But unlike China for US, I care about US because it is exporting crisis to the rest of the world.Originally Posted by Dreadnaught
I did not mean to be rude, BTW.
But unlike China for US, I care about US because it is exporting crisis to the rest of the world.
I did not mean to be rude, BTW.
You've just become an enemy of the people in Alphaland.
Hope is the denial of reality
No. I was telling my experience with Americans frm other forums.
Here people are an exception... well, not sure about you, Loki...
You do realize the same logic you're attempting to use to tell Dread to stop worrying about China and not take an interest in it can be used to tell you the same things about the US...right? No? Of course not...
. . .
You used the word logic when talking to him? Don't see the problem there?
Hope is the denial of reality
Fully aware old chap...fully aware...
. . .
I am not telling not to worry. You are distorting my words. It is Ok to worry about chinese, but first you need to see if they are happy with their way of life. If any change is to occur, it should come from chinese in China, or Americans in US.
My point is that US criticizes other countries for problems US has.
My experience elsewhere suggests that Americans do not like anyone to point out US failures via constructive criticism.
I am not suggesting "controlling US" which would violate US sovereignity.
If any change is to take place, change management principles should be applied.
I understand that US is a rerun of the old medieval british imperial interventionist culture. UK has evolved, matured. But US is still like a teenager country. This is why I find it easier to talk to British people instead of some Americans. Dread is quite mature in many ways, unlike people elsewhere. I know he understands my point.
Loki, Illusions, the fact that you do not like what I say proves my point. Truth is not always pleasant for Americans, but inconvenient sometimes.
Are you a Costa Rican clone of Timmy?
Hope is the denial of reality
Pollution in China: I was under the impression it's related to where they are in their changing economy, rather like the US was post-industrial.
Ad hominem comment.Are you a Costa Rican clone of Timmy?
Ad hominem is the reason of those who have no reason.
China must be facing a tough transition. Such a fast growth risks becoming a mess. It seems to enter the climate change initiative, but they face important challenges. But they also have some advantages.
China's Changing Energy Economy
Is clean tech China's moon shot?Going forward, however, the picture may be changing, as China is investing heavily in renewable energy. Wind energy in China has grown nearly 10 times faster than fossil fuel consumption, expanding from less than 500 megawatts of capacity in 2002 to over 12,000 megawatts in 2008. The exponential growth of China's wind energy sector is expected to continue, with major projects moving forward including the Wind Base program's seven mega-complexes, each with a capacity of 10,000 to 30,000 megawatts. Once built, they will together exceed the entire world's wind generating capacity at the start of 2008. These ambitious projects are just scratching the surface; a study published in the journal Science calculates that China could generate more than seven times its current electricity consumption from the wind alone.
So far, wind turbines are not Sputnik. But one day they could be.
(...)
China is leapfrogging global wind power rankings with a combination of aggressive growth targets and domestic support. It has doubled its entire installed capacity each year since 2005, according to the Global Wind Energy Council (GWEC).
(...)
But China has its own distinct advantages. First and foremost is a "cozy relationship" between state-owned utilities, grid companies and banks, said Steve Sawyer, secretary-general of the Global Wind Energy Council.
China is expected to announce a target soon for about 150 gigawatts of wind power by 2020, which it would hit if it simply maintained present annual capacity growth, said Sawyer. The country also has two turbine makers, Sinovel and Goldwind, in the world top 10, according to the International Energy Agency.
Tao Wang, a climate policy expert with WWF China, said the country would this year develop its next five-year development plan to run from the start of 2011: this is likely to contain new steps to boost alternative energy.
"The Chinese government is essentially using the state banks and state power companies to support and foster a turbine industry," said Jefferies Bank analyst Michael McNamara.
(...)
"It's worthwhile learning from the Chinese that these big transformations do require some exercise of public power," said James Cameron, vice-chairman of green investors and advisers Climate Change Capital.
Last edited by ar81; 03-02-2010 at 03:22 PM.
It really doesn't sound that way. You sound like the cost advantage is more important to you than making them clean up their act. You say; "How are supposed to make them clean up their act? It's their country. We can't tell them what to do." Answer; we buy their shit for too cheap. Make it cost the same as it would if it were manufactured in a country that takes care of the environment -- fair trade.
Faith is Hope (see Loki's sig for details)
If hindsight is 20-20, why is it so often ignored?
China has not been cleaning up in the past and that's why Dread is so scandalized. It is until recently, with climate change initiatives worldwide that China is starting to go greener. Chinese government has its own climate change research team, and I know that because I met a famous british filmmaker who interviewed them. China will not go greener because of fair trade (a western anglosaxon concept), they will do it because it is profitable.
Not very effectively.
Last night as I lay in bed, looking up at the stars, I thought, “Where the hell is my ceiling?"
Funny, it feels to me sometimes that British people take even more offense than Amerikans when people question their tactics. I just don't think you can quite pin this issue as a cultural. In any country you will find tons of people offended by the slightest things.
For instance, unlike Dread's experience, my experience with Chinese people studying in the US is that they are not nationalistic but agnostic: focused on the task at hand. The few times I have heard Chinese people praising their country is in a joke format. (a joke pointed at the US, of course)
Curiously chinese in my country use to unite and do not like to get together with non chinese.
I got to meet chinese because of a friend of mine.
My experience in American forums has been a bit bitter.
That is definitely part of it. They rely more on manufacturing. But it's also a function of how the government promotes growth at any cost; if there is no economic growth, the justification for the one-party state becomes weaker.
It's also a function of a government that is simply corrupt at every level. Developers and industrialists can just pay off the right people to get around any regulations that might be on the book.
