LaxFan2000 wrote: ↑Tue Aug 09, 2022 1:15 pmYou live in one of the bluest states in the US. Nothing more needed to be said.
Minnesota is "purple". Just about as many Repukes as Democrats. State Senate majority is Puke.
LaxFan2000 wrote: ↑Tue Aug 09, 2022 1:15 pmYou live in one of the bluest states in the US. Nothing more needed to be said.
exactly! I know several Mexican Americans who's level of "conservatism" (as Brooklyn would use the word in all its potential derogatory interpretations) makes me more than a little uncomfortable......LaxFan2000 wrote: ↑Tue Aug 09, 2022 1:15 pmYou live in one of the bluest states in the US. Nothing more needed to be said.
These parts were core to the Kemp/Buckley Republicans of 25yrs ago.HooDat wrote: ↑Tue Aug 09, 2022 1:00 pmAmericans of Mexican decent obviously come in all shapes and flavors. I am not sure MAGA has "matured" enough to have a very firm definition in anyone's mind. For some, MAGA is anything Trump says. For others it is a pseudonym for racist or fascist. I think there is a growing part of the GOP that wants to see MAGA come to represent a globalism suspicious, state's rights, fundamental interpretation of the Constitution, small business and family focused movement. I would venture to say (in the spirit of my opening line) that Mexican Americans fall into all three categories, but I was focused on the last.Farfromgeneva wrote: ↑Tue Aug 09, 2022 12:26 pm but you’ve lost focus of what the MAGA movement believes in and wants. Not a political party.
I understand that many of Mexican heritage are conservative but that still doesn’t make them part of the team as well.HooDat wrote: ↑Tue Aug 09, 2022 1:00 pmAmericans of Mexican decent obviously come in all shapes and flavors. I am not sure MAGA has "matured" enough to have a very firm definition in anyone's mind. For some, MAGA is anything Trump says. For others it is a pseudonym for racist or fascist. I think there is a growing part of the GOP that wants to see MAGA come to represent a globalism suspicious, state's rights, fundamental interpretation of the Constitution, small business and family focused movement. I would venture to say (in the spirit of my opening line) that Mexican Americans fall into all three categories, but I was focused on the last.Farfromgeneva wrote: ↑Tue Aug 09, 2022 12:26 pm but you’ve lost focus of what the MAGA movement believes in and wants. Not a political party.
You must see the world through a far more race based lens than I do.Farfromgeneva wrote: ↑Tue Aug 09, 2022 1:43 pmI understand that many of Mexican heritage are conservative but that still doesn’t make them part of the team as well.HooDat wrote: ↑Tue Aug 09, 2022 1:00 pmAmericans of Mexican decent obviously come in all shapes and flavors. I am not sure MAGA has "matured" enough to have a very firm definition in anyone's mind. For some, MAGA is anything Trump says. For others it is a pseudonym for racist or fascist. I think there is a growing part of the GOP that wants to see MAGA come to represent a globalism suspicious, state's rights, fundamental interpretation of the Constitution, small business and family focused movement. I would venture to say (in the spirit of my opening line) that Mexican Americans fall into all three categories, but I was focused on the last.Farfromgeneva wrote: ↑Tue Aug 09, 2022 12:26 pm but you’ve lost focus of what the MAGA movement believes in and wants. Not a political party.
How so? What makes you conclude that? I’m talking about the behavior fo a cohort towards Mexican Americans. Not myself, that isn’t my view but it’s the view I’ve heard and seen projected and stated in primary source many many times. I would include large chunks of my paternal family in that group, all in WNY or SE PA basically.HooDat wrote: ↑Tue Aug 09, 2022 1:58 pmYou must see the world through a far more race based lens than I do.Farfromgeneva wrote: ↑Tue Aug 09, 2022 1:43 pmI understand that many of Mexican heritage are conservative but that still doesn’t make them part of the team as well.HooDat wrote: ↑Tue Aug 09, 2022 1:00 pmAmericans of Mexican decent obviously come in all shapes and flavors. I am not sure MAGA has "matured" enough to have a very firm definition in anyone's mind. For some, MAGA is anything Trump says. For others it is a pseudonym for racist or fascist. I think there is a growing part of the GOP that wants to see MAGA come to represent a globalism suspicious, state's rights, fundamental interpretation of the Constitution, small business and family focused movement. I would venture to say (in the spirit of my opening line) that Mexican Americans fall into all three categories, but I was focused on the last.Farfromgeneva wrote: ↑Tue Aug 09, 2022 12:26 pm but you’ve lost focus of what the MAGA movement believes in and wants. Not a political party.
Not trying to ruffle your feathers. You just seem to keep bringing everything down to a perception that race and/or racism is what is driving people's politics. In my life I see little to none of that.Farfromgeneva wrote: ↑Tue Aug 09, 2022 2:02 pmKind of feels like a cheap shot too but I’m not going to be a biyach about it like some because I’m actually comfortable with myself unlike some folks running around here (not you). Comes across as a cheap heuristic.
