Кина ја вади Америка од кризата- по цена на уште поголемо задолжување

Член од
17 март 2005
Мислења
11.493
Поени од реакции
1.588
Кина мора да го финансира Американскиот долг заради зачувување на стабилноста во државата и сходно преживувањето на режимот на комунистите таму.

Но останува фактот деха Америка се повеќе се задолжува кај Кина. Впрочем, комуњарката Хилари Клинтон појде во Пекинг да пита. Новинарот Wyatt Andrews oд CBS News беше единствениот кој ја претстави посетата на Клинтон онаква каква што е - срамотна.

“The truth is the Administration needs China’s help. America’s stimulus is very expensive and the U.S. wants China to help finance it,” Andrews reported. This is what America has become a country that sends its Secretary of State abroad to beg for money from foreigners. In this case, it’s a communist dictatorship that forces women to have abortions, tortures Christians, and threatens the freedom and democratic government of Taiwan.

So the cost of the “stimulus” is more sacrifice of American independence and sovereignty, as well as our own values, ideals, and commitment to human freedom. It is a sad day both for America and China.

Clinton was shown saying, “We are relying on the Chinese government to continue to buy our debt.” The almighty dollar takes precedence over everything else, even as it falls in value and the dangers of hyperinflation and national bankruptcy loom. The tragedy is compounded by the fact that pandering to the Chinese will not solve anything. This policy, set in motion by big banks and corporations and pursued by Democratic and Republican Administrations, is what got us into this predicament in the first place.

Clinton’s comments, which concern the overall economic policy of the new administration, are far more significant than the Obama mortgage plan. Clinton is getting to the heart of the issue how the mortgage plan and the stimulus are being financed.

White House spokesman Robert Gibbs expressed irritation last week that CNBC commentator Rick Santelli went into a rant over the prospect of forcing American taxpayers to underwrite the bad mortgages of deadbeats and others who are unable to pay their mortgages. But Santelli only touched on one small part of the problem.

Where’s the outrage over the pro-China policy that spans several administrations, and which has benefited his corporate bosses at General Electric, of permitting the communist dictatorship in Beijing to have the upper hand in global trade relations? All that Santelli has to do to understand this problem is attend a GE annual meeting and listen to the complaints of the GE workers losing their jobs to China. But don’t expect to see anything about that on CNBC, NBC, or MSNBC.

If you want more information on this travesty, please go to the website screwthatbulb.org and learn how GE is going “green,” which has the effect of shipping American jobs to China. If Santelli did a rant about that, you can bet he wouldn’t be on the air again.

We were already in terrible shape under the Bush Administration because of a mysterious financial collapse apparently caused by illegal manipulation of our markets, but now the communists have us completely over a barrel because the Obama Administration, with the acquiescence of Congress, recklessly decided to spend even more money that we don’t have. Under the circumstances, this is criminal negligence.

Mrs. Clinton is officially stating what everyone should know is the truth. She deserves credit for being brutally honest. America has become a subsidiary of China Inc. In order for the U.S. to stay afloat, we have to depend on Beijing to finance a bailout. But the other major problem, of course, is that the stimulus is not a bailout in any real sense of the word. It depends on more government debt and borrowing at a huge cost of being more indebted to the Chinese. So the bailout is really digging our nation’s grave deeper.

To make matters even worse, as the Andrews report made clear, the cost will include the jobs that the Obama Administration says will be created by the stimulus. He interviewed an American manufacturer about the loss of American jobs caused by China’s trade practices, who said that the “cheating” in global trade has cost millions of American manufacturing jobs.

In the end, the only “jobs” that will be created or “saved,” as Obama likes to say, will likely be those benefiting from spending the federal money that the federal government doesn’t have. Most of them work for government at all levels.

Productive private sector manufacturing jobs will not be created and cannot be because despite their campaign promises, neither Obama nor Hillary will do anything about those unfair Chinese trade practices, such as the currency manipulation, that make Chinese goods artificially cheap and American goods more expensive.

