Time to sue China?

[JackThompson]

2 hours ago, OneMoreFarang said:

Should Trump also be punished?

For blocking the Chinese coming in, and being called "xenophobic" and "racist" for doing so?  Granted, all other countries NOT blocking incoming Chinese should also have been banned from entering - can blame him for that - but his position was the best in the field of public-discourse, at the time.

[JackThompson]

3 hours ago, darksidedog said:

I don't disagree with your sentiment, but good luck in trying to force them to pay, especially since they are in denial and trying to blame others.

  

2 hours ago, Henryford said:

It will be a cold day in hell before China pays a single Yuan.

They hold many nation's debts (US T-Bills, etc) - so simply confiscate those in lieu of cash payment.

 

3 hours ago, UbonThani said:

Not crazy at all. They spread it via the people on purpose.

We know they covered it up - and that is all we need to know.  The WHO was complicit in this, even if only by taking at face-value what a totalitarian communist govt said as truth.

 

But we don't know anything about prior-intent - and I don't see why they would release a bioweapon right next to their bio-labs on purpose, when releasing it where the bats are common (South China, or another country) would provide a much more believable cover story.

 

1 hour ago, UbonThani said:

  https://www.theatlantic.com/ideas/archive/2020/03/china-trolling-world-and-avoiding-blame/608332/

 

It's pretty clear they wanted it to hit the west

There is a saying, "Never let a crisis go to waste."  Their actions don't prove intent before the fact, but their tactics after are a separate question.

[Brewster67]

2 minutes ago, JackThompson said:

 

Since when does "hard work" mean "cheaper workers" and "intelligence" mean corporate espionage / intellectual-property theft and copying?

 

The trade-deficit is in China's favor.  There is no "disadvantage" to the West in ending ALL trade with China, except that the economy is dependent (as in "addicted like a junkie"), due to supply chains re-routed through China, by unpatriotic corporations.   Those have to be fixed, and that process may be painful, econonomically, in the short-term (a few years).

 

The only long-term "disadvantage," is to transnational-corporations who prefer the higher profits which come from cheaper labor and near-zero envronmental or health/safety standards in China.

Hundreds of millions of jobs worldwide would be instantly lost if there was a completer trade embargo against China. i don't think that would lead to 'short term' effects. It would obliterate all western economies and look at all the low economy countries who rely on China for affordable stuff.... NONE OF THEM would participate in such a stupid exercise in self-destruction..... lol

[Logosone]

3 minutes ago, JackThompson said:

 

The trade-deficit is in China's favor.  There is no "disadvantage" to the West in ending ALL trade with China, except that the economy is dependent (as in "addicted like a junkie"), due to supply chains re-routed through China, by unpatriotic corporations.   Those have to be fixed, and that process may be painful, econonomically, in the short-term (a few years).

 

The only long-term "disadvantage," is to transnational-corporations who prefer the higher profits which come from cheaper labor and near-zero envronmental or health/safety standards in China.

China does not just export. It also imports. It is also one of the largest markets in the world. It is very much to the West's advantage to sell in China, Trump himself happily made a deal whereby his farmers made billions from China.

 

If you really think any government or corporation will boycott one of the largest markets in the world because a bat sneezed on a ferret I think you need a reality check.

 

Needless to say every consumer in the world benefits from China's cheap and plentiful production. If what you said were done we would all pay a price for goods that is double or triple what we pay now, if not more.

[UbonThani]

17 minutes ago, Logosone said:

A virus did originate in Kansas, the Spanish flu pandemic.

 

"Nonetheless, in seven years of work on a history of the pandemic, this author conducted an extensive survey of contemporary medical and lay literature searching for epidemiological evidence – the only evidence available. That review suggests that the most likely site of origin was Haskell County, Kansas, an isolated and sparsely populated county in the southwest corner of the state, in January 1918"

 

https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC340389/

 

Last I checked the people in Kansas did not have an obsession with exotic foodstuffs. The virus can arise anywhere, it's a fact. It could equally arise in domestic cats, it does not need to be transmitted by eating, aerosol or touch is fine.

 

By the way, Australians eat more bats than the Chinese:

 

"Bats have been hunted by Aboriginal Australians for thousands of years, extending into modern times. Popular game species are the black flying fox and the little red flying fox. In 1997, it was estimated that the Aboriginal people of the Top End consumed 180,000 flying foxes each year"

 

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Bat_as_food

 

 

 

Yet no Corona deaths. Which means the Chinese spread the virus on purpose.

[Enzian]

Giant Made In China sticker on everything that comes from there? No little hidden labels. Then we all have a choice.

