Welcome to the Hardcore Husky Forums. Folks who are well-known in Cyberland and not that dumb.
Benny Beaver Outed in NY Times
Comments
-
[Backyard furnaces
Main article: Backyard furnace
Backyard furnaces in China during the Great Leap Forward era
With no personal knowledge of metallurgy, Mao encouraged the establishment of small backyard steel furnaces in every commune and in each urban neighborhood. Mao was shown an example of a backyard furnace in Hefei, Anhui, in September 1958 by provincial first secretary Zeng Xisheng.[19] The unit was claimed to be manufacturing high quality steel.[19]
Huge efforts on the part of peasants and other workers were made to produce steel out of scrap metal. To fuel the furnaces, the local environment was denuded of trees and wood taken from the doors and furniture of peasants' houses. Pots, pans, and other metal artifacts were requisitioned to supply the "scrap" for the furnaces so that the wildly optimistic production targets could be met. Many of the male agricultural workers were diverted from the harvest to help the iron production as were the workers at many factories, schools, and even hospitals. Although the output consisted of low quality lumps of pig iron which was of negligible economic worth, Mao had a deep distrust of intellectuals who could have pointed this out and instead placed his faith in the power of the mass mobilization of the peasants.
Moreover, the experience of the intellectual classes following the Hundred Flowers Campaign silenced those aware of the folly of such a plan. According to his private doctor, Li Zhisui, Mao and his entourage visited traditional steel works in Manchuria in January 1959 where he found out that high quality steel could only be produced in large-scale factories using reliable fuel such as coal. However, he decided not to order a halt to the backyard steel furnaces so as not to dampen the revolutionary enthusiasm of the masses. The program was only quietly abandoned much later in that year.]
The whole thing reminds me of Mao's "Great Leap Forward" only with GDP numbers instead of steel production quotas. Huge "economic numbers" are being driven by a lot of unseen costs that the reality of will eventually set in. It's better as a situation than the Great Leap in that you won't have massive starvation but I won't be surprised if you see massive deleveraging for a decade or more with all of the debt accrued. -
In my estimation, Trump's instincts are right that there's a problem and that China needs to be dealt with. The idea that we are going to revitalize the rust belt though is never going to happen the way he thinks it is. Even if he really believes that I just view it as a useful way to mobilize part of the base to have this fight out.Swaye said:So what I took from this entire thread, which was excellent btw, is Trump is WINNING again!
Sorry HondoBros. Maybe one day the US will lose again and then you can be happy.
American competitiveness is in innovation(Cdawg is right in this). American manufacturing is actually at all time highs despite the perception it is long gone. It's just that we manufacture using high-end processes to make high-end goods using lots of automation, as a developed economy should. Part of the trouble arises when our high end firms have to compete on unfair footing where a state with one of the most complex and well developed cyber espionage systems is designed to crush them(this is where Cdawg is wrong). For China it is a win-win(they like to use this phrase a lot as double speak), sabotage the US and gain economic prosperity at home. Theire're goal is world domination by the Chinese Communist Party, nothing less. The trade war though, could send China into recession and give the CCP more than they can handle at home.
My hope is that Trump's love for a deal will propel him to start striking trade agreements with allies. Great Britain is the most obvious candidate at the moment with a bilateral agreement. The US should be punishing China for unfair practices while championing fair and open trade across the rest of the world. We should be seen as the champion of the free world and a much better alternative to doing business with China. Not the less bad of two bullies. -
This is why I let you have man sex with me.UW_Doog_Bot said:
In my estimation, Trump's instincts are right that there's a problem and that China needs to be dealt with. The idea that we are going to revitalize the rust belt though is never going to happen the way he thinks it is. Even if he really believes that I just view it as a useful way to mobilize part of the base to have this fight out.Swaye said:So what I took from this entire thread, which was excellent btw, is Trump is WINNING again!
Sorry HondoBros. Maybe one day the US will lose again and then you can be happy.
