NewStats: 3,264,424 , 8,183,698 topics. Date: Wednesday, 11 June 2025 at 03:50 AM 105x5c

Gerrard59:

I am not a prophet and haven't come across those articles you posted. Also, if not for the anti-spam bot, I would have posted the links to the articles I read, which made me foresee a reduction of tariffs.

Oh ok. BTW that video posted by LordAdam16 contradicts his (and your) assertion that China has all the cards

QuinQ:


Oh ok. BTW that video posted by LordAdam16 contradicts his (and your) assertion that China has all the cards

I never stated that. I stated there would be scars here and there. So far, from what I have read, the Chinese might have to come to an agreement sooner or later. But I no dey C neither am I an ethnic Chinese. So, I am sure they have thought this over. For instance, the quiet removal of tariffs as seen from your shots say a lot about they are coping with the blockade. So, it is not all rosy as one would have expected. The thing is: I just believe the C elites will handle things much better than any country that faces a similar bullying from the US. When Lord stated that China has to buy as much as she sells, I agreed and saw reasons why that should be done and even wrote two suggestions.

So, I am a fan of the Chinese and what they have achieved, but I am not a fanatic.

QuinQ:


Oh ok. BTW that video posted by LordAdam16 contradicts his (and your) assertion that China has all the cards

How so, Einstein?

Comprehension does not appear to be your strong suit.

-Lord

LordAdam16:


How so, Einstein?

Comprehension does not appear to be your strong suit.

-Lord

Genius obviously did not watch his own video.
See it summarized below 4 ya, plus a short

Gerrard59:

I never stated that. I stated there would be scars here and there. So far, from what I have read, the Chinese might have to come to an agreement sooner or later. But I no dey C neither am I an ethnic Chinese. So, I am sure they have thought this over. For instance, the quiet removal of tariffs as seen from your shots say a lot about they are coping with the blockade. So, it is not all rosy as one would have expected. The thing is: I just believe the C elites will handle things much better than any country that faces a similar bullying from the US. When Lord stated that China has to buy as much as she sells, I agreed and saw reasons why that should be done and even wrote two suggestions.

So, I am a fan of the Chinese and what they have achieved, but I am not a fanatic.

So who said this, verbatim:
"Nevertheless, I see the Chinese winning this or coming out victorious"

You, Pansophist, and Lord have all said China will win. These videos beg to differ:

One minute long:
https://youtube.com/shorts/loBncym73IA?si=Wvxx6l6BXUeIdst6

4 minutes long

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=NNfmA9meewA?si=94QnOYPzDqWFrFw2

PART 1 OF 5

@QuinQ

Here is a friendly advice, do not forcefully insert yourself into a conversation you haven't the slightest clue about nor have the intellectual capacity to discuss.

I asked you to point out a contradiction. And you couldn't even type out a sentence in your own words.
Should be easy-peasy if you watched the video and understood the topic we're discussing.

-Lord

PART 2 OF 5

In one of my earlier comments, and I mean several weeks back, I stated that China had to up its domestic consumption.
@Gerrard59 initially contested that as it was a tad too close to the tired Western talking point that consumerism is a pillar of economic growth.
In subsequent comments, I fleshed out my point.

I shared Maxinomics video with Gerrard59 to buttress that point. With charts, stats, and references.

-Lord

PART 3 OF 5

To a hammer, every problem is a nail.
To a chronic Westernophile, anything that isn't an unrestrained celebration of China's greatness is a ding on its status.
That Neanderthal-like, simplistic association impelled you to claim a phantom contradiction.

Let me say this as clearly as I can:
China is NOT resting on its oars.
In an economic war with the US, it has tools in its arsenal you couldn't possibly envisage.

And if you actually watched the video, you would know that this domestic consumption shortfall relative to the first world is not so much a problem as it is an yet-to-be-realized opportunity.

China has the population.
Its population has $20 trillion (with a T) in savings.
It has the industrial capacity to meet any level of domestic demand.
It has one of the most effective governments in all of human history.

The highlight of that video you didn't watch is at the 12:45 mark when Phil points out that increasing the household consumption rate by ONLY 10 percentage points from 38% to 48% will balance China's trade with the rest of the world.
And that is still 20 percentage points lower than the 68% consumption rate of the US.


https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=u1y0T3R7t3I?t=765

-Lord

PART 4 OF 5

The reasons why China's savings rate is 4x that of the US as mentioned in the video are struggle, the one child policy, and the dearth of investment opportunities. All three are transient.

