China policy/John Bolton interview... Or guess who listens to NPR?

Carmine

Old Man with a Hat
Joined
Feb 22, 2015
Messages
5,586
Reaction score
8,639
Location
Detroit 'burbs
It might surprise many of you, but I listen to NPR pretty often on my 30 minute commute to work. This is an equal function of small amounts NPR reporting being of good-quality, and huge swaths of Detroit radio being really, really awful. And by "Detroit radio" I actually mean endless commercials for utility monopolies interrupted by radio hosts sniffing jockstraps.

Anyway, this morning featured an excellent, telling, interview with John Bolton, President Trump's National Security Advisor. I've selected what I feel are the best parts of the transcript (and added some emphasis). Bolton is obviously Tom Hagen to Trump's Sonny Corleone. Contrast this to prior administrations who have been nothing but Fredo Corleone when dealing with the Virgil Sollozzo's of the world.

tom.jpg


OK, for those of you who haven't seen the Godfather (!?!?!) it means there is LONG-OVERDUE intelligence behind President Trump's bluster. Read my excerpts or check out the whole transcript here:

Q: [China] is a rising country with an economy that continues growing. Does U.S. national security require that Chinese economic power be limited in some way over the long term?

I don't think national security requires that at all. What I think national security does require is that whatever economic growth China is blessed with, it gets by playing by the rules. And I think the inescapable conclusion is that China, ever since, for example, it joined the World Trade Organization, has not played by the rules. I think we've got a view, whether it's in Japan or the European Union or the United States, thatintellectual property is always at risk from Chinese theft and that these are the kinds of practices that are not acceptable. Whether you're a free trader or not, but maybe particularly if you're a free trader, you should not turn a blind eye when states, as a matter of national policy, are stealing intellectual property from their competitors. And obviously a government that does that, whether they're stealing the design of the F-35 fighter plane to use for their own purposes — and the latest generation of Chinese fighters looks an awful lot like F-35s —whether they're stealing the intellectual property of entertainment companies, manufacturing companies, financial services companies. That's unfair competitive advantage, and obviously the stronger the Chinese economy is, the better its ability to translate that into military force. So it's the fact that they're not beating other countries in fair competition, they're stealing from them.

Q: Vice President Pence in a speech about China some weeks ago essentially said that the United States and the West more broadly made a bad bet. The bet was that if Western countries participated in capitalism with China, that its political system would open up, that democracy would follow. He said that bet hasn't worked out, which does seem plainly true. Do you assume that China will never open up?

No, I don't think we should assume that at all. In fact, I think a very important factor in answering that question isdo we accept that they will continue to pursue mercantilist trade policies in a free trade environment and use authoritarian practices in their government to maintain control. But it's, I think the vice president was completely correct. I've heard going back years: just let the Chinese economy grow a little bit and you'll see democracy spread all through the country, that you can't have economic openness, ultimately, without having political openness. And on the basis of empirical reality, we know today that connection is far from certain.
 
Last edited:
I've never trusted the Chinese ...not even in the kitchen.

There is probably more reason to trust the Chinese people than many other Asian cultures with whom we trade. In fact, by virtue of "being on their side" (embargoing Japan, supplying weapons and training) the Chinese people have a greater love for Americans/culture than that of Japan. Witness the success of GM in China over Toyota. As with many other places in the world, it's the government's that suck.

And although I'm not down with most Chinese food, there is a 25 y/o place near me with excellent, generous Almond Chicken and a very friendly staff.
 
When my dad was a kid during the depression, they used to roam the neighborhood on their bikes and try to catch a fat cat. When successful, they could sell the cat to the local Chinese eatery for $.15. During the depression, that was a weeks worth of candy. "Roof Rabbit". Till the day he died he would never eat at a Chinese place.

Dave
 
There is probably more reason to trust the Chinese people than many other Asian cultures with whom we trade. In fact, by virtue of "being on their side" (embargoing Japan, supplying weapons and training) the Chinese people have a greater love for Americans/culture than that of Japan. Witness the success of GM in China over Toyota. As with many other places in the world, it's the government's that suck.

And although I'm not down with most Chinese food, there is a 25 y/o place near me with excellent, generous Almond Chicken and a very friendly staff.


Only because they wanna buy us.
 
They probably already do, if the US deficit of 22 trillion or so dollars is largely borrowed from them, perhaps not but there must be some Chinese money there somewhere.

One wonders when the ability to borrow ends and repayment is required?

