Miscellaneous News

manqiangrexue

Brigadier
Good, so you know using individuals as example for international politics is stupid. Then you should know better to not use it as example as you repeatedly have.
No, there are two dimensions to it. The first dimension is legal. If discussing the legal dimension, then international trade cannot be conflated to domestic law. But morally (to answer the question of whether something constitutes bullying), there are many comparisons that can be drawn. You drew the legal comparision asking if I can discriminate against Jewish customers in my business in the US. The comparison is a failure because you mixed domestic law with international trade in a legal comparison. But my comparison of boycotting a business in protest to its owner is based on a moral standpoint and perfectly valid.
Well, not that the example is right for individuals in first place. But that is besides the point. I used the movie example as an equally awful argument. Individual relations do not apply to international relation.
No, they do morally, not legally. Your movie example was awful and your Jewish discrimination example is awful. Your Bruce Lee example was so terrible it completely ignored the fact that he was defending against imperialism occurring in his own country to try to counter whether inclusion/exclusion counts as bullying. Your example was so far off it was in outer space.
Great, you get the point. Domestic laws do not govern international trade. The moment scope is beyond domestic matter it no longer applies.
That was always understood legally, NOT morally.
Speaking of that, US is using domestic law to override international trade.
Some of this is correct and some not. America banning the sale of an item is legally and morally sound; you cannot force someone to sell you anything. But when America posts sanctions on a third country and interdicts their shipping, it is of course and overreach like it did to Iran and to other countries shipping thier arms.
It would be perfectly valid to cancel further American products to business selling to China.
Yes, no problem
Not so much if the product is already sold after contracts. The same way domestic law cannot apply to arrest foriegners not obeying your law in their own country.
Right, they don't apply, but the threat is that if the product is sold to China against American wishes, then they will receive no further shipments from the US thus collapsing their future business. Sometimes, it doesn't even come to that. Sometimes American diplomatic appeal is enough. That is within America's own rights and does not violate China's.
I guess you could say might makes right, and I won't refute that. I am not here to cry about morals. What is important is how China present itself.
Not sure what this is a response to but it does seem you are here to cry about morals accusing America of bullying China just for witholding its trade and acting within its rights to coerce its partners into withholding trade from China. I'm saying that other than the US pirating shipments and starting color revolutions in countries that don't align with it, its trade and tech wars against China are fair game.
I have been pretty consistent that China is a pragmstic country. China obeys international law, because it is good to. US do not, because it is shortsighted. It is pragmatic for China to expose how incompatible USA is to an international law based world order. It undermines US authority. It helps China on its next step of secure global leadership. When you have two equally powerful country struggle for leadership. One is firm and consistent, one is unhinged and irrational, which one to pick is obvious.

I say China should cry as loud as it can. Not because it will make bully stop being a bully, but to fuck with its reputation. Once justification is established, next time you can punch him in the face as hard as you can and no one will feel sorry for the stupid bully.
This does not register with me as a reply to anything I've said.
 
Last edited:

SanWenYu

Captain
Registered Member
It's not just incentives. Vietnam has a skilled labour shortage
This is something that have been conveniently ignored by those who hype about the "next China".

In the 80s when China was opening up, it had already got tens of millions of skilled workers in the SOEs. Its education system were also producing millions of highschoolers and hundreds of thousand college graduates a year.

These two groups became the backbone of China's work force from 80s to 90s. Then came the big expansion of college enrollments that have produced millions and millions of engineers with higher education in STEM every year for two decades. At the same time, the Chinese universities have been ascending rapidly in all kinds of STEM rankings around the world.

Tell me about the "next China" only when another country can do this at the same scale.

Not to mention that, the opportunity for workers of lower educations is about to diminish. In the 80s and 90s, one with a highschool degree could fit most positions in manufacturing. Now college graduates are barely enough to qualify for some of the highly automated assembly lines.

The "If China can, I can, too." meme came to my mind when I saw the headline of Vietnam to get an Intel semiconductor fab.
 

getready

Senior Member
So you are saying it is ok for SK to have a radar at 1200 KM range while Seoul to Beijing is only 950KM. And China tells SK not to do such a thing is bullying?

By your logic, if you live in an apartment, and the family live on top of you is very loud, and you tell them they should be quiet is bullying?

And so, China should sell weapons to NK and place them right next to Seoul, and SK should be quiet about it, saying anything is bullying.
He had stunningly bad takes on China Russia relationship and now the SK China issue. I've long given up.
 

getready

Senior Member
I have no problem with that. I said one needs to follow the laws of the land. Why would you think I have an issue with anti-discrimination in China or the US? It has nothing to do with international business and by conflating it with domestic law, you are quite wrong.

Once again, domestic laws do not govern international trade. Your analogy makes no sense. Any country can ban trade with any other country and it would be well within its rights to do so.

As I said, this likely falls into the gray zone because it damages the third party by adding extra restrictions post contract but it is not unlawful and on the flip side, it would be a bigger violation of someone's rights to force the US to sell or continue to sell its technology. The buyer and the seller have to both agree and when one doesn't, for any reason, there is no sale. Very basic and no amount of crying about bullying is gonna change that.

LOLOL I understand everything else here other than, "You know what makes Bruce Lee mad? You know how he felt about those racist people?" LOL That, as it pertains to international trade, I don't understand.

Definition of what? I'm facing an argument here that if I dislike a guy, I have to apparently keep spending money at his business or I'm somehow bullying him. That's no dictionary definition and anyone can come up with something more valid than that.
That was the same stupid argument by racist Australians when they blame China for economic coercion or bullying or whatever stupid term they call it after china stopped buying some of their products. This was after Aus gov kept shitting on China but expect China to take it all in the face and still buy their wines and lobsters.
 

supercat

Major
The US government is rather dysfunctional, because some of its members are sociopaths.

BREAKING: AL JAZEERA INVESTIGATION FINDS THAT THERE ARE NO HAMAS TUNNELS UNDER GAZA’S SHIEKH HAMAD HOSPITAL

Israeli forces claims debunked.

Some Western publications are published by sociopaths, and are published for sociopaths.

Ukraine is like a sinking ship. No matter how much money you send in, it will be siphoned off very quickly by those who are preparing to jump ship.
 

LawLeadsToPeace

Senior Member
Staff member
Moderator - World Affairs
Registered Member
The US government is rather dysfunctional, because some of its members are sociopaths.



Some Western publications are published by sociopaths, and are published for sociopaths.

Ukraine is like a sinking ship. No matter how much money you send in, it will be siphoned off very quickly by those who are preparing to jump ship.
In regard to Ukraine, given the fact that Twitter is filled with fake news, this is the link to the interview:


and his plea for loans starts at 29:35
 
Top