Miscellaneous News

chgough34

Junior Member
Registered Member
And it will be a costly legal battle that will be fought in the state legislature at the legislation step and courts for regulators at disproportionate cost.
No. It wouldn’t. State legislators regulating the economy are entitled to substantial deference - see Williamson v. Lee Optical Co., 348 U.S. 483 (1955); United States v. Carolene Products Company, 304 U.S. 144 (1938). The ultra vires lawsuits the federal government gets mired in simply don’t apply to state legislation since state legislatures have consistent majority political coalitions that can modify laws, unlike the Congress where laws once passed on ideological lines from transient coalitions, are frozen in time.

Any Hail Mary dormant commerce clause and/or federal affairs preemption necessarily fails as well, since the ban would apply equally to byd made in the U.S. vs any other country to which the Congress can preempt at any time (see National Pork Producers Council v. Ross, 598 U.S. 356 (2023)) and for which the federal government would write an amici supporting the states, more or less foreclosing the issue - see Faculty Senate of Florida International University v. Winn, 616 F.3d 1206 (11th Cir. 2010) - the lack of a federal amicus brief supporting the Faculty Senate created a nearly irrefutable presumption of non-preemption on behalf of Florida defendants.
And is 17% of California's population in jail?

Please, Log in or Register to view URLs content!
Simply inapplicable. The driving age population isn’t the driving population since
many people don’t drive since they are retired, they have others that drive them, they are college students, etc
Self insurance is legal in 11 states. All you have to do is provide evidence of funds. Now the state will have to go after individual Americans at no cost to BYD to prevent it.

And then there's the substantial portion of the population that outright doesn't have insurance.
If you need to argue these details on a portion of a portion of a population (uninsured motors that want to buy BYD and would stil buy them after a ton of manufactured FUD; that is such a small population that it can be entirely safely ignored as a rounding error)
 
Last edited:

_killuminati_

Senior Member
Registered Member
The evident collusion between Pakistani elites and the west does worry me when it comes to CPEC and overall BRI, not to mention the role they may play if it comes down to a Sino U.S. war. Too many of Pakistan‘s elites have homes and children in the west.
British propaganda during the colonial period was too strong; they've still not recovered. One could argue reasonably that the British left the region once they understood the local populace has been sufficiently enslaved and will do the work of the "Farangi" themselves (i.e. exploitation). It is not just the elites but the entire stratum of the population that has chosen to be enslaved (save for the very low class of society who are generally unaware of both history and politics).

Ironically, the founding fathers of the country were vehemently opposed to the Farangi doctrine of exploitation which served as an impulse for independence. Unfortunately, that original movement faded into obscurity (or some say, it was hijacked) very early in the history, and the minority groups who picked up on it and kept it alive were the religious camp, both the moderates and the extremists; in them, surprisingly of all people, is the scope of rationality, but they are generally unpopular. Incidentally, Iran became somewhat of that country which Pakistan was envisaged to be; the Ayatollahs drew some of their inspiration from the Pakistani leaders.

The elites are the ones obstructing BRI. Even while knowing how much development it brings, they prefer to still lick the boots of their abusive former colonial masters - brainwashed to the extreme. There is a lot of foreign (Western) interference in the country in every sector, from politics to military to media to education system. Hate to say it but the country is shackled head-to-toe.
 

pmc

Major
Registered Member
No, the intention was to find a way to sanction Russian oil. It failed.

Please, Log in or Register to view URLs content!

It does not take much too fail those Russian sanctions when there is that Soft Power.
You can see this Boeing head for Africa saying that they have team in Dubai teaching African airlines to bring Safety culture. this is like introducing Arabs through Aviation to Africans. I have read network equipment in Africa is Chinese. but if it is Chinese equipment how come Arabs are so confident in investing there with Soft power. These people want to confirm things through multiple ways and long term . (Africa agenda 2063).

