To Serve People: Hate Week: Five Days Of Chinese Media Hating On The US

A weekly column in which Chinese media is taken to the stocks.

By TAR Nation

The phrase “China-bashing” has taken hold in the propaganda rags. Disgust, indignation and odium are liable to rain down like bukkake. This past week, government papers shot out editorial upon editorial on two occasions when US entities spoke about China. In one instance, it was presidential nominees; in the other, it involved arguably the greatest newspaper in the history of modern print journalism.

But here’s a little perspective: government-run papers hate the US every day. That’s just what they do. They wake up and hate, and they hate while eating lunch, and hate just before bed. So let’s look back at the week that was of hate – and insults – directed at the US in China’s ongoing disgrace to the Fourth Estate.

Monday, November 5

In “Unity priority during times of change,” Global Times takes a crack at America’s entire political system for seemingly no reason. The article’s not about the US: it’s part of a larger pastiche. Until election day and well after, China will probably be taking cheap shots at democracy. This is just the foreplay. Thus:

The most well-known electoral system in the West, that of the US, will go through its quadrennial elections for president on Tuesday. The election did not touch upon any concrete social problems. It’s more like a routine with some verbal sparring between candidates.

Ready for the knockout punch? Here comes.

China is totally different.

Boom! You like that, bitch? Where’s your little election now? Booyah!

The rest of the editorial reminds people that they need to be united during the Party Congress and that it’s okay to be diversified, ya know, later. There’s a little more brow-beating of “Western-style” democracy and elections, but nothing too scathing.

Also, our favorite Party paper – we mean Global Times, of course — did some beating on Hillary Clinton after claiming that China “helped” the US in the financial crisis, in some unknown mystical way.

Her sins?

Generally, Clinton’s role in Sino-US relations during her office has been negative. She undermined China’s trust toward the US. [...]

She harshly criticized China on several occasions without the appropriate style that a top diplomat should have. [...]

Clinton paid visits to China’s neighboring countries, and sowed discord and division between China and these countries. [...]

She promotes the idea of Sino-US competition in the Asia-Pacific region and looks for ways the US could balance China’s power. [...]

Her visits were more like putting on a show. [...]

She also turned the earlier positive approach of the Obama administration to China into more mutual friction. [...]

Clinton’s “efforts” did not necessarily yield the results she had expected. I can’t think of a major diplomatic legacy that she left behind. [...]

She has a strong sense of ideology and always stresses democracy and human rights.

Human rights and democracy? The bitch.

(Everyone always seems to miss the out-of-focus guy in that picture who looks like the barbarically racist Asian Mickey Rooney character. Velly solly, Hirrory Crinton.)

Today wasn’t all bad though. People’s Daily published “Cooperation key to future Sino-US ties” and “Americans in China expect better Sino-American relations.” But these are pretty cut and paste articles, interviews with people who are less interesting than anyone I have ever personally met. Also, they come next to a photo piece called, “North Korea dear respected leader watches soccer game.” So, grain of salt with that flat flattery.

Tuesday, November 6

Where to begin? I suppose with People’s Daily (reprinted from Jiefeng Daily): “Does China lack ‘great diplomacy’ strategy?

A dumb question, stupidly asked, and the answer is yes. The US is hellbent on enslaving the planet, if you didn’t know, and China is here to welcome you into its benevolent bosom (warning: bosom may contain knives). That’s basically China’s foreign policy. The view of the CPC is that there are two competing world diplomatic strategies. With diplomatic debonair, the author puts it thusly: China…

…pursues a harmonious world established by China based on the philosophical principle of harmony and diversity.

Ready for the other side of this weighted trick coin? Here goes: USA…

…aims for a peaceful world ruled by the United States based on American values.

Actually, those are kind of identical, except for the minor grammatical switch of “established” for “ruled” and “American values” for … whatever that other stuff is.

If it were the case that you had to choose, I might suggest going with the one that doesn’t consider human rights websites a national threat. But that’s just me.

The editorial suggests there are “keywords” to diabolically ruling the world for both nations. Apparently, these keywords for America are “leading status” and “never settle for number two.” For China, it’s “equal partners” and “win-win cooperation.” As far as I’m aware, there are four “keywords” for world domination: Evening, Mister, Good and Bond.

