http://www.veteranstoday.com/2012/03/07/china-rise-fall-and-re-emergence-as-a-global-power/
Prof James Petras and Martin Jacques give us some excellent insights into China's history and the Wests flawed perceptions of their culture.

Jacques observes that people in the West view their Nation State as an intruder that must be controlled.China has notions of a Civilisation State that is head of the family.They are the oldest civilisation on the planet and 90% believe they come from the same race, ie The Han.

When Hong Kong was handed over to the Chinese 13yrs ago the West saw failure.Chinese philosophy was one country two systems.In fact China lets many systems operate in it's market economy but the State provides the infrastructure mostly debt free for the people.This is another reason why their growth rates are enormous.

James Petras observes that while China will soon be the largest economic power they have failed to match the USA in the arms race,thus the US is using this muscle to try and starve China of energy and resources.This is what has brought about this alliance between China,Russia Pakistan and the BRIC Nations.Some 300 Chinese oil engineers were forced from Libya when NATO invaded it.

Now we have the stand off in Syria and Iran with both China and Russia warning the West not to invade either.Japan went to war because of trade embagoes by the USA and fear of energy starvation.

Our problem is that the old ego driven Oligarchs who rule us and destroyed our economies,cannot accept that their power is waning and are willing to risk a global conflict to establish their New World Order.

oh dear on two fronts
http://forum.worldfreemansociety.org/viewtopic.php?f=43&t=12942

http://www.zerohedge.com/news/china-posts-biggest-trade-deficit-1989-crude-imports-surge-china-recycling-export-dollars-solel
Check the links in the story.
Exports have stopped.
The ships are parked.

The Baltic Dry Index is flat lining near the bottom
http://www.dryships.com/pages/report.asp
Interbank lending has stopped.

The BRICS are turfing the U.S. dollar
which in turn will flood the states with huge amounts of money driving up inflation..

China Posts Biggest Trade Deficit Since 1989
As Crude Imports Surge: Is China Recycling Export Dollars Solely Into Oil?

In addition to all the US election year propaganda and delayed after effects of central banks injecting nearly $3 trillion in liquidity to juice up the US stock market, something far more notable yet underreported has happened in 2012:

the world stopped exporting.

Observe the following sequence of very recent headlines: "Japan trade deficit hits record", "Australia Records First Trade Deficit in 11 Months on 8% Plunge in Exports", "Brazil Posts First Monthly Trade Deficit in 12 Months " then of course this: "[US] Trade deficit hits 3-year record imbalance", a

nd finally, as of late last night, we get the following stunning headline: "China Has Biggest Trade Shortfall Since 1989 on Europe Turmoil."......read more at the link at the top

OUG China can simply increase local wages and create it's own economy.Of the 1300 million there only 400 million sharing in the bonanza.They in all reality don't need the West if they are smart.China's domestic market can take up the slack.

The West's economy is shrinking because of the debt based system of money creation.We increasingly will buy less goods no matter how cheap they are because our productivity gets expressed as debt by private banks.

Arjay, so what if China becomes an economic powerhouse? Why will
it matter? People in Japan used to be poor, people in South Korea
used to be poor, look at them both now. Why do you assume that
the West has to be poor for China to do well?

At some point the Yuan will be traded and then it will rise and
the US$ will fall. So some things will be produced in America
once again.

What the Chinese have learned the hard way, is that having your
vaults full of US$ does not really do alot of good.

Meantime a whole new market has opened up for Western goods. The
Chinese are the world's largest buyers of European luxury goods.
From Hermes 5000$ handbags to 20'000$ Rolex watches, they are being
snapped up. We are selling iron ore at coal and prices which were
unimaginable just 10 years ago. They now buy our lamb, they come
here as tourists.

Trade benefits both sides, so why would anyone want to start a war
over all this?

I agree Yabby,that's why I don't want to go to war with them.A few lunatics in the West want to.The USA had one aircraft carrier in the Pacific,they have just moved another 7 of their 14 carriers there to antagonise China.

Arjay, nearly every nation that I can think of, including Japan, China
Iran and many more, has some nationalistic zealots calling for
warfare. That does not mean that its taken seriously or will happen.

The Pacific Ocean covers nearly half the world's oceans, so it
makes perfect sense for the US to station about half its fleet
in that ocean.

But you people jump to conspiracy conclusions. It must be to upset
China. Do you really believe that Obama is a warmonger who wants
to start a war with China? Why would he?

