U.S. and China Trade Negotiations

The United States should stop trading with China completely and permanently.

China agreed to fairness in trade and economics when joining the World Trade Organization in 2001 (BBC staff writers, 2001), but that fairness has never happened, and it never will.  Its government had promised to abide by all international standards to join the WTO, but it does not abide by adverse rulings of the Permanent Court of Arbitration or the WTO, as all members of the UN are required to do.

The government of China is using the technicality that it did not agree to the arbitration of the PCA in its spat with the Philippines.  However, Article 288 of the LOSC (a.k.a. Law of the Sea Treaty) and Article 9 of LOSC’s Annex VII gives the PCA jurisdiction to decide the matter, and the absence of one party from the proceeding cannot stop the matter from going forward even if it was brought unilaterally by the Philippines.

China's leadership claims it has no obligation to abide by a decision of the PCA in the matter of The Philippine's case against China building military bases on territory claimed by other nations with senior claims to China's.  In fact, China's government claims the entire South China Seas, with no historical basis whatsoever for that claim, except for a reference to an ancient map of a Chinese emperor's dynasty from long ago in antiquity, which proves little or next to nothing.  The PCA ruled that there is no basis for China's claim to the entire South China Seas.

China's leaders say that the Philippines should have brought the claim in the International Court of Justice, not at the PCA (Puspitawati*, D., 2018).  What do you want to bet that the Philippines would win that legal battle also, and China and its leaders will not submit to that future ruling, either  -- even if it is submitted to the ICJ and won by the Philippines?

Selective logic from China's leaders means we are better off without China, totally, as it and its leaders are not reliable partners in anything.

When China and its government finally does come to the negotiating table, whatever they agree to will not be lived up to just as China agreed to abide by WTO rules and has not.  Just like China agreed not to manipulate its currency and not to manipulate trade against other countries, and it has in both cases while maintaining that China is for global free trade.  Not!

It is true that China allows joint ventures between Chinese and foreign companies, but the outsiders' companies must reveal all technical and trade secrets to their Chinese joint venture partners, the ones Chinese operatives have not stolen.

The government of China and its domestic industry leaders have no intention of changing its unfair trade tactics (President Trump, 2018).  Indeed, Chinese producers are already beating President Trump's growing tariffs on Chinese goods by rerouting them through other countries, where they are repackaged in the second country and represented as non-Chinese goods, before they are sent to the U.S. to avoid tariffs (Nikkei Asian Review staff writers, 2018).

The truth is, China and its leaders are for global free trade only if China unfairly gets the best of its trading partners the majority of the time.

China is not worth the trouble that it causes, and we need to stop doing any business with them at all.  It is a complete waste of our time and resources, which could be spent better elsewhere.

China has no intention of completely opening its markets, as required by the WTO, and China never had any such intention.  The actions of China's leaders speak much louder than their words, which are meaningless.

The government of The United States, including its Executive Branch and all of Congress, needs to stop wishful thinking that China will open its markets to free trade, which is something China's leaders are not committed to and never will be fully committed to, no matter what China's leaders say to the contrary.

References list:

BBC News | BUSINESS | China joins the WTO - at last. (2001). News.bbc.co.uk. Retrieved 19 September 2018, from http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/business/1702241

Puspitawati*, D. (2018). China And The SEA In Asia’s Troubled Waters – Analysis. Eurasia Review. Retrieved 19 September 2018, from https://www.eurasiareview.com/17092018-china-and-the-sea-in-asias-troubled-waters-analysis/

Chinese producers expected to beat US tariffs by rerouting goods. (2018). Nikkei Asian Review. Retrieved 19 September 2018, from https://asia.nikkei.com/Economy/Trade-War/Chinese-producers-expected-to-beat-US-tariffs-by-rerouting-goods

Statement from the President Regarding Trade with China | The White House. (2018). The White House. Retrieved 19 September 2018, from https://www.whitehouse.gov/briefings-statements/statement-president-regarding-trade-china-2/

Obama Plans Regime Change in November 2018 Elections

Former Democratic President Barack Obama recently spoke at the University of Illinois to give us our sanity back, as, according to him, something is not right in the current Whitehouse, or words to that effect. So Obama is out to foment an outright regime change during the U.S. House of Representatives election in approximately two months from now.

To say that Barack Obama is a Democrat-Socialist would be putting it lightly. It would be like saying that Bernie Sanders is a hardcore conservative constitutionalist.

