While Ebola Had Your Attention: Obama Unilaterally Proclaims Trade Changes With Russia

originally posted by: EA006

The U.S will provide gas to Europe.

How? Do we have a pipeline or a super fleet of ships that I'm unaware of?

a reply to: Zanti Misfit

Except in this case Obama followed the law set forth by Congress with the notification. While I would normally and completely agree about his pissing on the Constitution, in this case he is in the right.

Cold War never ended from side of the west. It was always a Cold Peace at works. Now that Russia is pushing back, the Cold has turned into Hot Peace aka Cold War.

US and China in bed together? Wrong, it might have been true that China needed US much more in 1990s but not now.

China is more busy tending to its internal demands and to those of other growing economies like BRICS.

originally posted by: victor7

US and China in bed together? Wrong, it might have been true that China needed US much more in 1990s but not now.

China is more busy tending to its internal demands and to those of other growing economies like BRICS.

I do not believe that my assertion is wrong at all. The US and China overlap in countless ways and effectively act as controls for their respective halves of the planet. The term "Chimerica" was coined for good reason.

Twenty or thirty years ago nobody would have dared think there would be a McDonalds or a 7/11 in Bejing - nor would they have ever believed, for a second, that the US Government would restrict freedoms through such mechanism as the Patriot Acts.

Today China is a lot more Americanized than it historically was, and America is being governed in a much more Chinese fashion of totalitarianism. Just a more subtle form.

a reply to: Hefficide

Excellent points.

The only other thing I would point out would be the current generation of Chinese citizens. You still have leaders in china that were familiar with the original Chinese system of government, economics and views about their citizens.

A prime example is North Korea. While the government of China is irritated with N. Korea, the newer generations of Chinese citizens, who were born closer to the current environment, don't share the same view of N. Korea. They think NK is a waste and do not understand why the Chinese government is propping them up.

From 2013 -
In sign of Chinese frustration with North Korea, ‘Daily Show’ clip mocking Kim racks up 2.8 million Chinese views

China is more than just North Korea's most important ally: Kim's regime relies economically and politically on Beijing, which provides everything from fuel to international support. But, as the Beijing-based journalist Helen Gao wrote last year, there is a strong feeling of disapproval in China toward its longtime ally, a sense that this "ungrateful" country is taking and taking from Beijing and, in return, only embarrassing a China that is very concerned with how it's perceived abroad.

Chinese President Xi Jinping made some thinly veiled but pointed criticism of North Korea in a speech over the weekend, saying that no single country should be allowed to threaten global stability. Analysts have taken this as a sign that China is showing greater willingness to publicly chastise North Korea and rein in its ally, although they also find no sign that China appears willing to change its overarching strategy of propping up the Kim regime.

It's the decision makers in Beijing who will ultimately decide policy toward North Korea and who, in some ways, are the people outside of Pyongyang with the most ability to influence how the country behaves. Still, even if they are not directly accountable to their billion-plus citizens, popular attitudes do enter into their calculus. And it certainly appears that a certain class of the Chinese public could be even more upset with Kim, and even more willing to move away from North Korea, than even Xi did in his speech. Given how deeply Kim relies on China, he should be worried.

Click link for remainder of article.

a reply to: Hefficide

Today China is a lot more Americanized than it historically was, and America is being governed in a much more Chinese fashion of totalitarianism. Just a more subtle form.

Having McDonalds or 7-11s does not mean China is Americanized. There were certain freedoms that were not available during Communist times and some of those freedoms are now attainable with certain limits. China will always pursue capitalist principles with Totalitarian leadership and governance.

Chinese have for sure shunned the 'raw' communist lifestyles that NK practices even today. However, Chinese will never want to make NK totally abandon the totalitarian regimes based on military. That would make NK want to join the SK and thus giving rise to potential adversary to the size of Japan.

Those hoping for a fracture in Russi-Chini alliance should keep their expectations to only utopian levels.

