A Brave Step To Curb China's Influence

Who was it that coined the term "unsinkable aircraft carrier"?

Same old big brother attitude? When you don't win flex muscles? Forgetting the erstwhile smaller brother too has muscles now.

BTW: is it not politics in the forum!

No, this is not politics.

We have had many threads and blogs on here in which global trade has been discussed. Global trade directly influences manufacturing and engineering, as does China's growing influence around the world. You may be new here.

The thread is about exactly what the name implies and is open to discussion. Thanks for your input.

The discussion can continue as long as it stays on-topic and doesn't turn into a political debate. If that shift happens, the thread will be closed.

I started it off on a positive note. I would be intersted in knowing how our friends from around the world feel about it.

We'll see how it goes.

While it is slightly political, it's international politics on the world stage. I don't see any reason for sniping between members on here.

I'll try to keep it on track with some questions:

Will this help even the playing field in Australia?

How deep is Chinese influence in Australia and New Zealand?

China has been left out of the pact, for now. Will this anger them, or get them to play ball with the other members of the pact?

Does this have teeth, or is it empty sabre rattling?

Can we afford to do things that even give the appearance that we are snubbing China?

China is very keen on maintaining good relations with the US. We are still one of the wealthiest nations in the world and hence have buying power. It is that very buying power (our dollar) that is propelling China onto the world stage. They will eventually reach a point where their citizens believe having a microwave oven, a television and a cell phone are necessities. When that time arrives, the playing field will level out a little.

That's true. I was doing some looking around on the web after reading about the strange patterns in Chinese desert article, and people were busy superimposing the patterns over US cities to see if they could find a match. I thought to myself, 'That's ridiculous, the Chinese would have no interest whatsoever in bombing the US'.

I also read an article recently that stated that the wage disparity between the US and China would even out by 2015. Personally, I think that's way, way, too optimistic.

I'll admit that my opening thread is not without sarcasm. I'm sure it's clear to anyone that knows me. Quite frankly, I don't know what to think of this. On it's face, it looks like some kind of joke. Whether it's 250 or 2500, I can't come up with any positive impact that this will have. Hence the thread............................I'd like to hear what others think.

I'll admit that my opening thread is not without sarcasm.

What?...Who?...Wha?

Who's kidding who? China owns us already.

"The Treasury Department reported Tuesday that China owned $895.6 billion in U.S. bonds as of November. That's down from $906.8 billion a month earlier and is the first decline in China's holdings since June."

So we're buying their stuff with their money. Details, details...

I think China well take it in good humor for what it is.

They may however decide to have a bit of fun with Julia, given their position as the largest customer.

I'm quite sure they don't feel threatened. I'm a little nervous about what they consider fun.

I'm not sure how appropriate this particular use of US troops is either.

He probably saw the video

But, find me an engineer who wouldn't, [given the chance], f^cq with the minds of a bunch of lawyers [who after all, dreampt this silliness up].

"appropriate"; Australia is host to a great many US service personnel under ANZUS. 250 or 2500 won't make much difference. A lot come for specialist training - so it might boost course numbers and of course the tourist dollars.

"Base" is the only new thing in this. Let's hope, for the troops sake, pub wise, they put it at Darwin, or Cairns, not Pine Gap, or the ADF 'the middle of nowhere' northern training area.

That's funny.

Yes, I'm sure this is largely symbolic, but symbolic of what?

I'm also sure that the troops that get to pull duty in Australia probably feel like they won the lottery.

Here are the member nations. It appears that China wasn't invited this year. I could see this back firing..........................China could punish the smaller nations that they trade with, pretty easily.

From my little perch, these games look kind of dangerous.

The area has a history of 'economic alignments'. Have a look at ASEAN

In the end, they don't want the US, or China, or Australia, or Russia dictating to them, any more than the EEC does [or your States do]

For what it's worth, Hawk, Keating and Clinton are/were 'democrats' - and Clinton is/was certainly the preferred brand of US politician in the rest of the world.

Obama, who they all know is struggling in the polls, will be given more latitude, in the hope he survives.

Meaning the "dangerous game" starts if/when the US 25% votes in another "invent a war" Republic***.

I'd be questioning this regardless of who was in office.

I thought it was due to the Chinese keeping their currency low, but it looks like they have been getting pushy, in what are international waters.

Yep - hear tell, the pushy sods made Julia bend over and give them bases.

Chinese bases in Australia??!! You're joking ..............right?

Unfortunately, we don't get much in the way of news anymore in the US. This meeting in Hawaii barely got a mention. Every news outlet in the country is currently consumed over whether or not some coach is a pervert.

It's true about the international waters, but then, who owns the Persian Gulf?

I am sometimes surprised that the various administrations speak of China keeping the value of their currency down while we, at the same time, are printing more and more dollars to try and climb out of the hole we dug for ourselves.

