Russia Writes Off Cuba Debt

Poitier

My Words Law
Supporter
Joined
Jul 30, 2013
Messages
69,412
Reputation
15,484
Daps
246,421
A 10 year old wrote this, not to mention its 3 years old :russ:


China Is 175.6% Dependent on the U.S.
Comment Now
Washington.

China’s overall trade surplus in 2011 was $155.1 billion,according to the Ministry of Commerce.

And how much of that surplus is related to America? Commerce Department figures show that, through the first 11 months of last year, China’s trade surplus against the United States was $272.3 billion. That’s up from $252.4 billion for the same period in 2010, a 7.9% increase.

The Commerce Department has not released the December trade number yet, and some are predicting that China’s surplus against us will top $300 billion when all the figures are in. Yet let’s assume, merely to be conservative, that China’s December surplus is zero. If December’s surplus is zero, then 175.6% of China’s overall trade surplus last year related to sales to the United States. That’s up from full-year figures for the three preceding years: 149.2% for 2010, 115.7% for 2009, and 90.1% for 2008.

Notice a trend? The Chinese economy is becoming even more hooked on selling things to the United States. Why the big jump last year? Because orders from the 27-nation European Union for Chinese goods collapsed. And if Europe falls apart this year—increasingly likely—China will become even more reliant on the American consumer.

President Obama, in his State of the Union message on Tuesday, is expected to announce the creation of a China trade task force that will combine officials from the Treasury, Commerce, and Energy Departments as well as the U.S. Trade Representative’s office.


Is the concept a good one? Ted Alden of the Council on Foreign Relations praised the idea in the January 12 Nelson Report when he said “this should be seen as an opportunity for creative thinking about trade enforcement.”

Perhaps it is, but we don’t need to get fancy on this issue. All we need is for President Obama to tell the Chinese that they need us more than we need them. And all he has to say is “175.6%.” The clever officials in Beijing will not need interpreters to figure out what that means.


:troll:
 

Trajan

Veteran
Joined
May 23, 2012
Messages
18,821
Reputation
5,305
Daps
82,226
Reppin
Frankincense and Myrrh
Did your links not say they are using Nuclear Energy? Did your links not state that they plan to transition off of Nuclear energy into renewable energies in the immediate future? What exactly did I say wrong? The countries that don't have Nuclear power plants want to build some to transition from carbon-based to renewable.

All that you said is quoted. Anyone who reads it can see what you were saying versus the reality.

The Europeans, for what it's worth, has begun an unprecedented transition to nuclear and renewable energies in the last decade or so. The EU would push for a continent wide transition.


Did your links not state that they plan to transition off of Nuclear energy into renewable energies in the immediate future? What exactly did I say wrong? .

You think these two statements match fam?
 

Type Username Here

Not a new member
Joined
Apr 30, 2012
Messages
16,368
Reputation
2,400
Daps
32,646
Reppin
humans
I'm cheering for this Russia-China economic alliance, dead serious. The United States, especially its people and workforce, needs a true global economic competition so we can move towards more government investment in production, labor, infrastructure, education, science, arts and manufacturing. Tax the wealthy to cover the initial shortfall, close the tax loopholes and punish US companies producing abroad. Bring it all back home and cripple them in the same process.
 

Type Username Here

Not a new member
Joined
Apr 30, 2012
Messages
16,368
Reputation
2,400
Daps
32,646
Reppin
humans
All that you said is quoted. Anyone who reads it can see what you were saying versus the reality.






You think these two statements match fam?


The countries that already have Nuclear Energy are transitioning to renewable energies.

The countries that depend on non-renewable are hoping to build nuclear plants to eventually transition to renewable.

What is hard to understand?

WHILE gas disputes between Ukraine and Russia resonated at Bratislava’s session of the European Nuclear Energy Forum, Prime Minister Robert Fico confirmed Slovakia’s long-term support for nuclear energy.

“Our effort is to achieve until 2030 the share of low-carbon technologies of the total production of electricity at the level of 80 percent,” Fico said, as cited by the TASR newswire. “We consider it important that new rules of the EU enable effective development of the nuclear energy sector while keeping the high level of safety.”

http://spectator.sme.sk/articles/view/54405/3/slovakia_sticks_to_nuclear_energy.html

http://www.koreatimes.co.kr/www/news/biz/2014/07/123_160645.html

So what did I say that was non-factual?
 

Trajan

Veteran
Joined
May 23, 2012
Messages
18,821
Reputation
5,305
Daps
82,226
Reppin
Frankincense and Myrrh
Joined
May 15, 2012
Messages
28,010
Reputation
1,251
Daps
60,678
Reppin
NULL
I'm cheering for this Russia-China economic alliance, dead serious. The United States, especially its people and workforce, needs a true global economic competition so we can move towards more government investment in production, labor, infrastructure, education, science, arts and manufacturing. Tax the wealthy to cover the initial shortfall, close the tax loopholes and punish US companies producing abroad. Bring it all back home and cripple them in the same process.

Its over breh, the americans have been sent up the creek without a paddle by their corporate gods, there's no way for the american working class to compete in the global company
 
Joined
May 15, 2012
Messages
28,010
Reputation
1,251
Daps
60,678
Reppin
NULL
United States domestic economy could use a new Cold War/WW2 government-funded economy.

Might force them to re-open factories, re-assess imports/exports, increase wages to prop consumer base, increase domestic job market, move into renewable energies, re-kindle the space program, government investment in science/arts/education, cut-off international access to the best higher education in the world, re-invest in social programs, re-build infrastructure.

You have to understand Universities are corporations out only to make money, also the US has the best higher education facilities because of that very fact
the truth is it doesn't matter because the US education system is terrible so the students can't make much of the higher education anyway because they're already at a disadvantage
 

Type Username Here

Not a new member
Joined
Apr 30, 2012
Messages
16,368
Reputation
2,400
Daps
32,646
Reppin
humans
Its over breh, the americans have been sent up the creek without a paddle by their corporate gods, there's no way for the american working class to compete in the global company

Far more drastic revolutionary changes have occurred in the past. A key problem is that the corporations that control our government have also put US national security at risk by cultivating foreign economies for short profit gain and market expansion. We need to re-invest back at home, and a serious economic threat might be the thing that does it.
 

Type Username Here

Not a new member
Joined
Apr 30, 2012
Messages
16,368
Reputation
2,400
Daps
32,646
Reppin
humans
You have to understand Universities are corporations out only to make money, also the US has the best higher education facilities because of that very fact
the truth is it doesn't matter because the US education system is terrible so the students can't make much of the higher education anyway because they're already at a disadvantage

It wasn't always like that though. The US invested heavily in education post WW2 at all levels, and education was affordable. It can be that way again.
 

Type Username Here

Not a new member
Joined
Apr 30, 2012
Messages
16,368
Reputation
2,400
Daps
32,646
Reppin
humans
No the heck it wasnt. ONly rich white whites were in college. It was things like the montgomery GI Bill that made college afordable

Well, the GI Bill was government investment last time I checked. Also, tuition and fees were very low in relation to income earned. Tuition hikes really began to increase faster than inflation the last 30 years, which also coincidentally is the same time worker pay has remained relatively stagnant.
 
Top