Chinese are very clever and know the real growth is with BRICS not the west. The debt laden western economies are spent up and exhausted.

Ebola is the new Pistorius trial: Fodder to keep the goyim occupied with "news" that will never affect them.

originally posted by: victor7
Chinese are very clever and know the real growth is with BRICS not the west. The debt laden western economies are spent up and exhausted.

Chinese troops withdrew from India after the Chinese leader visited. China and India are never going to trust each other and history bears that out. they have fought 3 wars in the past and still have issues over the border.

Secondly if china were to start something that would result in sanctions there is no way in hell china could find a new market encompassing 800 million + people (Europe / US combined population).

The US / EU can always go back to their domestic economies to fill the gap in terms of producing items that would be lost with China sanctions. Both the US / EU can manufacture and buy.

China is not self sufficient, meaning it must build items to export in order to keep people employed. The profit for china comes in the cheap slave labor / wages they pay while marking it up massively to sell to people who can afford the markup.

the loss of those markets would be a disaster for China.

so maybe you should stop with the land of make believe, thinking lost markets can be replaced the following day.

a reply to: Hefficide

With a Congress that only wants to say 'No', and go on vacation, the Pres has no chice but to act unilaterally. Worst. Congress. EVER.

a reply to: TownCryer

I do not disagree with your assessment of Congress at all. Sadly I also find myself extremely disappointed with the POTUS I voted for twice.

He promised "change" only to remind us all of the idiom "The more things change the more they stay the same."

a reply to: Hefficide

Look at the map which shows Areas populated in Russia. You will see why people think its a developing country. There is SO MUCH empty land there. You can fit in half the states.

Not sure that this will have much of an impact on Russian / US relations, which are already soured.

They are probably just ensuring that Russia has no loopholes to get out of Sanctions.

Apparently the Russian Government have hired lobbyists to get the sanctions overturned, using political bribery that would be incredibly illegal in Russia but are the accepted way of doing business in the United States, the most politically corrupt nation on the planet.

About freaking time!!! Russia a "developing country"? They dont need the beneficiary of the US. Look how muchy they are spending on military development?? What took so long for this to go through? Russia isnt freaking Rowanda!!

originally posted by: Hefficide
Hello again ATS!

As I am settling back into my routines, I realized that I had not checked the Whitehouse website - one of the sites I tend to visit frequently - in quite awhile. While there I found this potential gem / bomb waiting to go off.

Presidential Proclamation -- To Modify the List of Beneficiary Developing Countries Under the Trade Act of 1974

TO MODIFY THE LIST OF BENEFICIARY DEVELOPING COUNTRIES
UNDER THE TRADE ACT OF 1974

- - - - - - -

BY THE PRESIDENT OF THE UNITED STATES OF AMERICA

A PROCLAMATION

1. Sections 501(1) and (4) of the Trade Act of 1974 (the "1974 Act") (19 U.S.C. 2461(1) and (4)), provide that, in determining whether duty-free treatment would be appropriate under the Generalized System of Preferences, the President shall have due regard for, among other factors, the effect such action would have on furthering the economic development of a beneficiary developing country through the expansion of its exports and the extent that the beneficiary developing country would be competitive with respect to eligible articles. Section 502(c) of the 1974 Act (19 U.S.C. 2462(c)), provides that, in determining whether to designate any country as a beneficiary developing country, the President shall take into account various factors, including the country's level of economic development, the country's per capita gross national product, the living standards of its inhabitants, and any other economic factors he deems appropriate. Section 502(d)(1) of the 1974 Act (19 U.S.C. 2462(d)(1)), authorizes the President to withdraw or suspend the designation of any country as a beneficiary developing country after considering the factors set forth in sections 501 and 502(c) of the 1974 Act. Section 502(f)(2) of the 1974 Act (19 U.S.C. 2462(f)(2)), requires the President to notify the Congress and the affected country, at least 60 days before termination, of the President's intention to terminate the affected country's designation as a beneficiary developing country.