On the same day, there was “Powerful interests work against expression of US democracy” by some quisling conspiracy theorist twat named Norman. This is what should be expected for the next day’s election, except it’ll probably be from Hu Xijin and much, much worse, similar to GT’s abhorrence of the French elections.

Wednesday, November 7, 2012: ELECTION DAY

Well, this was pretty easy to see coming, a scathing indictment of human beings participating in their government by none other than the man himself, the Beast with the Least, the Master Insult Caster, the Sino Rhino: Hu “The Fuck Carcass” Xijin!

The editorial is “Be wary of populism led by democracy.” It’s barely readable and completely insane.

At this point it’s just depressing. No one has more deplorable opinions, more idiotic assumptions, more hairbrained fuckwittery than Hu Xijin. Enjoy.

No matter who wins… the problems in the US will remain. [...]

The electoral system encourages populism. Parties and politicians are slowly turned into its captives.

The article is pretty hard to follow if you don’t speak Batshit, but after possibly dogging on “civil rights” (in language I can’t even begin to understand), he goes on to say:

The concepts of effort and hard work will become outdated. The overall progress of the country has become an issue of secondary importance. [...]

However, Western governments have given up their responsibility to lead society and now only shuffle voters and votes. [...]

There’s no perfect political system. However, China’s current system is widely considered to be an effective one. The efficiency of this system is both outstanding and rare.

The most precious thing in the world is development. Some people think that happiness is more important than development. [...]

China has already experienced the old days, when there was a low standard of fairness. But now, who wants to go back to that time? [...]

This should alarm Chinese society. The spirit of hard work and effort must not be replaced by unrealistic welfarism.

Yeah, that’s right. A staunchly Communist fiscal conservative. It doesn’t get any worse.

You know what, just read it. I can’t do any more. It’s bad. It’s Hu Xijin. He’s is a bad, bad person. It all piles up. It never stops. No matter what happens, the CCP will never let go of its stranglehold on the media. There is no hope. None. Can’t stand it anymore. It’s all too much. Can’t go on… unless…

10:54 am, November 7, same day

Found Hu Xijin’s phone number, called him a cunt in two languages. Ahhhhhh, that’s better. It’s not free press, but it’ll do for now.

Thursday, November 8, 2012

Obama wins and the world rejoices, but the CCP is not to be outdone by some silly Americans and their ridiculously outdated political system. Everyone knows a pseudo-royal merit/autocracy makes the trains run on time (note: trains may also be on fire {sub note: train accidents should not be covered in the media without approval. Your friend, Xinhua}).

With Obama the winner, GT wades into him with “Obama’s second term will show his true colors.” Again, it’s an indictment of America’s political system and the idea that those who rule draw their legitimacy from the consent and will of the governed. Also, they find time to say that the US is terrified of China’s inevitable “rise.”

Even Obama’s tiniest achievement in terms of economic recovery has been cherished by the public. [...]

The world faces another four years of dealing with the Obama administration and a lot of this weight falls upon China. [...]

It remains uncertain whether the US will calmly accept the fact that China is catching up with it. [...]

The smart diplomacy promoted by Secretary Hillary Clinton, though making some trouble for China, has brought no tangible gain to the US. It is widely seen as a failed policy. [...]

The US, as a country, has grown less confident but more suspicious. [...]

Perhaps we need a stronger psychological grounding, to have a certain degree of tolerance of US distrust toward China.

Not as bad as yesterday, but a theme persists: Americans are afraid of China.

I was once told by someone much smarter than me that someone is only as strong as what terrifies them. If it is true that Americans are afraid of China, that’s not bad. It’s the most populous country, shut off from the outside world, led by second-generation insecure sadists. That’s pretty scary on paper.

China is afraid of Facebook.

Trying to poke the US with a pointy stick also came in the form of Xinhua’s “As US elections wind down, so might China bashing” and People’s Daily’s “America’s problem: Money politics seldom supports reform.” The Chinese version is here. GT also had “Seven hour wait to vote; this election is shameful” (Chinese).

Friday, November 9

A day packed with 18th Party Congress propaganda. Surely, today is safe. Surely, the papers will be full of propaganda of how great and totally, totally legitimate it is to have a ruling authoritarian power. Surely, they won’t take time out of their busy propaganda schedule to shamelessly harass the US with meaningless bile-filled gibberish.