On struggle, the silent generation in the US who were shaped by the Great Depression of the 20s were savers and misers.
But later generations who lived through America's peak--Boomers and later--progressively became more consumerist.
Xi Jinping lived through the Great Famine. Let me repeat that, the current Chinese premier lived through the deadliest famine in all of human history. Wealth coalesces higher up in the population pyramid. As the older generation down their wealth to later generations who do not have that painful memory, consumption will improve. This will be a natural, organic progression sans any input or stimuli from the C.

On the one child policy, that is history.

On the dearth of investment opportunities. Phil said in the video that in 1979, only 20% of Americans owned stocks. Today, that figure exceeds 60%. WW2 ended in 1945. So it took more than 30 years to get 20% of Americans to invest in stocks at a time period when the US was the premier industrial powerhouse on the planet. Clearly, there is a process, there's a trajectory.
If you make an apples-to-apples comparison, you'll see that China is early on its own path. The financialization of its economy will happen. It is a work in progress. But the C will not put the cart before the horse.

Take all of these together and you'd realize China's modest consumption rate is not a problem. It's the equivalent of an oil reserve. It's in the ground, you just have to extract it. Crucially, neither of us are Chinese. Phil is not a Chinese . So when Leland Miller of China Beige Book was listing a number of mechanisms Xi could use to boost consumption rate, you have to understand that China operates on its own timeline. Not mine, not yours, not America's.

And that Mr is what we mean when we say China has all the cards.

-Lord

@QuinQ

PART 5 OF 5

Everything I've typed Gerrard59 could glean via deductive reasoning after watching that video.
But I've had to expend valuable time I'll never get back because of your insolence.
Let this be your final warning. I will block you if you continue to make a nuisance of yourself.

-Lord

LordAdam16:
PART 1 OF 5

@QuinQ

Here is a friendly advice, do not forcefully insert yourself into a conversation you haven't the slightest clue about nor have the intellectual capacity to discuss.

I asked you to point out a contradiction. And you couldn't even type out a sentence in your own words
Should be easy-peasy if you watched the video and understood the topic we're discussing.

-Lord

This Nairaland sef. They only posted this part one in my mentions. It was when I went to your profile that I then saw parts 2 and 3.
Can you believe it? Sometimes you won't even know a person never saw your reply to them!

Anyway, I got into this discussion by way of "recent posts". I saw a post forecasting China would drop some tarrifs - funny since I just finished reading China already did just that, so I had to point out it was no forecast as I assumed he also just read it.

As for your video, I not only watched it I shortened it to 4+ minutes. My version ends with that part you said I didn't watch. Watch it and see below.

As for comparisons, US has almost all the global apps we use today, AND their competitors, AND Hollywood and Broadway, AND rap and jazz, AND
Microsoft and Apple, AND Android and IOS, AND the cities with the most billionaires, AND the top ten richest people in the world, AND both Blue Origin and Space X, etc.
So what's China's answers to all these? So it goes far beyond consumerism. In determining who wins you put all that into !

**Part 5 just appeared in my mentions. Parts 2,3,4 are still missing

4 minutes

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=NNfmA9meewA?si=0c_-uWZZSY8SprQ_

LordAdam16:
@Gerrar.d59

Yesterday, Maxinomics put out a succinct video on China's spending.
Give it a watch.


https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=u1y0T3R7t3I

-Lord

Thank you for the video. It was very revealing and interesting. As we have agreed, the Chinese do need to spend and consume other countries' goods and services. To an extent, I can understand their fears for not opening the stock market to foreign investors who could take advantage to ruin ordinary Chinese investments and/or attack Chinese companies' finances. But then, even when China wants to buy finished goods from other countries, the US puts up limitations such as semiconductor machines and chemicals. That is not the fault of China.

The way out as I have written elsewhere would be to share the technologies they (the Chinese) have developed to the rest of the Global South, set up factories in those countries to sell to their citizens and export to neighbouring nations and buy finished goods from those countries. To an extent, this is done in Brazil.

On the other hand, I watched this video a week ago and came to fully understand the US' motive by the Trump istration and general US elites. I could have posted it earlier on, but the anti-spam bot has been a mess on my moniker.


https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=NSWMEc8J88Y

QuinQ:


Genius obviously did not watch his own video.
See it summarized below 4 ya, plus a short

So who said this, verbatim:
"Nevertheless, I see the Chinese winning this or coming out victorious"

You, Pansophist, and Lord have all said China will win. These videos beg to differ:

Yes, I see them winning, but not without scars here and there. You did not see that part? I used the case of Huawei. It was attacked and almost grounded, but has risen back better, more diversified and stronger. I just don't see them capitulating to the West, whether easily or otherwise.