[monkfish]

5 minutes ago, Brewster67 said:

Hundreds of millions of jobs worldwide would be instantly lost if there was a completer trade embargo against China. i don't think that would lead to 'short term' effects. It would obliterate all western economies and look at all the low economy countries who rely on China for affordable stuff.... NONE OF THEM would participate in such a stupid exercise in self-destruction..... lol

Yea that's been the big mistake of the World driven by greed of a few becoming dependent on a country like China now hopefully the world will wake up and reverse that trend.

 

[JackThompson]

3 minutes ago, Brewster67 said:

Hundreds of millions of jobs worldwide would be instantly lost if there was a completer trade embargo against China. i don't think that would lead to 'short term' effects. It would obliterate all western economies and look at all the low economy countries who rely on China for affordable stuff.... NONE OF THEM would participate in such a stupid exercise in self-destruction..... lol

Products were "affordable" before they were produced in China.  The retail-price was not affected significantly by the labor/regulations savings - only the wholesale prices of large volumes accrue significant savings.  The "loot," from the looting of our economies, was then shared as "bonuses" to the boards of directors who behaved in a treasonous fashion - both in harm to our nation's citizens, and to our national-security.

 

Look up the "labor cost" of a product made in China - the cost of one-unit - then multiply that labor-cost by 4x, and you will find it would NOT make prices go up "double or triple what we pay now" - as if nearly the Full Retail Price of products were labor-costs.

 

Your statement about the obliteration of western economies proves the national-security point.  What decent citizen would do that to their country on purpose - putting the economic well-being of their nation in the hands of a totalitarian state like China?

[Russell17au]

2 minutes ago, UbonThani said:

Yet no Corona deaths. Which means the Chinese spread the virus on purpose.

Where is your proof. Stop causing problems for the everyday asian because they look like they might be Chinese which has happened in America and Australia. All you are doing on this thread is inciting violence against any Chinese looking Asian.

[overherebc]

6 minutes ago, UbonThani said:

Yet no Corona deaths. Which means the Chinese spread the virus on purpose.

Or it came from 'somewhere' other than a bat.

[scorecard]

4 hours ago, ravip said:

I wish all countries that destroyed other countries economies are made to pay up. Why, only China?

If one read the news, you will see how Innocent people, including children, were killed brutally by so called powerful developed countries on false accusations etc.

Why, are they justified? Do certain countries have the right by default, to destroy any other country at their whim and fancy? Does not one feel ashamed to cover up those atrocities? 

 

Edit

The lovely song All I Have To Do Is Dream by The Everly Brothers, comes to mind...

So perhaps the families of all Chinese (and Indian, Bangladeshi and Cambodian) children who have worked (and been held) in slave conditions to make big name very expensive sports shows for half a dollar a day (if they ever got paid) should sue the USA (and others)?

[monkfish]

31 minutes ago, Brewster67 said:

They can get their oil from Russia and Iran... oh wait.... THEY DO!

 

Sanctions?... Global manufacturing will stop immediately, hundreds of millions of jobs worldwide depend on what China exports to the companies they all work for... Tis US car manufacturing as a single example.... of the 2000 components that go into a US made car, how many are made in China?... up to 500. 

 

Do I need to go on?

Up to the Chinese maybe they are happy to just work with Russians and Iranians and some other asian countries but if they want to continue working with the west some cooperation will be required.

[ChouDoufu]

7 minutes ago, Logosone said:

China does not just export. It also imports. It is also one of the largest markets in the world. It is very much to the West's advantage to sell in China, Trump himself happily made a deal whereby his farmers made billions from China.

 

If you really think any government or corporation will boycott one of the largest markets in the world because a bat sneezed on a ferret I think you need a reality check.

 

Needless to say every consumer in the world benefits from China's cheap and plentiful production. If what you said were done we would all pay a price for goods that is double or triple what we pay now, if not more.

the farmers made billions from china?  no, they made billions from bail out subsidies.  (note how many congressmen are collecting farm aid!) 

 

the phase one bill was simply a public relations exercise.  nothing is required or enforceable.  it "calls on" china to "strive to" increase purchases to an impossible amount which was greater than before the trade war began.  trump happily signed a meaningless deal that was expected to hold up until after the election.  in the meantime, he could goose the markets with his weekly "phase two deal looking mighty good!  any day now!" twatterings.

 

there's no way china could ever buy the amount of soy in the deal.  america sells gmo soy which is used solely for pig feed in china.  with half or more of the herd dead, there's no need for that type of soy.

[RJRS1301]

59 minutes ago, Kinnock said:

Yes, definitely.  If people can be sued for criminal negligence, why not a Government? 

 

The local government in Wuhan failed to enforce the 2013 law preventing sale of wildlife in food markets - clear negligence.