I was doing sarcasm just now.

Actually, the papers are more full of them today than any other day this week. Let’s get stuck in.

First, People’s Daily’s “US ‘duel deterrence’ is self defeating” is a full-out attack on the US’s non-interference strategy in the Diaoyu Islands debacle, basically calling on the US to make a decision on the matter and also, somehow, stay out of it. US diplomacy is depicted as some sort of clever trickster playing both sides.

This is called a “diplomatic trick of the US” and is frowned upon by “China.” Actually, it’s funny they should mention that. I can think of another “duel deterrence” strategy that’s worked out pretty well so far, called the One-China Policy.

Next up, a Global Times attack on the US-China Economic and Security Review Commission, saying Chinese investment in US companies could be a “potential Trojan Horse.” The unnamed editorial says it “shocked us.”

I have no idea who “us” is supposed to be. Could be China, could be the staff at GT (though a+a=b would have them shocked), and it could just be the voices in Hu Xijin’s head. No clue.

Here are some gems:

The US, which used to be at the top of the chain, is gradually feeling a sense of crisis. [...]

Such a mentality is spreading throughout the West. China cannot make one-sided sacrifices to eliminate it. [...]

On Wednesday, the US International Trade Commission decided to issue anti-dumping and countervailing duty orders against China’s photovoltaic industry. China will certainly respond. If the US is indeed in decline, then these two commissions are accomplices to this. [...]

The Chinese, who have worried about US ambitions of subjugating China, have become positive, if not blindly so, while the Americans, who had no fear in the past, have become oversensitive, speculating as to the motives of Chinese companies.

We don’t know whether these concerns are genuine, or whether the accusations are just a disguise for trade protectionism.

…We? Who are you?!

Next, again from GT, is “Obama faces steep uphill political climb.”

It’s basically a 4th grade social studies understanding of presidential terms, but then it falls into one-line paragraphs that make the editorial look and sound like poetry. Credit where it’s due: the editorial held out for a whopping 13 paragraphs before mentioning China. Then, the zit popped:

Obama may adjust his foreign policy toward China in his second term. To please voters, most US presidents put much pressure on China in their first term.

They take high-profile containment measures toward China when they have just taken office, and they put pressure on China when they pursue reelection.

After they enter their second term, these presidents may adjust Sino-US relations in the interests of the wider country, no longer worrying about voters. [...]

We are already aware of these conflicts of interest and some of them have already been resolved. Overall, we can be optimistic about the prospects of Sino-US relations.

WE! Again! TWICE! Please, someone find out who these people are. They could be in need of help, slowly drowning, and we don’t even know it.

The Week:

Well, that was China’s relationship with the US. There was a lot more. A lot. But from China Daily to Xinhua, the game plan was pretty clear: berate, insult and otherwise lambast the US on a daily basis in lieu of legitimacy or respect.

Regular readers of Chinese newspapers will know that one of the favorite whipping boys for the Chinese press, be it the Dalai Lama or the economy, is the Western media, specifically the US media. Well, for a little perspective on that, let’s look at some China editorials from The New York Times, a respected paper around the world that was banned in China recently for… reporting.

There were three editorials. Three. On the most important week in Chinese politics in a decade, there were three editorials on NYT China in the same time period. One brazenly open attack on Chinese employers from Han Dongfang called “China’s Workers Unite,” one by Ezra F. Vogel on Deng Xiaopeng’s model for future leaders, and one extremely critical take from Wang Lixiong on what it’s like under the tyranny of China’s 18th Party Congress push. Please, forgive me if I missed a few, but my proxy is leaking, and I’m about to sink.

There were a lot more news articles on China in NYT, of course. But The New York Times does news. It’s a “Western media” thing.

|To Serve People Archives|

    26 Responses to “To Serve People: Hate Week: Five Days Of Chinese Media Hating On The US”

    1. Innocent Observer

      You should be thankful to the Global Times for letting you know what a significant portion of China’s stakeholders are really thinking. Look at it this way, if it weren’t for Fox News, would most people have been aware of the rising power of the Tea Party faction?

    2. DSLAM

      “A staunchly Communist fiscal conservative. It doesn’t get any worse.” hahaha, I love it.
      Another great article that achieves what Beijing Cream wants to do, educate and entertain simultaneously.