The Chinese keep pointing that out too. I don't think we can act as though we don't manipulate our currency.

A country devalues its currency to promote exports. When euros buy more than dollars, Europeans will buy US goods! This frustrated the heck out of my last employer. They couldn't import German goods, even though their quality is so much better, they could only afford to import from China! The shift happened as the dollar/euro exchange rate declined for the dollar.

Unfortunately, politicians use this as a sticking point, "Don't vote for politician X he made the dollar lose against the euro!"

It's also one of the reasons Greece, Spain, and now Italy are having problems. Independent governments that are sharing the same currency. They have no way to devalue their currency, they have no control over it.

I had to read this again.

"If that shift happens, the thread will be closed."

I initally thought you'd have to censor yourself, until I saw the "f".

I didn't notice that the first time around either.

Cute.

Aw c'mon. A certain degree of politics is unavoidable. Look at the blogs.

It's the fighting that bugs them. And let's face it...................China is becoming a bigger and bigger influence in everything by the day, particularly in engineering and manufacturing. They aren't just making party favors anymore. Sure there are political aspects to it.

China's become a big enough gorilla in the room, that decisions like this have the potential to cause ripples around the globe. I certainly think it's worthy of discussion on an engineering forum.

The Australian people have always been good neighbors to those of us here in the USA. What wrong with working closer together. Our Navy already does in the area. Why not our ground forces. Maybe there is something for both to learn that came up in the present conflicts.

As far as flexing our muscle 250 marines isn't much of a flex. And there is most likely a lot more US Forces on the ground there then that already.

What wrong if it look like we have their back. We do, just as Australia has always been one of the first to have ours when we have gone into any conflict.

Absolutely, Australia's always been a strong ally. This particular move kind of took me by surprise. It kind of seems akin to shooting an elephant with a BB gun.

I wasn't suggesting that we don't look out for our friends.

Maybe the reason the US picked Australia is its far enough away, so it does not look like a direct threat to China. If they start some buildup/training.

Unlike S. Korea or Japan both of which we already have bases there. If I remember last last year there was some tension when S.Korea an US were doing some practice in the ocean. Along with China "doing" there own. It caused some flareup when China was using some islands as targets because there was a dispute who controlled them.

-----

Keep yanking the dogs tail it will turn and bite you.

How long till China says enough! Pay up sucker! We own you.

----

But my biggest worry is when is this country going as Greece and others are.

And this is a whole different topic that may not be fit for this forum.

1+1=7 then?

why station 2500 of them in Australia? for example there are american bases in Japan, putting them so far from china could be seen as an act of weakness IMHO

Japan, lots of troops in South Korea.

I don't see it as an act of weakness, as much as a non event. The fact that the US and Australia decided to make the announcement as if it's some kind of move to thwart Chinese influence in the region......................lets just say, I don't get it.

Was that the intention of those governments or did the media put that spin on it.

The first section of the article, including quotes, doesn't seem to be spin. It happens to be from a Canadian news source, so I don't know why they would spin it................but it's always possible.

Hmm, you are right, maybe it is much more an act for australlia then for china

If so, I would like to think that the people of Australia are smart enough not to be placated by a token gesture like this.

Don't rule out 'idiot advisers' with no idea of cause and effect 'snowballs'.

The Australian 'diplomacy' in this case was based on 'no you don't need a navy, you have us to protect your gas fields'.

The people in power, (around the world), are up to soooooo many things that we have no idea about.

We can sit here all day long and speculate, and still not have a clue about what's really going on.

The saying "follow the money" is now "spot the resources" - do that and you'll have a good idea of what is going on in the 'create an excuse' game.

Mind you, knowing the aims doesn't make the level of arrogance, blind greed and rampant stupidity any less frightening.

Nope......................and like I've mentioned before on here, while everybody else is practicing their own brand of arrogance, greed and stupidity, China is busy insuring that they have access to resources for decades.

And therein lies the essential difference between arts/law and engineering degrees.

Yes.......................and who ends up running things.

That very much depends on the values of the corporate and the mechanism of appointment.

In Company X, people who understand how things work tend to filter to the top. The lack of a set 'term' in appointments means they are reviewed on 'performance'. Think of a successful private enterprise corporate structure.

In Company Y, if a good talker can get a little over half of the approval of the 25% of the market who bother to fill in a survey, they get a management position for several years. So long as he/she can hide complete ignorance of the job, via rhetoric, then they needn't actually do anything except lobby for the next survey.

Now if you add to this a limit on how many times a CEO person can be appointed, you can assure limited impact by the untalented. But also, handily, get rid of the annoyingly talented, who show you up by doing things.

Company Y is a terrific system while no actual management is wanted. Just don't expect it to be of any use when 'performance' is wanted.

The whole system of free worldwide trade cannot be functional over many years.

