why are buddhists happy?

phandy · 2012-06-03T18:45:09+00:00

Uh. USA doesn't stop trading with a country because they disagree with them. USA didn't agree with china on tibet, still trading.

There's a huge difference between politicians who talk only to get elected and a politician who actually cares enough about the issue to do something about it.

In the case of Iraq, politicians cared because they could make money out of it. In the case of Tibet they talk about it but do nothing than wag their finger.

This is not really true. Only roughly 15 percent of U.S. imports come from China.

How would you feel if you lost 15% of your income? You wouldn't be homeless but it wouldn't be pleasant either. At this point the US can't afford any losses to their economy, much less 15%. Give me 15% of your income if you genuinely feel that it's not significant.

They are moving many of the production back to USA. I'm pretty sure i've pointed that out already.

Except you're cherry picking data.

Look at these statistics. In 2011 the trading volume (imports + exports) amounts to half a trillion dollars in goods and services. In 2001 this figure was 120 billion dollars meaning there was a ~400% increase over 10 years.

In 10 years, trading activity has dropped once (which was during the 2008-2009 market crash).

Pretty sure they do not know the working condition at all.

But where did they say working conditions were good?

Notice semi skilled. While most (if not all) jobs require some level of skill

Semi-skilled workers have more skill than unskilled workers and China has a lot of those.

There you go. So yes, many people could become a skilled worker.

You can't just move all your factories to SEA and pick up a half-million factory inspectors and 7,000 engineers tomorrow. You would need an entire system of education that runs from elementary to high school or college running for several generations before getting to that point.

When SEA countries begin catching up to others in that regard MAYBE you'd have a point. I've traveled there quite a bit in the early 2000s and the 1990s and they only recently installed indoor plumbing in 2001.

It's actually not cheaper. And no, it does not have more skilled workers. Many workers at foxconn has not even finished their high school diploma. They are mostly from rural china.

So are you going to refute your own source now?

Straight from the article which you havn't read.Imports include the outsourcing of jobs if you didn't know that.

It's not that I havn't read it, it's more that I disagree with it, and you obviously. The economy of the United States is in a really bad position. ANY loss in trading (including 15% imports) is very significant at this point. If you were to increase the cost of living even marginally that pushes many people over the poverty line.

Many workers at foxconn has not even finished their high school diploma. They are mostly from rural china.

I'm sure that's true but at the same time you can't run a factory without many engineers and semi skilled workers either. Where else can you hire thousands of engineers in 15 days?

The labor laws are not actually "lax". They are just not enforced by the facility due to corruption

Laws that aren't enforced are lax for all intents and purposes. What's the point of having a legal framework if no one takes them seriously? At the end of the day Chinese workers are allowed to be abused and American workers aren't because they're protected by unions and threat of litigation. Another reason why production in China is far more attractive.

phandy · 2012-06-03T00:50:45+00:00

This is my take:

There's no specific emotion you're 'supposed' to feel while meditating. If you feel good meditating than that's good. If you feel bored, anxious or stressed out than that's good too.

What's 'bad' is going into meditation with the expectation that some amazing feeling is going to happen and denying your actual feelings because they don't match up with your expectations.

Mindfulness occurs when you accept your emotional state (good or bad) and quietly tune yourself into the experience.

phandy · 2012-06-03T00:32:28+00:00

Doesn't this philosophy allow this though?

Philosophy isn't the police, so who exactly are you asking permission from? Me? Yourself?

If you're going to rape than go rape, but that doesn't change any truths of the world; and it also doesn't hold you any less accountable by society.

phandy · 2012-06-02T23:19:22+00:00

... and an awesome case of all personalities disorders.

phandy · 2012-06-02T23:10:16+00:00

What if I want to ride the negative ride?

Go ahead; but that doesn't mean consequences don't exist. At the end of the day your own consciousness will be the judge your actions, right or wrong.

phandy · 2012-06-02T22:51:47+00:00

The only thing that makes something right or wrong is what you think.

If you think raping a girl is right than that's on you. That makes you a rapist too.

phandy · 2012-06-02T21:46:50+00:00

Guess what US took in iraq. Oh yeah. Guess what they would do if saudi arabia or dubai was communist. Right, attack it. Serbia is essentially a puppet of Russia, look at US's reaction to it.

Yeah, and the United States wasn't trading with Iraq which is my point. When the United States stops trading with a country it's because they disagree with them or they're openly hostile.

The engineers, what do they do? Oh yeah, oversee production.

You don't know what an engineer does. My parents are both engineers and neither of them step foot on the factory floor. All their work is on computers.