    3. bert

      Sometimes your comments are a little forced. Every once in a while just show us the CD articles and let us laugh at them w/o your commentary.

      • BS

        Disagree. 99% of what is on this blog is Anthony Tao linking to articles. When an article like this appears which is clearly well thought out, well written and well researched… I revel in the thoroughly amusing commentary.

    4. btravers33

      Maybe I am missing something, but I don’t quite see what is wrong with what Hu Xijin wrote? A lot of what he said regarding the situation in the US is very true. You may not like it, but that doesn’t mean it is false. Western governments DO pander to votes in lieu of progress. The concepts of effort and hard work ARE becoming outdated and replaced by unrealistic welfarism.

      This is by no means a tip of the cap to the Chinese system, however there should be no denial regarding the significant social / economic problems facing the US, even if you don’t necessarily like the person delivering the message.

      • DSLAM

        Oh boy, looks like we’ve got a Romney supporter here. There’s no denying ALL countries have lots of fun problems. But by your reasoning, places like Denmark and Britain should be living hell holes where no one wants to work anymore I gather?

        • btravers33

          Interesting conclusion to draw.

          Politics aside, the economic situation of the US is dire. It doesn’t take a partisan to see that.

          So tell me, what is my reasoning? All I said was that I didn’t see what was wrong with his statements. So, what is wrong with them?

          • KKandnotK

            Um, no. It’s not that dire. My guess is the largest economy in the world can weather the politically manfactured light drizzle. But hey, if the US bursts into flames all of a sudden, egg will be all over my face.

            • btravers33

              I guess it depends on the individuals’ definition of dire. I consider a situation dire when even if you cut all discretionary spending (Military, Homeland Security, TSA, etc.) you still fall $175 billion short on covering the mandatory spending (Interest, Medicaid, Social Security, etc.) based on total tax receipts. Add to that the fact that 10,000 new people are coming onto the mandatory programs every day. This is a tough hole to dig out of.

              A country is only the world’s largest economy until it isn’t anymore, and no country stays the world’s largest economy forever.

              As a US Citizen, I wish this wasn’t the case, but it is the unfortunate reality of today.

      • KKandnotK

        Absolutely nothing. Just a little perspective, but since you asked…

        Pandering to voters is how democracy works. And it works pretty well. They don’t do it in leiu of progress, they do it to bring about concensus on progress. Democracy is hard work. We shout, they listen. That’s why when democracies fuck up, “the people” deserve it. Also, your budget projections are way off the CBO’s after the much publicized fiscal cliff, which sounds scary but is actually kind of awesome.

        I object to “The concepts of effort and hard work ARE becoming outdated and replaced by unrealistic welfarism.” Yeah…damn those lazy kids; and what’s up with all this traffic. Sorry you feel that way. Luckily, there is no way to prove or disprove that Americans are all becoming lazy and entitled. It’s just naked assumption and insult.

        I also object to the “serious” economic and social problems bit. I don’t even know how you would go about gauging social problems, let alone diagnosing them. Just spoke with some friends in the US. Seemed to be fine. They looked out their window and there didn’t seem to be any social problems.

        The article is about how the CCP media dogs on the US everyday but whinges when they get talked about, and, frankly, GT is working the propaganda mill to try to discredit the US, the West and the whole process of electoral governance. It’s a full on assault, an argument to which no other side is allowed participate. That’s what Hu’s piece was. Just part of the continuing war on conversation. The worst part is, it’ll continue to work.

        Anyway, another good one, TAR Nation. Funny as hell.

        btravers33, I understand if you want the last word. Enjoy. I’m out.

        • btravers33

          Good response, I always appreciate a different perspective. Not a last word for the purpose of having a last word, just a few clarifications:

          1) My numbers come from the CBO 2011 financials. I used the Interest expense from the Treasury website, as opposed to the CBOs net interest. The reason being is the debt is held by funds whose cash holdings goes towards causes (FDIC, Highway Trust) etc. So while this is intragovernment, if they cannot pay that, then these programs lose out.

