|
Post by sj on Nov 18, 2024 16:51:34 GMT -5
|
|
|
Post by ForRealTho on Nov 19, 2024 10:57:19 GMT -5
Of course, no single action exists in a bubble.. one event leads to another. Russia brought North Korean troops into Ukraine to help them turn the tide. So they were a bit naive in thinking the US wouldn't up their ante. In the 1980s the US supplied Osama Bin Laden and his friends with $50,000 stinger missiles, which were used by the Afghans to shoot down multi-million dollar USSR helicopters. Similar to US supplied missiles being used to shoot at Russians. If they didn't start lobbing nukes over that, I don't think they will over this. If the US decided to invade Russia I don't think China would pick Russia over the US. China makes waaaaay more money with the US and uses a ton of US technology.
|
|
|
Post by sj on Nov 19, 2024 11:21:17 GMT -5
Of course, no single action exists in a bubble.. one event leads to another. Russia brought North Korean troops into Ukraine to help them turn the tide. So they were a bit naive in thinking the US wouldn't up their ante. In the 1980s the US supplied Osama Bin Laden and his friends with $50,000 stinger missiles, which were used by the Afghans to shoot down multi-million dollar USSR helicopters. Similar to US supplied missiles being used to shoot at Russians. If they didn't start lobbing nukes over that, I don't think they will over this. If the US decided to invade Russia I don't think China would pick Russia over the US. China makes waaaaay more money with the US and uses a ton of US technology. There are new details you're missing. There are large populations of Russians living in Ukraine and Russia sees it as their territory (under Putin's restore the former USSR mindset). Of course it's absurd, but that's Russia's stated pov regarding Ukraine. Putin very recently rewrote their nuclear doctrine such that they can first-strike with nukes if US continues supplying Ukraine with weapons that hit deep inside Russia. i.e. their nuclear doctrine is no longer the same as it was from yesteryear. Read it for yourself. www.bing.com/news/event?q=putin+change+in+nuclear+policy&form=BFD001&eventid=ot_5774098bbe62fdd9c32edaec95893548_v2_en-us_3a94e354efa28908dd7879fc535d7647&eventt=Putin+issues+warning+to+U.S.+with+new+nuclear+doctrine
|
|
|
Post by sj on Nov 19, 2024 11:28:44 GMT -5
I agree that China probably won't get involved in Europe militarily (unless all-out WWIII breaks out, including the Pacific theater w/ China invading Taiwan). The Middle East also perhaps, if we attack Iran and if China believes they need ME oil, since China doesn't have huge oil fields in their own territory. Also, they'd rather declare lands surrounding their country as their own territory (which they've been doing and pissing off most of their neighbors, including Russia). So yeah, the Russia/China alliance is weak and would only be temporary if WWIII broke out. If they won a hypothetical WWIII (assuming the west were defeated), Russia & China would be warring with each other (over who controls what territories).
|
|
|
Post by sj on Nov 19, 2024 11:46:33 GMT -5
You need to realize that during Russia's war in Afghanistan, our weapons were only targeting Russian military inside Afghanistan (very few or no Russian civilians living inside Afghanistan).
Not so for the current war in Ukraine and Russia. Military and civilian (Russian) targets are being hit inside both Ukraine and Russia. What inevitably happens when a country targets civilians (even unofficially) is the citizens in that country start opposing the war more & more. This places pressure on the govt (in this case, Putin) to escalate aggression & threat levels in an effort to end the war sooner (before the PR gets so bad that ppl want to overthrow the current leadership).
|
|
|
Post by ForRealTho on Nov 19, 2024 13:02:50 GMT -5
True, I just don't think Putin is going to start a nuclear war over this. I could be wrong.
|
|
|
Post by sj on Nov 19, 2024 13:48:28 GMT -5
True, I just don't think Putin is going to start a nuclear war over this. I could be wrong. Perhaps not, but still. I'm considering 3rd party perspective, from the people ("think tanks") who do nothing but sit around every day thinking & analyzing the probabilities of humanity's demise. i.e. the "Doomsday Clock" (based on various simultaneous metrics - not only war - but other potentially humanity ending things like climate change) has never been closer to midnight (officially "90 seconds 'til midnight"), which is basically code for saying that humanity has never been closer to an extinction level event. And then there's all these recent news articles, about govt policies and wartime escalations, following their estimations and backing them up.
|
|
|
Post by sj on Nov 19, 2024 14:01:52 GMT -5
Also, consider the rapid progress in AI going on in the west. Putin is aware of this.. www.theverge.com/2017/9/4/16251226/russia-ai-putin-rule-the-worldRussia and China may actually want WWIII the moment some tech leader in the west (most likely, in the US or UK) announces that they've created AGI or ASI, to prevent the west from achieving total domination over them.
|
|
|
Post by ForRealTho on Nov 20, 2024 13:32:26 GMT -5
|
|
|
Post by sj on Nov 20, 2024 13:50:36 GMT -5
The funny part is that Obamacare isn't even socialized medicine. It's a copy of a Republican's state-level healthcare system which doubles down on the people purchasing privatized, for-profit health insurance. Well, except for ppl living at or below poverty level incomes, then it's quasi-socialized (it's still insurance, but government regs force the insurance co's to re-distribute the costs to paying customers). The ppl living at just above the poverty level get the shortest end of the stick. The best thing about it and what got most ppl on board was removing the insanely greedy pre-existing conditions clause insurance co's used to have.
