It looks like you're using an Ad Blocker.
Please white-list or disable AboveTopSecret.com in your ad-blocking tool.
Thank you.
Some features of ATS will be disabled while you continue to use an ad-blocker.
Originally posted by StellarX
I am well aware and the articles i posted mentions this fact. I am not the one trying to obscure reality. You claimed that China did not have coal reserves enough to support it's economy wich i showed to be a patently false claim. Once again avoiding the issue might normally work for you but i can assure you it will not in this case.
Originally posted by HowlrunnerIV
John Meynard Keynes, father of Keynsian Economic Theory (would you credit it!) and the prime mover behind the World Bank.
The only man who theorised a way out of the Great Depression which a) didn't involve a war and b0 was proven to work.
The irony being he was British and ignored in Britain while FDR put his theories into practice in the US and in theprocess the US was the only nation to actually climb fully out of depression before the outbreak of WW2.
The World Bank and IMF have also moved about as far away from his ideals as it is possible to go.
None of which has anything to do with the point I made.
Originally posted by HowlrunnerIV
Let's do this in nice, bite-sized parcels...
Credit is given where credit is due. Try reading the original post.
I said that if (or when) China has an economic crisis it will make the '97 Asian financial meltdown look small.
I didn't say they were involved the '97 crisis. I never denied bringing up the issue, I told you to list the Asian Tigers.
The Asian Tigers (who suffered) are small nations with hothouse economies.
That is economies that were forcing ahead of their abilities and were not diversified enough to withstand the crisis. ie Thailand, Malaysia etc, the other nations of SEAsia suffered because their economies were in such poor shape after decades of corruption and mismanagement (ala Indonesia) that they didn't have a hope.
Learning to read will save you some time, effort and needless effrontery.
The alarmist's view is that China's economy is now so large, and so hooked into the world, that if (or when) it has a crisis it will precipitate another depression, not merely a recession.
I'd say it will definitely cause another recession. Too many Western nations (mostly in the form of big-business) have oriented themsleves to China as a cheap producer/supplier, ignoring other, more traditional, sources, all in the name of dividends for their shareholders.
Again you miss the point, as you have each time you've posted on this little item. I was giving you a hypothetical situation, based on observations coming out of China regarding their energy limits.
You decided to give an answer to a completely different question. Still having difficulty reading, then?
No, but in today's textile industry a few blackouts and a missed order or two does a factory kill.
And the "fantastic" is me showing you why you shouldn't be crowing about the improvements.
ATS has been riddled with threads and posts about what many commentators in the west call China's "Slave Wages".
Just because they are better than last year doesn't mean much. All of which is beside the point I was making, which was how are you going to pay your workers at all if you don't get orders?
Originally posted by HowlrunnerIV
Uh-huh. Tienman 1989 ws the mark of a mature democracy. So is the persecution of Falun Gong. Or the demand that western-based ISPs make web-user details open to the government.
Oh, Burma is so much worse than China because they have locked up the winner of the election and won't allow her to take part in political life, so different to the CCP locking one of its own members away under house-arrest until he dies, just for asking some students to go home...
Originally posted by StellarX
Fact is America and Britain have influence in Burma and if they ordered her release tommorow she would be. She is a awesome women and have been abandoned by the west that sees only what it wants to see namely profit.
I refuse to attack Chinese conduct against it's own civilians while the west who condemns them goes around bombing invading and generally starve millions of foreigners. If you can not change the conduct of the west wich is supposedly so civil and democracy why on earth even bring up Chinese atrocity against it's OWN nationals?
Your bias is your undoing and as long as you have a vested interest in the details of this discussion you will never accept or understand the facts i have offered.
Originally posted by StellarX
Originally posted by HowlrunnerIV
John Meynard Keynes, father of Keynsian Economic Theory (would you credit it!) and the prime mover behind the World Bank.
No need to credit it since i did not bring up the theory. I suggest you get some background before attacking China over it's economic policy.
The only man who theorised a way out of the Great Depression which a) didn't involve a war and b0 was proven to work.
Even i can think of ways to get out of a depression without getting into a war of conquest. If you can not i can see why you are attacking me so.
The irony being he was British and ignored in Britain while FDR put his theories into practice in the US and in theprocess the US was the only nation to actually climb fully out of depression before the outbreak of WW2.
The British did not have to ignore the reforms as they did not suffer anywhere near the economic decline of North American or Europe. The British economy was stagnant since 1929 anyways and new deal type government control over currency and loans would obviously destroy the rule of the central bankers over Britain. It was thus not ignored as such and instead not implemented, as a policy decision, making you wrong again.
The new deal pretty much consisted of massive government spending to put money, and thus buying power, into the economy making it possible for people to get loans start producing and thus power economic growth. It's basically state spending and the creation of buying power ( Wich is exactly what drives china's growth) in the economy that enabled America to do what it did. Since America was by the time allready in the clutches of the FED it was obviously something they wanted to happen at that stage. These theories FDR was allowed to put into action was no invention of Keynes, as you seem to think, so your claim is patently false.
In 1934 Sweden become the first counry to fully recover from the depression so your yet again simply wrong
The World Bank and IMF have also moved about as far away from his ideals as it is possible to go.
"Lenin is said to have declared that the best way to destroy the capitalist system was to debauch the currency. By a continuing process of inflation, governments can confiscate, secretly and unobserved, an important part of the wealth of their citizens...Lenin was certainly right. "
John Maynard Keynes
"Capitalism is the astounding belief that the most wickedest of men will do the most wickedest of things for the greatest good of everyone."
John Maynard Keynes
None of which has anything to do with the point I made.