          2) Regarding the welfarism comment, its not to say damn those young kids, I am in that group, so it isn’t a matter of demographics. Since the 80s, the number of households receiving government benefits increased from ~30% to ~50%. Sure, the baby boomers make up a portion of that growth, however all the rhetoric around ‘fair share’, ‘one percenters’, ‘you didn’t do this on your own’ indicates a direction in mentality. This isn’t a matter of right / left either as entitlement spending under Republicans has historically been 8% greater. However one wants to package it, currently, unless changes are made, tax revenue cannot keep up with entitlement spending
          3) In regard to social programs, I refer to more of the fact that on average, the quality of life in the US has declined for the average worker compared to 1980 by way of real earnings decrease. This kind of lack of progress is a social issue and will lead to further social issues if it is not addressed.
          4) OK, I get how this is going after the hypocrisy of the CCP. I guess I just didn’t quite get the hate for Hu Xijin as he, from the limited amount I have read, does seem more progressive and outspoken than most of the other media talking heads. Far better than China Daily, etc.

          Anyway, good debate. It is always nice when these don’t descend into name calling.

          • RhZ

            I really think your perspective on the problems in the US are contradictory. And most certainly you should be providing links to any specific numbers you are using.

            You simultaneously point out that household income has been stagnant or dropping for a long time, and also that ‘government benefits’ have been growing (as measured by the percentage of households receiving them). Well, aren’t those contradictory? I mean, if you are concerned about household income, then why would you be so concerned about those benefits?

            Second, I do not for one second believe that 50% of households receive medicare/medicaid, welfare, or something like this. If your numbers are right, then ‘government benefits’ must include things like the earned income tax credit, the mortgage deduction, or some other middle class benefit. Not the end of the world…

            Third, I notice that while you are worried about the debt, you fail to point out the two biggest reasons for the debt. The rich are paying a fraction of the taxes they used to, and the same is true of large corporations. The second reason is Bush’s unfunded wars. We did have a surplus just a decade or so ago. So now things are so terribly dire? What fundamentally changed? Obama now has a mandate to raise taxes on the rich, and finally end these horrible wars. Additionally, one of the biggest ways that people’s standard of living has suffered over the years has been the steady decrease in health benefits, and the new laws will help to right that. So we are going in the right direction.

            Finally, what you got to understand is that Hu Xijin is just like any other of these party-controlled attack dogs. He will dump on anyone he is told to. Gov’t tortures somebody? Hu will be right there to tell all of us that that guy has the wrong attitude and is just trying to get fame for his personal benefit. The gov’t is never wrong, you see?

            When Chen Guangcheng left for the US, you know what Hu said? He said the US is a place where its easy to control people. Yes, after the gov’t kept this guy illegally in his house for about two years, its the US which is good at controlling people.

            Do not be confused by the occasional seemingly reasonable statement from Hu. He loves to talk about how reform is necessary. But he will never say what kind of reform, because his masters haven’t told him what is acceptable. He will also talk about how rule of law is important. But again, when push comes to shove, the gov’t is allowed to torture, imprison indefinitely, and just do whatever the hell they want to.

            He is like a dog that way, never an original thought in his pretty little head.

            • btravers33

              That is fine, a few things:

              1) Government benefits do not count as household income. I am going strictly of wages. Most of my numbers came from actual US govt websites like the CBO and Treasury website. The household receiving benefits figure is from the WSJ ( What I am concerned about is that income produced from jobs is going down, while benefits received from government are going up. Regardless of your political ideology, this is just a dangerous path. So, either we find a way to create more jobs or we have to reverse this trend. I can provide more links if necessary.
              2) Yes, I am worried about the debt, but that doesn’t make me a republican. I know Bush is mostly responsible for the debt. But who cares? Blaming him fixes nothing. Right or wrong, the fact of the matter is, when you tax rich people or corporations more, they leave. They have the resources and connections to do this. Just calling for tax increases of the rich, while it sounds nice, rarely works in reality. Just look at the offshore structures of so many US corporations already. You think they will come back once taxes are increased? The government needs to be more creative in reforming the tax code. Make taxes so simple that it is not worth it to avoid them. A % of something, although not high, is better than a % of nothing.
              3) The reason for the lowered standard of life, while healthcare is an issue, is really driven a lot by the constant printing and weakening of the US dollar. This weakening makes goods for the average American family more expensive and hurts savers by artificially suppressing interest rates. they will keep printing money in order to support the debt interest, the government programs etc. It is a vicious circle and will damage the middle class mostly. This ongoing quantitative easing will not end well.
              4) After the last four years, Obama really didn’t change much in terms of foreign policy from the Bush days. The guy is totally drone happy. I voted for Obama hoping for change and was highly disappointed. We have continued our war mongering ways. I think Oliver Stone said it best recently:

              “The country Obama inherited was indeed in shambles, but Obama took a bad situation and, in certain ways, made it worse,”.

