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.

Politics : Welcome to Slider's Dugout -- Ignore unavailable to you. Want to Upgrade?

To: SliderOnTheBlack who wrote (209)	7/20/2005 11:12:08 PM
From: 8bits	Respond to of 50670

Slider why read interpreatations when you can go to the source: terrorism.ws What is unusual is that this document has attracted mainstream attention and basically had some prescient insights. Also to be fair to the authors they both stated in the aftermath of 9/11 that they were horrified at what happened. The are many wargame scenarios written by US analysts that include engagement with China, they just are widely publicized. China indeed may have a crash but their economy (and management of that economy) looks similar to Japan in the 1950s and 1960s and Taiwan, South Korea, and Singapore in the 1970s and 1980s. There will be bumps along the way but in the long term they will continue to grow substantially. Have you seen Jay Chen's comments on Booms, Busts, and Recoveries about China..? Good reading.

To: SliderOnTheBlack who wrote (209)	7/20/2005 11:16:46 PM
From: sketch	Read Replies (1) \| Respond to of 50670

Good discussion. My reservations have to do with the extreme Cold War rhetoric being used to think about China and energy. Slider is relying on the idea of "collapse" or an "abyss" in China. The macro-limitation w/ this melodrama is that nearly everything wrong with China applies to the US as well--out of control debt, shaky banking, increasing opacity and spin on all levels of govt reporting, unaccountable monopolies and central planning from the all-manipulative Fed. In this context to inveigh against "communism" is shadow-boxing. Hard to know what that word means in this day and age. The "commies" are at least buying gold and not shipping high tech jobs to the US (I count at least 3000 important jobs lost in last week's headlines alone). To rail against Castro is irrelevant except as a rhetorical stimulant. That sorry island has been suffering a US embargo from day one, has no indigenous oil to speak of, etc. Whatever the blunders, China and India and other scale-breaking newcomers on the economic stage aren't going away. As for appeals to sources like newsmax, et al. Many of them use unexamined assumptions and sledgehammer lingo that finally aren't persuasive. Yes, the markets are in volatile and unstable shape. Yes, conflicts are all too likely. But seizing on the grand assumptions being pumped up in certain quarters may make us part of the problem, not the solution.