It's Time To Tell China To Get Nicked

[Value Collector]

Bearing in mind I'm using it as an analogy, it's an appeal to the reality that very rarely did the owner of a generic take away shop complete with its Coke sign and so on make a successful transition. Few if any of those shops took down the sign which said "TAKE AWAY", scraped the tobacco company advertising off the windows and put up a new sign saying "McDonald's" and continued in business.

In reality those who invested heavily in such shops mostly ended up looking for the least bad exit. Reality though was that usually involved some other use of the building, the business itself not being worth overly much for those who failed to see the warning signs and hung around too long.

Milk bars and generic take away shops selling deep fried everything were just one of many possible examples I could have used.

Newsagents today are going down that track. Anyone who can't see that the business model is losing its relevance must be blind. It has the same basic problem - a move away from the core product meanwhile there's more competitors selling everything else.

Then there's things like careers in professional sports or modeling, pop music or even politics. The odd one makes a long term career out of it but for most it's a relatively brief thing even if they do "make it" for a time.

And so on. There's countless examples of the concept but point is we're living in a world where relying on something to last forever, or even just the ~40 years of someone's working life, is a huge gamble and that pace of change is accelerating it's not slowing down.

Now, is anyone going to seriously tell me that selling two basic product lines, that is raw materials for steel production and fuel for power stations, and having over a third of all exports going to one country is a sure thing with no chance of ending?

The writing's already on the wall for both with a greater emphasis on steel recycling and a push to use heat from sources other than coal in production. Meanwhile when it comes to power generation well there's a push against fossil fuels there to the extent of having an international agreement regarding climate change. And those risks are without even mentioning China itself.

The notion that Australia's even slightly concerned about economic retaliation from China is of itself evidence that we've got a problem. When a dependency starts intruding on decision making and you're under pressure to do things you otherwise wouldn't, that's a sure sign it's getting out of hand.

I don't hate China but we're being fools in relying on them to keep increasing their use and imports of coal, gas and iron ore indefinitely. At some point it's going to end and in my view we'd be wise to bear that in mind. That doesn't mean don't sell coal to China just as nobody would sensibly say that someone shouldn't pursue success in sports or music but it does mean having a definite plan for when it ends. A plan that doesn't involve prayers, groveling or ending up broke.

times change, people’s wants change.

the key is knowing when it makes sense to inject capital to grow or sustain a business, and when to drain every dollop of profit out and put it into another business.

Just because you own a business that is on a down trend over the next 10 years doesn’t mean to have to personally be on a down trend.

I mean, this is just an analogy too, but a milk bar owner could have been reinvesting his profits back into McDonald’s shares for the last 10 years of his business down trend.

 

[Value Collector]

And much of the present day USA was New France. What's the point?

well the USA purchased that part off the French, but still had to kill off the inhabitants.

the point is, (if you are following the conversation), China’s annexation of Tibet is not new thing, The USA for example was built by a series of annexations of others people’s land.

 

[hja]

well the USA purchased that part off the French, but still had to kill off the inhabitants.

the point is, (if you are following the conversation), China’s annexation of Tibet is not new thing, The USA for example was built by a series of annexations of others people’s land.

Well just about every reasonably powerful nation has done this, in the history of the world. China is (was) made up of so many disparate cultures and languages. An outsider mightn't think so with China's ability to create a virtual monocultural state.

 

[Value Collector]

Well just about every reasonably powerful nation has done this, in the history of the world. .

Thank you for restating my original point.

 

[SirRumpole]

With China basically boycotting our barley and potentially other agricultural crops it seems a good opportunity to set up ethanol processing plants to take the surplus.

Barley wheat, sugar cane, basically any plants can be used for ethanol which can reduce our needs for imported fuels. If the markets don't want our products as foods, no reason we can't use them for fuel.

 

[SirRumpole]

Well just about every reasonably powerful nation has done this, in the history of the world. China is (was) made up of so many disparate cultures and languages. An outsider mightn't think so with China's ability to create a virtual monocultural state.

So where does it end ? If China decides to invade Taiwan do we all accept it ? Then Japan or Korea perhaps ?

 

[hja]

So where does it end ? If China decides to invade Taiwan do we all accept it ? Then Japan or Korea perhaps ?

Japan/Korea - World war? But for Taiwan, it's all arbitrary. It depends how much is at stake for the onlookers, possible sanctions and for China's image, as with Hong Kong.

 

[chiff]

So where does it end ? If China decides to invade Taiwan do we all accept it ? Then Japan or Korea perhaps ?

The west ,for political reasons,may say Taiwan is separate country,but China says it is a breakaway province.What does the history show?

 

[chiff]

So where does it end ? If China decides to invade Taiwan do we all accept it ? Then Japan or Korea perhaps ?

China ,so far, has used different tactics-different to the blunt instrument that the US uses.

 

[dutchie]

China can take out Taiwan by force if it wants to. The US has admitted that it will be unable to defend a military takeover.
However the world would be very angry with China if they tried. Consequent economic sanctions could cause China to self destruct.

 

[dutchie]

Australia had a win over China in the sanctioning of an investigation of the China Virus, but of course China would not admit it.
Build the wall. MAGA

 

[Smurf1976]

I mean, this is just an analogy too, but a milk bar owner could have been reinvesting his profits back into McDonald’s shares for the last 10 years of his business down trend.

Indeed and that is my point.

At a national level, use the iron, coal and gas to get into something with a longer term future both in terms of the industry itself and the customer base rather than waiting for the world to dump coal or China to change iron ore suppliers.

At present, we’re akin to the milk bar owner flatly denying that McDonald’s is anything more than a passing fad.