              “Rather than repudiating the policies of Bush and his predecessors, Obama has perpetuated them.”

              “The biggest winner under Obama was Wall Street.”

              “Among the greatest disappointments to his followers was Obama’s refusal to roll back the expanding national security state that so egregiously encroached on American civil liberties.”

              The above was from USA Today.

              5) I will take your guys’ word regarding Hu. I really don’t have much at all to disagree with. Hu just seemed like the most moderate of all of the editors of the major newspapers on the mainland, so that is why I was cutting him some slack. I have seen him speak out against the government from time to time. But I guess that is just a small sample size. It is good for me to know more about him.

              Thanks. And I also invite those who like to counter-argue to also provide links to back up their disagreements.

            • btravers33

              One last comment, with the new shale revolution in the US, the door is open to bring manufacturing back due to extremely low energy costs relative to many other manufacturing powerhouses in the world. The government needs to slow down and reform regulations in order to attract this sector back. Right now, the level of regulation is mind-boggling and scares many manufacturers away.


            • RhZ

              Wow you hadn’t left! Great, good to see your comments! Ok let’s go one by one:

              1. I don’t know what to do with the WSJ chart. Its not clear to me, it doesn’t clearly state all of the government benefits included. Also it just says, well some of this increase could be caused by families doubling up because of the recession, but certainly even without that the percentage has increased…that’s opinion.

              I will note that Medicade is commonly used to cover people who can’t get regular insurance, basically pre-existing conditions, people with MS or other debilitating conditions. The insurance racket is really great, they get to demand that anyone who can make them profit must pay, but if someone might cost them money then they refuse to cover, and let the society pay for that. So you are paying for your personal insurance and also paying for people the companies don’t want to touch. Great for their profits, not good for the country. And this problem will be at least partially solved by Obamacare, its one of the inefficiencies the gov’t plan is designed to fix. And SS and Medicare are because of the increasing number of seniors, nothing to be done about that. They paid into the system and they are going to get their money out. The fact that Washington didn’t save that money doesn’t matter. Its an electoral loser, never gonna change.

              What we need is living wages for people. If people are forced to work for a wage below the poverty line, then the government will have to make up the difference. Companies like Walmart make billions, but refuse to pay a living wage to their workers. Once upon a time workers got their 40 straight with benefits, but the percentage of people with that has gone down and down, along with the unions. That has to change. I am not a super union lover, but no unions means no benefits for anyone unless we let the state require it. So pick your poison, I guess.

              2. I don’t care if you are a Republican, I pointed out Bush only to show that hey, recently we knew how to do it right, why is it we can’t just do it right again? Actually we have to dig out from the debt he put us in which won’t be easy, but nothing fundamentally has changed. That was my point.

              However when people complain about the debt, I always want to look at them like, where the heck have you been? Paul Ryan has this problem, he did turn on Bush relatively early, but still he voted for the unpaid war, the unpaid medicare d program, the unpaid whatever, I think there is still one big one I forgot heh.

              The GOP tried to go from being the party in power actively increasing the debt, to the party out of power that was shocked, shocked I tell you, at the size of the debt. They don’t get to do that. When a political party screws up that bad, they need to get punished for that. So blame is needed.

              You say “Right or wrong, the fact of the matter is, when you tax rich people or corporations more, they leave.

              That’s an assumption, and one I do not agree with. They want to go Galt, let them, and some have. Capitalism has done its job for a long time. You want to sell your goods in the US? Pay your taxes already. You want to keep your citizenship? Well the IRS has something they want to talk to you about. I don’t like the IRS anymore than you do, but they got the power to do that. This is not an issue. If someone wants to shut down operations, let them. The market will recover, competitors will hire new staff and increase sales, and all will be well.