 

Then the Provincial government compounded the issue by delaying action through a local cover up.

 

Then the Central Government delayed the implementation of international travel restrictions to prevent global spread.

 

And if they don't pay the compensation/damages, place a levy on all goods from China to fund the compensation.

 

The global economy is already knackered, so any knock on impacts will be limited.

 

Governments need to learn to be more globally responsible before COVID-21 kicks off.

In which court would the matter be heard?

China is not part of the International Court of Justice, 

The Court of Public Opinion has no sway

No National Court ie the US SUpreme Court can impose any penalty and extract reparation

 

 

[Russell17au]

3 minutes ago, monkfish said:

Up to the Chinese maybe they are happy to just work with Russians and Iranians and some other asian countries but if they want to continue working with the west some cooperation will be required.

So let China stop buying American farm produce, farm chemicals and stop buying Australian iron ore and farm produce and you can kiss the American and Australian economies goodbye because China whether you like it or not is the largest buyer of materials from America and Australia. So it is not China that needs to co-operate with America and Australia it is the vice-versa

[Logosone]

3 minutes ago, ChouDoufu said:

the farmers made billions from china?  no, they made billions from bail out subsidies.  (note how many congressmen are collecting farm aid!) 

 

the phase one bill was simply a public relations exercise.  nothing is required or enforceable.  it "calls on" china to "strive to" increase purchases to an impossible amount which was greater than before the trade war began.  trump happily signed a meaningless deal that was expected to hold up until after the election.  in the meantime, he could goose the markets with his weekly "phase two deal looking mighty good!  any day now!" twatterings.

 

there's no way china could ever buy the amount of soy in the deal.  america sells gmo soy which is used solely for pig feed in china.  with half or more of the herd dead, there's no need for that type of soy.

No, the phase one deal would have been enforceable, it quantified the goals fairly precisely. Had China breached the terms of the deal Trump would have levied more tariffs.

 

Obviously now with the virus pandemic China can justifiably argue that the drop in GDP means targets should be adjusted. We'll see if they do that and if they do if Trump would agree, given that China looks well on the path to returning to normality.

 

China US relations have become even more fascinating.

[OneMoreFarang]

26 minutes ago, JackThompson said:

his position was the best in the field of public-discourse

So you believed him when he said he would give himself a 10 out of 10. 555

[monkfish]

6 minutes ago, Russell17au said:

So let China stop buying American farm produce, farm chemicals and stop buying Australian iron ore and farm produce and you can kiss the American and Australian economies goodbye because China whether you like it or not is the largest buyer of materials from America and Australia. So it is not China that needs to co-operate with America and Australia it is the vice-versa

They managed fine without China before sure products would cost a bit more but they can manage.

[RJRS1301]

28 minutes ago, UbonThani said:

"Bats have been hunted by Aboriginal Australians for thousands of years, extending into modern times. Popular game species are the black flying fox and the little red flying fox. In 1997, it was estimated that the Aboriginal people of the Top End consumed 180,000 flying foxes each year"

Different species, live and roost in open rain forests not caves, different diets, and meat is eaten within hours of trapping and killing, not killed and stored in open areas.

 

[Russell17au]

3 minutes ago, monkfish said:

They managed fine without China before sure products would cost a bit more but they can manage.

No they wont. You need to open your eyes because a lot of the industries in Australia closed because the raw materials were sold to China and those industries will never be able to open again. So the only export for those raw materials is to China

[tifino]

2 minutes ago, monkfish said:

7 minutes ago, Russell17au said:

So let China stop buying American farm produce, farm chemicals and stop buying Australian iron ore and farm produce and you can kiss the American and Australian economies goodbye because China whether you like it or not is the largest buyer of materials from America and Australia. So it is not China that needs to co-operate with America and Australia it is the vice-versa

They managed fine without China before sure products would cost a bit more but they can manage.

Edited just now by monkfish

yeah but OZ (ATO) didn't/doesn't get anything out of it when it all goes off shore near-taxfree. The Income from the Sales of the raw Ore nowhere meets the Costs of the resultant later purchase of the processed steel... which has also been adulterated/weakened by whatever cost saving substandard processes the chinese did to the ore 

 

[ChouDoufu]

8 minutes ago, Logosone said:

No, the phase one deal would have been enforceable, it quantified the goals fairly precisely. Had China breached the terms of the deal Trump would have levied more tariffs.

 

Obviously now with the virus pandemic China can justifiably argue that the drop in GDP means targets should be adjusted. We'll see if they do that and if they do if Trump would agree, given that China looks well on the path to returning to normality.

