U.S. CitiesCity-Data Forum Index
Go Back   City-Data Forum > General Forums > Economics
 [Register]
Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
View detailed profile (Advanced) or search
site with Google Custom Search

Search Forums  (Advanced)
Reply Start New Thread
 
Old 04-21-2018, 06:26 AM
 
2,240 posts, read 1,385,700 times
Reputation: 4894

Advertisements

You do realize China is a nuclear armed power?

There won’t be any factory bombing, navel destruction, and starving of their people.

From your posts in the employment forum, I know you’re part of the lunatic fringe, but at least try to operate in reality.

Total war as it existed in ww2 doesn’t exist today because no power will be pushed to that point of desperation and destruction without responding with nuclear weapons.

China is one of the world war 2 victory powers and it deserves a seat at the big boy table and it now has it.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message

 
Old 04-21-2018, 09:05 AM
 
8,278 posts, read 3,452,461 times
Reputation: 1584
Quote:
Originally Posted by pittsflyer View Post
This is all flim flam code for, we as america wont do what it takes to retaliate the economic warfare that has been levied on us with cruise missile strikes on american company factories in China who sold out their own people.

These sorts of posts are disengenuous and over complicate a very simple issue.

After we blew up some major factories and all of Chinas war making capabilities and then blockaded them they would learn real quick who the big boy is. We could wipe out their navy and most manufacturing over night leaving them crippled and then blockade them and starve out their people.

But we wont because we are weak. When the american people get hungry enough and tired enough of the crap it will happen, but by then it might be too late, if we keep letting this go on China will have the means to defend themselves and that will be a very big problem. I guess at that point it will just be a total war. People are not just going to sit around and work their fingers to the bone to fight a loosing economic battle, at a ceritan point it will be time for physical warfare.
Just because our middle class lags is far from any reason to go to war. The middle class is still fed, housed and transported. Comfortable or not, but not desperate or dying on the vine by any means.

On the far side, just create the money we would need to go to war and use that money to help fund the middle class's HC.

The Chinese are not our enemies. Yet. We the people decided we wanted more and cheap. That's our own capitalism at work. We just haven't understood our money like the Chinese central command has.

China
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 04-21-2018, 11:29 AM
 
6,064 posts, read 2,492,570 times
Reputation: 3876
Quote:
Originally Posted by Thatsright19 View Post
You do realize China is a nuclear armed power?

There won’t be any factory bombing, navel destruction, and starving of their people.

From your posts in the employment forum, I know you’re part of the lunatic fringe, but at least try to operate in reality.

Total war as it existed in ww2 doesn’t exist today because no power will be pushed to that point of desperation and destruction without responding with nuclear weapons.

China is one of the world war 2 victory powers and it deserves a seat at the big boy table and it now has it.
Taiwan was the legitimate govt of China they are the ww2 victors and our ally not China as it is today, and yes it would potentially be a pseudo nuclear war but China is no russia and there nuclear retaliation would be minimal and if they used nukes first they would be bombed into dust never to rise again as a nation.

When the people of America get tired enough of globalism it will happen.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 04-21-2018, 11:32 AM
 
6,064 posts, read 2,492,570 times
Reputation: 3876
Quote:
Originally Posted by SportyandMisty View Post
It is more accurate to say "some" manufacturing goes to where the cheap labor is. Maybe even most. But certainly not all. Some manufacturing goes to where the taxes aren't.

Take the manufacturing of semiconductor chips. The modern microprocessor, with over 18 Billion transistors grown on a slice of silicon about the size of your thumbnail, is arguable the most complex thing ever invented or manufactured in the history of mankind. That a microprocessor actually works is only about this far >< away from magic, where any sufficiently advanced technology is indeed indistinguishable from magic. Indeed, during the manufacturing process, lots of them fail to work - and we usually don't know why.

The jobs in microprocessor manufacturing factories are good, high paying jobs. Employees typically have PhDs in chemistry, solid state physics, materials science, electrical engineering, mechanical engineering, chemical engineering, industrial engineering, photolithography, etc.

Even with those high paid employees, the cost of labor isn't even a rounding error in the financials of manufacturing a microprocessor -- they are swamped by the capital, infrastructure and consumables costs -- and cost of taxes.

Let me back up a bit.

When you build a Wafer Fab (a factory that manufactures semiconductors such as microprocessors on wafers about the size of a dinner plate; that 300 mm diameter wafer is later cut into individual components called "die"), you start with raw land, and you invest about $6+ Billion and pray there is a market for the microprocessors it will begin producing about 3-4 years from now. Oh - that $6 Billion factory will be obsolete 5 years after it begins production. So a company is usually "betting the farm" on that factory decision.

