Page 8 of 11
Re: china, China, CHINA
Posted: Thu Jul 28, 2022 6:21 am
by mikeylikey
Hiphopapotamus wrote: ↑Wed Jul 27, 2022 2:46 pm
I think this assumes perfect and equal price elasticity amongst all goods and services, no? Industry has a greater or a lesser ability to pass on the higher cost of a "retail revenue tax" depending on the item or service, and would therefore be eating a greater or a lesser share of such a tax.
I would say it assumes a reasonable and realistic degree of elasticity. Even without perfect elasticity the market will end up distributing the burden of a tax between producer and consumer. It will just take longer. On the time scales over which tax policy usually gets implemented, I don't believe this fundamentally changes my argument.
By corollary, the notion that sales taxes are fundamentally regressive and corporate taxes progressive assumes practically zero elasticity which seems sillier to me, in a more-or-less free market system like we have.
for the time being.
Re: china, China, CHINA
Posted: Tue Aug 02, 2022 9:02 am
by Hiphopapotamus
So, what's going to be the response? Bluster and empty threats or will this result in a real change for the worse in relations?
US House Speaker Nancy Pelosi lands in Taiwan amid threats of Chinese retaliation
Re: china, China, CHINA
Posted: Tue Aug 02, 2022 10:22 am
by aurelius
It is quite possible that China, Russia, and Iran will conspire to create another international crisis in the near future. The US only has the capability to some what respond to a single crisis. Which we are doing in UKR. If China sought to diminish US prestige and influence worldwide, creating a crisis in the south China sea that the US cannot effectively respond to would be the play.
Re: china, China, CHINA
Posted: Tue Aug 02, 2022 10:34 am
by Hardartery
Nothing happens at all is my guess. They already have way too much bad going on there that they can't get a handle on, they do not actually have the resources to even be a PITA right now. The have not sold arms to Russia or sent them anything, which is telling. You would expect them to at least take the opportunity to turn a profit, and they have not. They also would probably like to repair relations with Russia, which would be easy to do with a little weapons sales. They don't have the pockets to pay for a conflict right now, they don't have the pockets to curb the housing crisis there or the cascading mess of failing steel producers (6 bankrupt and 28 shutdown according to China Insights) and inflation making food difficult to afford. It's a storm of suffering over there right now.
Re: china, China, CHINA
Posted: Tue Aug 02, 2022 11:45 am
by quikky
aurelius wrote: ↑Tue Aug 02, 2022 10:22 am
It is quite possible that China, Russia, and Iran will conspire to create another international crisis in the near future. The US only has the capability to some what respond to a single crisis. Which we are doing in UKR. If China sought to diminish US prestige and influence worldwide, creating a crisis in the south China sea that the US cannot effectively respond to would be the play.
I think what is going on in Ukraine is relatively minor for the US in terms of military and economic involvement. I don't think two fronts is the problem here, rather, how well a front with China would work out.
Hardartery wrote: ↑Tue Aug 02, 2022 10:34 am
Nothing happens at all is my guess. They already have way too much bad going on there that they can't get a handle on, they do not actually have the resources to even be a PITA right now. The have not sold arms to Russia or sent them anything, which is telling. You would expect them to at least take the opportunity to turn a profit, and they have not. They also would probably like to repair relations with Russia, which would be easy to do with a little weapons sales. They don't have the pockets to pay for a conflict right now, they don't have the pockets to curb the housing crisis there or the cascading mess of failing steel producers (6 bankrupt and 28 shutdown according to China Insights) and inflation making food difficult to afford. It's a storm of suffering over there right now.
The only thing that can sway towards the direction of military involvement is the classic totalitarian philosophy of "if things are bad internally, create a problem externally". I think China tends to be a lot more pragmatic, compared to say Putin, but you never know.
However, I think you are right and my thinking tends to be much more along the lines of what you said.
Re: china, China, CHINA
Posted: Tue Aug 02, 2022 11:55 am
by mikeylikey
quikky wrote: ↑Tue Aug 02, 2022 11:45 am
The only thing that can sway towards the direction of military involvement is the classic totalitarian philosophy of "if things are bad internally, create a problem externally".