Please, Log in or Register to view URLs content!
For Africa we have a dedicated team here in Dubai, working with every airline and regulator as well to bring this safety culture and the safety management system, educating the teams and sharing experience at airline level. Our safety teams are working with a dozen airlines to bring core competences in training, where people are trained based on their competence level, identifying the gaps and addressing them.
 

manqiangrexue

Brigadier
Yes - this checks out.
But your reading comprehension doesn't.
China has thin technological advantages and is competitive in a narrow number of market segments, but has faster catch-up than most everyone else, which over enough time, turn into pushing the technological frontier in a growing number of fields (fast catch-up growth is of course, uncertain).
He didn't say that China has very few leading fields and that it was the norm for the US to be leading. He said that of the times that China has played catch up, it has been successful AND it is currently playing catch up in all the areas where it is not leading. Is the US player catch up? No, it's playing being caught up to in some areas and being left behind in others. It is losing its edge where it still has one and being left further back where it does not. Compared to that, playing catch up is worth celebrating.
This site shows China lacks market share in exports in the large high tech sectors so uhh…
So uhhh the new guy needs some time cus he's on his way up. What, you wanna end the game and call score just when the other team is rallying?
Yes, it all points to the fact that China’s tech lead is a very thin one that is centered around a select handful of sectors.
That China's tech has an overall thin lead, maybe, I mean, we're just getting warmed up. A select handful? Where's that written? It wouldn't happen to be the most important technologies in contention against your imaginary unnamble "thousands" of areas in which America supposedly leads, right? We went through the most important ones and the majority sees Chinese leadership while the entirety shows China outrunning the US.
The TikTok panel was an Obama judge (Srinivasan), a Trump judge (Rao), and a Reagan judge (Ginsburg). The DC Circuit is 7 Democrats and 4 Republicans but somehow, TikTok drew a 2 GOP panel, lol.

In other words, bye bye TikTok! enjoy December 6 when the DC Circuit denies your request for a preliminary injunction.

The U.S. can turn all trade & investment from China into a political hot potato that corporate legal counsel and state/local economic development agencies from coast to coast will not touch with a 30 feet pole and still have >2.X% growth and <3% inflation and China can do nothing about it as the U.S. simply vaporizes all of China’s FDI projects.
Heard that shit before; can you get it done this time, finally? Are your politicians finally able to come together to ban an app? We'll see. We've been banning your crap from Google to Yahoo to Facebook for decades. We've been waiting for you to learn how to finally get one in like Usain Bolt eating a sandwich at the finish line waiting for South Park Jimmy to finally cross so we can all celebrate the incredible courage of a handicapped child. Can you... actually get there this time?
What’s more - China’s response is to deepen relations with any U.S. business that will listen;
This happen in a different world? LOLOL
Yellen-bows.gif

