Trump speaks with Taiwan's president, risking China tensions

[thaibeachlovers]

18 minutes ago, GinBoy2 said:

Then look around you. What, if tariffs were applied to all those goods would it do to US consumer prices? US companies choice to manufacturer in China to lower US consumer price, and increase their own profits.

 

You don't pressure China by hurting your own consumer base

LOL. Chamberlain thought like you, and look what happened, but as long as the sheeple can buy cheap crap, that's OK then?

 

Yes the loathsome companies chose to go to China and exploit the peasants there because Americans would never work in conditions like that, or for starvation wages. They did it to get rich, not because of any concern for American consumers.

I hope Trump gives it to them large if he makes China kick them out, but unfortunately they would just relocate to other countries where they could exploit people. Best result would be if Trump did go protectionist and tax imports up the wazoo.

Edited December 4, 2016 by thaibeachlovers

[GinBoy2]

11 minutes ago, thaibeachlovers said:

If China could be relied on to just be the big boy on the block no one would be worrying.

However, they ain't building tourist resorts where they have zero right to be.

There is only one reason for the military build up in the South China Sea, and it isn't for light houses.

I have a very healthy fear of China expansionism, unlike many on TVF who seem to relish in the fact that China's expansionism is at the expense of American influence

 

My main point in all of this thread is that 'in your face' goading of China isn't going to work. That's not how they think, it's not how they respond.

 

We live in Asia, you know, or should do, how much 'face' means. To the regime in Beijing face is everything, publicly slap that face, and nothing good will ensue.

Edited December 4, 2016 by GinBoy2

[NeverSure]

5 minutes ago, GinBoy2 said:

Then look around you. What, if tariffs were applied to all those goods would it do to US consumer prices? US companies choice to manufacturer in China to lower US consumer price, and increase their own profits.

 

You don't pressure China by hurting your own consumer base

 

You can reduce corporate taxes, costly regulations, and a combination of that and tariffs would restart US manufacturing. The US has long been a very good manufacturer but overburdened with costs. 

 

The are also robotics that while reducing costs, open up a whole new field for workers and still provide work for the suppliers, raw materials providers and all that goes with that.

 

While China makes most clothing sold in the US, the US with robotics can now make clothing without human intervention. Where does that leave China when we have to ship them the cotton just to make the clothes before they ship them back? 

[thaibeachlovers]

17 hours ago, Morch said:

The issue is not snubbing the PRC. It is not even about any principals as such. Wouldn't mind if it was, but as it stands, seems this is more about Trump's ego than anything else. Notice his tweeter comments afterwards - they do not echo much of the interpretations, hopes and fears detailed on this topic - they're all about Trump's sense of pride.

 

If the aim is to challenge the PRC, by all means, go for it. Just perhaps would be better if there was actually any planning and reasoning behind it, rather than an apparently simple minded  "why can't I?". This reads more like something fitting a juvenile, not someone about to become the president of the most powerful nation on Earth.

 

And here's another thing, Trump is not the president at this time, and not for almost two month hence. Rather, it will be the outgoing administration who will need to contend with any trouble he causes until the inauguration. It is not just about disregarding protocol or even applying basic common sense, but perhaps more to do with lacking much by way of decency.

I find it alarming that you, and apparently the western authorities, take such fright at the very idea of upsetting China because of a phone call.

China is just a huge bully that is trying to take over SEA, and should be treated as a big bully, not as some valued member of a peaceful world community.

I scorn the idea that China can be that upset because Trump takes a phone call. If they really are, they need a reality check.

[thaibeachlovers]

6 minutes ago, GinBoy2 said:

I have a very healthy fear of China expansionism, unlike many on TVF who seem to relish in the fact that China's expansionism is at the expense of American influence

 

My main point in all of this thread is that 'in your face' goading of China isn't going to work. That's not how they think, it's not how they respond.

 

We live in Asia, you know, or should do, how much 'face' means. To the regime in Beijing face is everything, publicly slap that face, and nothing good will ensue.

The revolting regime in China is worse than the Castro dictatorship ever was, yet the American government bends over and takes it from China, while trying to destroy the Castro government.

 

The Chinese government needs a good face slapping.

[GinBoy2]

15 minutes ago, NeverSure said:

 

You can reduce corporate taxes, costly regulations, and a combination of that and tariffs would restart US manufacturing. The US has long been a very good manufacturer but overburdened with costs. 

 

The are also robotics that while reducing costs, open up a whole new field for workers and still provide work for the suppliers, raw materials providers and all that goes with that.

 

While China makes most clothing sold in the US, the US with robotics can now make clothing without human intervention. Where does that leave China when we have to ship them the cotton just to make the clothes before they ship them back? 