2. Consistent with section 502(d) of the 1974 Act, and having considered the factors set forth in sections 501 and 502(c), I have determined that Russia is sufficiently advanced in economic development and improved in trade competitiveness that it is appropriate to terminate the designation of Russia as a beneficiary developing country effective October 3, 2014. I notified the Congress and Russia on May 7, 2014, of my intent to terminate Russia's designation. In order to reflect the termination of Russia's designation as a beneficiary developing country, I have determined that it is appropriate to modify general notes 4(a) and 4(d) and pertinent subheadings of the Harmonized Tariff Schedule of the United States (HTS).

3. Section 604 of the 1974 Act (19 U.S.C. 2483), authorizes the President to embody in the HTS the substance of the relevant provisions of that Act, and of other Acts affecting import treatment, and actions thereunder, including removal, modification, continuance, or imposition of any rate of duty or other import restriction.

NOW, THEREFORE, I, BARACK OBAMA, President of the United States of America, by virtue of the authority vested in me by the Constitution and the laws of the United States, including but not limited to title V and section 604 of the 1974 Act, do proclaim that:

(1) The designation of Russia as a beneficiary developing country is terminated, effective on October 3, 2014.

(2) In order to reflect the termination of Russia's designation as a beneficiary developing country, general notes 4(a) and 4(d) and pertinent subheadings of the HTS are modified as set forth in the Annex to this proclamation.

(3) Any provisions of previous proclamations and Executive Orders that are inconsistent with the actions taken in this proclamation are superseded to the extent of such inconsistency.

IN WITNESS WHEREOF, I have hereunto set my hand this third day of October, in the year of our Lord two thousand fourteen, and of the Independence of the United States of America the two hundred and thirty-ninth.

BARACK OBAMA

Whitehouse.Gov Source

The actual laws involved are a few steps above my head but I have come to an understanding that the above means barriers to trade with Russia have been made more complex with this act. Though why we considered Russia to be a "developing country until now is somewhat mysterious to me... I would guess it was a political carrot that came with their Glasnost period - when we had hopes that Russia might become a Democracy on some level.

With Putin in power and the hardliners regaining control of the country, apparently that carrot has been taken away.

Is Churchills Iron Curtain dropping once again?

With China and America in bed together with no end in sight, is Russia to be the next "enemy" - a return to the pre 1980's fear mongering?

It all smells very planned and fishy to me.

We are at war with Eastasia. We have always been at war with Eastasia...

For those interested in getting into the depths of it all, a direct link to the PDF of the Trade Act of 1974

originally posted by: TownCryer
a reply to: Hefficide

With a Congress that only wants to say 'No', and go on vacation, the Pres has no chice but to act unilaterally. Worst. Congress. EVER.

Are you referring only to Republicans or are you also taking into account Reid not allowing any bills to go up for vote that would cause issues for Democrats running for re-election?

Secondly nothing gives the President the authority to act unilaterally. The Constitution specifically prohibits it and that was reinforced by Supreme Court rulings taking Obama to task for acting unilaterally.

Dont like what Congress is doing - then vote them out.

trying to justify unilateral, illegal and unconstitutional action is not a resolution.

Russia a developing country? LMAO!!!!! The US should have made this move long ago.

originally posted by: princeofpeace
Russia a developing country? LMAO!!!!! The US should have made this move long ago.

That is exactly my point - or at least part of it.

This move should have been made at least a decade ago, probably more like fifteen years ago. Yet it wasn't.

Understanding why seems pretty obvious and basic - politics and keeping Russia happy. They did not need the special treatment - it was an appeasement measure.

So... Why are we not appeasing them now? The Crimea? Seems unlikely as Russia has engaged in this type of behavior with other satellite nations in the past and we tended to make a loud noise - all while overlooking the whole thing without reaction.

In my estimation, this move has a deeper implication and I think that implication directly involves a global power restructuring.