HooDat wrote: ↑Tue Aug 09, 2022 2:15 pmNot trying to ruffle your feathers. You just seem to keep bringing everything down to a perception that race and/or racism is what is driving people's politics. In my life I see little to none of that.Farfromgeneva wrote: ↑Tue Aug 09, 2022 2:02 pmKind of feels like a cheap shot too but I’m not going to be a biyach about it like some because I’m actually comfortable with myself unlike some folks running around here (not you). Comes across as a cheap heuristic.
I think you may have missed the much larger question ardilla was asking, which TLD (supposedly my alter ego main account) responded with a sarcastic yet appropriate response.a fan wrote: ↑Mon Aug 08, 2022 5:54 pmWithout question, given the other options available.ardilla secreta wrote: ↑Mon Aug 08, 2022 5:44 pm Given the size of China, was it really a good idea by the American politicians while in a head-lock by American business interests to build such a country into one of the strongest economies and therefore allowing it to become the most menacing?
What path would you have chosen? Cold War and isolation?
Yes. But this was not a governmental choice. This was a free market choice. Our companies can make chips and components domestically. They CHOSE not to do that for the last 30 or so years, in the absence of government intervention.NattyBohChamps04 wrote: ↑Tue Aug 09, 2022 9:38 pmI think you may have missed the much larger question ardilla was asking, which TLD (supposedly my alter ego main account) responded with a sarcastic yet appropriate response.a fan wrote: ↑Mon Aug 08, 2022 5:54 pmWithout question, given the other options available.ardilla secreta wrote: ↑Mon Aug 08, 2022 5:44 pm Given the size of China, was it really a good idea by the American politicians while in a head-lock by American business interests to build such a country into one of the strongest economies and therefore allowing it to become the most menacing?
What path would you have chosen? Cold War and isolation?
We gave China a golden goose decades ago . Our manufacturing capacity and other supply chain infrastructure to save a few bucks and improve profits. They had a billion people in 1980. They did things cheaper and we didn't care how. Made us a few bucks at the expense of national security and independence.
https://www.ipwatchdog.com/2015/04/02/c ... /id=56088/NattyBohChamps04 wrote: ↑Tue Aug 09, 2022 9:38 pmI think you may have missed the much larger question ardilla was asking, which TLD (supposedly my alter ego main account) responded with a sarcastic yet appropriate response.a fan wrote: ↑Mon Aug 08, 2022 5:54 pmWithout question, given the other options available.ardilla secreta wrote: ↑Mon Aug 08, 2022 5:44 pm Given the size of China, was it really a good idea by the American politicians while in a head-lock by American business interests to build such a country into one of the strongest economies and therefore allowing it to become the most menacing?
What path would you have chosen? Cold War and isolation?
We gave China a golden goose decades ago . Our manufacturing capacity and other supply chain infrastructure to save a few bucks and improve profits. They had a billion people in 1980. They did things cheaper and we didn't care how. Made us a few bucks at the expense of national security and independence.
This was long before we had to choose a Cold War and isolation.
Now we're shifting manufacturing to India and other countries India plenty of issues, but you only need 2-3 decades of government centralization to turn it into a global superpower.
“Insourcing” (such a dumb term) has been going on for close to a decade now. Companies like Delta have pulled back call centers Etc. So it can happen organically.a fan wrote: ↑Tue Aug 09, 2022 11:38 pmYes. But this was not a governmental choice. This was a free market choice. Our companies can make chips and components domestically. They CHOSE not to do that for the last 30 or so years, in the absence of government intervention.NattyBohChamps04 wrote: ↑Tue Aug 09, 2022 9:38 pmI think you may have missed the much larger question ardilla was asking, which TLD (supposedly my alter ego main account) responded with a sarcastic yet appropriate response.a fan wrote: ↑Mon Aug 08, 2022 5:54 pmWithout question, given the other options available.ardilla secreta wrote: ↑Mon Aug 08, 2022 5:44 pm Given the size of China, was it really a good idea by the American politicians while in a head-lock by American business interests to build such a country into one of the strongest economies and therefore allowing it to become the most menacing?
What path would you have chosen? Cold War and isolation?
We gave China a golden goose decades ago . Our manufacturing capacity and other supply chain infrastructure to save a few bucks and improve profits. They had a billion people in 1980. They did things cheaper and we didn't care how. Made us a few bucks at the expense of national security and independence.
So the obvious question is: what's was (and now is) the alternative? And the obvious answer is: Government intervention to somehow steer production and trade away from China in the name of military security. A Cold War.
That's it. That's the option.
