The stat is somewhere on this site but their trade surplus is a huge percentage U.S. The U.S. refuses to buy their stuff, plus defaults, they would crash and burn along with the U.S. That's why it all needs to be graduated, but China is frankly smarter than the U.S. on a host of economic issues. They can just act, move, while the U.S., can't get a damn thing through Congress and even on executive action, where they could move faster, not much happens.
Economic war against the United States seems like a right on quote. We owe China so much money and they literally have us right where they want us. What would happen if they called in their loan?
Very funny. Yeah, during the primaries it was astounding. I was trying to tell people Hillary was more Progressive than Obama by votes and policies and was rebuffed at the time. Wasn't anyone paying any attention? This guy is a globalist. He just knows how to give good speech.
I think Krugman recently defined "bi-partisan" as a choice between the "Right and far right". I wouldn't go that far, I'd say it's a compromise between the multinational corporations and what they have concluded in unison.
Gee, now the horse has left the barn, the bubble has burst, and his party lost the White House Greenspun says lock the door and calls for fraud investigation? The money is stolen and the thievery worked brilliantly. How is it going to be fixed when it was the SEC itself in the Madoff case, the banks in concert all of them involved in the mortgage bubble by backing the fly by night originators and blind ratings agencies, and now the banks are unable to do anything about documents in the foreclosure scandal?
The HAMP is hopeless, the banks want it to fail because their model included foreclosing and making a windfall on the foreclosed properties ASAP. Only the economy tanking has hurt the speculative runup and dented their profits.
The spread between the near zero rate and what they charge nowadays for best customers, let alone the rest is obscene.
We would be better off with a near zero national mortgage rate not for favorite banks of the Fed but for owner occupied residences. Not 5 million, 10 million foreclosures like we are getting. And this Administration is allowing to happen.
H-1B, L-1 and immigration are used TO offshore outsource, esp. in knowledge transfer. That's why they want them so badly. It isn't an either/or scenario, they need to curtail both and put U.S. workers first. It's been proved not only in research but also straight out of NASSCOM those Visas are used to offshore outsource projects, transfer knowledge and even obtain training from U.S. workers.
Would massive increases in the number of H-1B visas we issue help slow the pace of offshoring? It seems better to pay low wages to workers in this country, even if those workers have bee imported than to send the jobs overseas. At least we get the benefit of tax receipts and OASDI receipts. What say you?
Sorry I don't have the links but China is only 10% labor costs as the motivation to manufacture. In India, there have been numerous studies which show offshore outsourcing is a net loss on cost savings, not a gain as "expected".
There are other forces at play here. For example, finance, they can make huge money by investing in EEs and manipulating global interest rates. Then, China requires manufacturers build in China, sometimes with state partner enterprises but these nation's tariffs schedules and that's just straight up tariffs, not even getting to currency manipulation and their use of VATs make it cost prohibitive to import.
So, it's not a matter of labor costs and it is especially not a matter of wage repression in the U.S. and has much more to do with national policies, big finance and their "investments", returns, currency manipulation and trading away U.S. jobs for some "foreign policy" agenda too.
I think it's also pure "who you know". NASSCOM, India BPO have made incredible headway into our political system and gaining access. Not a good thing.
Sure, Bush was the one sitting in the White House at the actual event, but both parties are equally responsible for allowing China into the WTO without actually having to follow all the WTO requirements.
Obama's actions to date - such as his India speech - show a continuation of the same policies.
The informstion provided is interesting, but confuses the mechanism with the cause.
The cause is high labor costs - which in turn is caused by high property prices, which again in turn are the result of decades of bankster interference.
Its all about FIRE folks - Finance, Insurance, and Real Estate.
Obama - as a populist figurehead - has clearly passed on every single opportunity to rein in these interests. Instead he's continuing to unsubtly support his corporate sponsors.
But then again, his race is irrelevant. The real issue is his age.
An older person would not care as much about money as his/her legacy.
Obama on the other hand would be throwing away 3 or more decades of corporate speaking engagements, consulting positions, and what not by acting in some way for the benefit of the American people and American nation.