Far more likely for Obama to roll a joint and smoke a peace pipe.
Obama is not Bush.

Yabby said;
Why do you assume that the West has to be poor for China to do well?

It is simple, the resources needed to make all Chinese moderately well
off are not available without denying those resources to the "west".

The Chinese realise that and it is why they are buying up land in
Australia and Africa, oil fields in Africa and Sth America, iron ore
prospects in Africa, Australia and Sth America.
A ban on export of rare earths, etc etc.

The earth just cannot supply enough food and resources for 7 billion
people at our standard of living. Either we become poorer or a few
billion stay on a low standard of living or they starve.

Thems the choices, no ifs, no buts, no argument we have passed the
point of arguing about it.

You choose.

Arjay, there are as many views on "understanding China" as there are commentators. But you are right, it is a fascinating story, one that will occupy us for the next fifty years at least, if not the rest of this century.

I recommend that you read Kissinger's "On China" sometime. Although it is just one man's interpretation of history, at least he was there. And this excerpt from the Guardian's review will probably get your conspiracy-nerves a-tingling...

"...why and how did President Richard Nixon decide that it was in America's interests to protect communist China? Kissinger tells us that this de facto alliance was personally decided by Nixon in August 1969 just as the Soviet Union was preparing to launch a pre-emptive nuclear attack on China. Nixon had decided the Soviets were the more dangerous party and that it was against American interests for China to be "smashed" in a Chinese-Soviet war"

But more recently, the Kiss is earning his crust with articles like this:

http://www.foreignaffairs.com/articles/137245/henry-a-kissinger/the-future-of-us-chinese-relations

"On January 19, 2011, U.S. President Barack Obama and Chinese President Hu Jintao issued a joint statement at the end of Hu’s visit to Washington. It proclaimed their shared commitment to a 'positive, cooperative, and comprehensive U.S.-China relationship.' Each party reassured the other regarding his principal concern, announcing, 'The United States reiterated that it welcomes a strong, prosperous, and successful China that plays a greater role in world affairs. China welcomes the United States as an Asia-Pacific nation that contributes to peace, stability and prosperity in the region.' Since then, the two governments have set about implementing the stated objectives."

Later in the article he - tantalizingly - points out that:

"Significant groups in both countries claim that a contest for supremacy between China and the United States is inevitable and perhaps already under way."

Those are the ones you like to hear about, aren't they?

And I know I've mentioned this before, Arjay, but it's probably worth another go: don't try your hand at economics, or anything to do with international finance. You'll only end up with egg on your face.

>>China can simply increase local wages and create it's own economy.Of the 1300 million there only 400 million sharing in the bonanza.They in all reality don't need the West if they are smart.China's domestic market can take up the slack.<<

There's so much wrong with those four sentences, it's difficult to know where to start. But as a kick-off, how about you consider first the impact on China's trade of a shut-down of exports. Then think how any "increase in local wages" could come about without causing inflation. On the way, try to work out how China would fund the replacement of all its imports.

Once you have done that... no, forget it, it's bound to be a waste of time. You haven't listened in the past, why should you start now?.

bazz/re-quote...{the West has to be poor for China to do well?}

""the resources..needed/without denying..those resources to the "west".""

that isnt so
[we are..in a mining boom
all booms bust...

yes its going to china
but its extra....[on a fast depleting/resource..any capitalist would stock_pile..its needs for the next twenty/years

and this..china has done!

lol..in ever falling yanki/dollars
[yet china..still wants to retain parity..with us$]

if they let..their yaun rise
the chinese would get it..ALL..at a bargin rate
pennies in the dollar..[thats default rate]..

[who's at fault?]
those holding hard assets
for proffiteering!

that lot of corperates
that have near trippled its cost
knowing we need to buy it...to consume it

to work hard for less..just
to keep building it..ever cheaper
with ever lowers wage slaves..not consuming[barely surviving]

using less/resource
each new generation..for..a better product

""The earth..cannot supply enough food/resources
for 7 billion..at our/standard of living""

that is bull
mate verticle_gardening alone
can double .the crop..then you got
like cuba's urban gardens..[that will become huge..anywhere there is a little sun...soil or room..to run hydro]

mate..imagine high_rise farming
the next evolution..of verticle farming

why the buildings ..llready got lights/water transport
direct into cbd...[just run some trickle irragation]

fish in the basement
worms..fowl.....[i know guys making
50,000 on half an acre..just selling dried herbs

""Either we become poorer or a few
billion stay on a low..standard of living..or they starve.""

lets decapitalise
im ok with halving my standard of consumption

in fact will take
the 5 year pledge..not to update anything not totally needed

heck i just need..a packet of china vitamin noodles
and a packet of jelly crystals..two dimsims

and half a pack of bread and toppings..per day
plus my coffee...smokes...lighters papers...web acces electicity

buy there is plenty of ways..to reduce
consume locally..heck give me a couple of chooks 2 eggs perday

a pregnant sow
bacon for life

""Thems the choices, no ifs, no buts,
no argument..we have passed the
point..of arguing about it.

