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 (84261)	12/7/2011 9:52:44 PM
From: TobagoJack	4 Recommendations Read Replies (2) \| Respond to of 217732

Clarification for the uninformed: (i) the chinese government (of the state) is explicitly answerable to the ruling party, and vast majority of government officials are firstly party members placed in state / government position by the party; (ii) the chinese military is an explicit entity of the ruling party, ruled via the military commission of the party, and its officers are members of the party (the military of most nations are an entity of the state); (iii) the leader of the party is also / must be the leader of the military commission that the military answers to; and so i am not sure what you are talking about when speaking of coups and such. Noting for the dense: (i) the above scheme is assuredly a better construct than the american construct whereby the parties are answerable to some unchallengeable concept of "we the people" and "the nation" whereby both are as conveniently defined by the military industrial complex and monetary-financial cabal. (ii) as and when the ccpcc is past best-use-by date, the entire ccp complex goes, per dynasties of yesteryear (iii) as and when the republicans get done pinning "we the people", the democrats takes sloppy second. it is obvious to me that you are so oriented that you are having difficulty discerning the true nature of schemas and constructs. so, do you know who you would be voting for in 2012? why, as in what for, as in what do you hope to achieve? do you see the path? Question, again asked but never answered: (i) by your <<hard landing>> i take it now you are of the opinion that the rmb should rightly drop against the usd? yes or no ? (ii) if you believe the rmb should drop against the usd, then why had you heretofore always positioned that the rmb should rise? (iii) if you believe the rmb should rise, then why would you believe china would hard land? i had never been able to get a straight answer from you re your apparently shifting stand. so, again, which way is the rmb supposed to go? and based on your stance we shall pin you down and watch and brief. please choose how you wish to be pinned. cheers, tj