In a 2014 article in The Western Journal, "Just How Radical Were The People Who Influenced Barack Hussein Obama?" Steven Baldwin clearly points to overwhelming documented evidence that Obama's entire life has been in the political company and association with Marxists and Socialists. Indeed, former President Obama made numerous appointments to these Democrat-Socialist-Marxists in both of his previous presidential administrations. (https://www.westernjournal.com/just-radical-people-influen…/)

Who remembers when in a televised meeting between former Venezuelan President Hugo Chavez and former U.S. President Barack Obama that Chavez turned to the crowd and cameras and said, "He's more of a Socialists than I am?" The now deceased Chavez was in amazement that such a political radical was then President of The United States. We all saw it in Chavez' face expression.

It is hard to see how The United States of America was winning under the business-restrictive policies of Kenyan national former CIA operative Barry Soetoro, a.k.a. former President and Socialist-Democrat-Marxist-in-Chief, Barack Obama. Of course, Marxist Obama is coming out against a progressive, winning President Trump who is renegotiating Obama's bad trade deals that were not in the interests of America. On the other hand, anti-colonialist Obama gave billions in bribes to Iran and helped his Muslim Brotherhood allies, while Ambassador Stevens was tortured, and, eventually killed, and Stevens' NCIS agents were murdered in Libya. Former U.S. President Obama is the same man who created ISIS and did everything he could to ruin America. Now Obama says, in essence, that there is something wrong with President Trump's America.

Yes, that is correct. We are winning, again! -- like we have not done since Ronald Reagan and John Kennedy, arguably two of the best Presidents that The United States has ever had. The current Trump administration is not only renegotiating the bad trade and political deals of previous administrations, but President Trump has also delivered on his promises to the American people to create more jobs, bolster the economy, and he has brought back trillions of USDs from overseas holdings of U.S. corporations. Generally, our current President is running government like a business, not a "vote for me and I will give you any kind of largess you want to further ruin the credit of the U.S., while adding enormous debt to our nation." Actually, having the temerity to move our U.S. Embassy to Jerusalem is the favorite action of President Trump that many Americans love, both Democrats and Republicans.

The list of accomplishments of President Trump and his administration is too long to enumerate, but few Americans have been hiding under rocks. Our citizens know completely what those accomplishments are, though not all Americans are willing to give the Trump administration credit, even where credit is due.

Now deep state cheerleader Obama is fighting to have a mid-term regime change of the U.S. House of Representatives in favor of the Democrat-Socialist-Marxists so The United States of America will collapse, like Venezuela, the old Soviet Union, and Democrat-controlled Chicago. Eventually, that will usher in Obama's One World Government led by the UN.

It is not in the best interests of Americans for us to continue this political divide, those who want to destroy America and those who want to strengthen it. There was a time when all of us, on the left, in the middle, and on the right, politically, would fight for The United States, instead of tearing it apart for the vested interests of others.

Reference:

Just How Radical Were The People Who Influenced Barack Hussein Obama?. (2014). The Western Journal. Retrieved 19 September 2018, from https://www.westernjournal.com/just-radical-people-influenced-barack-hussein-obama/

U.S. government finances from April 9, 2011

Today most citizens were gratified to learn of the agreement between the U.S. Democrats and the Republicans for a budget to get us through the rest of the current fiscal year.  However, $38 billion this year and $500 billion in additional cuts over the next decade is not enough, considering the incredible amount of debt that we have as a nation, which will soon be over $14 trillion and which will be much higher than double that figure in one-decade from now.

Therefore, unless both houses of Congress and the President of the United States, right now, get serious about making substantial cuts in all of our future budgets, then we will have to consider if our current spendthrift ways will end in a hyper-inflationary or a deflationary depression and financial collapse.

Most Americans understand that it would not be in the best interests of the U.S. Federal Reserve and all U.S. banks to have hyper-inflation, as that would destroy their own assets; however, the U.S. Fed is merely reacting to the increasing governmental debt placed on us by our politicians.

As the U.S. House of Representatives originates all financial and monetary appropriation bills [voted on by the House, the Senate and vetoed or signed by the President of the United States], and it is the job of Congress to oversee the U.S. Federal Reserve, the most likely long-term outcome is hyper-inflation, not deflation.

The U.S. Federal Reserve is supposed to be independent, but, in reality, it reports to the U.S. Congress.

On the other hand, either way, a hyper-inflationary or a deflationary depression will mean the end of business as usual, and a forced new way of doing business, which some call "financially responsible behavior" that will permeate the affairs of all private citizens, businesses, organizations, bureaucrats and politicians in the United States of America, soon.

In the not so distant future, out of dire necessity this new "financially responsible behavior" will be demanded by all Americans.

Though it will look like the end of the United States, in reality, it will just be a new beginning, which will make us much stronger, wiser and more cautious, again.

We are just one of a long line of nations and civilizations that will have had to re-learn these lessons of history, which play over and over, again, throughout time and probably always will.

In the end, human nature is always the same:  we learn from lessons, then we prosper from those lessons, the generations that lived through those lessons die-out, and then we go through the painful process of re-learning all of those lessons, again.