We see the consequences: the low prices of some states (China is not alone on this side) kill our producing industry, suck a lot of money out of the western states and in total creates economic crisis.

We have seen this crisis some years ago (not only by this mismatch of prices) and see it now once more.

So the one and only solution would be a tax (at customs) dependent on the different (or relation) of income of a typical worker here and there.

Any goods from cheap states will be more expensive by a factor of 2 to 5.

The western states will still be buyers but the governments will have a big bunch of additional money.

And the Western companies a much easier field to play.

And the Eastern companies and governments a strong motivation to raise the payments!

This would work but nobody will introduce this system.

Why?

RHABE

You're right.

When all of these free trade agreements were crafted, I think the US politicians just assumed that we would be exporting goods all over the world. It never occurred to them, that if people in other countries work for $5 a day, and US workers are looking for $40,000-$60,000 a year, that it would create a completely lopsided situation. I really think that part of it was arrogance.............I don't think our politicians believed that anyone else in the world was capable of making the things that we made in the US. They were wrong. Politicians are not necessarily very business savvy.

The door is opened now.

People think I'm anti union.................I'm not. But even within the US, union members enjoy $40-$50 per hour wages, while people that would be willing to do the job for $18 per hour are locked out.

I just have to think that part of the equation, is that Americans are going to have to get used to the idea of earning, and living with, less. Right now that's not happening. Somehow we seem to have the notion that we can have our cake and eat it too.

If we wait for the rest of the world to bring wages up to our level, we're going to starve ourselves out of the game. Corporate America of course, will still do well. They are happily taking advantage of the cheap labor pool that the rest of the world has to offer.

I am doing more with less, better than I ever have. I wonder if I would be allowed to open a fishing corporation in China??? They did not let me in Belize.. it seemed Red Lobster had the Government run Co-Op locked up.

Money is necessary..............................but stuff is highly over rated. I don't require much either.

Kramarat, here an idea about free trade.

When the USA started free trade it was not to long that Europe started the euro zone with one common currency. Though it took a few years for everyone balanced out. Meanwhile in the US the money changers were getting the rules changed to there favor.

Now the world banks are working toward the day there is one currency. Just last year there was talk about forming the Americans (north,central,south) version of currency just like the euro.

Now the fly in the ointment. The housing/finance bubble popped, starting a ripple effect through the world. Throw in some that are not playing by the money changers rules.

The countries in the euro zone started seeing the common currency starting to unravel because of unsustainable borrowing/growth projections in a few country's.

In similar fashion they are failing like here. If you notice the world banks are trying to prop up a house of cards that falling. I think there going to fail.

----

That one side of the coin. The other is corporations here were sold on the idea of increasing profits. They found by going to other countries where labor, regulations and other costs are far less than here. Even with shipping costs figured in. All because free trade has enabled it.

----

Now throw China in to the mix, there playing by there own rules. He who has all the gold makes the rules. China has been buying our debit and others in the world.

They have the raw materials, the people, the technology, the will to surpass everyone in the world. How? When? How quick we self destruct as a world. When they think they have the advantage to strike.

---------------

The only way short of going back 20 or more years before the "changes" started. IS to have the one world currency with everyone through out the world at the same level. For some that would be a great increase. Others a great fall. But everything would have to balance out. Environmental laws, workers laws, etc, etc would have to be address in every country so there would not be an advantage. This would bring manufacture back, stuff would not be shipped half way around the world. People could go back to work living there little life.

---

To get from here to there. There would be a lot of heart ache. Most likely there would be a few very few that would be at the top of the pile of gold. Just like now. How the world banks are playing a game and were the pawns. Sorta the ultimate Monopoly game.

----

I personally would hate to see a world where everyone was the same grey. Now if everyone retained there culture. Could travel without prejudice. People not trying to kill each other. Where everyone is equal but unique.

BUT this will never happen. Because there are people for no mater how much they have they want more.

---

Sorry for the rambles. I just have a problem trying to put it all together the way I see it in my mind for everyone else to understand. At least I'm honest.

Charles

From where I'm sitting, (I may be wrong), it doesn't look like the Euro zone is working out very well. It looks to me like the countries with weak economies and bad policies are dragging down the countries that are doing somewhat well.

These things only seem to work in theory, (maybe not even then), not in reality. As far as I'm concerned, bailouts=bandaids, and bandaids don't last.

One global currency will require one governing body to oversee everything.Guess where that will start..............................The United Nations....................the most spineless and crooked organization on the face of the planet.

No thanks.

Could always return to the gold standard

Well at least your getting something that can be used. It beats a piece of paper that not even worth what its cost to make. If the fiat money system fails.

With gold or any other precious metals/stones there an intrinsic value that others will value. As to what to expect in trade would need to be worked out by the individuals.