Isn't that why Biden sent Pelosi to Taiwan?
Re: china, China, CHINA
Posted: Tue Aug 02, 2022 12:04 pm
by quikky
mikeylikey wrote: ↑Tue Aug 02, 2022 11:55 am
quikky wrote: ↑Tue Aug 02, 2022 11:45 am
The only thing that can sway towards the direction of military involvement is the classic totalitarian philosophy of "if things are bad internally, create a problem externally".
Which is why Pelosi went no?
One way to look at it but I think Pelosi is mostly about theatrics. However, I agree with these particular theatrics. The two main authoritarian regimes, i.e. Russia and China, are hurting right now, not a bad time to rub some noses a bit.
Re: china, China, CHINA
Posted: Tue Aug 02, 2022 1:39 pm
by Hiphopapotamus
aurelius wrote: ↑Tue Aug 02, 2022 10:22 am
It is quite possible that China, Russia, and Iran will conspire to create another international crisis in the near future. The US only has the capability to some what respond to a single crisis. Which we are doing in UKR. If China sought to diminish US prestige and influence worldwide, creating a crisis in the south China sea that the US cannot effectively respond to would be the play.
Definitely. Russia just tried to stir shit up in Kosovo but it looks like that's been put back to perpetual simmer for the time being.
As far as general grand strategy goes: sure, the US has only a limited capability, but I think it is still a greater capability overall than Russia and China combined, at least as of right now. Especially when Russia is already up their tits in a clusterfuck of their own making. And that's without counting NATO, Japan, Australia, S. Korea.. I realize we have other global defense commitments, but I think if confrontation will be painful for us, it will be equally or more so for them. I mean, if they really want Cold War Two™, well, we beat them before.
Re: china, China, CHINA
Posted: Tue Aug 02, 2022 1:55 pm
by Hiphopapotamus
mikeylikey wrote: ↑Tue Aug 02, 2022 11:55 am
quikky wrote: ↑Tue Aug 02, 2022 11:45 am
The only thing that can sway towards the direction of military involvement is the classic totalitarian philosophy of "if things are bad internally, create a problem externally".
Isn't that why Biden sent Pelosi to Taiwan?
Re: china, China, CHINA
Posted: Wed Aug 03, 2022 6:27 am
by JonA
quikky wrote: ↑Tue Aug 02, 2022 12:04 pm
mikeylikey wrote: ↑Tue Aug 02, 2022 11:55 am
quikky wrote: ↑Tue Aug 02, 2022 11:45 am
The only thing that can sway towards the direction of military involvement is the classic totalitarian philosophy of "if things are bad internally, create a problem externally".
Which is why Pelosi went no?
One way to look at it but I think Pelosi is mostly about theatrics. However, I agree with these particular theatrics. The two main authoritarian regimes, i.e. Russia and China, are hurting right now, not a bad time to rub some noses a bit.
If _I_ was trying to rub some noses of authoritarian regimes, I'd do it 80s style, with a booming economy, military excess, and cocaine for everybody. Suffering through the same economic problems as the other regimes while sending Pelosi to Taiwan seems a bit subtle to me.
Re: china, China, CHINA
Posted: Wed Aug 03, 2022 8:31 am
by Skid
JonA wrote: ↑Wed Aug 03, 2022 6:27 am
If _I_ was trying to rub some noses of authoritarian regimes, I'd do it 80s style, with a booming economy, military excess, and cocaine for everybody. Suffering through the same economic problems as the other regimes while sending Pelosi to Taiwan seems a bit subtle to me.
Well to achieve that Reagan ran the country's debt up hugely. At 30 trill+ in debt now there isn't too much more room for that.
Re: china, China, CHINA
Posted: Wed Aug 03, 2022 9:20 am
by Hardartery
Skid wrote: ↑Wed Aug 03, 2022 8:31 am
JonA wrote: ↑Wed Aug 03, 2022 6:27 am
If _I_ was trying to rub some noses of authoritarian regimes, I'd do it 80s style, with a booming economy, military excess, and cocaine for everybody. Suffering through the same economic problems as the other regimes while sending Pelosi to Taiwan seems a bit subtle to me.