The Andrews report, which caught me completely by surprise on a newscast that tends to portray the new Administration in completely flattering tones, was absolutely blistering in contrasting what Obama and Clinton had said during the campaign and what they are doing now.

“Both the man who became the President and his future Secretary of State told the voters they would make the [trade] cheating go away,” Andrews reported. He showed candidate Obama saying that he would do everything in his power to stop China from manipulating its currency and Hillary saying that she would “aggressively crack down on China’s unfair trade practices.” These claims were shown to be empty and abandoned campaign promises. We should have assumed that would be the case.

Andrews asked Secretary of State Clinton about this and “she explained that times have changed.” Clinton said, “That was at a different time when we weren’t facing the kind of difficult situations we face today.” Translation: we need their money and we are in no position to demand or criticize anything. These Clinton comments preceded Andrews’ remarks about the cost of the stimulus and the perceived need to get China to help finance it.

As we had noted in a previous column about the Administration’s so-called economic program, Clinton was going to China for the purpose of getting Chinese money to finance the stimulus. Now we have it all on the record. Her trip was designed to reinforce Treasury Secretary Timothy Geithner’s private conversations on this topic with Chinese officials.

The land of the free and the home of the brave has now become the land of the quivering milquetoast, in awe of an emerging Communist giant that our big banks and corporations, as well as our government, have built into an economic superpower.

President Obama apparently sees nothing wrong with this. Indeed, during the campaign he praised China’s staging of the Olympic Games, saying their infrastructure was impressive and was something the U.S. might consider emulating.

Now, with Hillary Clinton having signaled to the Chinese dictators that we will beg for their money and ignore unfair trade practices and even human rights violations, it will be left up to President Obama to seal the deal. When he gives his State of the Union-like speech to Congress and the American people on Tuesday night, he will in reality be auditioning for a front-row seat on the board of directors of China Inc. Don’t expect to hear anything critical of the butchers in Beijing.

http://www.aim.org/aim-column/obama-sells-u.s.-to-china-inc/


.
 

AtoM-AnT

Dexter
Член од
3 септември 2008
Мислења
4.530
Поени од реакции
583
Кина ја вади Америка од кризата бидејки е еден од најголемите потрошувачи на Кинеска стока а имаат сега и голем број на недвижности во Америка,ги платија по астрономска цена па потоа дојде кризата и сега не вредат многу ама пак затоа Кина се ослободи од поголем број обврзници што ги имаше и ги вложи во Америка така да сега Америка и Енглеска биќе земја Кинеска.Кој ја прати економијата малку повеке ке разбере што сакам да кажам?
 
S

smart ass

Гостин
Jas mislam deka amerikanskata politika vo idnina ke bide blagonakloneta sprema kina zaradi zaednicki interesi sto e i donekade dodra rabota
 
R

RAYTHEON23

Гостин
sekako i nivniot sistem ne e imun na krizi,naprotiv oporavuvanjeto na amerikanskata i posebno evropskata ekonomija ke ima pozitiven odraz vrz kineskata a da zememe predvid deka i kineskite proizvodi se megu najevtinite,pa zatoa razbirlivo e zosto ke mu pomagaat na SAD a dali ova ke znaci i politicka sorabotka vo idnina tesko e da se kaze poradi faktot sto SAD kako lider na NATO ima sosema razlicni prioriteti od kineskite.....
interesno e i toa sto kina veke nagolemo navleguva vo afrika-imeno da ne go zaboravime zaemot i donaciite koi gi dava za afrikanskite zemji-razbirlivo za prirodnite resursi-ama ne trca so vojska tamu kako sto pravat SAD,znaci sepak od sorabotkata ke imaat korist i dvete strani:smir:
 
Член од
20 јуни 2007
Мислења
809
Поени од реакции
18
Пред некое време бегаа од Кинески инвестиции ко ѓавол од крст.
 