              “Just look at the offshore structures of so many US corporations already. You think they will come back once taxes are increased? The government needs to be more creative in reforming the tax code. ”

              The whole offshore thing is where the system started going off the rails. Corporations made these huge loopholes in the code and everyone went rushing to change their corporate home to the Caymans or whatever. Those holes need to be patched up quick. You think the GOP is going to work to patch them up? I will trust the Dems more on that one for sure.

              3. “It is a vicious circle and will damage the middle class mostly.”

              I don’t agree with that whole part. Inflation is low, everyone is running to nice safe low yield T bills even though the interest rate sucks because there is no safety anywhere. If you look at people pushing the idea the inflation is around the corner, they have been saying the same thing for years and been wrong the whole time.

              4. “Obama really didn’t change much in terms of foreign policy from the Bush days. The guy is totally drone happy”

              I don’t like the drones either. But now you are attacking Obama from the left. Can’t do both right and left, cuz one of them is a concern troll argument. Also, you think the GOP is better about drones, or any of the other issues in this part? Not likely.

            • btravers33

              I am going to end this on my part with this as I am not sure where to go from here:

              “I don’t like the drones either. But now you are attacking Obama from the left. Can’t do both right and left, cuz one of them is a concern troll argument. Also, you think the GOP is better about drones, or any of the other issues in this part? Not likely.”

              Why on earth does this have to be about Left and Right? Republicans and Democrats? Because I am a fiscal conservative, that means I, by default, have to support war? That is totally counter-intuitive. I am for spending cuts, and it just so happens that war and military offensives would be at the top of my list for spending to cut. To be honest, I hate partisanship and refuse to align my ideologies within the framework of ‘Republican’ or ‘Democrat’.

              My simple point is this, the trajectory we are on makes no sense economically. If people want to run to ‘safe’ T-Bills, then I don’t know what to tell them. If they think that buying bonds with a negative real interest rate of an entity that produces a massive net loss every year is a good move or ‘safe’, then they can continue to bask in their ignorance. Inflation happens when you increase the money supply, but here is the phenomenon right now: In order to remain competitive, other nations are also printing money to keep up with the US in order to keep their exports up. So basically, we are exporting inflation and you can see this in the commodity manufacturing countries like China. Sure, you may be seeing low inflation rates now, but once other countries stop printing themselves, you will see this hit the US like a ton of bricks. I just don’t see how this is an economically acceptable MO; printing money because you can’t live within your means. This can’t be maintained.

              You bring up Walmart, but let me bring up a separate side of the argument to play devil’s advocate. Walmart operates on a 3.5% Net profit margin and 6% operating margins. Its not like they are hoarding money and evilly suppressing their labor force. Wages in the US are stagnant, costs are up due to inflation. US citizens demand low pricing, so therefore Walmart has to be aggressive on their costs in order to be profitable and maintain their competitiveness. It is OK to be anti-Walmart if you don’t like them, that is a personal opinion, but the fact is that many people living on low means need them to be able to afford their groceries.

              Anyway, thanks for the debate.

            • RhZ

              Alright, nice talking.

              Since you give me the last word, I will just say, Walmart *is* hording money. They had profits of 15 billion dollars in 2010, according to wikipedia. And yet they can’t seem to pay their workers a living wage.

              In the old days, they would be forced to provide benefits for their full time workers. But then somehow that requirement disappeared, companies found tricks to avoid it, giving everyone 38 hours a week or something like this. And Obamacare (do we have to call it that?) is a step to return to that original requirement.

              If these extra costs comes out of their profits, then only the most hard-core Randians will cry for the super-rich. They do not have a right to whatever profit they want to have. Labors laws, health and safety laws, taxes, all of these are perfectly reasonable. To deny that is to return to the time of Dickens.

              If you want a balanced budget and a healthy economy, then give workers healthcare and living wages. Its just about that simple. If the rich want to walk away from the huge US market, close all their US facilities and hand in their passports, then let them go.

    5. Devenish

      What the fuck is going? An intelligent debate on Beijing Cream comments? Thanks, KKandnotK and btravers33 for raising the tone and offering decent, fact-based arguments: you both win, and so do we


    Leave a Reply

    • (will not be published)

    XHTML: You can use these tags: <a href="" title=""> <abbr title=""> <acronym title=""> <b> <blockquote cite=""> <cite> <code> <del datetime=""> <em> <i> <q cite=""> <strike> <strong>

    four + 7 =