You know as well as of of us that the reason companies move manufacturing to China in general, has nothing to do with regulation or taxes, but labor cost. If you want everyone in manufacturing to be working for $10 a day go for it, that's the level playing field.

I worked in the semiconductor manufacturing business most of my life post military and watched the industry chase lower labor costs across the globe. Like it or not, Globalization has winners and losers

 

8 minutes ago, thaibeachlovers said:

The revolting regime in China is worse than the Castro dictatorship ever was, yet the American government bends over and takes it from China, while trying to destroy the Castro government.

 

The Chinese government needs a good face slapping.

Castro's Cuba was a 3rd world tinpot Dictatorship....China is a nuclear capable Superpower with the second largest economy in the world.

 

There is a reason we have Diplomats who treat countries differently.

Edited December 4, 2016 by GinBoy2

[NeverSure]

22 minutes ago, iReason said:

 

Absolutely right.

I have nothing to "add" to that ignorant, neanderthal drival you posted.

And have no interest in addressing your childish gibes as well.

 

Yawn... 

 

Welcome to my ignore list.

 

Cheers

[NeverSure]

1 minute ago, GinBoy2 said:

You know as well as of of us that the reason companies move manufacturing to China in general, has nothing to do with regulation or taxes, but labor cos

 

Castro's Cuba was a 3rd world tinpot Dictatorship....China is a nuclear capable Superpower with the second largest economy in the world.

 

There is a reason we have Diplomats who treat countries differently.

 

I don't know that. Shipping is a huge component of having things made in China, especially if the raw materials have to first be shipped to China.

 

Of course lowering taxes makes it more affordable to manufacture in the US.

 

The regulatory burden on US business has gotten out of hand and most larger businesses have to have compliance people who are experts to walk that minefield. Regulations are fully law, but they are put in place by bureaucrats, not by the legislature. The legislature creates the bureaus and gives them the authority to make regulations. Then pencil pushers who've never run a business have nothing better to do than to think up new ideas for businesses to comply with. The results are devastating.

 

These regulatory agencies are part of the Executive Branch which answers to the POTUS. Trump has promised to deeply cut regulations and steeply reduce taxes which will along with saving shipping costs and maintaining high efficiency make American manufacturing competitive. If it isn't enough there is always the ability to add tariffs.

 

Cheers.

[iReason]

Just now, thaibeachlovers said:

I scorn the idea that China can be that upset because Trump takes a phone call.

 

Except, of course. your premise is entirely wrong.

 

"Trump reportedly agreed to the call, which was arranged by Taiwan-friendly members of his campaign staff,

after his aides briefed him on issues regarding Taiwan and the situation in the Taiwan Strait, sources said."

http://www.taipeitimes.com/News/front/archives/2016/12/03/2003660473

 

No surprise.

Just another uninformed Trumpeteer who takes the huckster at his word...

 

Trump's Taiwan phone call preceded by hotel development inquiry 

Woman who talked to mayor about airport expansion plans said she was associated with Trump Organization, official says  

https://www.theguardian.com/world/2016/dec/03/trumps-taiwan-phone-call-preceded-by-hotel-development-inquiry

Edited December 4, 2016 by iReason

[thaibeachlovers]

18 minutes ago, GinBoy2 said:

You know as well as of of us that the reason companies move manufacturing to China in general, has nothing to do with regulation or taxes, but labor cost. If you want everyone in manufacturing to be working for $10 a day go for it, that's the level playing field.

I worked in the semiconductor manufacturing business most of my life post military and watched the industry chase lower labor costs across the globe. Like it or not, Globalization has winners and losers

 

Castro's Cuba was a 3rd world tinpot Dictatorship....China is a nuclear capable Superpower with the second largest economy in the world.

 

There is a reason we have Diplomats who treat countries differently.

Seriously? Russia was a nuclear capable superpower and America didn't bend over to it like they do with China. They certainly didn't go all wobbly because someone might have upset the Kremlin by talking on the phone. I bet the Chinese dictators are laughing like drains because of the hysteria in the west over it.

I guess that somewhere along the way the west became ruled by a bunch of pussies.

 

I can't even get my head around the way people are talking about a phone call as if it were the missiles on Cuba crisis. Pathetic.

Edited December 4, 2016 by thaibeachlovers

[NeverSure]

37 minutes ago, GinBoy2 said:

Then look around you. What, if tariffs were applied to all those goods would it do to US consumer prices? US companies choice to manufacturer in China to lower US consumer price, and increase their own profits.

 

You don't pressure China by hurting your own consumer base

 

What are Americans going to use for money to buy cheap Chinese goods if they don't have good jobs?

 

The people did MUCH better before all of this free trade which started with Bill Clinton and NAFTA. Now we're in a position where we don't have a bilateral free trade agreement with China. It's one sided. General Motors wanted to import Buicks into China but China balked. Now GM will build a plant in China to have the cars to sell because China doesn't play nice.