Any fiat money system is only as good as the nation backing it and others willing to accept it.

The only difficulty is the "creation of credit" which as you may remember from economics 102, is key to 'growth'.

To a point. Like anything, too much, too easy, spoils the soup.

The value of gold fluctuates by market demand as well as any other commodity. It's a silly idea to tie one's currency to a commodity.

Right now gold has reached sky high prices. Why? Because everyone believes its a solid investment. Gold will never loses its value....riiiight. Just like real estate could never lose value. We found that wasn't true in '08.

The only thing that investing in gold has done (other than making smart investors rich by selling it to the speculators) has been to make products that use gold more expensive i.e. electronics and other consumer products. The 'gold bubble' will pop. I don't think it's quite the big bubble that the real estate bubble was, but it will pop.

Nice to meet you Lo Volt.

You're right. Gold is a bubble.

I may be wrong, but here's where I'm coming from.

The moment things started going bad, (planet wide), is when we disassociated the dollar from a unit of work. Euro.................whatever.

I'll leave it at that for now.

when was that?

A long time ago.

I don't know when, but there was a time when each dollar that traded hands was earned. Actually, it was probably before there even was a dollar. I guess it goes back to when currency became a concept.

Read yourself rich

The more interesting bits; 1.6.1 Prolongation of the Great Depression

2.2 Advantages

2.3 Disadvantages

3 Advocates of a renewed gold standard

Interesting reading.

Returning to the gold standard, (at least in the US), would be impossible since we've passed the point of no return. There's not enough gold on the planet to even come close to covering our debt.

Personally, I utilize the barter system whenever possible. Not an answer to our problems, but I like it. I just trade labor for labor. Of course, barter schemes could land you in jail if you don't pay "the man", which I don't. I only pay them on money I earn. Let them lock me up. I'm probably headed there anyway, for some law that I'm not aware of, like removing my seatbelt before the ignition is off, or some other offense.

To bad it couldn't be expanded. It's the fairest system of all. Those that do nothing-receive nothing.

And just to cover my bases.....................no, I'm not saying that the old and sick, or anybody else that is incapable of producing should be left to die. We have a responsibility to take care of them.

"Those that do nothing-receive nothing"

I can think of a lot of highly paid people who would fail a 'performance review' if that was the benchmark.

And just to annoy you; most got there via 'bartering" back scratching.

I need to find me a good back scratcher. I don't think I would be allowed to run for political office.

Why do you think you couldn't run for political office?

whether or not you could be elected is an entirely different question

A bubble and it's resulting pop is a figment of the imagination. I have land here in Florida. The media told me it lost value a few years ago. They are wrong. It has always been worth the same to me; it represents a place to live, and a measure of freedom. I don't own gold because I can't eat it. If the world ever goes to $hit, a bottle of good homemade vodka and a bushel of corn will be worth all the gold in Fort Knox (if there is a Fort Knox).

Yes, there is a Fort Knox.....but the jury is out on whether it has any gold left in it.

You indirectly make a good point regarding value. The real estate market (and bubble) is dynamic and it generally refers to houses and/or land that is on the market. Your property has value to you and to the state of Florida and to the county you live in. Regardless of how much you value you property, the property taxes you are required to pay are based on the value assigned by the county's tax appraiser.

The value the rest of society (media, Realtors, etc.) place on your property is basically irrelevant until you decide you would like to sell it. At that time you will find out if your value of your property matches that of the rest of society (Realtors and potential buyers in particular).

If you should want to borrow money against your property, then it's perceived value comes into play again. The bank may not see it's value as being as high as you do, and thus may not be willing to lend you as much as you think they should.

I don't know about the taxes. Custom fees should be such that they pay for the inspection of the imported items so that they meet all our standards. This dumping the cheap products on the market until some one gets hurt or sick then catching it got to go. Why should anyone pay taxes to support the customs dept. It should be levied on to the imported products.

Found this.

It seems like the exact reason is a little sketchy for everyone. This link implies that the nations in the area asked the US to increase it's presence there.

Good Info, Kramarat. I can understand these nations looking for a security blanket.

I am happy we can be there for them, as we should be! We are for China...

May help

"By mid-2003 the Pentagon was planning a broad realignment of troops in Asia that may include moving Marines out of Japan and establishing a network of small bases in countries such as Australia, Singapore and Malaysia where the US has never had a substantial military presence"

Makes sense. Although they are saying that there won't be any US bases in Australia.

If it was already on the table, I'm not sure of the wisdom of implying that this was a recent decision, or implying that it is to counter the Chinese influence in the area.

No telling.

I can't find any press releases from the White House that spells out the reasoning behind it. The internet is humming..................almost all negative.

One factor perhaps relevant to the tsunami response mentioned

The motivation is obvious when you consider the population size, political climate, track record and demographics of Australia's biggest neighbor.

Not China.