You choose.""

NO WORRIES
i WILL GROW MY OWN

make do
do just fine

i agree china has plenty going for it
in the way of control over the instruments of govt/finance/law

the big advantage with china is many can simply return home
living relitivly rent free..with cash for some civilisation and comunication

if the factories close
many would simply go home to the farm

its all them compulsory things
that destroy wealth..compulsory 3 rd party insurance
is a huge cash cow..health insurance..etc

heck..they need to save
cause it all costs so much
but once you get home
you only need shelter food company
easilly done by paying them to restore their home
preserve culture document lifestyles...revere the old for their wisdom

next china will pick up bigger
on educating/caring for its people
[their main resource]

in the end govt can do anything a capitalist can
cheaper and better....as long as we got qualified skilled workers

*It is simple, the resources needed to make all Chinese moderately well
off are not available without denying those resources to the "west".*

So what resources are you concerned about, Bazz? Most resources
can in fact be recycled. Steel, copper, nickel, aluminium and all
the rest. Gas prices in the US are at a 10 year low, due to all
that shale gas and the Chinese have figured out that if they use
US technology, they can access 27 trillion cubic metres of their
own shale gas, enough for around 200 years.

Meantime electric cars are ready to go, for anyone wanting to buy
one, solar cells are dropping in price like a stone.

I know, the old oil is your concern. Well if oil is expensive,
somebody is making money. There are good reasons why lamb is at
an all time high for instance. The Arabs have money and will spend
it, people like me benefit.

In fact if Bazz wants to improve his lifestyele, he can buy an
Ipad which uses a few grammes of resources, download hundreds of
books and hundreds of music albums, take photographs to his hearts
content and use hardly any resources in the process. Resource
efficiency is a game changer.

Yabby,
Unfortunately it is not just recycling that is the answer, after all
you never get 100% recyclement, oh is that a new word !

Already copper, to take just one, has risen very high in price and is
now becoming money like silver and gold.
Seven billion people and increasing at our level of resource demand is
just beyond availability. We are already in trouble over wood, paper
water and an increasing list of products.
Take coal for instance, world peak coal is expected around 2025 and the
quality in most countries is falling, which increases the tonnage for
the same energy output.
The Chinese are currently using about three times as much coal as the US.

The shale gas in the US is something of a mirage as it needs
continuous drilling due to the short life of the wells, a bit over
one year, and a very steep depletion curve.

It just cannot be done for 7 billion people.

Yabby does talk some sense here.Most of the metal,plastic resources can be recyled.Energy may not be the problem in the near future as technology gets better.Cold fusion is not out of the question.Also hudrogen energy is being experimented by the Japs in cars.Also there is Fusion as in the Sun which is a future prospect.This is what could be worrying the Oil Maggots,who want to control us oil via their monopoly on energy.Hence this could also pushing this rush for war so they can control everything.

Pericles China can can slowly increase domestic consumption and keep their economy expanding.Eventaully the West will be totally broke with a one way system buying from China and pay interest to the debt parasites.If all your money to equal production is created as debt,then the debt eventually will be equal to all the money in your econmy.It is happening right now.You rabbit on about your economic prowess but I see little to impress me.

China is having manufacturers leaving for India. The cost of labour is rising. $ 200 / month does not do it any more, they want and get $400 / mth. This is causing labour shortages.

*Unfortunately it is not just recycling that is the answer, after all
you never get 100% recyclement*

Well no Bazz, because resources are still dirt cheap, in comparison
to say Western labour. If the West can't survive without resources
at giveaway prices, then perhaps the West needs to restructure.
Plenty more could be recycled, if it was worth doing so.

*Already copper, to take just one, has risen very high in price and is
now becoming money like silver and gold.*

Hang on, whoah. Copper is now talked about in dollars a pound rather
then cents per pound. Finally. It was so cheap for so long, that
nobody bothered to establish new mines, but now they are proceeding
in places like Mongolia. But its still not expensive. I just bought
some copper extension lead, which after going through the retail
supply chain gouge, still only costs a dollar a metre. Hardly
unaffordable.