China has unloaded some of their US debt holdings, their current holdings were $1.168 Trillion as Jan '18. Americans and US financial institutions own about 70% of the $22 Trillion, various foreign creditors own the rest. The ability to borrow ends whenever confidence is lost in the ability of the borrower to pay. That is the crux of the problem in Venezuela today, they borrowed money to fund their socialist experiment assuming that oil would stay above $80 per barrel for good. Well that did not happen and now they can not even pay the interest on their debt. Government services have collapsed, oil infrastructure has collapsed due to the lack of spare parts. Oil is leaking out of pipelines and tanks because workers were not being paid and they have abandoned the oil fields. All in all another fine mess. Socialism anyone?

Dave
 
China has unloaded some of their US debt holdings, their current holdings were $1.168 Trillion as Jan '18. Americans and US financial institutions own about 70% of the $22 Trillion, various foreign creditors own the rest. The ability to borrow ends whenever confidence is lost in the ability of the borrower to pay. That is the crux of the problem in Venezuela today, they borrowed money to fund their socialist experiment assuming that oil would stay above $80 per barrel for good. Well that did not happen and now they can not even pay the interest on their debt. Government services have collapsed, oil infrastructure has collapsed due to the lack of spare parts. Oil is leaking out of pipelines and tanks because workers were not being paid and they have abandoned the oil fields. All in all another fine mess. Socialism anyone?

Dave


That's actually a very good explanation of Venezuela's problems.
 
It might surprise many of you, but I listen to NPR pretty often on my 30 minute commute to work. This is an equal function of small amounts NPR reporting being of good-quality, and huge swaths of Detroit radio being really, really awful. And by "Detroit radio" I actually mean endless commercials for utility monopolies interrupted by radio hosts sniffing jockstraps.

Anyway, this morning featured an excellent, telling, interview with John Bolton, President Trump's National Security Advisor. I've selected what I feel are the best parts of the transcript (and added some emphasis). Bolton is obviously Tom Hagen to Trump's Sonny Corleone. Contrast this to prior administrations who have been nothing but Fredo Corleone when dealing with the Virgil Sollozzo's of the world.

View attachment 235455

OK, for those of you who haven't seen the Godfather (!?!?!) it means there is LONG-OVERDUE intelligence behind President Trump's bluster. Read my excerpts or check out the whole transcript here:

Q: [China] is a rising country with an economy that continues growing. Does U.S. national security require that Chinese economic power be limited in some way over the long term?

I don't think national security requires that at all. What I think national security does require is that whatever economic growth China is blessed with, it gets by playing by the rules. And I think the inescapable conclusion is that China, ever since, for example, it joined the World Trade Organization, has not played by the rules. I think we've got a view, whether it's in Japan or the European Union or the United States, thatintellectual property is always at risk from Chinese theft and that these are the kinds of practices that are not acceptable. Whether you're a free trader or not, but maybe particularly if you're a free trader, you should not turn a blind eye when states, as a matter of national policy, are stealing intellectual property from their competitors. And obviously a government that does that, whether they're stealing the design of the F-35 fighter plane to use for their own purposes — and the latest generation of Chinese fighters looks an awful lot like F-35s —whether they're stealing the intellectual property of entertainment companies, manufacturing companies, financial services companies. That's unfair competitive advantage, and obviously the stronger the Chinese economy is, the better its ability to translate that into military force. So it's the fact that they're not beating other countries in fair competition, they're stealing from them.

Q: Vice President Pence in a speech about China some weeks ago essentially said that the United States and the West more broadly made a bad bet. The bet was that if Western countries participated in capitalism with China, that its political system would open up, that democracy would follow. He said that bet hasn't worked out, which does seem plainly true. Do you assume that China will never open up?

No, I don't think we should assume that at all. In fact, I think a very important factor in answering that question isdo we accept that they will continue to pursue mercantilist trade policies in a free trade environment and use authoritarian practices in their government to maintain control. But it's, I think the vice president was completely correct. I've heard going back years: just let the Chinese economy grow a little bit and you'll see democracy spread all through the country, that you can't have economic openness, ultimately, without having political openness. And on the basis of empirical reality, we know today that connection is far from certain.

China has been stealing secrets, doing this stuff for many decades.
Guess there is no answer to fix it??

Also - try 580 AM on your dial... ;)
 
That's actually a very good explanation of Venezuela's problems.

On the related issue of Socialism, the French are rioting. The French socialists passed the carbon tax "to fight pollution and end global climate change." The more pressing and actual reason for the carbon tax is the French government was and is broke and needed a new source of revenue. For those of you familiar with the whole global warming controversy, it originated with the French socialists about 20 years ago as an excuse to raise fuel taxes.

Fast forward to today and the carbon tax is now so high in France that citizens can no longer afford basic necessities like fuel and food because the high tax has raised the cost of living past ordinary folks ability to pay. The tax is repeatedly imposed at every stage is the product distribution cycle. Worse than that, the tax is administered and spent by unelected government officials who piss most of the revenue down a rat hole with little benefit to the French public. Socialism at it finest.

