Taiwan deploys anti-China missiles

[Abhishek_]

If they fire first they get flattened. If they fire second they won't fire at all. Don't get how it changes anything.

a flattened taiwan is of no use to china. if you cant even care for your own blood, what else is there to care about. try a different line of argument

 

[GR!FF!N]

Another Indian try to export Brahmos to Taiwan, as I had anticipated before I opened the thread. India is such a big military importer that it should give a rest about exporting any weapons. Finally, if India tries to sell Brahmos to Taiwan, Russia will say "hell no" to such a sale. The only thing India can do is shut up and go home.

another taiwanese trying to be oversmart..only 5 years ago,China was biggest exporter of arms in the world..it doesn't take time to reduce our imports when we modify our older weapons platform.and BRAHMOS is a JV(unless you don't know what it means)..so,it'll be a joint decision by both Russia and India..

 

[śūnya_0_Zero]

And what you think will happen to the inflation when the cheap chinese goods stop coming in?

In the year 2011 China exports 400 billions worth of goods to US and imports 103 billions.

The total export including US in 2010 is 1578 billions. In other words it is around 25 percent.

The exports and GDP ratio is around 30 percent.

You are saying?

Incorrect .. those exports "claimed from china" are actually South Korean and Japanese exports ... china just assembled and packs them. That's it.

Look at all those imports from South Korea, Japan and Taiwan to China ... China doesn't consume all those high technology electronics imports, but simply re-exports. Further, the IP for many of those "electronic components" manufactured in these countries are also held by United States (e.g. Apple).. they just don't want the manufacturing-related pollution in USA .. and the costs.


so, come out of your "dreamland". welcome to the world of reality.

your assembly line is waiting for your "cheap" labour.

 

[Black Stone]

This is normal procedure, ROC cannot sit idle and need to do something to assure it's citizens.

 

[ice bomb]

Incorrect .. those exports "claimed from china" are actually South Korean and Japanese exports ... china just assembled and packs them. That's it.

Look at all those imports from South Korea, Japan and Taiwan to China ... China doesn't consume all those high technology electronics imports, but simply re-exports. Further, the IP for many of those "electronic components" manufactured in these countries are also held by United States (e.g. Apple).. they just don't want the manufacturing-related pollution in USA .. and the costs.


so, come out of your "dreamland". welcome to the world of reality.

your assembly line is waiting for your "cheap" labour.

Source: http://www.defence.pk/forums/chines...loys-anti-china-missiles-5.html#ixzz1wQuAzRrS



And do tell what does that got to do with the post I was replying to?

D_In;2988767]it seems u didnt get my point and making your own theory of economics....what I pointed out at was, if there is any conflict between US and China, its China which will hurt the most and not the US….to understand this basic scenario you need not to have a great understanding of economics may be a simple common sesnse….I am still saying the same thing, if the US decides not to import anything from China, it can still live with it and can manage its economy..as its not China that makes up considerable part of US’s economy….on the contrary, if China lose the huge market like US from which it generates majority of its export revenue, its economy will go for a toss…Jackass…indeed you made me read it twice…lol..

If we follow your logic, then chinese exports only stands for a fraction of her total GDP. After all they are not really produce anything. It is the Korean, Japanese and US companies that will have to find a new market. Not that easy, right?

 

[śūnya_0_Zero]

Incorrect .. those exports "claimed from china" are actually South Korean and Japanese exports ... china just assembled and packs them. That's it.

Look at all those imports from South Korea, Japan and Taiwan to China ... China doesn't consume all those high technology electronics imports, but simply re-exports. Further, the IP for many of those "electronic components" manufactured in these countries are also held by United States (e.g. Apple).. they just don't want the manufacturing-related pollution in USA .. and the costs.


so, come out of your "dreamland". welcome to the world of reality.

your assembly line is waiting for your "cheap" labour.

Source: http://www.defence.pk/forums/chines...loys-anti-china-missiles-5.html#ixzz1wQuAzRrS



And do tell what does that got to do with the post I was replying to?

D_In;2988767]it seems u didnt get my point and making your own theory of economics....what I pointed out at was, if there is any conflict between US and China, its China which will hurt the most and not the US….to understand this basic scenario you need not to have a great understanding of economics may be a simple common sesnse….I am still saying the same thing, if the US decides not to import anything from China, it can still live with it and can manage its economy..as its not China that makes up considerable part of US’s economy….on the contrary, if China lose the huge market like US from which it generates majority of its export revenue, its economy will go for a toss…Jackass…indeed you made me read it twice…lol..

If we follow your logic, then chinese exports only stands for a fraction of her total GDP. After all they are not really produce anything. It is the Korean, Japanese and US companies that will have to find a new market. Not that easy, right?

Actually, it's that easy .. dear.

If nobody buys an iPhone ... china loses the least.

It's South Korea, Japan, Taiwan and off course USA which lose.

... And all this, when EACH iPhone in the world is "manufactured" (or rather "assembled") in china, and find out how many Billion $$ worth of iPhone is exported out of China.

And yet, china doesn't need care or "find" markets for iPhone.

 

[ice bomb]

Actually, it's that easy .. dear.

If nobody buys an iPhone ... china loses the least.

It's South Korea, Japan, Taiwan and off course USA which lose.

... And all this, when EACH iPhone in the world is "manufactured" (or rather "assembled") in china, and find out how many Billion $$ worth of iPhone is exported out of China.

And yet, china doesn't need care or "find" markets for iPhone.

Well, dear. You dont need to convince me in an internet forum.

Only those who are outsourcing to China.

I only state the ground reality. You can keep dreaming about how easy it is to find a similar market with skilled workers and infrastructure to support the operations.