Seen in this light, it is only surprising that he hasn't been MORE corporatist.
Ireland could draw on the 60 billion euro ($82 billion) segment of the broader 750-billion-euro fund set up by the EU and International Monetary Fund in May, Irish state broadcaster RTE said, without saying where it obtained the information. The smaller pool is funded directly by the European Commission, the EU’s Brussels-based executive branch.
This is good stuff, the problem is Obama has given many a time good rhetoric. Will they back it up with some action?
I'll like to find an analysis (from a group objective, which is hard to find) on what exactly would happen if the U.S. slapped tariffs against China, across the board. I think they should just plain do it, act unilaterally and get serious. That said, so much is manufactured in China, I'm not sure what that would do short term to the U.S. economy. If they do that, they should repeal the offshore outsourcing tax credits and probably offer some huge incentive package to build/manufacture in the United States, even if that is creating new companies to compete directly with "U.S." multinationals who moved to China.
I think they really should do a scaled, targeted group of tariffs, i.e. hit the business that a. we have alternatives in the U.S. for those goods and b. it's clearly a currency manipulation as the reason
Of course that would generate a flurry of WTO complaints but I think the U.S. needs to act in their own interests, go solo and give a big FU to these other nations on jobs and trade.
I think these other nations know the U.S. won't do a damn thing in reality...that's why they walk all over the U.S.
It's not because Obama lost in the midterms, they would do it no matter who was in office and how popular they were.
It's the first time the President of the U.S. has ever said anything about trade and how it's hurting our economy. Bush was busying destroying the U.S. economy and so did Clinton by passing these bad trade deals in the first place.
My surprise was more Obama even mentioned anything. Since Clinton, these countries got our manufacturing base and captured our economic power through trade manipulation so no surprise to me any suggestion they should give that up would be met with rebuking.
This is one of the first things they should have done in office is more the story.
"the U.S. is not only up against the world, but also up against our powerful multinational corporations, many which have more financial power than entire countries." Guess who this administration will represent in that fight.
Here's the latest. It's from the Christain Science Monitor. It seems that, by far, the biggest gripe that the other oligarchs have with the US is the Quantitative Easing. We've invaded militarily and financially, done some real damage, and now it's pay back time.
Good luck to you in this fight. The response that you got form the AG's office is about right, in some cases at lease. They talk a good fight but rarely show up when it's time to mix it up.
Damn! listen to the whining. I worked almost my entire life in the shadows never qualifying for any of these goverment benefits. Have any of you begun to think maybe you've been sold a bill of goods and a pack of lies?
All this stems from Free Trade and Globalization combined with corrupt politicians. Well duh! Maybe that free trade isn't so free after all. I heard Ross Perot's Giant Sucking Sound loud and clear? Did you? And your government is simply trying to keep you bleating sheep calm and not go out and riot or try to change the status quo.
Shut up! Figure out how to survive and then go do it. I did because I had to. And you CAN do something about the Republicrats and Demopublicans. Get rid of the liars and thieves.
The MSM is calling this a "failure" and quoting fictional job numbers straight from the labor arbitraging U.S. Chamber of Commerce lobbyists, who also have managed I guess to get into White House press releases?
Do these major networks bother to check their numbers when claiming the Korea Free Trade Agreement would "create jobs".
I guess they do not, same as the press releases on India.
Those in charge are reaching new levels of arrogance in their looting of the system. They think nobody notices. But that's not the case. A good deal of the voting by 42% of those eligible was out of anger, punishment votes. The majority, however, were those who think it's not worth voting. That is a vote and a telling one. Let them pursue the Social Security cuts for real after Dec 1 and we'll see how the public delivers the message.
The study results are not surprising. Government policies and the banks have delayed an inevitable supply of foreclosures. Another factor not mentioned is jobs, considering that sufficient income is needed for a mortgage, which determines the maximum home price a buyer can get.
The stat is somewhere on this site but their trade surplus is a huge percentage U.S. The U.S. refuses to buy their stuff, plus defaults, they would crash and burn along with the U.S. That's why it all needs to be graduated, but China is frankly smarter than the U.S. on a host of economic issues. They can just act, move, while the U.S., can't get a damn thing through Congress and even on executive action, where they could move faster, not much happens.
i assume by these comments that you're all Ron Paul fans.