Macron, the French Prime Minister is toast and in hiding. The French government is weeks, maybe days from a complete collapse and the EU is probably not far behind as most of the rest of the EU countries have the same problem. Watch and learn.

Dave
 
Last edited:
Re socialism, our Fruitcake prime minister, namely Justin Trudeau is trying to impose a national carbon tax Jan 1 for the same reasons. So he can throw money at mass immigration, vocal minorities, and appease the environmentalists by claiming to comply with the so called Paris accord. A sad state of affairs that will hopefully change in 2019.
 
Re socialism, our Fruitcake prime minister, namely Justin Trudeau is trying to impose a national carbon tax Jan 1 for the same reasons. So he can throw money at mass immigration, vocal minorities, and appease the environmentalists by claiming to comply with the so called Paris accord. A sad state of affairs that will hopefully change in 2019.

His poll numbers are also in the toilet, we shall see if he is smart enough to learn from the Macron example. Politicians tend to be slow learners. Our own soon to be "Speaker of the House", Nancy Pelosi (or if you prefer, "miss lube rack for 1959) is a leading proponent of the Carbon Tax. It probably has no chance of passing for now, but the idea is probably not going to go away any time soon.

Dave
 
Last edited:
It might surprise many of you, but I listen to NPR pretty often on my 30 minute commute to work. This is an equal function of small amounts NPR reporting being of good-quality, and huge swaths of Detroit radio being really, really awful. And by "Detroit radio" I actually mean endless commercials for utility monopolies interrupted by radio hosts sniffing jockstraps.

Anyway, this morning featured an excellent, telling, interview with John Bolton, President Trump's National Security Advisor. I've selected what I feel are the best parts of the transcript (and added some emphasis). Bolton is obviously Tom Hagen to Trump's Sonny Corleone. Contrast this to prior administrations who have been nothing but Fredo Corleone when dealing with the Virgil Sollozzo's of the world.

View attachment 235455

OK, for those of you who haven't seen the Godfather (!?!?!) it means there is LONG-OVERDUE intelligence behind President Trump's bluster. Read my excerpts or check out the whole transcript here:

Q: [China] is a rising country with an economy that continues growing. Does U.S. national security require that Chinese economic power be limited in some way over the long term?

I don't think national security requires that at all. What I think national security does require is that whatever economic growth China is blessed with, it gets by playing by the rules. And I think the inescapable conclusion is that China, ever since, for example, it joined the World Trade Organization, has not played by the rules. I think we've got a view, whether it's in Japan or the European Union or the United States, thatintellectual property is always at risk from Chinese theft and that these are the kinds of practices that are not acceptable. Whether you're a free trader or not, but maybe particularly if you're a free trader, you should not turn a blind eye when states, as a matter of national policy, are stealing intellectual property from their competitors. And obviously a government that does that, whether they're stealing the design of the F-35 fighter plane to use for their own purposes — and the latest generation of Chinese fighters looks an awful lot like F-35s —whether they're stealing the intellectual property of entertainment companies, manufacturing companies, financial services companies. That's unfair competitive advantage, and obviously the stronger the Chinese economy is, the better its ability to translate that into military force. So it's the fact that they're not beating other countries in fair competition, they're stealing from them.

Q: Vice President Pence in a speech about China some weeks ago essentially said that the United States and the West more broadly made a bad bet. The bet was that if Western countries participated in capitalism with China, that its political system would open up, that democracy would follow. He said that bet hasn't worked out, which does seem plainly true. Do you assume that China will never open up?

No, I don't think we should assume that at all. In fact, I think a very important factor in answering that question isdo we accept that they will continue to pursue mercantilist trade policies in a free trade environment and use authoritarian practices in their government to maintain control. But it's, I think the vice president was completely correct. I've heard going back years: just let the Chinese economy grow a little bit and you'll see democracy spread all through the country, that you can't have economic openness, ultimately, without having political openness. And on the basis of empirical reality, we know today that connection is far from certain.


John Bolton is an interesting fellow. Bush 43 wanted to appoint him to be UN ambassador. Democrats, who controlled the Senate at the time, refused to bring his nomination up for a vote. His positions (opposition to unrestricted free trade, global climate change taxes (Kyoto Protocol), unrestricted immigration and the proposed Law of the Sea Treaty) were considered "too far out of the mainstream" to adequately represent the US at the UN. Bush '43 used a recess appointment to get him the job anyway which incensed the Democrats. He proved to be a highly competent UN ambassador.

Of all the appointments that Trump has made, Bolton is probably the best. We need a no nonsense individual as Secretary of State. In my opinion, Bolton is highly qualified, intelligent and an American Patriot of the best kind.

Dave
 
Back
Top