It absolutely CAN happen, I agree. It's a choice made by overpaid CEO's who are unable to think long term, and don't have even a shred of patriotism.Farfromgeneva wrote: ↑Fri Aug 12, 2022 9:28 am “Insourcing” (such a dumb term) has been going on for close to a decade now. Companies like Delta have pulled back call centers Etc. So it can happen organically.
or...have considered their duty to be to maximize returns to shareholders...it's only recently that CEO's have been getting the message that there are many more stakeholders than simply shareholders.a fan wrote: ↑Fri Aug 12, 2022 11:40 amIt absolutely CAN happen, I agree. It's a choice made by overpaid CEO's who are unable to think long term, and don't have even a shred of patriotism.Farfromgeneva wrote: ↑Fri Aug 12, 2022 9:28 am “Insourcing” (such a dumb term) has been going on for close to a decade now. Companies like Delta have pulled back call centers Etc. So it can happen organically.
From my perspective, the Pentagon wonks are very serious about this.a fan wrote: ↑Mon Aug 08, 2022 11:48 pm Pardon me if I don't believe that America----or you----are behaving as if China is our enemy. Looks to me like they are our best trading and educational partner, Doc.
Do we issue more Student Visas to any other Nation than China, Doc? Nope. Now why would we do that if China was our enemy?
And why don't YOU care that we're educating Chinese students at Hopkins, Doc? Putting Chinese students in front of American students, Doc? Now why would you support that if you thought China was our enemy, Doc?
Wake me up when you and your fellow Pentagon wonks get serious about this so called "enemy" of yours.....
afan -- which option do you choose ?a fan wrote: ↑Tue Aug 09, 2022 11:38 pmYes. But this was not a governmental choice. This was a free market choice. Our companies can make chips and components domestically. They CHOSE not to do that for the last 30 or so years, in the absence of government intervention.NattyBohChamps04 wrote: ↑Tue Aug 09, 2022 9:38 pmI think you may have missed the much larger question ardilla was asking, which TLD (supposedly my alter ego main account) responded with a sarcastic yet appropriate response.a fan wrote: ↑Mon Aug 08, 2022 5:54 pmWithout question, given the other options available.ardilla secreta wrote: ↑Mon Aug 08, 2022 5:44 pm Given the size of China, was it really a good idea by the American politicians while in a head-lock by American business interests to build such a country into one of the strongest economies and therefore allowing it to become the most menacing?
What path would you have chosen? Cold War and isolation?
We gave China a golden goose decades ago . Our manufacturing capacity and other supply chain infrastructure to save a few bucks and improve profits. They had a billion people in 1980. They did things cheaper and we didn't care how. Made us a few bucks at the expense of national security and independence.
So the obvious question is: what's was (and now is) the alternative? And the obvious answer is: Government intervention to somehow steer production and trade away from China in the name of military security. A Cold War.
That's it. That's the option.
Rarely is.MDlaxfan76 wrote: ↑Sat Aug 13, 2022 8:12 am I don't think this is actually a binary situation.
There are benefits to the US and to the world of an ongoing economic and cultural relationship with China, even as they move more or less towards to aggressiveness, as their internal politics evolve (they have evolved very positively over the last 4 decades, but have recently backslid alarmingly). We can hope that they evolve in ways that are more congruent or at least compatible with our own values, but that's definitely not a sure thing...though at least more likely through ongoing cultural and economic exchange than without.
Whether that relationship will ultimately be sufficient deterrent to hot conflict with China, it is also clearly prudent to take various steps to deter such with hard power, not just the soft power referenced above.
Calibrating these is a major challenge, but I think the rhetoric of binary choice gets in the way of the most effective policy posture.
On the particular economic question that was posed, I don't think we need to go to a "Cold War" rhetoric to recognize that certain industries have such strategic importance in extreme (hot war) situations that we should be especially careful with them, given that the history of the world to date suggests that such extreme situations are likely to occur again...that doesn't mean cutting off trade, it means being more deliberate as a government, not entirely laissez faire.
Thus, the CHIPS act should have had very strong bipartisan support.
Then why is China our third largest Trading Partner? That's your idea of a 'serious'? issue. It sure isn't mine.
You mean where we actually discuss an idea or issue thoroughly? Perish the thought.
Yep. I also believe that Taiwan is a huge trading partner for China, and a cash register they'd rather not ruin. They know that if they invade, it will cost them long term money. It's the ONLY reason they don't invade.
I asked you months ago if the US is responsible for Taiwan. You said no. Did you change your mind?
I believe that you and your fellow Republicans are full of sh(t, and are the party that has been pushing for OPEN trade with China (and everyone else) since Reagan arrived. This policy, coupled with union busting and deregulation has eviscerated the US middle class, and destroyed our nation. So when I hear lame, pathetical calls about "standing up to China", I know a bunch of lies are soon to follow.old salt wrote: ↑Sat Aug 13, 2022 1:46 am (3) Do you believe that we can continue trade, tech sharing & shared development with China, as we have, regardless of their actions vis-a-vis Taiwan, the South China Sea, the WPac region, our Asis-Pacific allies & their imperialism, both military & economic ?
Sure it is. You either have the government step in to curtail trade with China BASED on the belief that they are our enemy, or you don't.