Член од
17 март 2005
Мислења
11.493
Поени од реакции
1.588
Ова мора да се прочита. Глобалната криза и служи на Кина и дефинитивно да се воспостави како регионална сила. Сега имаат 2 трилиони долари со кои можат да ги изнакупат западните компании. Додатно, Кина се повеќе ја гради својата армија.

http://frontpagemag.com/Articles/Read.aspx?GUID=F060995F-18EF-4D23-803B-1B916CEACE10


China Rising
By William R. Hawkins
FrontPageMagazine.com | Friday, February 27, 2009

The global economic downturn, triggered by the U.S. financial crisis that sent tremors through European banks and plunged Japan into a deep recession, could not have come at a better time for China. The turmoil will pull the focus of rival governments inward. There will be no desire, and few resources available, to face new confrontations abroad for years to come. Beijing will use the time to continue its “peaceful rise” without fear of interference by other powers whose longer term interests are at risk as China creates a “multipolar” world it can shape to its advantage.

China is, of course, facing problems. Its economy is dependent on exports in a world where trade is shrinking. Beijing is clearly worried about the impact of declining overseas markets. During the last few months, more than 20 million migrant workers have become unemployed. Last year 2,400 factories in and around the vibrant coastal region of Guangzhou closed. Rapid, double-digit economic growth has become the main legitimizing theme of the Communist dictatorship, and there is a real threat of social unrest if the economy slows. At a meeting of the cabinet last month, Prime Minister Wen Jiabao told government leaders to prepare for trouble, “The country’s employment situation is extremely grim,” he said. More than 3,000 public security directors from across the country have been summoned to Beijing to learn how to suppress rallies and strikes before they turn into riots.

Yet, China’s trade surplus in 2008 set a new record, both in the aggregate and with the United States. Its aggressive export strategy, based on currency values set by the regime, massive subsidies, and dumping by state corporations that value jobs and production over profits, has meant that Chinese exporters can beat out foreign rivals to expand their share of whatever markets remain open. A $585 billion stimulus package was introduced in November; much of it aimed at labor-intensive construction projects. And China’s already largely closed market for imports is becoming more protectionist– even as Beijing demands that markets in America and Europe open further to its products.

China also has the world’s largest hard currency reserves, estimated at around $2 trillion, the result of accumulated trade surpluses. The United States alone has given China $1.5 trillion via its trade deficit between 2000 and 2008. This massive Chinese hoard of capital hangs over the debt-ridden world economy like the Sword of Damocles. In the ancient Greek fable, the wealthy and powerful ruler of Syracuse was constantly menaced by a sword that hung over his throne by a single horsehair. Secretary of State Hillary Clinton certainly behaved as if she was sitting under such a weapon when she visited China last weekend.

The United States and China sit on opposite sides of every arena of conflict across the globe, as well as represent contrary principles of government and human rights. Yet, none of these issues played a major role in the discussions between Secretary Clinton and Chinese leaders, and many were not even mentioned. Beijing was praised for its “positive” role in hosting the Six-Party talks on North Korea. These talks have served Chinese interests well, protecting the Pyongyang buffer state from any concerted foreign pressure and even getting sanctions lifted in exchange for very little in the way of verifiable changes in regime behavior. Chinese support for the Iranian regime and its nuclear ambitions, which have stymied sanctions and undermined international pressure, was mentioned only by Chinese Foreign Minister Yang Jiechi in the joint press conference of Feb. 21, not by Secretary Clinton. There does not seem to have been any mention of the genocidal Islamic dictatorship in Sudan, which is armed and funded by Beijing in exchange for control of its oil industry, despite Secretary Clinton’s long standing personal concern for what is happening there.

There was no public sign that Afghanistan was discussed in Beijing. China is strengthening its ties with Pakistan, providing new combat aircraft and warships. It is also giving Islamabad diplomatic support to resist U.S. pressure to take the offensive against Taliban sanctuaries in Pakistan’s border region from which attacks are launched against U.S. and NATO forces in Afghanistan. Chinese arms are also the mainstay of the Taliban insurgents.

At the Feb. 21 joint press conference, Secretary Clinton said “it is essential that the United States and China have a positive, cooperative relationship. Both of us are seeking ways to deepen and broaden that relationship.” A great deal of attention was devoted to environmental issues, as if the U.S. side was trying to create a common enemy in “global warming” so as to form an alliance with China that would overshadow all the traditional geopolitical conflicts that divide the two nations.