Well to achieve that Reagan ran the country's debt up hugely. At 30 trill+ in debt now there isn't too much more room for that.
That sounds like a dare. "Hold my beer!" moment incoming.
Re: china, China, CHINA
Posted: Wed Aug 03, 2022 9:38 am
by JonA
Hardartery wrote: ↑Wed Aug 03, 2022 9:20 am
Skid wrote: ↑Wed Aug 03, 2022 8:31 am
JonA wrote: ↑Wed Aug 03, 2022 6:27 am
If _I_ was trying to rub some noses of authoritarian regimes, I'd do it 80s style, with a booming economy, military excess, and cocaine for everybody. Suffering through the same economic problems as the other regimes while sending Pelosi to Taiwan seems a bit subtle to me.
Well to achieve that Reagan ran the country's debt up hugely. At 30 trill+ in debt now there isn't too much more room for that.
That sounds like a dare. "Hold my beer!" moment incoming.
Well, the good news is that Schumer, Pelosi, and Biden were all in Congress back then, so it's already old hat for them.
Re: china, China, CHINA
Posted: Wed Aug 03, 2022 7:16 pm
by hector
JonA wrote: ↑Wed Aug 03, 2022 9:38 am
Hardartery wrote: ↑Wed Aug 03, 2022 9:20 am
Skid wrote: ↑Wed Aug 03, 2022 8:31 am
JonA wrote: ↑Wed Aug 03, 2022 6:27 am
If _I_ was trying to rub some noses of authoritarian regimes, I'd do it 80s style, with a booming economy, military excess, and cocaine for everybody. Suffering through the same economic problems as the other regimes while sending Pelosi to Taiwan seems a bit subtle to me.
Well to achieve that Reagan ran the country's debt up hugely. At 30 trill+ in debt now there isn't too much more room for that.
That sounds like a dare. "Hold my beer!" moment incoming.
Well, the good news is that Schumer, Pelosi, and Biden were all in Congress back then, so it's already old hat for them.
Warning: Tangent.
Assuming they're not getting clandestine blood transfusions from virile, healthy young donors that allow for unholy and preternatural life extension, Schumer, Pelosi, Biden and others in that age range should age out or die soon.
Do you imagine a rocky transition as newcomers assume power?
Re: china, China, CHINA
Posted: Wed Aug 03, 2022 9:18 pm
by quikky
hector wrote: ↑Wed Aug 03, 2022 7:16 pm
JonA wrote: ↑Wed Aug 03, 2022 9:38 am
Hardartery wrote: ↑Wed Aug 03, 2022 9:20 am
Skid wrote: ↑Wed Aug 03, 2022 8:31 am
JonA wrote: ↑Wed Aug 03, 2022 6:27 am
If _I_ was trying to rub some noses of authoritarian regimes, I'd do it 80s style, with a booming economy, military excess, and cocaine for everybody. Suffering through the same economic problems as the other regimes while sending Pelosi to Taiwan seems a bit subtle to me.
Well to achieve that Reagan ran the country's debt up hugely. At 30 trill+ in debt now there isn't too much more room for that.
That sounds like a dare. "Hold my beer!" moment incoming.
Well, the good news is that Schumer, Pelosi, and Biden were all in Congress back then, so it's already old hat for them.
Warning: Tangent.
Assuming they're not getting clandestine blood transfusions from virile, healthy young donors that allow for unholy and preternatural life extension, Schumer, Pelosi, Biden and others in that age range should age out or die soon.
Do you imagine a rocky transition as newcomers assume power?
If the newcomers are residents of Wokestan, then yeah. If they are more old school democrats, of which there are seemingly fewer and fewer, then no.
Re: china, China, CHINA
Posted: Wed Aug 03, 2022 10:03 pm
by aurelius
Hiphopapotamus wrote: ↑Tue Aug 02, 2022 1:39 pmDefinitely. Russia just tried to stir shit up in Kosovo but it looks like that's been put back to perpetual simmer for the time being.