I should point out that everyone was really friendly. And the place just felt safe, even in the neighborhoods I was told were "bad". Though the people there have really really crappy crowd dynamics when it comes to doing something like riding the subway. In New York, people on the platform wait for the subway car to empty, then cram in. In Shanghai and Hong Kong, it becomes like a football rush as soon as the subway doors open. Everyone just shoves and doesn't wait for people to exit the car.
Which reminds me of another oddity-- in the US we board planes starting with the back rows, then the middle rows and then the front. This makes boarding more orderly and faster. In China, they just tell everyone to line up and then board all at once. It's total chaos.
But I did have fun. It was really interesting and I saw cool stuff. Then I went to Australia, which was near-total bliss.
This is Tokyo, though.
Getting around regulations is the equivalent of virtual deregulation. That's capitalism.
What matters is not growth, but how this growth trickles down to people, so growth translates into higher wages.
US allowed jobs to be exported to China by trying to keep dollar up, since it is good for government bonds albeit US citizen, and this causes loss of liquidity through trade deficit and also government deficit and debt. Less jobs also means lower wages since the balance of supply and demand in the job market changes.
The apparent underpricing of yuan not only is caused by chinese transations that helped dollar to remain up, but also because of the preference of China for production and US preference for finances, and also the spending/saving culture of Americans and Chinese. US exported inflation with devaluation of yuan, which was contained by the culture of saving money that chinese had. So this is how China did not suffer deflation and US did not suffer inflation.
It seems to me that China based its capitalism on the ideas of Adam Smith: Deregulation (getting around regulations) and production of physical goods that delivers value added backed by goods. US changed this model for a model of speculative financial casino that creates money that is not backed by goods (toxic assets), and also the mechanisms to transfer the losses to third parties. In other words, US would produce money, and the rest of the world would produce goods. This model allowed exporting inflation and acquire huge amounts of debt without visible effects for a while.
US bankers thought they could be more creative than the adverse to risk model of the Medici in the middle age. Some people estimate that US would lose all manufacturing jobs by 2027 with this model, so the only jobs US citizens could have should be government jobs.
US citizens also based the model of capitalism on ideology, where the key is to make money, thinking that money is wealth and price equals value. Those apparently harmless differences create an economy that risks to emulate the same mistakes of the middle age spanish empire that considered that gold was wealth and created an unsustainable model.
that's pretty stupid as by those rules no one can say anything abur anything to anyone resulting in no change at all.@Dreadnaught:
The day when US becomes an example of 100% clean industry, then US can talk about not polluting.
The day when US becomes an example of 100% no corruption, then US can talk about corruption.
The day when US becomes an example of 100% freedom, then you can talk about freedom.
So my suggestion is to work on US, instead of caring about what China does.
China is another country and just like Americans would not like another country to impose anything in US, China may not like to have anything imposed. "China must be controlled" sounds really weird... I'd say China should control itself.
Cowboy diplomacy is unlikely to work on China.
@Loki: Do not worry, we all love you..
You're arguing for status quo. Which is stupid, cause if everyone felt the same way your rulers would be free to chop of your head for no reason other than that you're a subject and they're not.
If you have any rights at all it is because of the fact people/countries refused to shut up despite not being perfect.
Perfection does not exist, perfection is utopia.
As for your suggestion: maybe you should practice what you preach and and work on yourself instead of telling us what we should or shouldn't do?
Ahem:
Illustration:
India just sank into the ocean, a billion people are killed. The fact you probably do not like what I just said proves india just sank into the ocean.
The moment your posts are 100% free of fallacy, you get the right to criticize to talk about posts from other peopleAd hominem comment.
Ad hominem is the reason of those who have no reason.
I could have had class. I could have been a contender.
I could have been somebody. Instead of a bum
Which is what I am
I aim at the stars
But sometimes I hit London
No. I advocate sustainable change, which means not to impose from outside.
If a real sustainable change is to happen, it should be by convincing those in the country about the need of change.
They are the only ones who can change things.
I have convinced people in my country, and I have caused change.
I see US exporting crisis in several waves and I am not saying "US needs to be controlled". Why?
Because if a real change is going to happen, it only could come from Americans.
I may feel pain about those who suffer in US, financial homeless refugees, but in the end only American citizens or government can change their country.
Similarly, if a change is going to take place in China, it should either come from their people or their government.
There are people living like slumdogs. I also feel pain about them, and I bet that what motivates Dreadnaught is also pain for seeing this.
Imposed change from outside will only create more resistance, making statu quo stronger. Chinese feel offended when someone tells them they are ignorants and they should do this or that.
Mexico is a closer example of a society that has lots of problems. And it is closer to US. Unlike China, Mexican government are doing exactly the opposite of what is good for any country. At least you see China having climate change research and going greener somehow. In Mexico you see exactly what is needed to sink a nation.
Nowadays not even US can control itself.
And certainly China is too big to be controlled by a foreigner.
They have almost 1/3 of human race there.
This is a falacy.The moment your posts are 100% free of fallacy, you get the right to criticize to talk about posts from other people
Is the previous statement free of falacy?
Indeed, almost, they're just a little over 13.3% short of that mark.
I know it's a fallacy. I was mimicking yours.This is a falacy.
I could have had class. I could have been a contender.
I could have been somebody. Instead of a bum
Which is what I am
I aim at the stars
But sometimes I hit London
More like 1/5th then ...
Come on even I know that 13,3 is somewhere in the 1/7th region.
Congratulations America
Yes but I meant it's 13.3% less than a third. Or more than a third of a third less than a third.
I don't know how to state this any more unclear.
I could have had class. I could have been a contender.
I could have been somebody. Instead of a bum
Which is what I am
I aim at the stars
But sometimes I hit London
Posting Permissions
Reply With Quote