×

Welcome to the Slashdot Beta site -- learn more here. Use the link in the footer or click here to return to the Classic version of Slashdot.

Thank you!

Before you choose to head back to the Classic look of the site, we'd appreciate it if you share your thoughts on the Beta; your feedback is what drives our ongoing development.

Beta is different and we value you taking the time to try it out. Please take a look at the changes we've made in Beta and  learn more about it. Thanks for reading, and for making the site better!

WikiLeaks Cable: NASDAQ Folded To Chinese Pressure

timothy posted more than 2 years ago | from the give-that-man-a-peace-prize dept.

Censorship 269

jjp9999 writes "A WikiLeaks cable reveals that the NASDAQ folded to pressure from the Chinese regime and kicked out a U.S.-based Chinese TV network, NTD TV. The Chinese Communist Party has been trying to block this station for years now, since it's one of the few major Chinese media that refuses to censor its content. Although they're blocked in Mainland China, they broadcast in with satellites. The timing of the incident aligns well with other actions launched by the CCP against the TV station. They used to broadcast into China through French satellite company Eutelsat, but their connection was cut. Reporters Without Borders investigated and found the Chinese regime was behind it. They now use a Taiwanese satellite."

cancel ×
This is a preview of your comment

No Comment Title Entered

Anonymous Coward 1 minute ago

No Comment Entered

269 comments

Stop selling debt to China (0)

aglider (2435074) | more than 2 years ago | (#38829739)

It's like giving your home keys to robbers.
And then you wonder "how it came out!"

Re:Stop selling debt to China (4, Insightful)

Anonymous Coward | more than 2 years ago | (#38829779)

Sorry, the middle class in China is more important to our businesses than Americans are, given that the middle class in China is larger than the entire American population [financialpost.com] . Of course, we'll continue to ignore the hundreds of millions of peasants in poverty, just like they're ignored in the US. Bad for profits, you see.

Re:Stop selling debt to China (4, Funny)

Jawnn (445279) | more than 2 years ago | (#38829805)

What is this American middle class that you speak of? I thought the Congress that we elected to represent "us" was well on the way to eliminating that.

Re:Stop selling debt to China (1)

tgd (2822) | more than 2 years ago | (#38830243)

Sorry, the middle class in China is more important to our businesses than Americans are, given that the middle class in China is larger than the entire American population [financialpost.com] . Of course, we'll continue to ignore the hundreds of millions of peasants in poverty, just like they're ignored in the US. Bad for profits, you see.

And, keep in mind, the upper class lifestyle that most people in the US attribute to being middle class is possible because of the massive decrease in manufacturing costs for their lifestyle goods that China provides.

Re:Stop selling debt to China (5, Funny)

cpu6502 (1960974) | more than 2 years ago | (#38829803)

Yeah we need to stop being a poor debtor nation. The only person willing to balance the budget is Ron Paul.

But he's unelectable. And a kook. I'm not sure WHY he's either of those things, but CNN, FOX, NBC keep telling me it's true therefore I believe them.

Also those guys Beck, Limbaugh, Hannity on the Romney Radio network also say it, so that's double verification. (Who am to think on my own? I just do what the authorities tell me.)

(goes back to watching tv)

Re:Stop selling debt to China (5, Insightful)

MightyMartian (840721) | more than 2 years ago | (#38829909)

He's a kook because, while he makes one or two good points, by and large he's a historical and economic ignoramus, or more likely just a snake-oil dealer selling a suite of easy solutions that would neither be easy or solutions.

Imagine for the briefest moment if Ron Paul got elected. It's certainly not going to be the case that Congress is going to be filled with enough like-minded people that would be willing to go along with him, and so he would have at best very limited capacity to make good on any of his promises, and more likely would soon piss off Congress, regardless of party affiliation, and would find himself a very lonely man in the Oval Office as 2/3s majorities killed his vetoes and refused to co-operate with any of his plans.

Remember this, though sometimes it's hard to tell these days, a President is only as strong as Congress allows him to be.

Re:Stop selling debt to China (4, Interesting)

TheGratefulNet (143330) | more than 2 years ago | (#38830011)

if you get the stalled situation, like you said, maybe that's not too bad!

all our 'progress' in the last 10 or 15 years has been backward.

if we stand still, that's actually going forward! (head asplodes).

seriously, though; I'd be ok with having a guy in office that congress can't work with; as long as its both parties that can't work with him. enemy of my enemy and all that.

at this point, even a lunatic would get my vote if he's a true outsider. insiders are all messed up and voting for the same-old is not working. get some crazy guy in there as long as he's not R or D crazy. we've all had enough of that fake R/D choice, haven't we?

Re:Stop selling debt to China (4, Funny)

cpu6502 (1960974) | more than 2 years ago | (#38830205)

>>>"if we stand still, that's actually going forward! (head asplodes)."

You think like a Congressman!
"We made significant cuts in the budget."

But you increased spending by 2%!
"Right. But we had originally planned to increase spending by 5%, so we've cut our original goals. We made cuts. You should reelect us."

Re:Stop selling debt to China (-1, Flamebait)

geekoid (135745) | more than 2 years ago | (#38830303)

If you understood economics, you would know why that makes sense. But you don't, so you assume everyone else doesn't make sense.

Maybe you shoud try educating you're self before forming an opinion? oh, right your a dumb shit.

Re:Stop selling debt to China (4, Insightful)

cpu6502 (1960974) | more than 2 years ago | (#38830393)

I'm not an economics person but there are plenty of people who do (like Ph.D. Walter E Williams and Thomas Sowell), and they are warning us of the current danger.