 

[gambit]

Actually, it's that easy .. dear.

If nobody buys an iPhone ... china loses the least.

It's South Korea, Japan, Taiwan and off course USA which lose.

... And all this, when EACH iPhone in the world is "manufactured" (or rather "assembled") in china, and find out how many Billion $$ worth of iPhone is exported out of China.

And yet, china doesn't need care or "find" markets for iPhone.

That is a terrible argument. If the iPhone is that bad to the point 'nobody' would buy it, Apple and Chinese contractors would have learned very early and any losses would be borned by both parties. They would found out about it early and would accept the losses as part of the normal capitalist adventures. But since the iPhone is proven to be such a success, your 'nobody' argument is pointless. If the fad wears out, it would wear out gradually and Apple and contractors would begin to wind down production to match.

But the point is this: Since capitalism depends on consumption and China's rise depends on the same, except that it is foreign consumption for China's cheap labor, China is actually more dependent upon said foreign consumption than we on China's cheap labor because China does not have a monopoly on labor, let alone cheap labor, which other countries are willing to provide if the foreigners are willing to invest in education and training.

 

[Oldman1]

That is a terrible argument. If the iPhone is that bad to the point 'nobody' would buy it, Apple and Chinese contractors would have learned very early and any losses would be borned by both parties. They would found out about it early and would accept the losses as part of the normal capitalist adventures. But since the iPhone is proven to be such a success, your 'nobody' argument is pointless. If the fad wears out, it would wear out gradually and Apple and contractors would begin to wind down production to match.

But the point is this: Since capitalism depends on consumption and China's rise depends on the same, except that it is foreign consumption for China's cheap labor, China is actually more dependent upon said foreign consumption than we on China's cheap labor because China does not have a monopoly on labor, let alone cheap labor, which other countries are willing to provide if the foreigners are willing to invest in education and training.

Reminds me of the "The Bear and the Dragon" by Tom Clancy.

 

[śūnya_0_Zero]

That is a terrible argument. If the iPhone is that bad to the point 'nobody' would buy it, Apple and Chinese contractors would have learned very early and any losses would be borned by both parties. They would found out about it early and would accept the losses as part of the normal capitalist adventures. But since the iPhone is proven to be such a success, your 'nobody' argument is pointless. If the fad wears out, it would wear out gradually and Apple and contractors would begin to wind down production to match.

But the point is this: Since capitalism depends on consumption and China's rise depends on the same, except that it is foreign consumption for China's cheap labor, China is actually more dependent upon said foreign consumption than we on China's cheap labor because China does not have a monopoly on labor, let alone cheap labor, which other countries are willing to provide if the foreigners are willing to invest in education and training.

What you say is obviously correct.

Even that part, where you imply china does get a small cut in iPhone success ... but also you yourself said, it's as per capitalistic rules... profits are divided in proportion to contibution and risks taken.

What is china's contribution: cheap labour.
What is china's risk: nil

Who has maximum contribution and investment risk: Apple.

Hence, china reaps small benefits of "exporting" Billions of dollar worth of iPhones (in fact each and every iPhone is "manufactured" in china ... so almost entire revenues of Apple Inc. would be china's exports):

Apple buys components from South Korea, Japan and Taiwan (and even within US),
Apple imports these components into china,
Apple gives these components to Foxconn for assembly, which uses china's cheap labour,
Apple exports the assembled iPhones .... off course from china, which gets counted as Billion $$$ exports,
Apple worries at what price it will sell, who will buy etc.
Apples gets all the revenues and profits.


See what Apples role is .. what South Korea, Taiwan and Japan's role is ... and what China's role is: providing cheap labour and counting Billions of $$$$ in it's exports.

The the key is it isn't Apple's isolated story .... the story is the same for Dell, Philips, ToyRUs ... bla bla ... !!!

It's like saying, if India office of Intel designs an Intel chip, all Intel revenues on that particular chip should be "India's exports" .... even though all revenue goes to Intel, profit goes to Intel ..and all the risk and investment is borne by Intel. Is it?

No dear, it's only the wages that Intel pays in India .... and only that gets counted in India's services exports. Off course, not the global sales revenue on that chip.

Find out what proportion of those 400 Bilion dollars are owned, marketed and profited by MNCs.

And what is left from 400 Billion after these MNCs are removed .. is what is china's true exports.

 

[gambit]

Even that part, where you imply china does get a small cut in iPhone success ... but also you yourself said, it's as per capitalistic rules... profits are divided in proportion to contibution and risks taken.

What is china's contribution: cheap labour.
What is china's risk: nil

Still wrong. Without foreign products being assembled in China for foreign consumption, there would be no workers, factories, and assorted peripheral support industries. But once the workers are employed and enjoyed a better standard of life, factories that have investors, peripheral industries that inevitably sprang up to support those workers with their higher pay, and take them all away...What do you think is going to happen...??? Try unemployment and unhappy workers for starter.

 

[śūnya_0_Zero]

Still wrong. Without foreign products being assembled in China for foreign consumption, there would be no workers, factories, and assorted peripheral support industries. But once the workers are employed and enjoyed a better standard of life, factories that have investors, peripheral industries that inevitably sprang up to support those workers with their higher pay, and take them all away...What do you think is going to happen...??? Try unemployment and unhappy workers for starter.

Arguing on web forum doens't change reality .. does it?

China exported $$$ 100 Billion dollars of iPhones and iPads last year (Apple's revenue) and got $$$ 25 Billion out of this activity. Only this were true, as many chinese would like to believe !!!

No dear, china got only the wages Foxconn paid to the labour .. that's it.

And my or your wishing anything else doesn't change things. It's same story for all MNCs having factories in china ... they are only buying cheap labour or subsidized inputs.