Totally agree, re kaplan's "cinfident" conclusion. I hate the unthinking (Mao's red-guard-isque) nature of a lot anaylsts on Chicom, always too willing to apply ready-made labels and concepts, despite being wrong for 40, 70, 98 years (if u count from 1921). Chicom IS unique, it defies cliches and slogans. Until this habit is changed, China expectation and policy would always seem 'off'.
For the same reason, the point made in yesterday's Edition re reading party documents first hand (i dont envy the task but if one is paid to do it and call oneself a China analyst...fair enough) IS extremely important. That such a basic point needs to be made and seems novel is an indication of how poorly china/Chicom IS 'watched'. Imagine if China's US experts all 'watch' the US in the Same way and being content with superfitial anti-American cliches thus predicting American collapse every bloody year decades on end...Chicom for one would habe fired if not jailed all of them...and justifiably so.
Not that i agree with the trade war's logic and its objectives (set by a failed economist and a failed lobbyist left behind by this modern world economy of ours), but US obsession with the Stock market, one that has been indulged and turned into a meaningless computer game by 10 years and $7 trillion of free capital created out of thin air, is even more illogical.
If Chicom settles this and buys another 5-10 years of breathing room, it will be more convinced than ever of the supriority of its system. There is one thing that is worse than an incompetent fool and that is a loud, whinging, sanctimonious one.
Enticing someone to trade his/her long term interests for short term benefits is not a dirty Chicom trick, as claimed by Lighthizer. It is a routine business strategy and indeed its optimisation IS the foundation of economics. If you find yourself too willing to fall for it, the problem is with you not the seller. I wonder if this deal would become the latest example of it. The irony quotient in that case would be through the roof.
Totally agree, re kaplan's "cinfident" conclusion. I hate the unthinking (Mao's red-guard-isque) nature of a lot anaylsts on Chicom, always too willing to apply ready-made labels and concepts, despite being wrong for 40, 70, 98 years (if u count from 1921). Chicom IS unique, it defies cliches and slogans. Until this habit is changed, China expectation and policy would always seem 'off'.
For the same reason, the point made in yesterday's Edition re reading party documents first hand (i dont envy the task but if one is paid to do it and call oneself a China analyst...fair enough) IS extremely important. That such a basic point needs to be made and seems novel is an indication of how poorly china/Chicom IS 'watched'. Imagine if China's US experts all 'watch' the US in the Same way and being content with superfitial anti-American cliches thus predicting American collapse every bloody year decades on end...Chicom for one would habe fired if not jailed all of them...and justifiably so.
Not that i agree with the trade war's logic and its objectives (set by a failed economist and a failed lobbyist left behind by this modern world economy of ours), but US obsession with the Stock market, one that has been indulged and turned into a meaningless computer game by 10 years and $7 trillion of free capital created out of thin air, is even more illogical.
If Chicom settles this and buys another 5-10 years of breathing room, it will be more convinced than ever of the supriority of its system. There is one thing that is worse than an incompetent fool and that is a loud, whinging, sanctimonious one.
Enticing someone to trade his/her long term interests for short term benefits is not a dirty Chicom trick, as claimed by Lighthizer. It is a routine business strategy and indeed its optimisation IS the foundation of economics. If you find yourself too willing to fall for it, the problem is with you not the seller. I wonder if this deal would become the latest example of it. The irony quotient in that case would be through the roof.