Or you could just look at Iceland, Greece and Italy. The U.S. has almost the same debt-to-GDP load they have. We are not immune to the same collapse as they did.

Already China and Russia are abandoning the dollar in order to trade directly with gold (or gold-backed SDRs). It's time to wake up. http://rt.com/programs/keiser-report/ [rt.com]

Re:Stop selling debt to China (2)

peragrin (659227) | more than 2 years ago | (#38830499)

If you understood economics then you know having a debt loadthat your grandchildren wont live to see paid off is a bad thing.

Real economists understood that during 2000-2008 we never recovered from the dot bomb. That the only thing moving forward was low interest rates driving new home sales and anything not in those industries barely grew at all. Yet we doubled our debt, and cut our income at the same time.

Now congress resists trying to restore income, and you say it is a good thing.

Re:Stop selling debt to China (4, Interesting)

poetmatt (793785) | more than 2 years ago | (#38830349)

Actually, his point is quite valid. There are situations where congress should have stepped in but didn't (banks), and also situations where congress needs to stay the hell out of it but is eagerly trying to regulate (the internet). Literally, not regulating the internet is a far smarter move than actually doing so.

Same people do both, and it's bipartisan.

Basically, the issue is that money is still funding politics.

Re:Stop selling debt to China (1)

TheRaven64 (641858) | more than 2 years ago | (#38830655)

The official inflation rate in the USA is 3.5%. The actual inflation rate depends how you measure it, but it at least 3.5% and possibly over 5%. So, an increase of 2% in dollars in one year is a decrease in real terms of about 1.5%. But you knew that, right?

Re:Stop selling debt to China (4, Interesting)

0123456 (636235) | more than 2 years ago | (#38830077)

Ron Paul isn't selling easy solutions: that's precisely why he won't get elected.

People don't want to hear that saving the country requires major changes and serious pain... which is why they'll vote for more of the same and then act surprised in ten years when the Chinese bailiffs turn up to load everything of value into ships as debt repayment after America goes bankrupt.

Re:Stop selling debt to China (1, Redundant)

jbolden (176878) | more than 2 years ago | (#38830311)

First of all the country isn't lost. But if by "saving the country" you mean increasing employment, that doesn't require serious pain. It requires government created demand. We have extremely low interest rates and a demand shortfall. Do the obvious thing and the problem goes away.

Re:Stop selling debt to China (1)

Kenja (541830) | more than 2 years ago | (#38830375)

He's selling crazy, and we're all stocked up on the stuff. For every good idea he has, he has two that are the ramblings of a freeway off-ramp prophet.

Re:Stop selling debt to China (2)

ShavedOrangutan (1930630) | more than 2 years ago | (#38830607)

and then act surprised in ten years when the Chinese bailiffs turn up to load everything of value into ships as debt repayment after America goes bankrupt.

The debt will be inflated away. That's the whole point. Today's spending is being paid for by inflating away people's savings and buying power. They can't get away with raising taxes, but what they are doing is worse.

The national debt is meaningless, but a paycheck doesn't seem go as far as it used to, huh?

Re:Stop selling debt to China (4, Insightful)

cpu6502 (1960974) | more than 2 years ago | (#38830145)

A president has more power than you think.

(1) He can veto, and veto, and veto again any budgets that increase spending. He can just sit tight until the Congress finally he gives him a balanced budget (or close to one).

(2) As Commander-in-Chief he could end the slaughter of innocent men, women, and children in Afghanistan almost immediately. He's simply order them to withdraw and come home.

(3) Also Ron Paul founded the Liberty Caucus in the Congress. It has about 100 members. All they need to do is swing a few Republicans and Democrats to join their cause, in order to get the 51% majority needed to pass laws. (Such as a repeal of the NDAA and Patriot Act.)

IMHO :-)

Re:Stop selling debt to China (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 2 years ago | (#38830227)

2/3rds vote can turn over a veto, however I'm voting for Ron Paul.

Re:Stop selling debt to China (1)

Anonymous Coward | more than 2 years ago | (#38830249)

If memory serves correctly, with enough votes in favor, Congress can say "screw your veto, it's passing anyway". I do not recall the exact % of congresscritters that must vote "yes" though.

Re:Stop selling debt to China (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 2 years ago | (#38830271)

And congress can veto his veto.

Re:Stop selling debt to China (4, Informative)

geekoid (135745) | more than 2 years ago | (#38830377)

1) This alone shows how fucking ignorant you are. Congress can override a veto

2) He could do that, be the results would be really, really, fucking bad. If the pull out isn't done in a way that leaves an established power, even more people will die under the following religious extremist the fill the power vacuum.

3) Yes, letting corporations run with even less regulation, that would be fucking genius. Everythign else about the party is just smoke and mirrors. Look at their record.

Re:Stop selling debt to China (2)

Enderandrew (866215) | more than 2 years ago | (#38830643)

To point 3, this is a very important distinction.

Most Americans in polls say the economy is the number one issue we have currently, and yet we seem to favor over-regulating industries to the point of crippling them. This doesn't add up.

It is possible to have common sense regulation while not burying businesses in expensive red tape.

For instance, HIPAA has done nothing but cost the health care industry a small fortune, which in turn gets passed on to consumers in rising health insurance premiums. We have extremely complex legislation that costs us all money, which in turn makes health care unaffordable for some. And what do we gain?