As far as general grand strategy goes: sure, the US has only a limited capability, but I think it is still a greater capability overall than Russia and China combined, at least as of right now. Especially when Russia is already up their tits in a clusterfuck of their own making. And that's without counting NATO, Japan, Australia, S. Korea.. I realize we have other global defense commitments, but I think if confrontation will be painful for us, it will be equally or more so for them. I mean, if they really want Cold War Two™, well, we beat them before.
Russia and China's autocracies offer an advantage in this regard. As in they give zero shits about the plight of the people. Remember that the USSR's aggregate economic output was shit compared to the US but they still fielded a world class military.
The US government has to be ultra-responsive to a whiny and self indulgent population. We are a nation of brats. Essentially it is a game of who can take the most pain. Sadly, the US is not in a position to win such a fight if the stakes remain low. China knows this but has to have the guts to execute.
I think we are stretched thinner than many realize. We will spend years replenishing the combined arsenal (back stocking European allies) that has been transferred to Ukraine.
Re: china, China, CHINA
Posted: Thu Aug 04, 2022 3:58 am
by hector
quikky wrote: ↑Wed Aug 03, 2022 9:18 pm
hector wrote: ↑Wed Aug 03, 2022 7:16 pm
JonA wrote: ↑Wed Aug 03, 2022 9:38 am
Hardartery wrote: ↑Wed Aug 03, 2022 9:20 am
Skid wrote: ↑Wed Aug 03, 2022 8:31 am
JonA wrote: ↑Wed Aug 03, 2022 6:27 am
If _I_ was trying to rub some noses of authoritarian regimes, I'd do it 80s style, with a booming economy, military excess, and cocaine for everybody. Suffering through the same economic problems as the other regimes while sending Pelosi to Taiwan seems a bit subtle to me.
Well to achieve that Reagan ran the country's debt up hugely. At 30 trill+ in debt now there isn't too much more room for that.
That sounds like a dare. "Hold my beer!" moment incoming.
Well, the good news is that Schumer, Pelosi, and Biden were all in Congress back then, so it's already old hat for them.
Warning: Tangent.
Assuming they're not getting clandestine blood transfusions from virile, healthy young donors that allow for unholy and preternatural life extension, Schumer, Pelosi, Biden and others in that age range should age out or die soon.
Do you imagine a rocky transition as newcomers assume power?
If the newcomers are residents of Wokestan, then yeah. If they are more old school democrats, of which there are seemingly fewer and fewer, then no.
I wouldn't think, offhand, any Democrat too far from center would get the nomination.
But then, I also read this:
https://thehill.com/opinion/campaign/35 ... p-in-2024/
Re: china, China, CHINA
Posted: Thu Aug 04, 2022 4:14 am
by mgil
That opinion piece was written by an incoherent, illiterate imbecile.
Re: china, China, CHINA
Posted: Thu Aug 04, 2022 4:42 am
by mbasic
mgil wrote: ↑Thu Aug 04, 2022 4:14 am
That opinion piece was written by an incoherent, illiterate imbecile.
lol, did not make it past the headline
"AOC is the Democrats’ best shot against Trump in 2024"
I hope it was a comedic piece
in what world does trump and AOC get the nods from their respective parties?
Re: china, China, CHINA
Posted: Thu Aug 04, 2022 4:53 am
by hector
mbasic wrote: ↑Thu Aug 04, 2022 4:42 am
mgil wrote: ↑Thu Aug 04, 2022 4:14 am
That opinion piece was written by an incoherent, illiterate imbecile.
lol, did not make it past the headline
"AOC is the Democrats’ best shot against Trump in 2024"
I hope it was a comedic piece
in what world does trump and AOC get the nods from their respective parties?
No idea. But I was one of those people who, at least early on, didn't anticipate Trump getting the nomination.
So I'm confident AOC won't get the nomination. But I'm also wring about this stuff.
I would love the debate though.