 

The US has been a sucker for China for too long. If you don't like the way Trump handles them (Thread Topic) just give it time. Americans need those jobs whether China likes it or not.

 

Cheers.

[GinBoy2]

1 minute ago, thaibeachlovers said:

Seriously? Russia was a nuclear capable superpower and America didn't bend over to it like they do with China. They certainly didn't go all wobbly because someone might have upset the Kremlin by talking on the phone.

I guess that somewhere along the way the west became ruled by a bunch of pussies.

 

I can't even get my head around the way people are talking about a phone call as if it were the missiles on Cuba crisis. Pathetic.

The big difference is, the USSR was an economy built on sand, Reagan know that a military arms race would eventually collapse the house of cards.

 

Today however we have a reverse situation with us sat on the house of cards, with our principle foe holding a good percentage of our debt

 

[thaibeachlovers]

25 minutes ago, GinBoy2 said:

You know as well as of of us that the reason companies move manufacturing to China in general, has nothing to do with regulation or taxes, but labor cost. If you want everyone in manufacturing to be working for $10 a day go for it, that's the level playing field.

I worked in the semiconductor manufacturing business most of my life post military and watched the industry chase lower labor costs across the globe. Like it or not, Globalization has winners and losers

 

Castro's Cuba was a 3rd world tinpot Dictatorship....China is a nuclear capable Superpower with the second largest economy in the world.

 

There is a reason we have Diplomats who treat countries differently.

Once AI comes in and labour will not be necessary, will the US companies move back to the US or is there some other reason to be there?

 

Re Cuba. You make the US sound like a bully that will only take on countries that can't fight back. Does principle not come into it anywhere?

[GinBoy2]

1 minute ago, thaibeachlovers said:

Once AI comes in and labour will not be necessary, will the US companies move back to the US or is there some other reason to be there?

 

Re Cuba. You make the US sound like a bully that will only take on countries that can't fight back. Does principle not come into it anywhere?

It's called diplomatic pragmatism

[thaibeachlovers]

7 minutes ago, GinBoy2 said:

The big difference is, the USSR was an economy built on sand, Reagan know that a military arms race would eventually collapse the house of cards.

 

Today however we have a reverse situation with us sat on the house of cards, with our principle foe holding a good percentage of our debt

 

WOW, Reagan was psychic! Who would have known.

[thaibeachlovers]

Just now, GinBoy2 said:

It's called diplomatic pragmatism

I guess you would have supported Chamberlain then.

 

Back to the OP. Does anyone outside the Washington bubble world give a rat's bottom if Trump talks to the Taiwanese president or not?

[GinBoy2]

3 minutes ago, thaibeachlovers said:

WOW, Reagan was psychic! Who would have known.

Reagan was an exceptional President. At the time he was viewed quite negatively outside the US, but I think history has proven that his vision was spot on.

 

I hope that we could have the same vision today, in what is a more complex world

 

Edited December 4, 2016 by GinBoy2

[NeverSure]

5 minutes ago, GinBoy2 said:

The big difference is, the USSR was an economy built on sand, Reagan know that a military arms race would eventually collapse the house of cards.

 

Today however we have a reverse situation with us sat on the house of cards, with our principle foe holding a good percentage of our debt

 

 

Wow. This again, huh?

 

China holds US debt because it has to. If it didn't it would be instantly out of the business of international trade. What it's doing is holding $USD, the international unit of trade in the form of US Treasuries. It's not that China has surplus money to lend. It doesn't. It has its own debt. It has to borrow money to buy those US treasuries. It has to have those dollars to back its international trade.

 

There is a large and active market internationally for US Treasuries and they are always liquid. They often sell above par. ONE of the bullets the US has is to call in those treasuries and leave China with no USD and out of biz overnight.

 

My perception is that you greatly overestimate how many moves China has before it's checkmate.

 

Cheers.

[thaibeachlovers]

10 minutes ago, GinBoy2 said:

Reagan was an exceptional President. At the time he was viewed quite negatively outside the US, but I think history has proven that his vision was spot on.

 

I hope that we could have the same vision today, in what is a more complex world

 

While off topic, Reagan was, IMO, a very bad man that approved an illegal war on Nicaragua. Sort of negates anything good he did. I also remember astonishingly high interest rates about the time he was in charge. Perhaps because he was a nutter that believed in star wars technology, and wasted billions if not trillions on war toys.

Edited December 4, 2016 by thaibeachlovers

[GinBoy2]

3 minutes ago, thaibeachlovers said:

While off topic, Reagan was, IMO, a very bad man that approved an illegal war on Nicaragua. Sort of negates anything good he did. I also remember astonishingly high interest rates about the time he was in charge.