Once the factory is obsolete, you rarely attempt to retrofit it (because it turns out doing so is very hard); usually you just build a new factory from scratch, repeating the cycle. In the old factory, you probably keep making those older generation microprocessors as long as you can find someone to buy them - and demand trails off over a few years.

Once the physical factory is built, you outfit it with the "toolset" - all the semiconductor manufacturing equipment (billions and billions of dollars worth) and of course you buy all the factors of production (silicon ingots, chemicals, pure elements, gases, rare earth metals, precious metals, etc -- billions of dollars worth).

When you select a site for a major semiconductor manufacturing plant, you need access to an educated workforce, lots of water, clean & clean electric power, a reliable transportation system, you need a stable political environment, a stable social environment, a modern system of environmental protection, a well-developed legal environment (including protection of intellectual property), etc etc etc. Any nation or state that wants a fab knows that fab is like a marquis tenant in a shopping mall, and most are eager to attract one.

So, since manufacturing labor is "in the noise" and the site selection and operation is not sensitive to wages paid to the employees, what does matter?

One of the key elements of the list of criteria is money. Building a fab is expensive and risky. It is up to The State to determine its incentive package, of which tax incentives are front and center.

Money is fungible, of course - so if a governmental is unable to contribute via tax incentives, it may instead provide water and electricity at reduced rates to achieve the same $$ value and result. Decades ago the State of Texas gave as an incentive to Apple something like 1 Million free credits at the University of Texas at Austin as part of its incentive package. That is worth quite a bit.

In the case of the State of Israel, Israel gave cash in addition to incentives such as tax holidays to Intel to build a fab. It was many hundreds of millions of dollars. Note that the USA gives many billions to Israel, which in turn gave over 10% to Intel to locate a fab there. If you were a cynic, you would say we US citizens pay federal income taxes to IRS (Treasury), and cash flows from there to Israel, and then to Intel so Intel will export some of our own high-paying jobs to Israel. But none of us are cynics.

Thus, tax policy frequently is almost always the the major consideration for site selection. Intel had done an analysis of the cost of building and operating a Fab in the USA vs offshore (this was prior to the recent tax overhaul). The difference was about $1 Billion. Essentially all of that was US taxes. I haven't seen an analysis done of the difference including the recent tax overhaul.

Beyond taxes, there is also the inevitable "immune system response" to building a Wafer Fab. Environmental nutjobs come out of the woodwork looking for something -- anything -- to scuttle the project. In New Mexico a few years ago, regulators required the water coming out of the plant -- water used in the manufacturing process -- to be 100% pure water and nothing but water. H2O and only H2O Clearly these regulators were not chemists. Intel argued that was stupid, but ultimately just saluted and said "Yes, Sir."

Anyone who passed college level Chem 101 could forecast the result. Absolutely pure water -- so-called '18 megaohm' water (it is called that because pure water is an insulator, not a conductor of electricity) is not a good thing to put into the environment. Eventually, after the wafer fab was in operation for a while, regulators learned enough to allow Intel to put out water that mimics the chemistry of the local environment. So, Intel cleaned the water to be as pure as technically feasible at the time, and then "dirtied it up" with minerals so it was essentially the same as the input water.
The taxes are used to finance the us govt, going to China is treason.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 04-21-2018, 01:52 PM
 
1,025 posts, read 558,839 times
Reputation: 300
Quote:
Originally Posted by pittsflyer View Post
This is all flim flam code for, we as america wont do what it takes to retaliate the economic warfare that has been levied on us with cruise missile strikes on american company factories in China who sold out their own people.

These sorts of posts are disengenuous and over complicate a very simple issue. ...
PittsFlyer, flim-flam?
To continue your analogy of USA and China engaged in economic “warfare”:
We've determined some of our nation's global political policies and some federal laws that better enact those policies.
Our Department of Defense responsibility is not limited to defending USA's interests from Chinese, or Russian, or Iranian attacks, but rather to militarily defend us from any and all military threats to our nation.

I'm among the proponents that advocate USA unilaterally adopt the policy described by Wikipedia's “Import Certificates” article. It would significantly reduce, if not entirely eliminate USA's chronic annual trade deficits of goods in a manner that would increase our GDP and numbers of jobs more than otherwise.

Annual trade deficits are always net detrimental to their nation's GDPs and drag upon their numbers of jobs.

Respectfully, Supposn
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 04-21-2018, 07:41 PM
 
Location: midvalley Oregon and Eastside seattle area
2,903 posts, read 1,344,207 times
Reputation: 2410
Now everyone should know the situation why the opium wars started between Great Britain and China .
For those of you who care: GreatBritain was essentially broke because it was buying Tea from China and China didn't need or want anything from the World/GreatBritain. GB discovered that it could sell opium from India and Afghanistan and resell to China. China didn't want this type of trade and tried to close this off. GB and others cried free trade right and decided to force a shooting war. China lost badly because its focus was not on weapons against outside threats but internal issues.