*We are already in trouble over wood, paper*

Well there you go Bazz. The internet does away with all that wood
and paper, your salvation is not far away.

*The shale gas in the US is something of a mirage as it needs
continuous drilling due to the short life of the wells*

Err so what? Either the drilling is worth doing, payed for by the
gas, or it is not. Given that BHP have just invested another 20
billion into shale gas, clearly they think its still profitable as
an energy source. The Chinese are hardly going to thumb their noses
at 27 trillion metres of gas, even if it takes a bit of labour
to get it out.

Arjay,
Hydrogen has been given away as a carrier for vehicles.
(It is not a fuel but a carrier of energy).
The efficiency is too poor, too much input energy needed for what
appears at the wheels.
A whole string of car companies have had a go at it, BMW, Toyota and
Volvo, probably others. Certainly Mercedes has played with busses but
they have not been financially successful due to the lifetime of the
fuel cells.

Yabby said;
Hang on, whoah. Copper is now talked about in dollars a pound rather
then cents per pound.

Ahhh, Yabby, have you missed that, the Chinese and no doubt others
are buying copper ingots and storing them in wharehouses instead of
buying gold. Cheaper to store and there is a more secure market for
copper and a more stable price with a better growth rate.

Re the natural gas, well a number are going broke because of the
poor price of gas. The shale oil companies are operating at a high
marginal cost because the wells give up their oil very slowly.
As Colin Campbell put it, the shale pores are very small and let the
oil through very slowly.

*Ahhh, Yabby, have you missed that, the Chinese and no doubt others
are buying copper ingots*

No I didn't miss that, Bazz. Buying copper rather the storing
US Dollars, makes perfect sense for the Chinese, or for any other
investor for that matter. For a long time the copper price barely
covered the cost of production, so marginal mines shut down.

The Chinese dilema is that when they need more raw materials, they
push the price up to sometimes crazy levels, so having their own
copper stash will to some extent secure against that.

Yes, the US price of gas at $2.50, is now so low because simply too
much is being produced. Just a few years ago it was around 10$ and
they were talking of importing gas from Australia. Thats all gone
now, they could export the stuff if they had an export terminal, but
building one for gas is not cheap. The point is that its a whole
new resource that we had not allowed for in our energy calculations.

If the Chinese go ahead with their shale gas development, it will
certainly have an effect on all our Australian gas exports that we are planning on doing, certainly on the price, as demand from China
will be nearly zilch.

Gas is even cheaper now at $2.27.
The problem they have is they can produce but nobody can use it and it
will take a long time to convert their trucks (the best usage) and to
build the supporting infrastructure.
There are technical problems with it as vehicle fuel but they are not
a real problem just an inconvenience that requires dedicated drivers.
There are buses in Sydney using natural gas.
The other major problem is that the credit is not available.

However that is only one problem and it will help but it cannot keep
up with depletion rates.
It is like bailing a sinking boat with a teacup.

http://www.businessspectator.com.au/bs.nsf/article/peak-oil-shale-gas-fracking-energy-nuclear-budget-pd20120229-rwr7c?opendocument&src=msp

Bazz, this is Alan Kohler's take on the subject and he does not agree with you.

There is not only shale gas, but shale oil too. But a whole lot of
petroleum in the US goes for plastics, fertilisers and of course
heating. Heating oil is basically diesel and if you live anywhere
in the northern half of the US, you'll need heating during the snow periods. If people start to use more gas to heat their homes, its
going to free up huge amounts of diesel for transport, instead of
home heating, as they burn it now.

I note that China's growth has slipped to 6% and they are actively sourcing energy/resources from countries not controlled by the Western Oligarchs.Our close alliance with the USA is hurting us.Perhaps we like India should play a more neutral role and not let US bases expand in our area.It is not in our interest to be a toady boy war mongerer to the USA/Great Britian.

Yabby, yes I read what he wrote a few days back.
In the last two or three weeks there has been a string of articles
in the US saying such as the US has become an oil exporter, that there
is a surplus of oil and many other comments, not as wild as that one
but all along the same theme.
Remember they are in the midst of an election over there.

However it is mainly smoke and mirrors because the contribution from
gas is really very minor in the total picture.
They still import 9 Mbd of oil !