Before HIPAA, health records were still treated as confidential with court rulings to back that up. Common sense dictated that doctors and hospitals could be found liable for revealing confidential records. Why overreact with massive legislation that does more harm than good? And yet we do this time and time again because we feel that corporations are evil and can't be trusted, so we need to keep them in chains at all times.

Re:Stop selling debt to China (2)

cpu6502 (1960974) | more than 2 years ago | (#38830703)

>>>"1) This alone shows how fucking ignorant you are. Congress can override a veto"

Yeah but how easily?
Not easy at all. My original point that he can keep vetoing a budget he doesn't like still stands.

(2) Why don't we just ask the Afghans? "Leave. Now." is what they say. Maybe we should listen to them. As Ghandi told the Brits several decades ago: "You are masters in somebody else's home. It is time for you to leave. And yes we wll have problems but they will be OUR problems and OUR solutions. Not yours."

(3) I said repeal the Patriot spying/warrantless searches Act and repeal the Indefinite Detention NDAA (or the relevant portions thereof). I never said anything about deregulating corporations (who I hate). You committed a strawman (stupid) argument.

Re:Stop selling debt to China (1)

SuricouRaven (1897204) | more than 2 years ago | (#38830385)

Even if congress doesn't overrule the veto, there is a reason spending bills are must-pass. If they don't, parts of the government run out of money, which leads to the formation of angry mobs when they discover their children have been sent home from school because the teachers aren't getting paid, shortly followed by an increase in crime when criminals realise that police don't work for free. Some states are very heavily dependant on federal funding even for things as simple as school meals.

Re:Stop selling debt to China (2)

raydobbs (99133) | more than 2 years ago | (#38830413)

Interesting...WRONG...but interesting.

1> He can veto everything that crosses his deck if he is so inclined. An override can be achieved with 2/3 majority vote of House and Senate. They'd simply be deadlocked on a lot of things, but 'vital' items they both agree on would be rammed through anyway. The public, however, would not be amused by an obstructionist president.

2> He could issue the order, but if the military hates him enough - they would disobey him, and possibly overthrow the government. Not good.

3> Nice to think, yeah - so it wouldn't be as abysmally bleak as point #1 or 2, but he'd be hard up to get anything he wanted done. He'd be fighting the political war on both fronts. Democrats hate Republicans, and vise versa - but they'd hate him MORE than they hate each other. Once his presidential term was over, he would never serve in political office ever -ever- again - the powers that be would make sure of it.

Re:Stop selling debt to China (1)

Enderandrew (866215) | more than 2 years ago | (#38830661)

US soldiers in Afghanistan would ignore orders to come home and overthrow the US government?

Part of me dies everyday when I read Slashdot comments.

Re:Stop selling debt to China (2)

novalis112 (1216168) | more than 2 years ago | (#38830183)

I have often made similar statements to people who think the President has way more power than he does, but you have gone too far in the other direction. The Executive branch has grown to a size of epic proportions and the President has full authority over it. The war on drugs, the Federal Reserve Bank and the IRS are all prime examples.

Re:Stop selling debt to China (0)

TubeSteak (669689) | more than 2 years ago | (#38830399)

Imagine for the briefest moment if Ron Paul got elected. It's certainly not going to be the case that Congress is going to be filled with enough like-minded people that would be willing to go along with him, and so he would have at best very limited capacity to make good on any of his promises, and more likely would soon piss off Congress, regardless of party affiliation, and would find himself a very lonely man in the Oval Office as 2/3s majorities killed his vetoes and refused to co-operate with any of his plans.

Even if Congress ignores 100% of Paul's agenda, there's still a lot he can do on his own.
Remember that Bush created the Department of Homeland Security by Executive Order.
A President Paul could sign an executive order and make it disappear.

Re:Stop selling debt to China (1)

Enderandrew (866215) | more than 2 years ago | (#38830679)

Congress has to vote to fund it. As head of the Executive Branch, Bush has the right to reshuffle existing separate departments into one organization and create a cabinet position. If I recall correctly though, part of the Patriot Act was Congress authorizing the increased funding necessary to make it happen.

Re:Stop selling debt to China (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 2 years ago | (#38830649)

would find himself a very lonely man in the Oval Office as 2/3s majorities killed his vetoes and refused to co-operate with any of his plans

And then Congress would find itself quite frustrated as Paul refused to implement the plans they funded. Just because the legislative branch passes a law, it doesn't follow that the executive branch has to implement it, whether or not they're bound by law to do so.

Re:Stop selling debt to China (-1)

Anonymus (2267354) | more than 2 years ago | (#38829921)

Ron Paul is a kook because he is a racist anti-abortion creationist who, if elected, would basically just try to kill off all social programs back to pre-Great Depression levels while using "states rights" as a shield to roll civil/human rights back to the feudal system.

Re:Stop selling debt to China (1)

RyuuzakiTetsuya (195424) | more than 2 years ago | (#38830029)

No, in Feudal England they at least had Boxing Day. Which sounds suspect in Ron Paul's John Birch Society utopia.

The kook has some points. (1)

Anonymous Coward | more than 2 years ago | (#38830075)

Ron Paul is a kook because he is a racist anti-abortion creationist who, if elected, would basically just try to kill off all social programs back to pre-Great Depression levels while using "states rights" as a shield to roll civil/human rights back to the feudal system.

1. Congress is the only one who can do that.

2. It would be wonderful to have Paul there to give Congress - on both sides of the isle - a reality check.

3. Paul would have had us out of Iraq a long time ago.

4. Although the Federal Reserve serves a great purpose and was created at the behest of business leaders, he does have a point about audits - even if those audits have no political ramifications, the citizens of the US do have a right to know WTF is going on. When I see people making billions of dollars off of the Fed's policies, I can't help thinking that old kook has maybe at least one point.

Re:Stop selling debt to China (1)

oztiks (921504) | more than 2 years ago | (#38830095)

I don't buy the racist stuff. I think his general vibe is good he's problem is his lack of defense on military defense, he needs to sell the American people he knows best, at the moment it's too scattered and high level "philosophical".

Having RP in power would mean a better America but his course in doing so will hurt. The US needs to hurt before it gets better maybe RP will hurt a bit too much.

Re:Stop selling debt to China (2)

characterZer0 (138196) | more than 2 years ago | (#38830151)

He doesn't want to kill the social programs. He just wants the states to run them instead of the federal government. Like the constitution says. Remember the constitution? That piece of paper on which our country is founded?

Re:Stop selling debt to China (4, Informative)

cpu6502 (1960974) | more than 2 years ago | (#38830273)

Wow.
You are the perfect example of somone who has been programmed by the media.

(1) You are bigoted against creationists? Christians, Jews, Muslims, and Hindus? Wiow. (2) And no he's not a racist. Here's video to prove it - http://youtu.be/i3EADdr-5AY [youtu.be]

(3) >>>kill off all social programs

"We made a promise to our citizens to provide Medicare and Social Security, and we must honor that promise. I will make no cuts to those benefits, though people 25 and younger will have the option to opt-out. The cuts will be made through offering early retirement to government workers and soldiers. 1 trillion dollars cut by 2014/" - Ron Paul at his Budget Meeting

Re:Stop selling debt to China (1)

Anonymous Coward | more than 2 years ago | (#38830599)

Not the same AC, but...

You are bigoted against creationists?

Yes, and damn proud of that.

Christians, Jews, Muslims, and Hindus?

Now wait just a second, you seem to be confusing "being a creationist" with "following a religion". While it is true that creationists are generally following a religion, it is an extreme stretch to say that all Christians, Jews, Muslims, Hindus, and practitioners of all other religions that you and I did not name, are creationists. I have no problems with the huge numbers of people who follow a religion but are not creationists. What I have a problem with are the few who are creationists, who don't give a damn what they do to the planet because "God will magically fix everything", who think critical thinking skills are crap and encourage their offspring to not have any, who make policy decisions based on there being an invisible sky daddy. Those are the people that the term "creationist" refers to, and those are the people that I am bigoted against.

Re:Stop selling debt to China (1)

Forbman (794277) | more than 2 years ago | (#38830691)

(reposting from AC)

Not the same AC, but...

You are bigoted against creationists?

Yes, and damn proud of that.

Christians, Jews, Muslims, and Hindus?

Now wait just a second, you seem to be confusing "being a creationist" with "following a religion". While it is true that creationists are generally following a religion, it is an extreme stretch to say that all Christians, Jews, Muslims, Hindus, and practitioners of all other religions that you and I did not name, are creationists. I have no problems with the huge numbers of people who follow a religion but are not creationists. What I have a problem with are the few who are creationists, who don't give a damn what they do to the planet because "God will magically fix everything", who think critical thinking skills are crap and encourage their offspring to not have any, who make policy decisions based on there being an invisible sky daddy. Those are the people that the term "creationist" refers to, and those are the people that I am bigoted against.

Re:Stop selling debt to China (-1)

Anonymous Coward | more than 2 years ago | (#38830479)

Racist?

When you pull the race card, you automatically lose the argument (corollary to Godwin's Law) . Thanks for endorsing Ron.

Re:Stop selling debt to China (4, Insightful)

Sarten-X (1102295) | more than 2 years ago | (#38830059)

He's called a kook because his preferred economic theory is to ignore evidence and history, especially when turned into mathematical models, and invest based on psychology. "We think this stock will do well, because the company's CEO is so charismatic" is Austrian School economic advice. The Austrian School is the conspiracy theory of economics. Once in a while, somebody predicts something that happens, but not reliably enough for it to be taken seriously, and the evidence in favor of other theories is far more substantial.

The idea of a perfectly-balanced budget makes little sense for a government. Running with some debt allows the country to have more liquid cash now, and pay for it with growth in a few years. What is even more absurd is going into debt by much more than we can reasonably expect to gain over a short time. Unfortunately, that's what's happening now: With more people unemployed, income taxes are bringing in less revenue than expected, but the contracts still have to be fulfilled, and that means that money has to come from somewhere. China has money to spare, so we sell them bonds to cover our contractual obligations. Of course, this mean we'll owe China a huge amount of money in a while, but that's actually somewhat preferable to defaulting on a large amount now.

There is a possibility that China will forgive some debt in exchange for more lenient political posturing, or extend it to a longer period with little or no additional cost. We'll have to wait and see what happens over the next few years. Maybe Apple will decide to bring its manufacturing to the US, boosting the American economy high enough to cover the debts. Here's hoping.

Re:Stop selling debt to China (1)

Scrameustache (459504) | more than 2 years ago | (#38830123)

"We think this stock will do well, because the company's CEO is so charismatic" is Austrian School economic advice.

So, Steve Jobs, then.

Re:Stop selling debt to China (1)

Pope (17780) | more than 2 years ago | (#38830365)

So, Steve Jobs, then.

Only if you're willing to ignore the quarterly and yearly balance sheets.

Re:Stop selling debt to China (3, Interesting)

cpu6502 (1960974) | more than 2 years ago | (#38830347)

>>>The idea of a perfectly-balanced budget makes little sense for a government.

Clinton and the Democrats bargged about it in 1998 and 99. They said it would enable them to pay down some of the debt, and they were correct.

Our current national + state government debt is 18 trillion, or about $180,000 per American home. Add another $110,000 in personal mortgage/credit card debt per household.

Almost $300,000 of debt per American household is NOT a sustainable policy. Even if your "some liquid cash needs to be available" theory was correct, almost 300K/home worth of debt is a Greece or Italy-like situation. It is NOT good.

We need a balanced budget as soon as possible, so we can pay down some of that debt load.

Re:Stop selling debt to China (4, Informative)

Anonymous Coward | more than 2 years ago | (#38830139)

But he's unelectable. And a kook. I'm not sure WHY he's either of those things

Because his economic notions are sheer fantasy? Because he would gut government services in pursuit of his fantasy libertarian tiny government?

From wiki [wikipedia.org]

eliminate 5 cabinet-level agencies (Education, Interior, Commerce, Energy, and Housing and Urban Development)
privatize the Federal Aviation Administration and the TSA
cut the federal workforce by 10%
cut funding (down from 2006 levels) for the
Food and Drug Administration by 40%
Centers for Disease Control by 20%
Department of Homeland Security by 20%
National Institutes of Health by 20%
Environmental Protection Agency by 30%
Substance Abuse and Mental Health Services Administration by 20%
cut the Department of Defense budget by total 15%; eliminate all foreign war funding
freeze funding for most other federal agencies at 2006 levels
eliminate all foreign aid
eliminate international drug programs
substantially reduce foreign travel
eliminate international organizations and commissions
administer Medicaid and other joint federal-state social welfare programs (SCHIP, food stamps, etc) through block-grant funding mechanisms to the states
Revenue Changes
cut the top corporate tax rate to 15% (down from 35%)
allow companies to repatriate capital without additional taxation
permanently extend the Bush administration tax cuts
eliminate capital gains and dividends taxes
eliminate estate and gift taxes
end taxes on personal savings
sell federal lands and other federal assets
Other Economic and Regulatory Measures
repeal the new healthcare law ("Obamacare") as well as the Dodd-Frank and Sarbanes-Oxley financial services and banking regulations
cancel certain "onerous" regulations instituted under executive order by previous presidents
conduct a full audit of the Federal Reserve
seek competing currency legislation "to strengthen the dollar and stabilize inflation"

If he made all of these changes he would probably leave a broken shell with no social programs, unregulated industry, and leave the US even more xenophobic and assholish than they are now, and with no tax revenue left because he's given the rich and the corporations a pass on paying them.

He's only slightly less crazy than the guys in armed militias, and anybody who believes his changes would make for a stronger nation has bought into the Libertarian tripe that says the free market is the highest moral ideal.

What he proposes sounds good to him and his base, but it's largely fantasy that simply won't work the way he believes it will ... this isn't sound economic theory, it's a religion.

I don't doubt that he sincerely believes it all, but I have no belief whatsoever that he would do anything other than wreak havoc.

Re:Stop selling debt to China (2)

jbolden (176878) | more than 2 years ago | (#38830277)

I like Ron Paul. I voted for him in '88, my first vote.

That being said, yeah he is a kook. I think an honest assessment of the types of society he advocates is horrifying. For example in his district this is what libertarianism really looked like in the 1900 Galveston hurricane:

The dead bodies were so numerous that burying them all was not possible. The dead were initially weighted down and dumped at sea, but when the gulf currents washed many of the bodies back onto the beach, a new solution was needed. Funeral pyres were set up wherever the dead were found and burned for weeks after the storm. The authorities passed out free whiskey to sustain the distraught men conscripted for the gruesome work of collecting and burning the dead.

That's what life without FEMA looked like. His ideas on the gold standard are incredibly destructive, the government having the ability to control economic activity has been a huge net positive, including this case where it has softened the blow considerably. The loss is unquestionably worth it.

He's doing a lot to popularize libertarian economics and his move to, along with Lew Rockwell, create paleolibertarianism was brilliant. But libertarianism needs to answer serious critiques if it wants to be the governing philosophy of the United States.

Re:Stop selling debt to China (1)

ElectricTurtle (1171201) | more than 2 years ago | (#38830681)

So your saying that if FEMA had existed in 1900, those people would magically not have died in a motherfucking hurricane? Or that magically there would have been no logistical problems with dealing with the corpses? Just what is your nonsense, libertarian--bashing point here?

Re:Stop selling debt to China (2)

geekoid (135745) | more than 2 years ago | (#38830279)

Ron Paul is NOT willing to balance the budget. He uses that as an excuse to cut there programs is big backers want hos to cut. Specifically the EPA.

Of course, your whole statement is fallacies in assume that cutting the budget would actual fix the dept. You have completely fallen for this false austerity that republicans keep pushing through the media.

Why is NBC listed there? they where one of the few to actually report Ron Paul's poll position without it being an aside followed by a jab at him. Ron Paul assumes industry will protect the people. You don't see a problem there?

Re:Stop selling debt to China (1)

na1led (1030470) | more than 2 years ago | (#38830395)

Ron Paul won't get elected because he speaks the hard truth that people don't want to hear. What people want is someone like Obama who will promise you heaven on earth! The elections isn't about finding the smartest person to do the job, it's a beauty contest!

Re:Stop selling debt to China (1)

Kenja (541830) | more than 2 years ago | (#38830481)

What Ron Paul promisses would destroy us (return to the gold standard? really?). Obama has fulfilled more of his campaign promisses then any president in recent history. There are some big issues I'm pissed off that he didn't move on, but overall he's done a very good job as a centerlist administrator.

Re:Stop selling debt to China (1)

mindcandy (1252124) | more than 2 years ago | (#38830605)

Unfortunately .. all of Dr. Pauls good ideas require approval of congress.
Many of his bad/kooky ideas he can do all on his own (as president).

Re:Stop selling debt to China (1)

Anonymous Coward | more than 2 years ago | (#38829841)

See here is something I don't think idiots like you seem to understand. The US isn't going to the Chinese and saying oh god here, please buy our debt. No, the Chinese are going, we'll US treasuries are still a pretty good investment and it is in the Chinese best interest for the value of those treasury notes and the US dollar in general to stay stable, you know why? Because then own the fucking debt that they own will be WORTHLESS and will collapse the Chinese economy too. The Chinese understand this, as do policymakers in DC. The problem is when you hook your cart on to the American money wagon..is you are stuck on a wild and crazy course with the Americans...like it or not(ask the Canadians, British, Japanese, etc about this)

Re:Stop selling debt to China (1)

Bardwick (696376) | more than 2 years ago | (#38830055)

Who do you recommend we sell it to? Not many folks can afford to buy that much anymore.

Re:Stop selling debt to China (1)

HornWumpus (783565) | more than 2 years ago | (#38830301)

The US federal reserve bank has been buying any leftover treasuries for more then a year.

That's right, we sell our debt to our own central bank. Which uses the magic of fraction reserve banking to print 10x (not sure what the reserve % is today, but you get the point) the face value of the bonds in currency.

We're in an economic deadlock. The only path out is for China to let its currency float. Which they refuse to do. We respond by printing more money, which creates inflation in China. This is what economic cold war looks like.

It's an attrition battle. Who can stand it the longest. The Euro looks like it's the weakest today.

Re:Stop selling debt to China (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 2 years ago | (#38830057)

Well, if the world is a school class, and you're the king of bullies, I think you can handle the class's thief. What you should be more afraid of, is becoming singled out because nobody likes you anymore.

If you want to see the USA's future, look at Iran. The crazy government, the fundamentalism, the extremism, the general poorness and going-downwards-ness... it’s all there.

(Not saying I like that. I wish the USA would get back under the control of the sane Americans again.)

Re:Stop selling debt to China (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 2 years ago | (#38830067)

Better yet, stop letting them make everything for everyone.

I mean, it's not like the US, Canada and Europe aren't capable for manufacturing goods - we all used to be awesome at it not that long ago. But now, even stuff that claim to be made in the USA/UK/etc tend to be made of materials from China.

One country shouldn't have that much material power over the rest of the world (and, stupidly, the rest of us have allowed the skills/knowledge needed for industrial production to fade) - especially when it's ruled by the kind of government China has. I mean, people complain when the US do think like the situation with Megaupload but Dotcom isn't going to end up in some labor camp farming for WoW gold.

Re:Stop selling debt to China (1)

Anonymous Coward | more than 2 years ago | (#38830101)

1) Stop being paranoid
2) Stop relying on oil
3) Stop liberating countries (for oil)
4) Stop spending money on your military

I mean you have over a 1000 nuclear warheads. Iran knows that. China knows that. North Korea. There is no fucking way how they would do anything more than just troll you now and then over your fucked up foreign policies.

But still I see you wasting Chinese money on the paranoia induced by your own media.

Fail.

Re:Stop selling debt to China (1)

swb (14022) | more than 2 years ago | (#38830269)

Selling debt denominated in our own sovereign currency to the Chinese is like free money.

Everyone things "gee, if they decide to dump those treasuries we're all fucked" -- nah, all we have to do is say they're void and worth nothing, but thanks for a couple of trillion dollars over the years.

And they're denominated in our own currency, so if we wanted we could just inflate the debt to worthlessness. This has some of its own issues, but over time the debt becomes less valuable due to inflation and is not vulnerable to currency fluctuations (some Europeans have gotten fucked by borrowing in other currencies -- when their currency nosedives relative to their payment currency, it's like their payment goes up, even though in absolute terms its the same, it just takes more local currency to come up with the payment).

Plus China needs to buy US debt to keep their currency peg working.

IMHO the downside of all of this is that we're so intertwined with them.

Re:Stop selling debt to China (3, Interesting)

afabbro (33948) | more than 2 years ago | (#38830379)

It's like giving your home keys to robbers. And then you wonder "how it came out!"

People think we call the Chinese and say "can you lend us $100 billion this week?

That's not how it works. It's an open auction, and the Chinese are as free to bid and buy as anyone, or they can buy it on the secondary market. As it is, they own about 8% of US-issued debt.

The ownership entitles them to one thing: repayment of the debt with interest. That's it.

"Oh, but if China ever dumped all their debt..." So what? Simple economics...supply rises, price falls (in this case, the interest rate would go up a half-point and other people would buy).

"Oh, but if China ever stopped buying our debt..." Same thing. Demand would fall, price falls. Government pays a little more interest and other people buy.

Oh dear. (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 2 years ago | (#38829755)

Why can't people just get along?

Re:Oh dear. (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 2 years ago | (#38829775)

Because some people are made wrong.

Re:Oh dear. (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 2 years ago | (#38830535)

Oh, that is easy. There is money to be made. For me to get more of what I want someone else has to get less of what they want. That someone probably includes you. You probably do not want to go along with that. Thus we do not get along.

"Hey China... (2, Insightful)

milbournosphere (1273186) | more than 2 years ago | (#38829781)

Here's our country on a silver platter." Seriously, in twenty years, we're going to regret moving our of production and debt to China. We're going be left with no leg to stand on, and only ourselves to blame.

Re:"Hey China... (1)

oztiks (921504) | more than 2 years ago | (#38829895)

Twenty? I'd say 5 to 10. Problem is that on an international scale there is very little that comes out of the US that isn't via Asia. Let em see .... Film and TV, Music ..... And yeah not a hell of a lot more.

What it will boil down to is free trade agreements the more they become redundant the quicker the US will fall prey.

Re:"Hey China... (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 2 years ago | (#38829969)

Twenty? I'd say 5 to 10. Problem is that on an international scale there is very little that comes out of the US that isn't via Asia. Let em see .... Film and TV, Music ..... And yeah not a hell of a lot more.

What it will boil down to is free trade agreements the more they become redundant the quicker the US will fall prey.

Software, films, and high speed pizza delivery.

Re:"Hey China... (1)

oztiks (921504) | more than 2 years ago | (#38830133)

and high speed pizza delivery.

And god bless them for doing so :) that and puff pastry cheese filled crusts!

Re:"Hey China... (1)

Tsingi (870990) | more than 2 years ago | (#38830107)

Twenty? I'd say 5 to 10. Problem is that on an international scale there is very little that comes out of the US that isn't via Asia. Let em see .... Film and TV, Music ..... And yeah not a hell of a lot more.

What it will boil down to is free trade agreements the more they become redundant the quicker the US will fall prey.

But you have an unparalleled military. What do you think that is for?

Re:"Hey China... (1)

oztiks (921504) | more than 2 years ago | (#38830181)

But you have an unparalleled military. What do you think that is for?

For being sidetracked just enough for the Chinese to steal ya ammo when the American people aren't looking ;)

Re:"Hey China... (1)

ae1294 (1547521) | more than 2 years ago | (#38830229)

Twenty? I'd say 5 to 10. Problem is that on an international scale there is very little that comes out of the US that isn't via Asia. Let em see .... Film and TV, Music ..... And yeah not a hell of a lot more.

What it will boil down to is free trade agreements the more they become redundant the quicker the US will fall prey.

and coal.

Re:"Hey China... (1)

oztiks (921504) | more than 2 years ago | (#38830305)

* oztiks points to Australia and the AUD ...

And they have pleeeennnttty of it and the world knows it. The amount of coal mines expanding in Aust is absolutely ridiculous and as result towns and jobs are lighting up like there is no tomorrow.

Re:"Hey China... (1, Interesting)

TheGratefulNet (143330) | more than 2 years ago | (#38830231)

there is very little that comes out of the US that isn't via Asia

you mean china? I consider that a very different 'asia' than, say, japan. wouldn't you?

japan has quality in design and manufacture, but they are not great inventors of new original ideas. they are copiers.

china has major issues with its view of 'quality' and customer satisfaction/long term viability ('sell and run' mentality). they do no new invention there and are pure copier and thieves.

sorry to generalize but you also paint with a huge brush via your 'asia' comment.

the US (and the west, overall) has a culture of innovation and modernization/progress. the internet, computers, electronics, you name it - it came from mostly US minds and labs. we still innovate, but we've given 98% of our manufacturing to outsourced we-dont-care companies who have this 'sell and run' attitude. once the sale is done, they don't care if their parts or build falls apart. not their problem (the way they see it). more suckers^Hcustomers just around the corner.

when I design and build hardware, I have a choice of cheap chinese-designed crap or better US-designed parts (both are manufactured in china, but one is by a chinese company, on their own; and the other is western controlled and managed; and it makes ALL the difference in so many ways). in almost every buying decision, when I get samples, I'm appallled at the lack of quality and the materials and machining decisions they make. I keep saying it, 'sell and run' is how I describe it. make it good enough to last a few days or weeks and after that, if the customer's goods fail, its HIS PROBLEM. and sending your stuff back to china is an exercise in frustration, not to mention cost.

the US still designs and ensures quality in things (my field, electronics parts and hw designs that use them). if we manage the whole chain, it can be made to work in a china setting; but if we don't manage every step of the way, its a disaster waiting to happen. they *will* cut corners and it can be fatal (china capacitor syndrome, for the most infamous example).

Re:"Hey China... (1)

oztiks (921504) | more than 2 years ago | (#38830503)

Okay, I'm not going to argue your points because I'm right there with you, especially on the innovation. Me being a purist I not only appreciate what your saying but I also follow it myself. Problem is, I'm not rich, I'm middle class, self employed and own a bucket load of valuable IP.

Do you know what all the my likeminded business colleges remind me of constantly? "being a purist doesn't make you rich" which is an american philosophy that we've taught the east WHILE at the same time bringing^HHHHHHHHgiving them innovation at the same time.

Re:"Hey China... (1)

Rasperin (1034758) | more than 2 years ago | (#38830307)

5 to 10? I'm gonna say 4 years ago and counting we've been regretting it. Think if during the recession all those jobs we created in China came back here (or never left in the first place), it would mean more spending Americans, which would mean more service jobs, etc etc etc. I understand and accept global trade but come on what we've given China is half our economy.

Re:"Hey China... (1)

milbournosphere (1273186) | more than 2 years ago | (#38830541)

At least we're still in a position to fix it. In five years, we'll be beyond the point of no return, and I wouldn't be surprised if it ends in war with China sometime 10 years down the road.

