Australia's Hard Choice Between China and the US

Thanks to Doonesbury, does not allow importation of products from child labor.
Maybe Aussies need a Doonesbury comic strip to teach them.
Thanks to a character, Phred the Terrorist who after the Vietnam War became a capitalist, entrepreneur in the new, Vietnam and found Child Labor cheap for making Nike shoes.


Obviously, products made from systems not allowed in Australia should be tariffed or denied.
Consider competing against polluting factories compared to domestic clean ones.

Australia just need to decide its' fate as national policy.
Like tax laws favoring domestic food production.

Run for Aussie National Office Sallyally.
Make things right.​

 

No, everyone would hate me and no one would vote for me!

 

That was a good thing done by the US govt. In 2016 wasn't it?
It can be hard dealing with countries with poor civil rights records.

 

Just get lots of pictures of you on a horse with an outback hat.

Talk Aussie dialect.

And talk a self sufficient Australia as much as possible.


Sound bites of your vast land and coastal waters.
Fit for employing and feeding Australians.

 

Photoshop would have a lot to answer for!
I think it takes a lot of money to become a Parliamentarian.

 

I believe it's because our ruling/political classes have become drunk on power, and it's adversely affecting their judgement about world affairs. I mean, take Mattis for example; the man is obviously becoming megalomaniacal. What worries me though, and I'm a good judge of character through appearance, is that he doesn't look very bright.

 

I think you've hit the head on the nail: "today's international climate", the one world neoliberal economic philosophy, which detests nationalism and favours shipping products from all across the world in place of growing more at home.

 

Mattis does appear, at least on the surface, as being not very bright, I agree. Whether he is or is not is not clear... to me anyway.

I think the real problem is that our ruling elite are all fully paid up members of neoliberal economics and the one world project. I have zero tolerance for it, myself - if for no other reason then it's plain wrong and morally unacceptable to shift massive sums of wealth into ever fewer hands. Besides that, the concept of a one world or a new world order run under the dominant leadership of the US would be intolerable. It takes wisdom and patience to be a wise ruler, not a massive military system.

 

Yes, wisdom and common sense, and there's a paucity of both in the US administration these days. And here in the UK??

 

Here in the UK. Better than the US, but not by much I would say. We've gone from the awful Blair, through to the pig shagging Cameron and onwards to the present incumbent of Downing Street, the City shill Theresa May, who oversaw four changes of judge in the child sex inquiry.

It doesn't inspire confidence does it.

 

It sure doesn't - I've said here a few times that I weep for my country. Ah well (and here's sommat else I've said here a few times!) - que sera sera.

 

Irrelevant to my point, so not sure what you are babbling on about now.

 

Aye, been there, done that, wept the tears.

Meanwhile below, Craig Murray's latest on or wonderful military shouting wolf by baying for more money to arm themselves better to defend against an attack they know absolutely isn't going to occur.

That MoD - defence industry revolving door turns without the slightest squeak...

https://www.craigmurray.org.uk/archives/2018/01/russians-coming-russians-coming/

 

Let me see: you indicated that I had written something I hadn't written which I then pointed out to you. But that's irrelevant.

By which I assume it's lunch-time at school and you're bored...

 

Yes ... if you look at any large institution, state or private, you can find individuals pursuing their own immediate short-term interests even when this clashes with the official goal of the institution -- there are a million examples of this.

However, I don't think Marx would be surprised at this, particularly. What would excite his interest, I believe, is why central planning failed to outstrip capitalism: that was the 'justification' for socialism -- that it would increase the forces of production, which capitalism could (supposedly) no longer do. He also believed, I think, that a society of economic abundance would change individual behavior for the better, but that's not a specifically Marxist or socialist belief. Most people probably think that.

For a long time, socialists could blame state-ownership-and-central-planning's failures on the fact that it was first implemented in backward, poor, war-torn countries, instead of in advanced capitalist societies as Marx had assumed would happen. And I think that's a plausible explanation, at first glace. But ... after decades of existence, we never saw socialist prosperity blossoming, not even in East Germany. (Although it has to be said, it worked better there than in Russia, probably for cultural reasons: Russians I knew during the Soviet period joked, 'Those damned Germans ... they can even make socialism work!')

But for me, the proof that socialism can't work is not just in the fact that it hasn't and doesn't, but in the fact that, although there are many intelligent Marxists around today, including some with advanced degrees in economics, none of them can tell you how a planned economy would decide how many 50mm annular ring nails to produce per year.

I recall a Krokodil [Soviet humor magazine] cover, from the late 70s or early 80s: a factory has proudly fulfilled its Central Plan quota for nails: the quota was set by weight: so many tons of nails. Now, it's easier to produce one heavy nail than several lighter ones that sum to the same weight, so this factory ... had produced one gigantic nail, 100 meters long and ten meters in diameter. (Eating utensils must have been produced to a numerical, as opposed to a weight, directive, since the forks in public cafeterias had tines you could actually roll into curls, they were so fragile.)

Anyway, socialism is dead now, except in a few Deparments of Philosophy, so the problem is how to make capitalism work for everyone.

 

And working people in more advanced nations suffer competing against the
cheapest, most unregulated work on the globe. Child labor. Polluting factories. Wages below subsistence.
And they call it, "Free Trade"!
Who profits?

Is it time yet?

​

 

They should go with China due to proximity and both have similar gun control laws.

 

like NK self sufficient? lol. in today globalism, if aussies isolate themselves, they are pretty much gonna end up like north korea economy. I don't know whats deal with you against Asians, as long they pay the tax bill and contribute to society, I don't see any cons for good skill Asian worker been part of Austrilia or other country. It certainly beat native sitting there all day and do nothing.

Take silicon valley for example, look at ethnic ratio of cisco, google, facebook, intel, apple, GE etc etc, you notice a lot are from asia. Looking at academy research and other high tech research area in US, most if not all are from asia. Look at Ivy league school in US, % ratio of Asian vs other.
if these high skill worker end up been in their native country, it will be huge blow to US high tech innovations. a lot Asian are hard working, educated, much better than some native that don't have proper jobs and live on government handout.

 

You take the point to extremes.

No Thank You.​

 

well yeah, you said self sufficient, so what do you mean, no export/import? self sufficient usually mean, nothing is depend on others. My understand is don't need to import/export, that sound like isolation.

 

It won't be much of a choice when Trump is playing trade hardball. Australia will soon be less of a friend to America, and Canada could be next if we don't quickly reinstate the bilteral deal we had with them prior to a failed NAFTA.

 

Of course I do not mean no import/export.
Why don't you try think it through rather than playing the Extreme Card or Baiting.

I explained it above.
Similar replies by you will give you "the last word".
Thoughtful replies will get one in return.
ttfn

 

Okay, but what should we have done with or about China?

 

There is no chance of that. None.

 

Trends giving rise to Issues worth discussing.