Secretary Clinton has taken flak from the human-rights community for downgrading their concerns in China. This should not have been surprising, since her husband Bill Clinton did exactly the same thing. President Clinton changed his campaign rhetoric about using trade as leverage for reform in China once he was in office under pressure from the business community. That corporate pressure is still in full force, but is now reinforced by the need to keep Chinese capital flowing to fund the U.S. budget deficit, even though that money originated from American consumers. Secretary Clinton tried to assure Beijing’s leaders that their considerable investment in Treasury bonds would remain safe.

Yet, in a world where banks and factories are failing, the potential returns from buying distressed real assets to take control of future production could be irresistible. Two days before Clinton arrived in Beijing, Fang Shangpu, deputy director of China’s State Administration of Foreign Exchange, said that China will encourage and assist its companies in expanding operations and acquisitions overseas. Beijing has for many years been buying up energy and other natural resources in Africa, Asia and Latin America, taking them off the market for exclusive use by Chinese industry. A considerable debate has been triggered in Australia by Aluminum Corporation of China’s (Chinalco) decision to invest $19.5 billion in British-Australian Rio Tinto Group and China Minmetals’ offer for a $1.7 billion investment in OZ Minerals Ltd. China Investment Corporation, the $200 billion sovereign wealth fund, is thought to be in talks with Fortescue Metals Group Ltd., Australia’s third-biggest iron ore exporter, about gaining a $3 billion stake.

The China Development Bank (CDB) is in final negotiations with Brazils Petroleo Brasileiro SA (Petrobras) to loan the company some $10 billion for deepwater energy development — a loan to be repaid in oil. Beijing’s approach is a resurrection of the 19th century colonial model. It buys raw materials and invests in infrastructure projects to develop trade routes, paid for by the export of manufactured goods on very favorable terms. Chinese mercantilism is not about profit in the sense used in Western capitalist theory. It is about the control of wealth and production capacity as the foundation of state power and international influence.

Beijing believes its rise to great power status is inevitable, but that it will take time to construct the economic, social and political foundations. During the period of emergence, China could be vulnerable to foreign pressure. It has played a wily came, posing as a fragile developing country that needs special treatment to alleviate poverty and establish a basis for reform; while at the same time using its economic and diplomatic clout to project its growing power and deter counteraction. This strategy has been very much in line with Sun Tzu’s ancient advice that, ““Warfare is the Way (Tao) of deception. Although capable, display incapability. When committed to employing your forces, feign inactivity.”

The “peaceful rise” line of propaganda was introduced over ten years ago in response to the “China threat” theory advanced at the time by Lee Kuan-yew of Singapore, whose strategic city-state built a dockyard designed for use by U.S. aircraft carriers in an attempt to pull American power back to Southeast Asia. In 2005, Beijing released a White Paper that tweaked the term from “rise” to “development” to make it sound less aggressive. A year earlier, Gong Li, vice director of the Institute of International Strategic Studies at the Central Party School of the Chinese Communist Party, had presented a conference paper arguing that only a minority of Chinese officials believe that common interests outweigh contradictions between Beijing and Washington. A majority believe that Washington could take action to “contain” China before it can become a threat to American “hegemony.” Beijing needed to buy time to grow strong in an environment of appeasement and accommodation. It will now have that time.

Japanese Prime Minister Taro Aso, who as Foreign Minister in 2005 told a press conference that China was beginning to pose a "considerable threat" because of its military buildup, is about to visit the White House. But he has an approval rating back home nearing single digits as Japan spirals into recession. President Barack Obama, looking to reduce the budget deficit even as massive stimulus packages are being passed by Congress, is planning major cuts in combat aircraft programs, missile defense and naval shipbuilding– the very capabilities that would be needed to contain a China that is modernizing and expanding its military in these same areas. As twilight is falling on the West, Beijing sees a new day dawning in the East.
 
