Sorry. I know that's the spiel, but it's just NOT OCCURING.

I hate to inform you of this, but the communists are not exactly the best purveyors of quality human rights. Unless you wish to declare all-out military war on Communism, you will never really change this. Perhaps that is your plan? Who knows? You don't seem to have a plan, you just don't want to trade with China, for whatever pinhead reason, for whatever pinhead logic, you think this will improve the situation for the people of China.

I think you're a brainwashed fool.

I think they might change if they were more desperate, less rich, less fattened on trade agreements, if their people were rioting and resisting and plotting against them, and if we were ACTUALLY on the side of freedom. Dixie, you make me physically ill with the fetid blackness of your soul.

Actually, I am not brainwashed a bit, I have been asking you for information like crazy, giving you every opportunity to explain your position, and you keep mindlessly repeating the same platitudes about our moral responsibility to not support slave practices. Instead of trying to see the points I have objectively presented, you had rather throw insults and pejoratives at me, and muddy the water with typical liberalist rhetoric and debate tactics. No, I am not the brainwashed one here, that seems to be you.

Again, prior to 1972, we did not trade with the Communist China regime at all. Through all the years we didn't trade with China, it never caused a change in conditions, and even the most retarded could figure out why it didn't, there was no motivation to change. In the meantime, Eastern markets benefit from Western isolationism, and China quadruples its population and production capacity. So, what you are proposing, is precisely what we were doing, and it didn't work! Not only did it not work, it resulted in China becoming the #2 world superpower.

The argumental point remains intact, we can not effect any political change in China without some means of diplomatic leverage, or something to bargain with. Trade dollars could eventually be that bargaining chip, that needed leverage to effect a change. It will not happen tomorrow, there is no magic feather to tickle the China's ass with, and make them start treating people with dignity and respect, you know this as well as I do, so you can't expect that to ever be the case. This problem must be viewed in context of what we can and can't reasonably do and expect. In that context, our best hope for any change in the future of human rights in China, has to lie in diplomatic and trade agreements, not isolation and ignorance.

 

[Care4all]

our trade with China is emboldening its gvt's military and arms build up...isn't it? you have to admit this, no?

 

[Kamala Trump]

We can do much more to influence behavior in this arena, we just choose not to.

Such as??? We've already been through this! We can continue to ignore them and refuse to trade with them for another 100 years, but how is that going to solve the problem? It hasn't worked so far,

But we've been executing your plan of trading with them. So what's not working? Your plan? We're doing YOUR plan. Are you learning disabled?

and there is no indication it would ever work, because there is no motivation for China to do anything differently.

Right, because under YOUR plan, which we are executing now , they are rich and happy, so why do you think they're suddenly gonna give people rights. No rights for anybody is working for them. Ya see.

We could drop about 20 500 megaton nuclear bombs on China... that would effect a change.... is that what you think we should do to influence behavior? The way I see it, those are the options... become friendly in trade and commerce, and try to diplomatically pressure them by dangling the carrot of trade dollars, or blow them to hell and back. The only other option, is to isolate ourselves, and ignore them, which has not worked, and has only served to strengthen the totalitarian regime, as well as providing the European markets with cheap goods, at our expense.

We can integrate with them slowly as they have legal changes and individual rights improvements, instead of this herky jerky "all at once before anyone complains" method of doing it.

The sad truth is that making us more totalitarian and slavery-tolerant is the real goal.

your bleak vision presumes failure.

No. The gazillions of dollars the communists skim off the top is somehow not "dissuading them" from their totalitarianism. Sorry. I know that's the spiel, but it's just NOT OCCURING.

I hate to inform you of this, but the communists are not exactly the best purveyors of quality human rights. Unless you wish to declare all-out military war on Communism, you will never really change this. Perhaps that is your plan? Who knows? You don't seem to have a plan, you just don't want to trade with China, for whatever pinhead reason, for whatever pinhead logic, you think this will improve the situation for the people of China.

I think you're a brainwashed fool.

I think they might change if they were more desperate, less rich, less fattened on trade agreements, if their people were rioting and resisting and plotting against them, and if we were ACTUALLY on the side of freedom. Dixie, you make me physically ill with the fetid blackness of your soul.