ex., Tesla in Shanghai, pushing on them in any glimmer of hope to improve relations, if anything, just revealing their weakness.
The only place in the world where Tesla's on the ropes, is China. The only country's EV capability that Elon Musk fears is China's. The weakness is America losing its edge in EV.
This is all quite easy to reconcile
Yeah, everything's easy if you use your imagination rather than actual facts.
1) China is leading in a select few number of fields, causing collective outrage in DC
Those being the most important ones and the outrage being completely useless in every way to reverse it, but ironically caused China to accelerate to take the lead in many other fields, all critical ones.
2) China has fast technological catch-up compared to most other countries but accumulated U.S. advantages are large and durable and in many cases, self-reinforcing
Faster compared to every other country combined because that's essentially what it's up against in the West. American advantage in some niche areas may fall later but when China targets one, it's dated, as is seen in the track records.
3) and related to 1), American politics has always had a paranoid style -
Please, Log in or Register to view URLs content!
Puahahahaha You're the second person who claimed this and very stupidly at that. If America was paranoid, no trade war or tech war could have happened. It is not paranoia to react to another taking your leads and crushing them in several areas only to find that your reaction only causes more to fall; that is the definition of waking up at the controls to see all indicators red and sirens blaring! Paranoid would have been to buy out or sanction out Chinese companies and technological endeavors in their infancy 2 decades ago. If the US attacked Huawei when it was putting together its first cellphones, that would have been paranoid. If the US made sure ASML could never sell to China, that would have been paranoid. Attacking Huawei when it became the leader in 5G and China's lithography sector after it was years away from EUV is slamming your 18-wheeler's breaks at 60 miles an hour 10 feet before a collision. If you still don't react, you might have a driver who died peacefully while cruising.
4) foreign affairs are risk-free entertainment for the bored house guys of Fairfax county after they get bored playing risk - the large size and relative economic and geographic isolation of the U.S. means foreign affairs don’t matter to any domestic constituency that can deliver votes or money (outside of course, Cuban-Americans in the Miami-Ft. Lauderdale-Pompano Beach, FL Metropolitan Statistical Area)
Combined with below:
That would last as long as the time it would take for the California Department of Insurance, New York Department of Financial Services and Texas Department of Insurance to jointly put out a statement saying they will not permit any of their regulated auto insurers to cover a BYD car (effectively clobbering BYD’s market since they would simultaneously be banned from selling to ~30% of the U.S. overnight and be uninsurable in 47 other states - more or less every insurer is regulated by the NYS DFS since all insurers have bond trading desks). Behind the border/non-tariff barriers to trade can just as easily be applied as a prohibitive tariff to ban trade
I'm with you on this one. It's America's right to deny high tech imports to its local population. As you said, foreign investment spurs competition; so don't bring the heat if you have no chance of surviving the burn. America is free to ban world-beating Chinese exports just like Cuba or North Korea can ban all things Western. And so what? They're living just fine. So will you be as well, just not at the technological edge.
 
Last edited:

_killuminati_

Senior Member
Registered Member
Please, Log in or Register to view URLs content!

Judges Show Some Skepticism of TikTok’s Fight Against Potential U.S. Ban​

TikTok on Monday pushed back against a law that would force the popular video app to sell to a non-Chinese owner or be banned, in what is shaping up to be a landmark case.




Just ban Tiktok US gov, what could go wrong?;)
What could go wrong, indeed, when the 2/3 of the judges pushing against TikTok here were 1) Jewish, and 2) Indian? Lol

Please, Log in or Register to view URLs content!
Please, Log in or Register to view URLs content!

Edit: just read @chgough34 post, showing the third judge is also indian.

Please, Log in or Register to view URLs content!


Does ignoring him stop him from posting? Because that's really what is being asked for here.
The way I see it, there's only two ways to do it: The easy way and the hard way.
The easy way involves banning him. And when he pops up with another username, ban him again. The dude clearly isn't capable of alternating his posting pattern, so regardless of what IP he uses, it would be easy to identify him. And if the main forum mods don't want the work and the headache, I'm sure there are plenty of volunteers who would be happy to at least police this thread or any of the non-flagship threads.

The hard way involves inviting this guy for tea, and all the complicated logistics therein.

I'm honestly ok with either method. In a perfect world, I would much prefer the latter than the former. But we don't live in a perfect world, and as cathartic as it would be, he's not worth the effort of the latter.
Option 3: make his posts invisible to everyone except himself.

Option 4: limit his postings to 1/day.
 
Last edited:

_killuminati_

Senior Member
Registered Member
That would last as long as the time it would take for the California Department of Insurance, New York Department of Financial Services and Texas Department of Insurance to jointly put out a statement saying they will not permit any of their regulated auto insurers to cover a BYD car (effectively clobbering BYD’s market since they would simultaneously be banned from selling to ~30% of the U.S. overnight and be uninsurable in 47 other states - more or less every insurer is regulated by the NYS DFS since all insurers have bond trading desks). Behind the border/non-tariff barriers to trade can just as easily be applied as a prohibitive tariff to ban trade
Considering c.30 million American motorists drive without insurance in the first place, whatever statements the insurers put out will mean fuck all, especially if the folk driving the vehicles bought it off the black market, just like fentanyl.
 