Keep digging for coal etc in the short term sure but the writing’s on the wall for coal as a whole and likewise with iron there’s longer term competition from others so we need to be getting into something else. We need a definite plan other than trying to stop the inevitable or pretending it won’t happen.

 

[dutchie]

If Taiwan falls then Australia is next.

 

[chiff]

If Taiwan falls then Australia is next.

View attachment 103602

If Vietnam goes communist Australia will fall to communism-domino effect?

 

[dutchie]

If Vietnam goes communist Australia will fall to communism-domino effect?

Who knows considering how ruthless China is in its desire to rule the world.

 

[againsthegrain]

Who knows considering how ruthless China is in its desire to rule the world.

I don't think China is as "tough" as they want the world to believe.

yes
1. they have massive amounts of weapons
2. alot of human "meat" soldiers

However
1. The quality of their equipment is questionable
2. The experience of their troops is also questionable, when is the last time China fought a land+sea conflict? (USA does it on annual basis)
3. What is the motivation of the young, almost teenage soldiers under the ccp? They might be willing to die on home soil but on enemy territory?

It kind of reminds me of the Russian invasion of Grozny in Chechnia, where young inexperienced soldiers who never saw battle were sent in with tanks and military equipment and slaughtered by partisans defending their land

The initial assault resulted in very high Russian Army casualties and an almost complete breakdown of morale in the Russian forces. It took them another two months of heavy fighting, and a change in their tactics, before they were able to capture Grozny

I don't believe China has the balls for a military conflict and the best hand they got and they are best at economic warfare

Lets please stop these scare tactics what if what if, No Chinese soldier will ever set foot in Aus uninvited

 

[sptrawler]

I don't think China is as "tough" as they want the world to believe.

yes
1. they have massive amounts of weapons
2. alot of human "meat" soldiers

However
1. The quality of their equipment is questionable
2. The experience of their troops is also questionable, when is the last time China fought a land+sea conflict? (USA does it on annual basis)
3. What is the motivation of the young, almost teenage soldiers under the ccp? They might be willing to die on home soil but on enemy territory?

It kind of reminds me of the Russian invasion of Grozny in Chechnia, where young inexperienced soldiers who never saw battle were sent in with tanks and military equipment and slaughtered by partisans defending their land



I don't believe China has the balls for a military conflict and the best hand they got and they are best at economic warfare

Lets please stop these scare tactics what if what if, No Chinese soldier will ever set foot in Aus uninvited

I think you are right with your assumptions, China technologically will be way behind the U.S, U.K and Germany, there is no way any of their really high tech stuff would be built in China.
Also a major war is a no win for anyone really, it is obvious that the Worlds resources are finite and that is now a recognised fact, so the wastage associated with a major war doesn't make sense.
China has benefitted most from a peaceful world and a world with growing affluence, the problem is Trump wants to slow their growth trajectory, China doesn't.
But common sense will prevail IMO, there is no point China putting everyone out of business, then they will have no one to sell their junk to.
The virus has really been a catalyst to bring the whole issue to a head, which probably needed doing IMO.

 

[Value Collector]

Indeed and that is my point.

At a national level, use the iron, coal and gas to get into something with a longer term future both in terms of the industry itself and the customer base rather than waiting for the world to dump coal or China to change iron ore suppliers.

At present, we’re akin to the milk bar owner flatly denying that McDonald’s is anything more than a passing fad.

Keep digging for coal etc in the short term sure but the writing’s on the wall for coal as a whole and likewise with iron there’s longer term competition from others so we need to be getting into something else. We need a definite plan other than trying to stop the inevitable or pretending it won’t happen.

some of the resources may be obsolete in 20 years, so we need to exploit while they are profitable.

But, I didn’t actually say we should just mine and let every other industry die.

I said we should focus on what we are good at and what we have natural advantages in.

Mining just happens to be one of those, others include farming certain crops, Wine making, Tourism, Education and countless others.

At the moment and probably for 200 years mining will be a great place to deploy capital, much better than a steel mill.

but there are also plenty of other places to deploy capital once the resources production peaks before we have to reach for the industries we a no good at.

 

[Value Collector]

I don't think China is as "tough" as they want the world to believe.

yes
1. they have massive amounts of weapons
2. alot of human "meat" soldiers

However
1. The quality of their equipment is questionable
2. The experience of their troops is also questionable, when is the last time China fought a land+sea conflict? (USA does it on annual basis)
3. What is the motivation of the young, almost teenage soldiers under the ccp? They might be willing to die on home soil but on enemy territory?

It kind of reminds me of the Russian invasion of Grozny in Chechnia, where young inexperienced soldiers who never saw battle were sent in with tanks and military equipment and slaughtered by partisans defending their land



I don't believe China has the balls for a military conflict and the best hand they got and they are best at economic warfare

Lets please stop these scare tactics what if what if, No Chinese soldier will ever set foot in Aus uninvited

Neither China or the USA have a snowball’s chance in Hell at occupying each other’s homeland, so neither will invade the other.

A Cold War is possible, but that’s it, but that is in neither sides interest.

 

[Smurf1976]

Who knows considering how ruthless China is in its desire to rule the world.

I won't claim to know that one but something I worked out long ago is that when someone says "it's all about money" they are usually wrong.

In practice it's about money only for someone seeking a very specific goal which can be purchased. Beyond that, the aims are either success for the sake of success or the big one - power as a means of control.

Artists and scientists seek success for the sake of success and the rest of us benefit from them doing so or at the least suffer no harm. If they happen to make some money out of it then that's fine with me.

Individuals seek money in order to cease working, take an around the world trip or whatever or in some cases in order to spend it helping others.

Power's the big game though. The ability to control physical and or human resources without needing to convince anyone else as to the merits of your intentions. That's the one which drives pretty much anything where the goal is either not immediately apparent or is perceived as being money.