Actually, I am not brainwashed a bit, I have been asking you for information like crazy, giving you every opportunity to explain your position, and you keep mindlessly repeating the same platitudes about our moral responsibility to not support slave practices. Instead of trying to see the points I have objectively presented, you had rather throw insults and pejoratives at me, and muddy the water with typical liberalist rhetoric and debate tactics. No, I am not the brainwashed one here, that seems to be you.

Again, prior to 1972, we did not trade with the Communist China regime at all. Through all the years we didn't trade with China, it never caused a change in conditions, and even the most retarded could figure out why it didn't, there was no motivation to change. In the meantime, Eastern markets benefit from Western isolationism, and China quadruples its population and production capacity. So, what you are proposing, is precisely what we were doing, and it didn't work! Not only did it not work, it resulted in China becoming the #2 world superpower.

The argumental point remains intact, we can not effect any political change in China without some means of diplomatic leverage, or something to bargain with. Trade dollars could eventually be that bargaining chip, that needed leverage to effect a change. It will not happen tomorrow, there is no magic feather to tickle the China's ass with, and make them start treating people with dignity and respect, you know this as well as I do, so you can't expect that to ever be the case. This problem must be viewed in context of what we can and can't reasonably do and expect. In that context, our best hope for any change in the future of human rights in China, has to lie in diplomatic and trade agreements, not isolation and ignorance.

Making them rich as hell isn't leverage.

 

[Kamala Trump]

And there it is. Ignorant Isolationist. Putting sanctions on slave labor is "isolationism" now. See how mentally bankrupt he is? Total retard level.

 

[Damocles]

No "substantive" increase in human rights, yet they haven't cracked down on Hong Kong, they have opened areas to capitalism, a new Middle Class has grown over the years and people move more freely with more automobiles and highways than ever.

Yes there are restrictive laws, yes there is Tibet, yes China needs to make more strides, but not trading with them didn't make any of the above changes happen. Opening areas to capatilistic trade would have been unheard of, and as more of the population reaches the undreamed of "riches" included more and more of them will spread this to the rest of China. The idea that there have been "no" changes because of the trade is simply denial, and that you get so hysterical over it only undermines your argument.

Denying trade kept people in the dark as to what others have and allowed the government an ultimate power they no longer have. They did not crack down heavily on huge demonstrations in 2002, previous to 1972, shoot even in the 90s they simply would have run over them with tanks.

To say that nothing has changed there, and that there is not slow progression toward something new, maybe too slow for some, but far better than pre-trade.

We make better strides being over-friendly than we ever did attempting to be strict.

 

[Dixie - In Memoriam]

And there it is. Ignorant Isolationist. Putting sanctions on slave labor is "isolationism" now. See how mentally bankrupt he is? Total retard level.

When I said "isolation and ignorance", I did not mean to simply insult, I was speaking literally. To 'ignore' something, is to have 'ignorance' of it. You advocate a policy in which we ignore China and isolate our markets from trade with them. I'm sorry you have that view, I have tried to convey some sense of reasoning here, and hopefully change your mind, but it is your view, I am only speaking truthfully about it. You endorse an isolationist ignorance of China, and claim you are doing so in the name of human rights. The problem is, your idea doesn't provide any solution to the problem, it simply chooses to be ignorant of it. Oh well... we can claim a 'moral' victory, I guess?

 

[Kamala Trump]

And there it is. Ignorant Isolationist. Putting sanctions on slave labor is "isolationism" now. See how mentally bankrupt he is? Total retard level.

When I said "isolation and ignorance", I did not mean to simply insult, I was speaking literally. To 'ignore' something, is to have 'ignorance' of it.

I fully understand your justifications. I think they're shortsighted and dangerous. Business arguments only go so far in justifying national security and sovereignty risks.

You advocate a policy in which we ignore China and isolate our markets from trade with them.

I suggest we make their huge orders contingent on human rights reforms.

I'm sorry you have that view, I have tried to convey some sense of reasoning here, and hopefully change your mind, but it is your view, I am only speaking truthfully about it.

You are using business arguments and ignoring facets of the issue which relate to long term survival of our nation, but you're an internationalist, so that's what I would expect. You see america's role as being to create a new world order. That's sad for you.

You endorse an isolationist ignorance of China, and claim you are doing so in the name of human rights. The problem is, your idea doesn't provide any solution to the problem, it simply chooses to be ignorant of it. Oh well... we can claim a 'moral' victory, I guess?

And your solution is to coprofit from totalitarian atrocity, which also fails your "litmus test", and to give up fighting for human rights at all, unless jews say to.