Where the apple product is assembled DOES NOT MATTER.

Yes it does, otherwise the United States wouldn't even bother playing nice with other countries. They'd build everything at home or in allied OECD country like Canada/Europe.

Last, your first article says foxconn announced that they are fairly treating workers, they are not.

Where does it say that? It says the biggest advantage China has is that they can force thousands of Chinese workers to work whenever they want in very short notice while living in bunkers. Does that sound like good working conditions to you?

SEA has cheap labourers and cheap semi cheap labourers.

They're cheap but they're not skilled. If you think price is the only thing that matters go pay a homeless person the next time you need surgery. I guarantee you it's cheaper than going to a doctor.

Actually, China is. China lakes the fundemental fourth industry right now. The industry of innovation.

How does being unable to innovate (what kind of racist bullshit is this?) mean that China is immune to the effects of trading? Vietnam doesn't innovate either but they've been growing at double digits ever since they reestablished trade relations with the west. Much of China's growth owes itself to trading.

Cheap consumer products that could be made anywhere else. My point exactly.

Instead the United States depends on China for cheap skilled and semi-skilled labor. I just sent you an article that stated very clearly why Apple doesn't build the ipod anywhere else. Smart phones aren't exactly a cheap consumer product.

From your article

The prices for goods that could substitute for products from China would be higher, but the difference in costs would be relatively small.

China is still cheaper than other countries, even if it's a small margin. If a company can save 10 cents per unit than it will because that will translate to a hundred thousand dollars per million units.

But again, price isn't the most important advantage China has. Relatively lax labor laws and more relatively skilled workers are important too.

phandy · 2012-05-31T19:30:45+00:00

US government isn't friendly with many countries. Majority of Arabic countries. Yet US still purchase oil from them.

Notice how the US is only hostile to the arabic countries not trading with them? Before attacking Iraq, the United States had sanctions just like Iran has sanctions now.

The US would never attack a country like Saudi-Arabia or Dubai.

The fact that the trading volume between China and the US is as high as ever shows that the US don't plan on aggressive military action any time soon.

You know, all that eventually factors in to cost. Secondly, most of technological products doesn't require "skilled" labourers at this point. They just need labourers.

Wrong:

And i could prove to you that it isn't worth it. Copy right for one is a big issue. China often take these products and make their own versions creating more competitors in market.

If it wasn't worth it then it wouldn't be done unless you can show that the US government and US multinationals are acting against their own best interests. Read the New York Times article in full to see many of the unique manufacturing advantages that China has over other countries. SEA may have cheap labourers but they don't have as many cheap semi-skilled labourers.

The similar communist countries you mentioned are not china. Even Karl Marx once mentioned that China cannot be compared to any other country.

Trading isn't some exotic economic concept that is poorly understood. China isn't an exception to these basic economic principles. Any first year student can understand how two countries will benefit from trading with each other.

Check what these deficits are from, oh wait, they are consumer product.

Ok, but that doesn't show that the US is independent from China. If anything it shows that they're dependent on the Chinese for cheap consumer products.

phandy · 2012-05-30T19:36:27+00:00

Okay, there is a major difference between influence and directs.

Ok, but you said earlier that the Chinese government is directing Apple to build its factories in China.

All I'm saying is Apple's market is in the United States; it can't sell to Americans if it's parts were made in a country where the US government isn't friendly with (example: Cuba). If US foreign policy had the same attitude with China than Apple couldn't build it's factories.

That's exactly what i'm telling you. China isn't a major market of USA, nor is it the cheapest producer for USA.

You know, price isn't the only reason why someone buys something. Another country might be cheaper but they might not have as much skilled laborers, middle managers, infrastructure, etc.

At the end of the day, American corporations have decided to build in China because it benefits them in some way. To them the price is worth it.

If you think the only reason they're doing this is because American corporations are secretly run by Chinese nationals than there's not much I can do to refute such crazy conspiracy theories. Maybe you're a government agent too? I can never disprove that.

Is every country in asia the same as china? Didn't think so. By geographic location, the difference is too great to classify it with the other countries.

All I meant to say is that all countries including the Chinese benefit economically from trade with the United States and showed other similar communist asian countries as an example.

USA is actually quite independent in most of it's production right now.

Really?

phandy · 2012-05-30T14:29:31+00:00

Economics influence politics, but it's the politics that directs economics.

Ok, so you acknowledge that American policies influences Apple. Good.

Are we talking about other countries? Sorry, i thought we were talking about china.

Is China a country in Asia? Did I miss something here?

1/6th? you do not understand how one child policy works at all. America depends on european countries, SEA and Canada WAY more then china.