 

China US relations have become even more fascinating.

okay, but i understand it removed the standard wto enforcement rulings that china usually complied with, replacing it with something about both sides having the right to decide for themselves if the terms were being met.  trump could add tariffs, china could ignore or add more tariffs if they believed or claimed to be in compliance.  so nothing there, really.  instead of something enforceable from the wto, we just restart the trade war, which we did once already.

[JackThompson]

36 minutes ago, Logosone said:

China does not just export. It also imports. It is also one of the largest markets in the world. It is very much to the West's advantage to sell in China, Trump himself happily made a deal whereby his farmers made billions from China.

Our farmers should NEVER have been made dependent on China as a critical market - any more than any nation wishing to preserve its atonomy would allow itself to be dependent on Chinese imports.    On Trump, see below.  I see ChouDofu has addressed the soybean issue.

 

Quote

If you really think any government or corporation will boycott one of the largest markets in the world because a bat sneezed on a ferret I think you need a reality check.

I have no illusions that profit-seeking corporations will give up their cheap-labor and "freedom from" environmental and safety provisions, which China offers - of their own free will.

 

Quote

Needless to say every consumer in the world benefits from China's cheap and plentiful production. If what you said were done we would all pay a price for goods that is double or triple what we pay now, if not more.

No, they don't.  The harm done to Western economies by the eviceration of our middle-class, which was outsourcing to China facilitated, did far more harm than the few cents of labor-cost per-item from shifting production to China.

 

12 minutes ago, OneMoreFarang said:

So you believed him when he said he would give himself a 10 out of 10. 555

Don't get me started on Trump; while I disagree with most "popular criticism" of him - by those whose policy-prescriptions are Worse - he has NOT done what he was elected to do. 

[JackThompson]

10 minutes ago, Russell17au said:

So let China stop buying American farm produce, farm chemicals and stop buying Australian iron ore and farm produce and you can kiss the American and Australian economies goodbye because China whether you like it or not is the largest buyer of materials from America and Australia. So it is not China that needs to co-operate with America and Australia it is the vice-versa

Speaking of the USA, in most cases, they buy our stuff, add value to it, then send it back and collect profit on the value-added price.  That's called "mercantilism" - and it is working very well for them (and Mexico, Vietnam, and others).  That's why the huge trade-deficit exists, which makes it a Net-Negative for the USA.  

 

Being an advanced Western nation, I am sure Australia could also produce their OWN products from their OWN raw-materials, and sell those - instead of selling the raw-materials, like some resource-expoited 3rd world country.

[tifino]

6 minutes ago, monkfish said:

They managed fine without China before sure products would cost a bit more but they can manage.

besides... just 'what' comes out of China that is of quality? - in that whatever has quality, has been some direct copy of something originally from a different country!

 - take military products: where anything decent in their armoury was originally of Russian design... copied and not necessarily Licenced manufactured from either.

[ravip]

4 hours ago, steven100 said:

I think they are complete a_rseholes .....   

Many around, who are 'they'? ????

[JHolmesJr]

Regardless of any ruling or directive to pay up, China will refuse to comply.

This is in their DNA.

So what should be the next step: all debt that is owed to China

by other countries should be treated as null and void.

 

Make them pay one way or another.

[Logosone]

2 minutes ago, ChouDoufu said:

okay, but i understand it removed the standard wto enforcement rulings that china usually complied with, replacing it with something about both sides having the right to decide for themselves if the terms were being met.  trump could add tariffs, china could ignore or add more tariffs if they believed or claimed to be in compliance.  so nothing there, really.  instead of something enforceable from the wto, we just restart the trade war, which we did once already.

Trump doesn't need the WTO to enforce. Just has to add more tariffs.

 

If China escalated the trade war, that would have been detrimental to China. It was always China that were more interested in a deal, as we saw. China is the big exporter, not the US. Tariffs hurt China pretty hard.

[JackThompson]

27 minutes ago, scorecard said:

So perhaps the families of all Chinese (and Indian, Bangladeshi and Cambodian) children who have worked (and been held) in slave conditions to make big name very expensive sports shows for half a dollar a day (if they ever got paid) should sue the USA (and others)?

I would not mind at all if they sued the Corporations who profited from this.  Those corporations used those poor people as tools to wreck Western lives and families - folks formerly supported at good wages producing those products for domestic markets.

[Logosone]

5 minutes ago, tifino said:

besides... just 'what' comes out of China that is of quality? - in that whatever has quality, has been some direct copy of something originally from a different country!

 - take military products: where anything decent in their armoury was originally of Russian design... copied and not necessarily Licenced manufactured from either.

Not an argument.

 

Every country started that way. The US copied Britain, Germany copied Britain. Japan copied Germany.

 

Then comes a point when a copying country makes the transition to improving and creating quality products itself. China has already made that transition.