China has a trade surplus because it produces what the World wanted. Inexpensive goods, disposable goods, which also happens to be what it's vast population also needed. It uses the currency surplus as reserves to finance it's infrastructure to the detriment of the environment but to the positive of better standard of livings.

The status quo needs to be changed now that the conditions both in China and US/World is now different.
Both sides need to recognize the need to change their thinking. Trump's presentation of the problem is a bit simplistic but effective. JMO.
JMO.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 04-21-2018, 08:11 PM
 
6,064 posts, read 2,492,570 times
Reputation: 3876
Quote:
Originally Posted by Supposn View Post
PittsFlyer, flim-flam?
To continue your analogy of USA and China engaged in economic “warfare”:
We've determined some of our nation's global political policies and some federal laws that better enact those policies.
Our Department of Defense responsibility is not limited to defending USA's interests from Chinese, or Russian, or Iranian attacks, but rather to militarily defend us from any and all military threats to our nation.

I'm among the proponents that advocate USA unilaterally adopt the policy described by Wikipedia's “Import Certificates” article. It would significantly reduce, if not entirely eliminate USA's chronic annual trade deficits of goods in a manner that would increase our GDP and numbers of jobs more than otherwise.

Annual trade deficits are always net detrimental to their nation's GDPs and drag upon their numbers of jobs.

Respectfully, Supposn
Economic warfare is a real thing and can be just as destructive as actual warfare. I dont think it is out of line to respond to economic warfare with physical attacks.

The end game of both forms of warfare is to take scarce resources from your opponent and cause them to suffer, which is what is happening right now. We dress it all up in complex terms and have fancy economic degrees and terms but this situation is actually not complicated and if Trump does not fix it, and I mean really fix it so that bankers, wal street and the mega corps doing get hit hard and the american people get VERY well paying jobs back with employer competiting for labor then people will continue to vote in progressivly more radical politicians who will get the job done.

People, at this point, really dont want ANY trade with China, other than mega corps that are getting filthy rich off of it.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 04-22-2018, 06:37 PM
 
857 posts, read 370,660 times
Reputation: 542
Competitive economy wins wars -- both physical war and economic war. Pittsburgh used to be the steel capital; now China makes 50% of world's steel. Steel is the foundation of both economic war and physical war. Tariffs don't work. When Trump announced tariffs, steel and aluminum company stocks all dropped.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 04-22-2018, 08:53 PM
 
Location: Paranoid State
12,672 posts, read 9,420,097 times
Reputation: 14925
Quote:
Originally Posted by pittsflyer View Post
The taxes are used to finance the us govt, going to China is treason.
"The budget should be balanced, the Treasury should be refilled, public debt should be reduced, the arrogance of officialdom should be tempered and controlled, and the assistance to foreign lands should be curtailed lest Rome become bankrupt. People must again learn to work, instead of living on public assistance." -- Cicero circa 55 BC
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 04-22-2018, 10:49 PM
 
8,021 posts, read 6,220,904 times
Reputation: 12004
Quote:
Originally Posted by SportyandMisty View Post
"The budget should be balanced, the Treasury should be refilled, public debt should be reduced, the arrogance of officialdom should be tempered and controlled, and the assistance to foreign lands should be curtailed lest Rome become bankrupt. People must again learn to work, instead of living on public assistance." -- Cicero circa 55 BC
That quote did not come from Cicero.

https://www.snopes.com/fact-check/taylor-made/

Quote:
Those words were never uttered by Cicero, however, and the reason no one ever quoted them as such until about fifty years ago is because they weren’t written until 1965. They sprang from the pen of Taylor Caldwell, a fiction writer best known for historical novels such as
Captains and the Kings, her 1972 best-selling chronicle of the rise to wealth and power of an Irish immigrant named Joseph Francis Xavier Armagh (which was also made into a popular television mini-series in 1976).
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
Please register to post and access all features of our very popular forum. It is free and quick. Over $68,000 in prizes has already been given out to active posters on our forum. Additional giveaways are planned.

Detailed information about all U.S. cities, counties, and zip codes on our site: City-data.com.


Reply
Please update this thread with any new information or opinions. This open thread is still read by thousands of people, so we encourage all additional points of view.

Quick Reply
Message:

Over $104,000 in prizes was already given out to active posters on our forum and additional giveaways are planned!

Go Back   City-Data Forum > General Forums > Economics
Follow City-Data.com founder on our Forum or

All times are GMT -6.

© 2005-2018, Advameg, Inc.

City-Data.com - Archive 1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6, 7, 8, 9, 10, 11, 12, 13, 14, 15, 16, 17, 18, 19, 20, 21, 22, 23, 24, 25, 26, 27, 28, 29, 30, 31, 32, 33, 34, 35 - Top