manqiangrexue

Brigadier
Considering c.30 million American motorists drive without insurance in the first place, whatever statements the insurers put out will mean fuck all, especially if the folk driving the vehicles bought it off the black market, just like fentanyl.
No guys, I don't know why you are arguing that China can illegally put its cars on American roads. It can't and it doesn't need to. Every country has the right to determine which automakers are allowed into its market. America can definitely deprive its citizens of superior tech when they cannot compete and the cost is that they will be left behind compared to countries that don't. The US can easily have Chinese cars NOT be in the registered list of road-compliant vehicles so they get pulled over on sight by police/highway patrol. It's not at all like some pocket gadget or drugs.
 

Rafi

Junior Member
Registered Member
British propaganda during the colonial period was too strong; they've still not recovered. One could argue reasonably that the British left the region once they understood the local populace has been sufficiently enslaved and will do the work of the "Farangi" themselves (i.e. exploitation). It is not just the elites but the entire stratum of the population that has chosen to be enslaved (save for the very low class of society who are generally unaware of both history and politics).

Ironically, the founding fathers of the country were vehemently opposed to the Farangi doctrine of exploitation which served as an impulse for independence. Unfortunately, that original movement faded into obscurity (or some say, it was hijacked) very early in the history, and the minority groups who picked up on it and kept it alive were the religious camp, both the moderates and the extremists; in them, surprisingly of all people, is the scope of rationality, but they are generally unpopular. Incidentally, Iran became somewhat of that country which Pakistan was envisaged to be; the Ayatollahs drew some of their inspiration from the Pakistani leaders.

The elites are the ones obstructing BRI. Even while knowing how much development it brings, they prefer to still lick the boots of their abusive former colonial masters - brainwashed to the extreme. There is a lot of foreign (Western) interference in the country in every sector, from politics to military to media to education system. Hate to say it but the country is shackled head-to-toe.

I disagree vehemently, Pakistani elites do live up to their stereo types, but all elites (apart from CPC) leaders are somewhat like that.

But when it comes to Pakistan vital national interests the elite has been pragmatic and strategic. Think nuclear programs, relationships with China when China was a very poor country.

And recently opposing NATO and the US in Afghanistan ie defying a global superpower that even China and Russia would hesitating at the time.

Pakistan is fully in the China camp but will never formally become part of camp politics.
 

_killuminati_

Senior Member
Registered Member
I disagree vehemently, Pakistani elites do live up to their stereo types, but all elites (apart from CPC) leaders are somewhat like that.
Like what?

But when it comes to Pakistan vital national interests the elite has been pragmatic and strategic. Think nuclear programs, relationships with China when China was a very poor country.
Think Kargil, hosting NATO, IMF debt traps, and splitting from Bangladesh.
The military is somewhat pragmatic but not totally. First round of US sanctions on paid-for military equipment should've been a clear warning not to trust USA for weapons. Yet they proceeded with more American weapons and now worry of US involvement with India.

And recently opposing NATO and the US in Afghanistan ie defying a global superpower that even China and Russia would hesitating at the time.
Afghans defied the global superpower, not Pakistan. Pakistan hosted and supplied NATO for war. NATO invaded Afghanistan directly from Pakistani soil << never forget this. A war in which Pakistan lost tens of thousands of civilians and soldiers, many of them to NATO raids, destabilizing the whole region, for a paltry price of $3 billion / year that US gave as "aid". Not exactly pragmatic or strategic.

Pakistan is fully in the China camp but will never formally become part of camp politics.
How many elites run to China when they are in trouble? None. +90% run to UK and US (often to regroup and return with new instructions). Same with the middle class. Even if not in trouble, the general population is heavily inclined towards the farangi and very little towards China, despite knowing full well how abusive the West has been and how helpful China has been.
 
Top