Tech decoupling is the key term. Not commerce decoupling.
Miscellaneous News
- Thread starter bd popeye
- Start date
From the original IISS Report Issue 123: "一旦失去美国这个目标，中国能否全方位持续引领科技创新是中国科学界一些学者的担忧。这种担忧并非源于对中国科学界与产业界自主创新能力的否定，而是来自于对美国科技水平和创新能力的长期观察和理性认识。"
Translation: Under the extreme case that the US loses its role as the tech pursuing goal of China, the concern among Chinese tech academias was whether or not China could continuously lead global comprehensive technological innovation. Such concern did not originate from denial of Chinese tech industry's ability to innovate indigenously, but from a long-term observation and objective understanding of the US technological level and innovative abilities.
Personally, the report is pretty scientifically fact-based though projected pessimistic views, which is fair and rightfully so. Why I extract this statement out is because I believe tech innovation is not only about a country's scientists' ability to innovate or the tech industry to build viable products. But more about the philosophy of how to employ the said new techs, in which field do we want to employ them and how does their employment further facilitate China's goal of realizing the preliminary stage of socialist market economy with Chinese characteristics. (whether in production, social welfare, security, national defence or resource distribution)
This just means there's nothing to lose by using whatever means necessary, instead of considering PR.
That is pure opinion. The funding of IISS and travel activities of their editors should be investigated.
China needs to decouple from West and especially US in both tech and broader commerce.
In the post peak energy age of deminishing EROEI, China making and shipping real goods and products (polluting and depleting its own environment to prop up the ungrateful yankees who maliciously slander China for so called genocide) to the US in exchange for margin returns (China only makes $8 profit on $1000 iphone) on less than worthless hostile US hegemonistic dollars (can only be used to buy soybeans etc) being quantitatively expanded to infinity (monetized the debt) is the worse possible situation for China...
In this new world of negative sum games,(climate change and overshoot/depletion) America is leveraging tech sanctions to try to pull the rug out from underneath China's value chain ascension... long term the laggard in tech will lose economically and militaristically, if US can contain China tech, all the other dominos will follow
China needs to counteract by cutting America off first (medicine, rare earths, and trade in general) in this Squid Game of Last Man Standing, yes it will be painful but it is the least worst option and it is what is necessary....America has indicated to China that it is pursuing "all or nothing" and that graceful decline is "not an option"... So China has no choice but to become number one in order to survive, otherwise 1.5 billion Chinese will become enslaved in another century of humiliation
Last edited:
It's more of a practical problem than a political or economic problem.
Simply stated, how many bridges, ports, railroads, or dams, that we need?
If they are already building a bridge or railroad with a Chinese funded project, they will not build another one right beside it.
It is not like someone opens a restaurant, then someone else opens another restaurant beside it.
This B3W and that EU one, it is too late in the game.
For example, the Chinese are helping the Mekong Delta region countries build about 15 dams. Are the Americans and Europeans going to help them build another 15 dams on those rivers as a counter to China? It's too late.
Sure, the developing world needs more infrastructure, and more will be built.
The problem for the Americans and Europeans, the best projects already being built or are built. That is just a natural expectation. If we can build any project, China will not build the second best one so that they will let the Americans build the best opportunity a few years later.
The Americans and Europeans were not even interested in the best infrastructure projects in the developing world. Now they are eager for the 3rd or 4th best ones.
Then after they build that 3rd or 4th best project, still all the goods more to and from China.
It's all hype what Western countries are talking about.
bajingan
Senior Member
Funding most likey from biden $300M to recruit spies and traitors inside China
I have pointed out that according to the estimation of Turkish authority, what you said is not true. But you kept saying otherwise. And you are NOW saying "already exceeding Germany". How do you come to this conclusion? Do you know something that the Turkish authority does not know?
Last edited:
Those are the estimations by the Turkish authority.
That is
And where did you get the "actual" consumption figures? Are you suggesting that you have data about Turkish consumption/import data that the Turkish government does not have yet?
We have only passed the first month of 2022, how could you possibly know the actual consumption of the whole year? You could only possibly know the actual data of the first month which the Turkish government also know and made the estimation based on that actual data. Yet you try to project a different picture? You sound like a time traveller from year 2023.
Last edited: