Back in the day, that's what we used to get for lunch at the Moffett Field O'Club. Best Monte Cristo I ever had.
-
Please take a moment and update your account profile. If you have an updated account profile with basic information on why you are on Air Warriors it will help other people respond to your posts. How do you update your profile you ask?
Go here:
Edit Account Details and Profile
Chinese Carrier
- Thread starter tomcatfan
- Start date
I'm going to take a stab in the dark and say that you've never been to China, or spoken with anyone who has a true understanding of what's happening in China (internet doesn't count)...
China's domestic market is sizeable. Not enough for it to base its economy on, but sizeable, and growing at break-neck speed. You can yammer on about bubble this and bubble that (what economy or economic fad hasn't proven to be a bubble in waiting?), but the fact of the matter is that China isn't likely to implode. Moreover, if it does, we're in for a shitty ride. China is so enmeshed into the world's economy that its upsets, are our upsets. Like Brett said, our economy is in the shitter, thus people seek out a scapegoat. In this case, it's one that has given the middle class a glut of cheap white goods, electronics, and random toys.
You are correct in that they didn't "weather" the storm unscathed. They did push through major stimulus which resulted in numerous infrastructure projects. However, to say that these infrastructure projects are shoddy and for show is a gross oversimplification. Shoddiness aside, China needs to develop infrastructure. All developing countries need to develop infrastructure (Eisenhower Interstate, anyone?). The need for stimulus following the 2008 economic crisis provided an opportunity to push through major spending.
China has so many problems confronting it that I have no real desire to list. Your explanation of what China "is" is too simplified and is one that is peddled by policy makers and pundits alike and does little to prepare the US for the 21st century.
Random#: I guess you're not getting the message. If you want to have a conversation on here, you're going to have to be more succinct. Nobody is going to read your gigantic posts.
Be that as it may, you're still just talking in circles about many of your points and they ultimately come down to people's theories or projections.
China employed a stimulus package. To use your words, so what?
China has engaged in deficit spending, so what?
None of these things mean that China's economy is about to implode, nor does it negate that its economy isn't growing as advertised.
Your equation of economic downturn to a Arab Spring-like uprising in China is beyond ridiculous.
Alright, remember: succinct, precise responses that people will want to read.
Brett
Be that as it may, you're still just talking in circles about many of your points and they ultimately come down to people's theories or projections.
China employed a stimulus package. To use your words, so what?
China has engaged in deficit spending, so what?
None of these things mean that China's economy is about to implode, nor does it negate that its economy isn't growing as advertised.
Your equation of economic downturn to a Arab Spring-like uprising in China is beyond ridiculous.
Alright, remember: succinct, precise responses that people will want to read.
Brett
Never been to China. I don't think anyone can claim to have a true understanding of what's happening in China, that's one of the problems right now.
They sure do, I'm not denying that, but it will hit a limit or a slow-down in the speed of its growth if/when their economy encounters a bust.
All economies, if you wait long enough, hit bubbles, but when an economy seems to be defying the odds in certain ways, yet has quite a few red flags, it makes people question.
Well three things:
1) Not arguing that China is going to "implode." China isn't going to have undone all of the progress that they've made over the past thirty years. But their economy isn't going to just keep growing linearly without encountering any hiccups either.
2) Yes, if the Chinese economy hits a crash, it may well be a major hit for the global economy, that is one of the concerns. No way to know for sure though because when the Japanese economy hit a wall, it didn't drag the American economy down with it.
3) Not seeking a scapegoat here, I am just skeptical of how so many are acting as if China is some new global economic anchor.
Yes, but whole cities that are vacant? Building additional skyscrapers when the current skyscraper supply is a good deal unused? As for the shoddiness, that is just suspected, but if you Google the Shanghai garbage bridge, which was a bridge built in Shanghai out of paper and styrofoam it turns out, it makes you question the overall quality control in China. When developing infrastructure that is legitimately needed, that takes time, in order to figure out WHAT to build. China can't have done that with the sheer speed at which they've been spending their money.
I'm not explaining that China "is" anything (or not meaning to), I'm just stating the reasons as to why I think much of their purported economic growth is really nonsense.
Okay.
It means a lot of things. It means their domestic economy fell prey to the recession like every other economy. And the speed at which they flooded their economy with the money shows that they are not concerned much with what it's spent on so much as that it gets spent immediately, which means a lot of the spending will be reckless.
I don't think they are engaging in deficit spending, as they are using their reserves.
I would say it definitely negates that its economy is growing as advertised, but I agree fully it doesn't mean the economy is literally going to implode. Arguing that it's in a big bubble isn't arguing for an implosion.
In a country with no social safety nets of any kind, I think it could if a major downturn occurs. The people are going to blame the government if they are starving. The thing with China's economy to keep in mind is that in economics, generally the axiom of "What goes up, must come down" often occurs. If real-estate prices or stock markets shoot up very high, very quickly, they can come crashing down very quickly as well. Again, look at Dubai and the U.S. and Japan for example.
Random#: I guess you're not getting the message. If you want to have a conversation on here, you're going to have to be more succinct. Nobody is going to read your gigantic posts.
Alright, remember: succinct, precise responses that people will want to read.
Brett
i've found all of his posts quite well thought out and informative - might not agree with everything written, but its a breath of fresh air considering some of the garbage that passes for "debate" 'round here. i might not be so dismissive....
Flight line cafe at Amarillo makes a great monte cristo - ideal for that next leg into ALB ferrying a/c out to the west coast. (And while RON'ing in ALB, stop at the Library for dinner, beer and scenery).
That is all.
That isolationism in the first half of the 20th Century may or may not have invited global war; who's to say that the outcome would have been significantly different had our actions been significantly different? Regardless, we are well beyond simply not being isolationist, and have been for some time. Isolationism brought us the attack on Pearl Harbor. Interventionism brought about a chain reaction spiraling towards Osama's attacks on 9/11. What will our current foreign policy, that of overt regime change and hyper-interventionism, bring us in the future?
A history of American foreign policy in brief:
We moved from isolationism straight to containment of the Soviets, which were indeed an existential threat. Meanwhile we shaped the politics of many countries, most notably Iran and Iraq, first to thwart the Soviets and then to thwart the Iranians after their revolution. Saddam won against, or at least stalemated, the Iranians. Then he got greedy and America thought Saudi oil would fall under our former ally's control. Osama bin Laden "declared war" against America as a result of our troops stationed there. It's illogical, irrational, but that's why the world trade center towers fell--some sociopath didn't like our meddling.
Hell, we're way beyond interventionism now. We're in full-blown, pro-active and overt regime change as of the invasion of Iraq. This was reinforced and made doctrine by the actions in Libya.
So what do we do about that? We can't possibly live in fear that some sociopath will do something crazy, because we can't really control that. However, there's got to be a better path of foreign/security policy than to bankrupt us with a combination of TSA goons groping grandma and perpetual war.
Probably nothing good, but I think (hope) we're edging away from that way of thinking.
Brett
A history of American foreign policy in brief:
We moved from isolationism straight to containment of the Soviets, which were indeed an existential threat. Meanwhile we shaped the politics of many countries, most notably Iran and Iraq, first to thwart the Soviets and then to thwart the Iranians after their revolution. Saddam won against, or at least stalemated, the Iranians. Then he got greedy and America thought Saudi oil would fall under our former ally's control. Osama bin Laden "declared war" against America as a result of our troops stationed there. It's illogical, irrational, but that's why the world trade center towers fell--some sociopath didn't like our meddling.
Hell, we're way beyond interventionism now. We're in full-blown, pro-active and overt regime change as of the invasion of Iraq. This was reinforced and made doctrine by the actions in Libya.
So what do we do about that? We can't possibly live in fear that some sociopath will do something crazy, because we can't really control that. However, there's got to be a better path of foreign/security policy than to bankrupt us with a combination of TSA goons groping grandma and perpetual
Of course the big question is, do you put the jelly on the Monte Cristo or do without?
Wait, I thought you put maple syrup on a Monte Cristo?
My vote is jelly all the way, though.