Член од
9 ноември 2007
Мислења
9.327
Поени од реакции
1.334
Кина ќе гради нови носачи на авиони

Кина ќе гради нови носачи на авиони

ПЕКИНГ - Кина, чиишто трошоци за одбраната ги загрижуваат САД и другите, има капацитет да изгради носачи на авиони и треба да го направи тоа набрзо, изјавија официјални претставници на армијата кои беа цитирани од страна на „Чајна дејли“. Кинески воени официјални лица со години лобираат кај централната власт за изградба на носач на авиони кој ќе им овозможи на поморските сили да пренесат воздушна сила во близина на брегот, меѓутоа, ретко излегуваат со информации пред јавноста за нивните намери. „Изградбата на носачи на авиони е симбол на значајна нација. Тоа е неопходно“, изјави адмиралот Ху Јанлин, кој беше цитиран во текстот со наслов „Изградете носачи на авиони што е можно поскоро“.

Медиум од Хонгконг објави дека до 2010 година би можел да биде изграден првиот носач на авиони, а Ху посочи дека силата во подем е подготвена. „Кина има капацитет да изгради носачи на авиони и треба да го стори тоа “, додаде тој. Се' поголемите воени трошоци на Кина предизвикаа загриженост во САД и други земји, особено во Јапонија и Тајван, за кој Кина тврди дека е нејзина територија и вети оти ќе го врати под нејзина јурисдикција ако е потребно и со употреба на сила.

Кина во средата соопшти дека воениот буџет за 2009 година, ќе биде зголемен за 14,9 отсто во однос на минатата година, бранејќи го зголемувањето како умерен и незаканувачки потег за подобрување на опременоста и заштита на социјалната стабилност. (Ројтерс)


http://www.utrinski.com.mk/?ItemID=848A6FAEF9EA004885600F16104BCB18
 
R

RAYTHEON23

Гостин
мисирков ова е јако....
China also has the world’s largest hard currency reserves, estimated at around $2 trillion, the result of accumulated trade surpluses. The United States alone has given China $1.5 trillion via its trade deficit between 2000 and 2008. This massive Chinese hoard of capital hangs over the debt-ridden world economy like the Sword of Damocles. In the ancient Greek fable, the wealthy and powerful ruler of Syracuse was constantly menaced by a sword that hung over his throne by a single horsehair. Secretary of State Hillary Clinton certainly behaved as if she was sitting under such a weapon when she visited China last weekend:salut:
 
Член од
7 мај 2005
Мислења
1.231
Поени од реакции
307
Реченово пак од Тимоти Гајтнер е уште појако. Тој вика дека ако под итно конгресот не ја подигне стапката на државниот долг над 14300 милијарди долари, на Америка и претат катастрофални последици заради неможноста да го покријат државниот долг од буџетот.

„I have written to Congress on previous occasions regarding the importance of timely action to increase the debt limit in order to protect the full faith and credit of the United States and avoid catastrophic economic consequences for citizens. I again urge Congress to act to increase the statutory debt limit as soon as possible,” Geithner wrote in his letter to Congress Monday.„

http://www.foxnews.com/politics/2011/05/16/government-hits-debt-ceiling-treasury-urges-lawmakers-reach-bud get-deal/
 

^X^

Член од
22 декември 2007
Мислења
1.457
Поени од реакции
376
Сето ова нема врска, во однос на БДП други се многу позадолжени (САД во апсолутни бројки, но Aмериканската економија е огромна), а Кинезиве уште долго ќе мора да ги трпат Американците, затоа што Кина е зависна од Американскиот пазар и американските инвестиции а не обратно.

На пр. денес најзадолжена е Јапонија, над 200% од БДП но едно е кога должи Јапонија, а друго Грција или Португалија кои не можат сами да го враќаат долгот па ги покрива ЕУ.
http://www.economicshelp.org/blog/economics/list-of-national-debt-by-country/

И денес секој на секого должи, но само ние се палиме на големи бројки.

А Гајтнер е нормално да даде таква изјава за да добие одврзани раце за да троши уште повеќе, во aдминистрација која и така многу троши.
 

Kajgana Shop

На врв Bottom