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 : 2026 TeoTwawKi ... 2032 Darkest Interregnum -- Ignore unavailable to you. Want to Upgrade?

To: Hawkmoon who wrote (66226)	9/20/2010 1:32:55 AM
From: TobagoJack	1 Recommendation Read Replies (1) \| Respond to of 218675

who can know? except one can definitively say that usa male suicide rate is higher than that in china, and then there is this youtube.com easily understandable, given that usa army routinely kill babies, sanctioned by its officialdom

To: Hawkmoon who wrote (66226)	9/20/2010 1:36:04 AM
From: TobagoJack	Respond to of 218675

and this is good, explains in part your lack of logic of what is and must be, wishing to adjust exchange rate this, terms of trade that, and security points of departure somewhere else. hilarious, truly online.wsj.com U.S. gets irrational on China By ANDREW PEAPLE It makes sense that U.S. politicians want to have a go at China with an election looming. That doesn't mean there is much consistency to their approach. Take two current issues: The debate about China's currency and a proposed investment in the U.S. by Anshan Iron & Steel Group. Critics of China's currency policy, which leaves the yuan undervalued against the dollar, say this is costing the U.S. jobs. The artificially cheap yuan, it is argued, keeps Chinese goods cheap so that U.S. industry is uncompetitive. A proposed remedy is to slap tariffs on Chinese imports. Jobs, though, don't seem so important to opponents of an investment by state-owned Anshan in a joint venture with U.S.-based Steel Development Co. The companies plan to build a steel plant in Mississippi, but Anshan could ultimately invest in as many as five. On the face of it, such an investment should add to employment in the U.S. But that isn't enough for the deal's critics, who fear Anshan is making its investment merely to obtain technological knowledge, which it will then use to make the Chinese steel industry even more competitive. Some are even alleging the investment—Anshan will own 14% of the joint venture—could threaten U.S. national security. Perhaps the world's only superpower is alarmingly vulnerable to a $23.5 million investment made by a Chinese company in a joint venture with one steel firm. More likely, this is out-and-out protectionism by those who want to stop the rise of Chinese steel companies at the expense of U.S. firms. Certainly, it betrays muddled thinking about China. On the one hand, China's currency policies are criticized for their effect on jobs; on the other, Chinese investment that could help create jobs is treated with suspicion. Worse, as Derek Scissors of the Heritage Foundation points out, while putting tariffs on Chinese goods or blocking Chinese investment will hurt China, it will also hurt the U.S. economy. Making Chinese imports more expensive isn't likely to lead to defunct U.S. industries springing back to life: Goods would instead be sourced from places like Vietnam, whose currency has also been devalued lately. For sure, there are legitimate complaints to make about Beijing's approach to trade and investment. The same could be said for Washington. —Andrew Peapl

To: Hawkmoon who wrote (66226)	9/20/2010 2:28:36 AM
From: TobagoJack	Read Replies (2) \| Respond to of 218675

the author you referenced is interesting case, but not in the way you believe because, to get the book published to begin with means it is a sanctioned act from up on high, by none other than wen himself, or at least his office otoh, there is this wastrel notable ... bbc.co.uk ("Obama e-mail teenager gets US ban") digitaljournal.com ("... p___k ...") which sharply contrasts with the london shoe-thrower telegraph.co.uk attacking dignified premier wen and get charged for crime by british police, only to be pardons by same dignified premier wen blogs.abcnews.com as opposed to this foxnews.com ("Iraq Shoe-Thrower Gets 3 Years in Prison") but same genre shoe attack on usa el presidente and the most unbecoming closure of case exceedingly indicative of small minded folks of which you may well be one now, why do you not at least try to be a real american and call it truly but then you are one of the "unbecoming", are you not?