This is one of those opinions I have changed over time. During the Reagan Presidency I hated him, but over time I look back and see his positives.

 

Time, and history have an interesting way of changing our perspective

[NeverSure]

Actually Reagan inherited those astonishingly high interest rates from Carter. He did a very good job of getting them and the high inflation rate he inherited down. He got things under control.

 

As for wars, I don't recall a recent president that didn't get us into wars. Korea, 'Nam, heck Clinton was bombing Iraq before GWB came along. He fought in Bosnia and Yugoslavia...

 

Obama has had the US at war longer than any other POTUS in the past 100 years. On it goes, it seems...

 

???

[thaibeachlovers]

2 minutes ago, NeverSure said:

Actually Reagan inherited those astonishingly high interest rates from Carter. He did a very good job of getting them and the high inflation rate he inherited down. He got things under control.

 

As for wars, I don't recall a recent president that didn't get us into wars. Korea, 'Nam, heck Clinton was bombing Iraq before GWB came along. He fought in Bosnia and Yugoslavia...

 

Obama has had the US at war longer than any other POTUS in the past 100 years. On it goes, it seems...

 

???

Apologies if I got it wrong on the interest rates, but not on my comment about Nicaragua.

There is a difference between a "legal" war, and an "illegal" war as with Nicaragua. The law applies to presidents as much as the common man.

I remember being horrified when the truth came out about Nicaragua, and that weasel Oliver North.

 

[aslimversgwm]

1 hour ago, GinBoy2 said:

The big difference is, the USSR was an economy built on sand, Reagan know that a military arms race would eventually collapse the house of cards.

 

Today however we have a reverse situation with us sat on the house of cards, with our principle foe holding a good percentage of our debt

 

Exactly - very well responded to - totally agree Ginboy! The US deficit is what? 19 trillion $? and rising every minute - almost! That's a lot of naughts for the Trumpettes who can't count  - 12 in fact! 19,000,000,000,000! Doesn't that worry you and you want to reduce taxation and borrow even more!? Geese! One day soon the Chinese will realise that this is unsustainable and stop investing in dollar bonds, or whatever, ensuring the Yuan becomes the future international currency replacing the almighty dollar. It happened to the British pound so don't think it can't happen Trumpettes! 

[onthesoi]

9 hours ago, tuktuktuk said:

Screw the Chinese. It's about time we shook their tree.

 

I'm trying to remember the last time you guys won a war?

 

& this time you're picking a larger opponent who is more your own size?

 

To gain what exactly?

 

 

 

 

[Silurian]

3 hours ago, onthesoi said:

 

I'm trying to remember the last time you guys won a war?

 

& this time you're picking a larger opponent who is more your own size?

 

To gain what exactly?

 

 

 

I would assume to gain a Trump Tower in Taiwan, right? Isn't that the reason for Don the Prez to hold diplomatic talks with Taiwan? I believe that this is the new normal.

[tuktuktuk]

3 hours ago, onthesoi said:

 

I'm trying to remember the last time you guys won a war?

 

& this time you're picking a larger opponent who is more your own size?

 

To gain what exactly?

 

 

 

 

So, a phone call will lead to war?  Did he somehow broadcast our intent to start one? If it could be misinterpreted as that then the one China policy was already dead anyway. 

[onthesoi]

5 minutes ago, tuktuktuk said:

So, a phone call will lead to war?  Did he somehow broadcast our intent to start one? If it could be misinterpreted as that then the one China policy was already dead anyway. 

 

Why, did someone claim a phone call will lead to war?

 

Things are already tense between China and the US, due to the US recently poking it's military nose into the south china seas, why risk further escalation over something so stupid and with nothing being gained?

 

Do you really think this gets the new president off on the right foot with one of the most important countries in the world?

[Jingthing]

So, a phone call will lead to war?  Did he somehow broadcast our intent to start one? If it could be misinterpreted as that then the one China policy was already dead anyway. 

It's a totally unnecessary provocation. Idiotic.

[tuktuktuk]

4 minutes ago, onthesoi said:

 

Why, did someone claim a phone call will lead to war?

 

Things are already tense between China and the US, due to the US recently poking it's military nose into the south china seas, why risk further escalation over something so stupid and with nothing being gained?

 

Do you really think this gets the new president off on the right foot with one of the most important countries in the world?

Then what's your point about the last time you guys won a war?

 

We need a better deal from China. Tiptoeing around isn't the way to get it. 

[onthesoi]

1 minute ago, tuktuktuk said:

Then what's your point about the last time you guys won a war?

 

We need a better deal from China. Tiptoeing around isn't the way to get it. 

 

My point was in response to your post:  "Screw the Chinese. It's about time we shook their tree."

 

You think you will get a better deal by pissing them off? 555555  No.