Economic war against the United States seems like a right on quote. We owe China so much money and they literally have us right where they want us. What would happen if they called in their loan?
Very funny. Yeah, during the primaries it was astounding. I was trying to tell people Hillary was more Progressive than Obama by votes and policies and was rebuffed at the time. Wasn't anyone paying any attention? This guy is a globalist. He just knows how to give good speech.
I think Krugman recently defined "bi-partisan" as a choice between the "Right and far right". I wouldn't go that far, I'd say it's a compromise between the multinational corporations and what they have concluded in unison.
Gee, now the horse has left the barn, the bubble has burst, and his party lost the White House Greenspun says lock the door and calls for fraud investigation? The money is stolen and the thievery worked brilliantly. How is it going to be fixed when it was the SEC itself in the Madoff case, the banks in concert all of them involved in the mortgage bubble by backing the fly by night originators and blind ratings agencies, and now the banks are unable to do anything about documents in the foreclosure scandal?
The HAMP is hopeless, the banks want it to fail because their model included foreclosing and making a windfall on the foreclosed properties ASAP. Only the economy tanking has hurt the speculative runup and dented their profits.
The spread between the near zero rate and what they charge nowadays for best customers, let alone the rest is obscene.
We would be better off with a near zero national mortgage rate not for favorite banks of the Fed but for owner occupied residences. Not 5 million, 10 million foreclosures like we are getting. And this Administration is allowing to happen.
H-1B, L-1 and immigration are used TO offshore outsource, esp. in knowledge transfer. That's why they want them so badly. It isn't an either/or scenario, they need to curtail both and put U.S. workers first. It's been proved not only in research but also straight out of NASSCOM those Visas are used to offshore outsource projects, transfer knowledge and even obtain training from U.S. workers.
Would massive increases in the number of H-1B visas we issue help slow the pace of offshoring? It seems better to pay low wages to workers in this country, even if those workers have bee imported than to send the jobs overseas. At least we get the benefit of tax receipts and OASDI receipts. What say you?
Sorry I don't have the links but China is only 10% labor costs as the motivation to manufacture. In India, there have been numerous studies which show offshore outsourcing is a net loss on cost savings, not a gain as "expected".
There are other forces at play here. For example, finance, they can make huge money by investing in EEs and manipulating global interest rates. Then, China requires manufacturers build in China, sometimes with state partner enterprises but these nation's tariffs schedules and that's just straight up tariffs, not even getting to currency manipulation and their use of VATs make it cost prohibitive to import.
So, it's not a matter of labor costs and it is especially not a matter of wage repression in the U.S. and has much more to do with national policies, big finance and their "investments", returns, currency manipulation and trading away U.S. jobs for some "foreign policy" agenda too.
I think it's also pure "who you know". NASSCOM, India BPO have made incredible headway into our political system and gaining access. Not a good thing.
It is amusing indeed to see how the present situation is being laid at the feet of one party.
The facts:
Clinton and the Democrats passed NAFTA.
The same parties tried for years to get China admitted into the WTO - even unto Clinton's farewell speech at the WEF in January 2000:
http://money.cnn.com/2000/01/29/economy/davos_clinton/
Sure, Bush was the one sitting in the White House at the actual event, but both parties are equally responsible for allowing China into the WTO without actually having to follow all the WTO requirements.
Obama's actions to date - such as his India speech - show a continuation of the same policies.
The informstion provided is interesting, but confuses the mechanism with the cause.
The cause is high labor costs - which in turn is caused by high property prices, which again in turn are the result of decades of bankster interference.
Its all about FIRE folks - Finance, Insurance, and Real Estate.
Obama - as a populist figurehead - has clearly passed on every single opportunity to rein in these interests. Instead he's continuing to unsubtly support his corporate sponsors.
But then again, his race is irrelevant. The real issue is his age.
An older person would not care as much about money as his/her legacy.
Obama on the other hand would be throwing away 3 or more decades of corporate speaking engagements, consulting positions, and what not by acting in some way for the benefit of the American people and American nation.