|
|
|
Post by sj on Nov 21, 2024 15:36:47 GMT -5
Here's another reason to stop playing favorites for China. The ongoing massive trade deficits with China. They're bleeding the US dry. www.census.gov/foreign-trade/balance/c5700.htmlHow they do it? Unlike the US and other countries that have floating currencies (value of currencies determined by the free market), China pegs their currency (in order to make their products look cheaper compared to the same goods sold by other countries). To put it simply, they fucking cheat and do so to the detriment of poorer nations that play by the international rules. www.investopedia.com/articles/forex/030616/why-chinese-yuan-pegged.asp
|
|
|
Post by sj on Nov 21, 2024 16:13:26 GMT -5
www.investopedia.com/ask/answers/041515/fiat-money-more-prone-inflation-commodity-money.asp#1 Excessive money printing, historically, has always caused the most rapid rises in inflation. #2 for driving inflation is a weak energy policy, that causes energy prices (and, in turn, nearly everything else) to go up. #3 is probably greedflation - companies riding a wave of inflation and padding it with price bumps of their own. Blaming China tariffs for inflation is BS (particularly, when talking about a trading partner who cheats the system). China cheats on trade in multiple ways, so they're not raising anybody's boats but their own. Cutting back trade with China will be good for the world as a whole, because it'll substantially raise boats of poorer nations that don't cheat (by diverting manufacturing & exports from cheating China to those other nations). What's more, recent history.. Trump upped tariffs on China his first term and we (the US) had some of the lowest inflation in the nation's history during that period. There was higher inflation during Biden's term, following a substantial reduction in Trump's tariffs on China. Lastly, there's a tech revolution on the near-term horizon that should substantially lower the cost of goods and services. AI.
|
|
|
Post by sj on Nov 21, 2024 16:40:40 GMT -5
Free trade - the key word being "free" - has positive economic benefits. But that's only going by the textbook rules surrounding "free" trade. China don't follow those rules. They dump product & material at artificially low prices through currency manipulation, govt price fixing, etc, in order to drive competing nations out of entire industries. Once they've eliminated the competition, their prices go up.
An example are batteries. China drove out the competition through their corrupt practices. And sure enough, they raised their prices. The high prices then allowed the richest man in the US, Elon Musk, to do the math and figure out that he could do it cheaper.. Tesla's Gigafactory, he brought battery production back to the US by creating his own factory & internal supply chain, thereby lowering the cost of batteries.
|
|
|
Post by sj on Nov 21, 2024 16:45:40 GMT -5
|
|
|
Post by sj on Nov 21, 2024 21:25:39 GMT -5
|
|
|
Post by sj on Nov 21, 2024 21:51:39 GMT -5
|
|
|
Post by sj on Nov 23, 2024 22:35:24 GMT -5
|
|
|
Post by sj on Nov 23, 2024 23:58:18 GMT -5
|
|
|
Post by ForRealTho on Nov 24, 2024 17:20:00 GMT -5
|
|
|
Post by ForRealTho on Nov 24, 2024 17:20:50 GMT -5
Musk is as rich as he is because of the US Federal government, now he is talking about firing millions of Federal employees, what a scumbag.
|
|
|
Post by sj on Nov 25, 2024 15:09:06 GMT -5
As true as that is (about how Musk got his businesses up & running), due to insanely excessive govt spending over the decades, there's no other way to balance the budget than by axing many of the roughly 450 (+/-) govt agencies, as per his plan. I already did the research (.gov site - fiscaldata.treasury.gov/americas-finance-guide/national-debt/#the-growing-national-debt) and confirmed that what Musk said is true.. zeroing out all of the billionaires (i.e. raising their taxes to 100%, to pay towards the national debt) would only cover a small fraction of it. You just divide total wealth of all billionaires by the total national debt (over $35 trillion) to see what percentage they could pay. It's as simple as that. The other problem with trying through taxes alone (and keeping all govt agencies in place without any cutbacks) is that all the rich ppl would divest their US assets, flee for greener pastures and take all of their wealth with them (outside of the US).
|
|
|
Post by sj on Nov 25, 2024 15:21:56 GMT -5
Recommend watching the Stephen King video/interview too (above) if you haven't. He rips Trump really bad too, going over the ironic parallels between Trump and one of his (King's) fictional baddies.
|
|
|
Post by sj on Nov 25, 2024 15:35:29 GMT -5
I don't know if Tesla is going to make it. But situationally speaking, due to their importance to national security and the fact that competitors like Boeing are utter failures (on price and reliability), govt is going to continue pumping money into SpaceX and Starlink (keeping them alive, well into the forseeable future).
If you pay any attention to space news, Boeing's manned rocket had many embarrassing failures that prevented them from bringing back US crew and they had to call on SpaceX to bring them home (from the ISS back to earth).
|
|
|
Post by sj on Nov 25, 2024 15:46:58 GMT -5
|
|
|
Post by sj on Nov 25, 2024 17:28:34 GMT -5
imo, the biggest mistake Musk ever made was building Tesla factories in China. They'll just copy all of his EV tech and kick Tesla out of their market once all the technology transfers are completed, like they've done with so many other American companies.
Musk supporting Trump is counterintuitive in regards to Tesla because Trump's stated goal is to role back EV tax credits and mandates (that Democrats passed), likely shrinking overall demand for EV's during Trump's upcoming term in the WH.
idk, maybe Musk finally woke up to fact that China's going to screw him over sooner or later, and he decided to support Trump since that's who would most likely bail him out from a bad or broken Tesla deal w/ China.
|
|