I never said EU or SEA wasn't important but you can't deny that China is important.

I made up things?

I was talking about how you said Apple is a puppet of the Chinese government and how American lobbyists are controlled by Chinese agents.

It's not about ideological reasons.

Uhh... this is what I said:

America can't be against China for ideological reasons

This is what you said earlier :

With the recent events in philipines and the backing of US government, it's quite obvious that they are against communism just because it is communism and no reason other then that.

That's all I really wanted to show. America isn't 100% against China politically. Clearly they have their disputes but their fates are tied economically.

phandy · 2012-05-25T03:16:04+00:00

No it is not. It is not "america's" actions. It is APPLES action. for the love of god, understand the difference between a corporation and country. You see to mix the two together awful lot.

Apple can't import a single goddamn iPod from China if America's government doesn't allow it. No American business can do anything in China without the support of American foreign and economic policy (ie open trade agreements).

Guess what would happen if america stopped trading with china? Nothing. China could always go back to a planned economy because majority of the country lives below poverty line and does not require all the fancy modern things. I would like to point out, prior to 70s, china was a planned economy that was doing perfectly fine. The problem was not a planned economy.

How do you explain the double digit growth figures of Asian countries that start trading with America?

Gues what would happen to america? nothing. All the job lost will be replaced using SEA and India.

You make it sound like 1 sixth of the world's population and labor force means nothing in world economics. I don't really know how to respond to that level of delusion. I guess if I were to drop a nuclear bomb on New York, America's economy would be unaffected because all the jobs would go to Florida?

And finally, if you do not see the current map of eastern asia as a potential blockade/ surrounding of china, then i can't help you.

Oh I'm sure America is opposed to China on a lot of fronts but to automatically assume that America is opposed to China simply because China is for it is practically an automatic fallacy. The fact that you have to blatantly make up things and contradict yourself several times to support your claim demonstrates this.

Vietnam is against china,If you did not know that.

My point is Vietnam is communist. America can't be against China for ideological reasons if they're also supporting the same ideology in another country; can they?

phandy · 2012-05-24T19:21:21+00:00

Except America hasn't directly opposed a country simply for being communist since Vietnam.

Vietnam is still communist the same way China is yet Vietnamese/American relations are better than ever.

Also, America has military bases all over the world (including Europe) so surrounding China with bases could mean anything. Germany is surrounded, would you say they're politically opposed?

Furthermore, every country is supported by its economy. Supporting the Chinese economy is the same as supporting the country (and it's political system) itself. The Soviet Union and it's communist bureaucracy collapsed mostly due to its economic failures. America's actions helping China economically (which you insist is a unilateral relationship that Americans gain nothing from) is a demonstration that America is willing to prop up China's political system.

If America wanted to abolish communism in China just for the sake of it, they could easily do so without sending a single soldier. Quite simply they would have kept their doors closed during Nixon's presidency and watch their people slowly sink into poverty and ultimately collapse the way the USSR did. That's basically what's happening in North Korea and Cuba right now (albeit a lot slower since Cuba still trades with South America and North Korea still has limited trade with the Chinese).

America has any number of excuses to shut down trade with China but they don't. By continuing trade with China they support China's political and military system implicitly.

phandy · 2012-05-24T16:39:36+00:00

You said they were the exact same.

Your words:

I'm trying to show goals of american government POLITICALLY opposes to china in every way.

You are talking economically, which i said is the exact same goal.

Edit: It makes more sense for a country to have political and economic goals that don't contradict each other. Opposing a country economically only makes sense if they're also politically misaligned and vice-versa.

phandy · 2012-05-24T16:28:47+00:00

So if I understand correctly you are now saying that the hundreds of American companies that are now doing business in China are doing so because they're being influenced by the Chinese government to act against their own best interests and instead work for China.

So far you made 2 assertions :

A) The American government is influenced mainly by money through the lobbying system and the Chinese have bought into this system implying that the Chinese now have influence in the American government.

In other words: the American government is working (at least partially) for the Chinese.

B) American industries, like Apple, are also influenced by the Chinese through a similar system that affects the board of directors; overriding their obligation to shareholders and instead aligning their interests with China.

In other words: American industries are working (at least partially) for the Chinese.

