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: Maurice Winn who wrote (70900)	2/8/2011 12:25:31 AM
From: Hawkmoon	Read Replies (2) \| Respond to of 217646

It seems reasonable that the wealth of Kuwait be spread over a larger population than that encompassed by a British Empire line on the map - especially since so many people love to denigrate said empire as having no redeeming merits. Y'know.. some would opine that having the US intervene 60 years ago in a conflict between rival empires (British, French, Third Reich, Italy, and Imperial Japan) was not justifiable. If we hadn't violated our neutrality by selling (trading?) arms for bases to the British, maybe the Japanese wouldn't have been persuaded to attack us and drag us into the war. But look at the changes that occurred in the world because we did. Decolonization, Democratization, the destruction of Communism.. and "relative" global stability for many decades were the result. And it's quite possible that, 60 years from now, we can look back and possibly see that bringing down some of these illegimate Authoritarian/Totalitarian regimes might produce the same result. We will certainly have our challenges, because there are other forces, such as Islamic Militancy, that are vying for the hearts and minds of the Muslim world. However, since Democratic Government is the only form that is implicitly legitimate, and we've yet to see truly democratic governments wage war upon one another, it a vision worth pursuing. And it's especially the case when these rogue regimes get out of line and wage wars of aggression/expansion against other nation/states. And btw, if you choose to legitimize Saddam's expansionist policies, what's wrong with the Israelis pursuing the same against blatantly Authoritarian/Totalitarian regimes, especially when those regimes incessantly threaten it's utter destruction? Hawk

To: Maurice Winn who wrote (70900)	2/8/2011 1:24:49 AM
From: elmatador	Respond to of 217646

Brazil’s latest moves regarding China would look like madness. Brazil’s China stance: buying time If the old marketing cliché “the customer is always right” was true in all situations, then Brazil’s latest moves regarding China would look like madness. When a country is your biggest trading partner, accounting for 12.5 per cent of your exports, is it really a good idea to complain? That is what Brazil is doing. Even though China’s purchases of its iron ore, soy meal and other commodities helped Brazil weather the global economic crisis, Latin America’s biggest economy is now crying foul as cheap Chinese imports flood its markets, undercutting domestic producers. If Brazil acts on its grumbles and makes public its concerns at an international forum, such as this month’s meeting of the Group of 20 or when Barack Obama visits in March, it will mark a shift in the world order. Until now, few countries other than the US have had the confidence to complain about China for fear that Beijing might simply pull up stumps and leave if it gets upset. Only a country such as Brazil, which has enough agricultural and mineral wealth to satisfy China’s thirst for resources for decades, is so indispensable to Beijing that it can dare to have a voice. “I think in the past there hasn’t been a unified global voice on these issues,” says Eric Farnsborough, vice-president of the Council of the Americas. “Nobody wants to upset the Chinese.” But even if Brazil does join the US in taking a stand on China’s allegedly undervalued currency, what is next? Brazil has already taken numerous trade-related actions in line with World Trade Organisation rules against Chinese goods, such as increasing tariffs on footwear and launching anti-dumping actions. Brazil would be unlikely to take more radical action against such an important business partner, particularly any moves that might violate global trading rules. Empty bluster is unlikely to bother China. But even if China did allow some appreciation of the renminbi, would this really help soften Brazil’s currency, the real, against the dollar and result in lower levels of cheap imports flooding into Brazil? The answer is probably no. Brazil has homegrown problems that have contributed to the currency’s strength. While China’s purchase of commodities has strengthened the real, Brazil’s real interest rates (nominal rates adjusted for inflation) are the highest of any large economy. This, together with breakneck economic growth fuelled last year by government spending, has drawn in overseas investors, adding further pressure on the real to appreciate. Whichever way you look at it, the solution to Brazil’s problems always seems to be the same. Cut government spending and reduce the role of the state in hogging national savings and many of Brazil’s industrial ills will cure themselves. Blaming the customer may go down well with the public in the near-time but it will only be a matter of time before people realise that more fundamental reforms are needed if Brazilian industry is to become more competitive.