American competitiveness is in innovation(Cdawg is right in this). American manufacturing is actually at all time highs despite the perception it is long gone. It's just that we manufacture using high-end processes to make high-end goods using lots of automation, as a developed economy should. Part of the trouble arises when our high end firms have to compete on unfair footing where a state with one of the most complex and well developed cyber espionage systems is designed to crush them(this is where Cdawg is wrong). For China it is a win-win(they like to use this phrase a lot as double speak), sabotage the US and gain economic prosperity at home. Theire're goal is world domination by the Chinese Communist Party, nothing less. The trade war though, could send China into recession and give the CCP more than they can handle at home.
My hope is that Trump's love for a deal will propel him to start striking trade agreements with allies. Great Britain is the most obvious candidate at the moment with a bilateral agreement. The US should be punishing China for unfair practices while championing fair and open trade across the rest of the world. We should be seen as the champion of the free world and a much better alternative to doing business with China. Not the less bad of two bullies. -
This fight and how Trump/US manage it will probably determine how much of the rest of the century play out. All 12 years of it.Swaye said:
This is why I let you have man sex with me.UW_Doog_Bot said:
In my estimation, Trump's instincts are right that there's a problem and that China needs to be dealt with. The idea that we are going to revitalize the rust belt though is never going to happen the way he thinks it is. Even if he really believes that I just view it as a useful way to mobilize part of the base to have this fight out.Swaye said:So what I took from this entire thread, which was excellent btw, is Trump is WINNING again!
Sorry HondoBros. Maybe one day the US will lose again and then you can be happy.
American competitiveness is in innovation(Cdawg is right in this). American manufacturing is actually at all time highs despite the perception it is long gone. It's just that we manufacture using high-end processes to make high-end goods using lots of automation, as a developed economy should. Part of the trouble arises when our high end firms have to compete on unfair footing where a state with one of the most complex and well developed cyber espionage systems is designed to crush them(this is where Cdawg is wrong). For China it is a win-win(they like to use this phrase a lot as double speak), sabotage the US and gain economic prosperity at home. Theire're goal is world domination by the Chinese Communist Party, nothing less. The trade war though, could send China into recession and give the CCP more than they can handle at home.
My hope is that Trump's love for a deal will propel him to start striking trade agreements with allies. Great Britain is the most obvious candidate at the moment with a bilateral agreement. The US should be punishing China for unfair practices while championing fair and open trade across the rest of the world. We should be seen as the champion of the free world and a much better alternative to doing business with China. Not the less bad of two bullies.
Either way, we will have eachother.
-
YBFEUW_Doog_Bot said:
This fight and how Trump/US manage it will probably determine how much of the rest of the century play out. All 12 years of it.Swaye said:
This is why I let you have man sex with me.UW_Doog_Bot said:
In my estimation, Trump's instincts are right that there's a problem and that China needs to be dealt with. The idea that we are going to revitalize the rust belt though is never going to happen the way he thinks it is. Even if he really believes that I just view it as a useful way to mobilize part of the base to have this fight out.Swaye said:So what I took from this entire thread, which was excellent btw, is Trump is WINNING again!
Sorry HondoBros. Maybe one day the US will lose again and then you can be happy.
American competitiveness is in innovation(Cdawg is right in this). American manufacturing is actually at all time highs despite the perception it is long gone. It's just that we manufacture using high-end processes to make high-end goods using lots of automation, as a developed economy should. Part of the trouble arises when our high end firms have to compete on unfair footing where a state with one of the most complex and well developed cyber espionage systems is designed to crush them(this is where Cdawg is wrong). For China it is a win-win(they like to use this phrase a lot as double speak), sabotage the US and gain economic prosperity at home. Theire're goal is world domination by the Chinese Communist Party, nothing less. The trade war though, could send China into recession and give the CCP more than they can handle at home.
My hope is that Trump's love for a deal will propel him to start striking trade agreements with allies. Great Britain is the most obvious candidate at the moment with a bilateral agreement. The US should be punishing China for unfair practices while championing fair and open trade across the rest of the world. We should be seen as the champion of the free world and a much better alternative to doing business with China. Not the less bad of two bullies.
Either way, we will have eachother.