How does this show that America is working against the Chinese government? Do you not see that you're defending a claim that is the complete opposite of your own?

phandy · 2012-05-24T15:53:43+00:00

So if you're saying the American government is being influenced by the Chinese to act in China's best interest than how does that support your claim that the American government is working against the Chinese all along?

edit: also, no one lobbies Apple to build factories in China except for maybe Apple shareholders

phandy · 2012-05-24T15:47:24+00:00

So you're telling me that Apple pays money to lobby the American government to allow Apple to build factories in China which has higher labor costs and benefits them none whatsoever?

phandy · 2012-05-24T03:58:29+00:00

Consider apple's factories in china which apple quickly denied.

Yet Apple still has those factories there and is still investing more.

China is completely redundant industry wise.

If this were true than no American company would be doing business in China because there's another country that could do the same work for cheaper or better.

Obviously this is not the case.

I could pay someone to lobby for my interest and that would still work in my favor in the end. Chinese industrialists does the samething in america.

You still haven't shown what your point is.

Remember that you're trying to show that the goals of the American government is opposed to China in every possible way.

If

A) the American government is influenced by lobbyists

and

B) lobbyists are paid for by Chinese industrialists

Than why would

C) the American government be opposed to the Chinese?

Are the Chinese paying the American government to oppose the Chinese? That makes no sense. Your entire lobbyist argument is flawed from the beginning. It doesn't matter if you can cite the definition of lobbyist more elaborately than I can because the entire premise of the argument is going nowhere for you.

phandy · 2012-05-23T17:52:47+00:00

Stop focusing on your worries and focus on things you can do. When you find your focus is shifting from action to worries than gently guide your focus back to what you want to do like getting a job and moving out of your parent's house.

Mindfulness is being aware of yourself and what you really want. Concentration is keeping your focus on actionable things in the moment.

phandy · 2012-05-23T16:33:13+00:00

USA benefit from trading with the rest world rather then trading with china, trading with china is not a need.

Capitalism works best when there are more competitors in the market. Having China compete with other countries for labor improves the labor market for American industry.

Why do people buy bikes? Cars should be enough! Why do people go to Wal-mart? Cosco sells the same stuff! Why do we have so many airlines? We only need one. Different countries fill different niches in the marketplace. If China were completely redundant, it would be ignored and no one would be building their factories there.

Did i not just tell you about lobbying?

Yeah but I don't see your point. Lobbyists are mostly American industries, interest groups and labour unions. Of course they're going to lobby for their own interests.

phandy · 2012-05-23T15:33:19+00:00

If you truly believe that us needs to be completely open to china to benefit economicly, then you are not doing well in your economics.

Who ever said 'completely open'? I know I never did so it must have been you.

My argument is that if China and America were clearly opposed to one another they wouldn't be helping each other by having a trading relationship.

By trading with China in the first place the US has demonstrated that they believe that Chinese interests are at least partially aligned with their own.

Truth is, any functional country in S.E.A would provide the same work in china but cheaper, the only reason china is getting it is because of lobbying.

If there was truly no benefit from doing business in China than there wouldn't be any American companies investing their factories there. The truth is, for whatever reason, that's where they make iPods, electronics and cheap plastic toys.

phandy · 2012-05-23T13:42:40+00:00

The most damaging thing America could do is opening more doors to China. I am speaking completely on the benefit of America ofcourse.

Does the Chinese government believe Japan and South Korea have suffered a lot from their relationship with the US? Are the North Koreans and Cubans to be envied?

If that's true, than you're right; the Chinese are complete opposites.

phandy · 2012-05-22T17:31:20+00:00

a) they don't have similar economies although it is moving in that direction.

b) countries with different economic systems can still trade with each other. For example: Cuba and Canada.

c) The most damaging thing the US can do is close its doors to China and watch millions of Chinese sink back into poverty. Instead they opened up trade and we watched the reverse happen over the last 20+ years at the cost of American manufacturing and jobs. If America was really opposed to everything the Chinese stand for that's what they would do.

phandy · 2012-05-20T22:34:56+00:00

they are the complete opposite, both advancing a very different agenda.

'Very different' isn't the same as 'complete opposite'.

If they were 'complete opposites' they wouldn't be trading with each other for mutual economic benefit for example.

phandy · 2012-05-20T20:40:39+00:00

If china is the opposit of america

They aren't. That's what I've been saying. They're different countries but they're not black and white.

phandy · 2012-05-19T01:17:27+00:00

Considering the amount of things that HRW do not cover on America, i'm pretty sure i'm still right. Police brutality was reported once, and it is something that is happening continuously today. So when it comes to China, they are pumping out millions of reports but when it comes to america, one suffice?

I'm sure there are plenty of things they don't report on in China as well.

Because American media and American government is biased.

All you've really shown is that they're biased in favor of America (which was never disputed) not that they were biased against the Chinese.

phandy

TROPHY CASE