Seen in this light, it is only surprising that he hasn't been MORE corporatist.
Then again, is that possible?
A follow up to this post, Ireland is being encouraged to accept Aid from the EU.
Calculated Risk is maintaining a problem bank list as well, here. The FDIC does not make this list public, so bloggers are putting these together.
Reuters report.
This is good stuff, the problem is Obama has given many a time good rhetoric. Will they back it up with some action?
I'll like to find an analysis (from a group objective, which is hard to find) on what exactly would happen if the U.S. slapped tariffs against China, across the board. I think they should just plain do it, act unilaterally and get serious. That said, so much is manufactured in China, I'm not sure what that would do short term to the U.S. economy. If they do that, they should repeal the offshore outsourcing tax credits and probably offer some huge incentive package to build/manufacture in the United States, even if that is creating new companies to compete directly with "U.S." multinationals who moved to China.
I think they really should do a scaled, targeted group of tariffs, i.e. hit the business that a. we have alternatives in the U.S. for those goods and b. it's clearly a currency manipulation as the reason
Of course that would generate a flurry of WTO complaints but I think the U.S. needs to act in their own interests, go solo and give a big FU to these other nations on jobs and trade.
I think these other nations know the U.S. won't do a damn thing in reality...that's why they walk all over the U.S.
It's not because Obama lost in the midterms, they would do it no matter who was in office and how popular they were.
It's the first time the President of the U.S. has ever said anything about trade and how it's hurting our economy. Bush was busying destroying the U.S. economy and so did Clinton by passing these bad trade deals in the first place.
My surprise was more Obama even mentioned anything. Since Clinton, these countries got our manufacturing base and captured our economic power through trade manipulation so no surprise to me any suggestion they should give that up would be met with rebuking.
This is one of the first things they should have done in office is more the story.
"the U.S. is not only up against the world, but also up against our powerful multinational corporations, many which have more financial power than entire countries." Guess who this administration will represent in that fight.
Here's the latest. It's from the Christain Science Monitor. It seems that, by far, the biggest gripe that the other oligarchs have with the US is the Quantitative Easing. We've invaded militarily and financially, done some real damage, and now it's pay back time.
Why world leaders smacked down Obama at G20 summit
Good luck to you in this fight. The response that you got form the AG's office is about right, in some cases at lease. They talk a good fight but rarely show up when it's time to mix it up.
Where's The Note? Shock and Awe for Big Banks
I wrote this for EP a few days ago. It's got a helpful section at the end with a listing of articles and other materials on ForeclosureGate.
Keep us posted.
Damn! listen to the whining. I worked almost my entire life in the shadows never qualifying for any of these goverment benefits. Have any of you begun to think maybe you've been sold a bill of goods and a pack of lies?
All this stems from Free Trade and Globalization combined with corrupt politicians. Well duh! Maybe that free trade isn't so free after all. I heard Ross Perot's Giant Sucking Sound loud and clear? Did you? And your government is simply trying to keep you bleating sheep calm and not go out and riot or try to change the status quo.
Shut up! Figure out how to survive and then go do it. I did because I had to. And you CAN do something about the Republicrats and Demopublicans. Get rid of the liars and thieves.
The MSM is calling this a "failure" and quoting fictional job numbers straight from the labor arbitraging U.S. Chamber of Commerce lobbyists, who also have managed I guess to get into White House press releases?
Do these major networks bother to check their numbers when claiming the Korea Free Trade Agreement would "create jobs".
I guess they do not, same as the press releases on India.
Those in charge are reaching new levels of arrogance in their looting of the system. They think nobody notices. But that's not the case. A good deal of the voting by 42% of those eligible was out of anger, punishment votes. The majority, however, were those who think it's not worth voting. That is a vote and a telling one. Let them pursue the Social Security cuts for real after Dec 1 and we'll see how the public delivers the message.
The study results are not surprising. Government policies and the banks have delayed an inevitable supply of foreclosures. Another factor not mentioned is jobs, considering that sufficient income is needed for a mortgage, which determines the maximum home price a buyer can get.
Pages