Re:"Hey China... (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 2 years ago | (#38830693)

Mod parent up ...

In fact if what the US should do right now is pull troops out of the middle east right now this instant regroup and then have the US govt declare war on china before it's too late :D

Falun Gong (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 2 years ago | (#38829799)

Falun Gong is the equivalent of Scientology in China. So, it's dog against dog now.

What about the bank docs? (4, Interesting)

jginspace (678908) | more than 2 years ago | (#38829825)

Around the time the cables were released, Assange said Wikileaks were about to release a tranche of documents implicating a certain US bank in shenanigans. What happened to those?

Re:What about the bank docs? (1)

MightyMartian (840721) | more than 2 years ago | (#38829937)

I'll wager they are his nuclear option. If the worst happens and he ends up being hauled off to the US, the documents will be released.

Re:What about the bank docs? (2, Insightful)

spire3661 (1038968) | more than 2 years ago | (#38830065)

And hence why i do not and cannot respect him.. Either you believe in free information or not. Hes holding secrets for political gain, jsut like anyone else in the game.

And so he frees the info... (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 2 years ago | (#38830157)

... and you whine and bitch about how he's irresponsible for not censoring and thereby putting people in danger...

PS what have you done recently to get secrets opened?

Re:What about the bank docs? (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 2 years ago | (#38830169)

He is protecting his life. He releases his nuclear option and he is dead within hours. Can't blame him.

Re:What about the bank docs? (2)

ae1294 (1547521) | more than 2 years ago | (#38830285)

And hence why i do not and cannot respect him.. Either you believe in free information or not. Hes holding secrets for political gain, jsut like anyone else in the game.

O come on, the man might spend the rest of his life in gitmo and you don't respect him for being smart enough to hold something back just in case? What the hell would you do different? O right, you'd never personally stick your neck out to begin with... Seriously just shut your pie hole, you're embarrassing yourself.

Re:What about the bank docs? (3, Insightful)

jbolden (176878) | more than 2 years ago | (#38830369)

I can respect an individual who took on the major intelligence agencies and won. He's done leaks on thousands of other topics as well.

If he holds a couple back to save his life, I think he's being wise not dishonorable. In real life people are often confronted with unpleasant choices.

Insurance? (1)

jginspace (678908) | more than 2 years ago | (#38830451)

I guess they're not in the 'Insurance' file because the password for that was leaked via the Guardian. And I think these files have been with Wikileaks since 2009 or before, so possibly those guys who split from Wikileaks have them too?

Re:What about the bank docs? (5, Informative)

SydShamino (547793) | more than 2 years ago | (#38830445)

Around the time the cables were released, Assange said Wikileaks were about to release a tranche of documents implicating a certain US bank in shenanigans. What happened to those?

They were destroyed by a former WikiLeaks employee who left with them, then destroyed the key. Yes, somehow there wasn't a backup of the documents or key (or at least one of the two).

http://www.rawstory.com/rs/2011/08/22/some-of-wikileaks-bank-of-america-files-destroyed-by-former-spokesman/ [rawstory.com]

Whatever Bank of America did, they got away with it.

Why quoting third-party reports? (2, Informative)

Anonymous Coward | more than 2 years ago | (#38829851)

Original cable here:http://wikileaks.org/cable/2007/01/07BEIJING621.html#

Re:Why quoting third-party reports? (1)

Anonymous Coward | more than 2 years ago | (#38830371)

Because slashdot editors are big juicy pussies.

And you failed to make it a link and included an extraneous hash (#) at the end of the url. :)

Re:Why quoting third-party reports? (1)

misosoup7 (1673306) | more than 2 years ago | (#38830587)

Because /. has a anti-Chinese government bias, so they quote Falun Gong backed sites, which obviously is against the Chinese government.
I think the truth is somewhere in between what the Falun Gong has to say and what the Chinese government has to say. Both use propaganda very well. But then again all media agencies are bias in some way and either sensationalize their reports or tries to achieve a political agenda.
Now I'm not saying the Chinese government is right for abusing human rights, in fact I think the Chinese government has a long way to go in that arena. In fact it's doing really poorly and its actions should not be acceptable. However, at the same time, I AM saying Falun Gong is full of crap, and I cannot support anything they say or do. I'd support other human right activists that aren't full of crap though.

Is a merger underway... (4, Interesting)

ibsteve2u (1184603) | more than 2 years ago | (#38830267)

Whereas it used to be "democratic capitalism" vs. "totalitarian communism", what we see now is the merger of the two ideologies into "totalitarian capitalism".

Re:Is a merger underway... (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 2 years ago | (#38830469)

Didn't Hitler try that?

What do you expect (1)

geekoid (135745) | more than 2 years ago | (#38830629)

when many of the worlds transactions are handled by a business? They will bow, and the people will have no recourse.

Load More Comments
Slashdot Account

Need an Account?

Forgot your password?

Don't worry, we never post anything without your permission.

Submission Text Formatting Tips

We support a small subset of HTML, namely these tags:

  • b
  • i
  • p
  • br
  • a
  • ol
  • ul
  • li
  • dl
  • dt
  • dd
  • em
  • strong
  • tt
  • blockquote
  • div
  • quote
  • ecode

"ecode" can be used for code snippets, for example:

<ecode>    while(1) { do_something(); } </ecode>
Sign up for Slashdot Newsletters
Create a Slashdot Account

Loading...