Yabby, you might find this article interesting.

http://tinyurl.com/7tobzj6

I had a look at your URL, Bazz. Lots of people claim to be able
to predict the future, but in my experience they are invariably
wrong, because some game changer comes along and changes everything.

The ongoing oil pumping always interested me, where was it all coming
from? Then one day I read that there are something like 4.5 million
oil wells out there and you only have to squeeze an average of
20 barrels a day out of each one and you live to survive another day.

The BP well which blew up showed how much oil is still out there,
yet to be discovered. We've really only scratched the surface on
deep water drilling. Only high oil prices will give people a reason
to drill in the first place. Then we have huge areas of the globe
where nobody drills, due to political risk.

So unlike yourself, I claim no certainty about knowing the future.

At some point however, I do think that this thing called civilisation
as we know it, will collapse, when the wheels fall off for a host
of reasons. If that happens a bit sooner or a bit later, for me
is neither here nore there. Fact is people now think that they
are above nature and IMHO it will eventually bite them in the arse.
So be it. I don't worry about things that I cannot change

Well, there you go again Arjay, contradicting yourself. This time, in consecutive sentences, which is quite an achievement.

>>Pericles China can can slowly increase domestic consumption and keep their economy expanding.Eventaully the West will be totally broke with a one way system buying from China and pay interest to the debt parasites<<

There is no doubt that China needs to increase domestic consumption, in order to strengthen its economy overall. An over-dependence on exports, especially when some of their overseas markets are stagnating, would be dangerous for them. But if you don't have a market for all those iPhones outside China (that's what exporting means), there is no way that you will be able to sell them inside China, would you? The money that the workers are presently paid comes from exports. No exports, no money to pay for iPhones.

So the transition from an export-driven economy to one that is able to thrive by servicing its internal market alone, will necessarily take generations, not months, years or decades.

But to that contradiction I mentioned. The "West", if it becomes "totally broke", wouldn't be able to continue "buying from China" anyway, would it? Which is exactly the challenge China faces - right now it is absolutely and critically dependent on the survival - and growth - of its overseas markets. Were they to suddenly dry up - which is one of the most likely scenarios from a Ron Paul US economy, given his aversion to debt - China would suffer a massive recession, against which the problems of the "West" would look like losing loose change down the back of the sofa.

Incidentally, Arjay, I have been meaning for a while to ask you: you do know that the banking system in China operates in exactly the same way as ours, don't you? That is, their lending is governed, as is ours, by a reserve ratio.

http://www.smh.com.au/business/beijing-looks-to-ease-limits-on-bank-lending-20120313-1uygx.html

Horror of horrors - it's that bogey of Paul-a-nomics: Fractional-Reserve Banking! Whatever next?

If you are interested, here's a factual report on the history of China's participation.

http://www.bis.org/publ/work360.pdf

Consider it all part of your education. Not everything can be found in conspiracy-nut web sites, you know.

Pericles,the Chinese Govt just like the US Govt pre 1913,creates 80% of new money to equal their people's productivity debt free,or as debt free infrastructure.This means that by comparison the vast majority of their citizens pay less tax than we do.Our Govts tax us to pay for debt to OS central banks and their parasites for no good reason.

When the US Federal Reserve came into power in 1913 by the corruption of Woodrow Wilson,the West's demise was set in train.You are witnessing the reality of absolute power.It corrupts absolutely.

Sorry, Arjay, wrong again.

>>Pericles,the Chinese Govt just like the US Govt pre 1913,creates 80% of new money to equal their people's productivity debt free,or as debt free infrastructure.<<

That is completely incorrect.

FYI, China's "official" government debt according to the IMF is 33.8%, or 60% higher than Australia's. But as we all know, that is only part of the story. When you factor in Australia's private debt, our figure is much higher.

Guess what. So is China's. They don't have the individual debts that we have, but they have instead other government debt hidden under the covers.

"Once local government debts, costs of re-capitalizing state-owned banks, bonds issued by state-owned banks, and railway bonds are included, China’s total debt amounts to 70 to 80 percent of GDP, roughly the level of public debt in the United States and the United Kingdom. Since most of China’s debt has been borrowed in the last decade, China is on an unsustainable trajectory at the current rate of debt accumulation, particularly when economic growth slows down, as it’s expected to do in the coming decade."

http://the-diplomat.com/2011/07/05/china%E2%80%99s-ticking-debt-bomb/

So please, no more garbage about "new money to equal their people's productivity debt free". You're only embarrassing yourself.