China’s coming Austrian collapse
tbwns.com
China’s coming Austrian collapse
1–10 of 12 posts
Re: China’s coming Austrian collapse
#2There might be truth to this article but its bias and demeaning tone are off-putting. It makes it hard to take the author seriously.
Re: China’s coming Austrian collapse
#3There might be truth to this article but its bias and demeaning tone are off-putting. It makes it hard to take the author seriously.
I find the comparison between China and Napolean/Nazi Germany, as a system of looting weaker economies, to be weak. If anything it would have been more relevant to consider French/British/Spanish/Dutch/Portugese colonnial empires, or even going further back the Roman empire.
Re: China’s coming Austrian collapse
#4There might be truth to this article but its bias and demeaning tone are off-putting. It makes it hard to take the author seriously.
> There might be truth to this article but its bias and demeaning tone are off-putting. It makes it hard to take the author seriously.
What exactly about this article was "demeaning"?
The author does seem to feel that Trump is handling China well, which I'm sure brings cognitive dissonance to some...
Re: China’s coming Austrian collapse
#5When an author is so confident in their assertions, it always raises red flags. Also, the latter part of the article seems to posit that "in order for the U.S. to win, China has to lose".
Re: China’s coming Austrian collapse
#6When an author is so confident in their assertions, it always raises red flags. Also, the latter part of the article seems to posit that "in order for the U.S. to win, China has to lose".
This wasn't what I got from the article. I believe it posits that if China is given a paddle on the butt, it will start to behave, which will be in everyone's best interests.
Re: China’s coming Austrian collapse
#7There might be truth to this article but its bias and demeaning tone are off-putting. It makes it hard to take the author seriously.
I find the comparison between China and Napolean/Nazi Germany, as a system of looting weaker economies, to be weak. If anything it would have been more relevant to consider French/British/Spanish/Dutch/Portugese colonnial empires, or even going further back the Roman empire.
If you were arguing that China would continue to be a strong economy by continuing exploitative expansion, then yes, that comparison would be more relevant. However, the article was trying to argue that China's activities are not sustainable and will lead that country down the same path of failure for the given comparisons.
Re: China’s coming Austrian collapse
#8There might be truth to this article but its bias and demeaning tone are off-putting. It makes it hard to take the author seriously.
Do you always refuse to consider the points of an argument if you find fault with the author?
It seems to me that if you cannot refute the given argument, your character assassination will be just as inadequate.
Re: China’s coming Austrian collapse
#9There might be truth to this article but its bias and demeaning tone are off-putting. It makes it hard to take the author seriously.
> There might be truth to this article but its bias and demeaning tone are off-putting. It makes it hard to take the author seriously. What exactly about this article was "demeaning"? The author does seem to feel that Trump is handling China well, which I'm sure brings cognitive dissonance to some...
I don't really understand how Trump could be viewed to be handling China well. One of China's big selling points as a negotiating partner is they're consistent. The US has traditionally also had this virtue. Trump isn't even consistent with his own state department. Why on earth would you rest anything on a country that might elect somebody like that? If you were Qatar, why would you agree to another US military base, knowing that the next president might say you're harbouring Al-Qaeda, because some Saudi royals told him so? If you were the Phillipines, why would you feel confident in US support?
I know some people like big tough guys in politics, and to some of those people, Trump appears big and tough. But I think even if you have this persuasion, Trump's no Kissinger, no Tito, not even a Putin.
Re: China’s coming Austrian collapse
#10Earlier quoted context omitted.
> There might be truth to this article but its bias and demeaning tone are off-putting. It makes it hard to take the author seriously. What exactly about this article was "demeaning"? The author does seem to feel that Trump is handling China well, which I'm sure brings cognitive dissonance to some...
I don't really understand how Trump could be viewed to be handling China well. One of China's big selling points as a negotiating partner is they're consistent. The US has traditionally also had this virtue. Trump isn't even consistent with his own state department. Why on earth would you rest anything on a country that might elect somebody like that? If you were Qatar, why would you agree to another US military base…
The Chinese came back to the negotiating table (after walking out in June) [0]. Anytime the other guys walks out and then comes back, you have the upper hand.
[0] - https://www.cnbc.com/2018/08/16/kudlow-confirms-trade-talks-...
For the record, negotiations look messy while they're ongoing. I think you'll find that the negotiations end up much better than most people think.
One of the key attributes of a good negotiator is to have a BATNA (Best Alternative To a Negotiated Agreement). Without one, you're going to fail. The last few administrations have not had that when negotiating with China, and they failed (heck, they didn't really get started before they backed off).
Trump's style is certainly unorthodox, but he has several folks who actually know how to negotiate (Robert Lighthizer & Wilbur Ross among others). I wouldn't count them out just yet.