Silicon Investor (SI) -- The First Internet Community

STOCKTALK

We've detected that you're using an ad content blocking browser plug-in or feature. Ads provide a critical source of revenue to the continued operation of Silicon Investor. We ask that you disable ad blocking while on Silicon Investor in the best interests of our community. If you are not using an ad blocker but are still receiving this message, make sure your browser's tracking protection is set to the 'standard' level.

Strategies & Market Trends : Booms, Busts, and Recoveries -- Ignore unavailable to you. Want to Upgrade?

To: TobagoJack who wrote (3120)	4/23/2001 11:25:56 PM
From: Ilaine	Read Replies (1) \| Respond to of 74559

Jay, interesting reading, as always. My sense is that the current US administration is unwilling for the US to continue to be the world's policeman. That was one of Bush's campaign pledges, and I think he will keep it. The proposed pan-American free trade alliance is a hint to where he hopes we will go. Central and South America need to be brought into the 20th century, maybe the 19th century, before they can be brought into the 21st century. There's no one to do it but us - the US. Political corruption and economic chaos are common states of affairs in Latin America. But they share the benefit of being on the same continent as the US, speaking a language which many people in the US speak, and not having fully embraced socialism yet. I think it's a great idea. I don't think we're going to abandon Taiwan, though. The US relationship with Taiwan is probably something that young people don't get taught anymore in the US, but Dubya is old enough to honor our alliance with Taiwan. Clinton would not have. Perhaps it's difficult for people in China to understand how much power a US president has in foreign policy when his hands are so tied in domestic policy. Constitutionally, the President is the Commander in Chief of the Army and Navy. US Presidents have historically acted unilaterally in sending in troops to wage war in foreign countries. Congress has tried to rein the Presidents in and the Presidents have always taken the position that the attempt to so limit their powers is unconstitutional. The only conceiveable referee, the US Supreme Court, has always taken the course of staying out of the way. The person with his finger on the button is the President, not the Congress. What does that mean to Hong Kong? Well, Great Britain decided that they had better give Hong Kong back to China - there wasn't really much they could to about it. If we had been in their shoes, I think we would have been force to make the same decision. Whatever kind of freedom you guys have is due to whatever forebearance China is willing to give you. Whether it's Clinton selling out, or Bush walking away, it's the same in the end. Taiwan, however, is another story - as long as Bush is President. As for mainland China - I am sure you know far more than I do.