With this new development, things are changing quicker than I expected.

https: //archive .md/2025.04.29-111910/ https: //www. bloomberg.com/news/articles/2025-04-29/china-says-willing-to-cooperate-with-us-firms-after-boeing-spat

If China bends the knee faster than expected, congratulations to Donald Trump.

Gerrard59:
With this new development, things are changing quicker than I expected.

https: //archive .md/2025.04.29-111910/ https: //www. bloomberg.com/news/articles/2025-04-29/china-says-willing-to-cooperate-with-us-firms-after-boeing-spat

If China bends the knee faster than expected, congratulations to Donald Trump.

China will not bend the knee. The Chinese are not known to double-speak, fork tongue, or outright lie. Below is what the Chinese ministry of commerce posted on their website.

https://www.mofcom.gov.cn/xwfb/xwfyrth/art/2025/art_ecd95ccc65ea4495a308f6fa2dbffd7e.html

It is in Chinese, so I will just translate it in English below

The position of China has always been consistent: if you want to fight, we will accompany you to the end; if you want to talk, our door is open.

The tariff war and trade war were unilaterally initiated by the U.S. If the U.S. wants to talk, it should demonstrate sincerity and be prepared to correct its wrong practices, such as canceling unilateral tariffs, and take action accordingly.

We have noticed that the U.S. has been constantly signaling adjustments to its tariff measures recently. What China wants to emphasize is that in any possible dialogue or talks, if the U.S. does not correct its erroneous unilateral tariff measures, it shows a complete lack of sincerity on the part of the U.S., and will further damage mutual trust between the two sides.

Speaking one way and acting another, or even attempting to use talks as a guise for coercion and blackmail, will not work with China.

The Talks in Europe are just diplomatic sidelines. China will fight to the end.

US Trade Rep Greer alludes to an agreement between US and China.
Details to emerge tomorrow.
You don't hash out a deal in a weekend, so he likely means the negotiators have agreed on some component within the ongoing discussion.
But he snuck in that agreement keyword so stocks moon tomorrow.
Wahala for who no buy the dip.

In any case, I've maintained that the US and China will strike a trade deal.
We're closer than ever to this inevitability.

-Lord

LordAdam16:
US Trade Rep Greer alludes to an agreement between US and China.
Details to emerge tomorrow.
You don't hash out a deal in a weekend, so he likely means the negotiators have agreed on some component within the ongoing discussion.
But he snuck in that agreement keyword so stocks moon tomorrow.
Wahala for who no buy the dip.

In any case, I've maintained that the US and China will strike a trade deal.
We're closer than ever to this inevitability.

-Lord

A deal has been reached, 90 days sha. I'm yet to read the full details, but so far, tarrifs on Chinese goods will be reduced to 30% by the US and 10% on US goods by the Chinese.

Gerrard59:

A deal has been reached, 90 days sha. I'm yet to read the full details, but so far, tarrifs on Chinese goods will be reduced to 30% by the US and 10% on US goods by the Chinese.

The agreement is for mutual tariff reduction.
China had insisted on eliminating the tariff as a prelude to serious negotiations.
Trump mused about a cut to 80%. 30% is nice.

Now negotiations for a comprehensive trade deal will commence.

Also, Trump has made a buy recommendation for stocks twice.
The first time was before the global tariff reprieve.
The second came last week before this tariff slash.

-Lord

LordAdam16:


The agreement is for mutual tariff reduction.
China had insisted on eliminating the tariff as a prelude to serious negotiations.
Trump mused about a cut to 80%. 30% is nice.

Now negotiations for a comprehensive trade deal will commence.

Also, Trump has made a buy recommendation for stocks twice.
The first time was before the global tariff reprieve.
The second came last week before this tariff slash.

-Lord

So far, to be honest and fair, the Chinese have negotiated hard enough. Way much better than the Japanese during the '90s. If the Japanese had negotiated this way or even better, the Lost Decades wouldn't have happened as a result of the Plaza Accord.

Ultimately, it's not just the tarrifs that the US-led West has against China, but the ferocious marketing and market overtaking by Chinese companies across the world and China's growing scientific strength.

I'm not sure America is gonna recover from this incompetent leadership

It is a statistical fact that 80% of STEM graduates remain in the United States.
This is true for the Chinese, as well as other students

This current move by Rubio at the behest of the Trump is foolish
Antagonising Chinese students and grads that hitherto wanted to build in the United States and be away from Chinese Communist Party

These guys don't understand the complexities of international diplomacy

Gosh

RodgersAkpafu:
I'm not sure America is gonna recover from this incompetent leadership

It is a statistical fact that 80% of STEM graduates remain in the United States.
This is true for the Chinese, as well as other students

This current move by Rubio at the behest of the Trump is foolish
Antagonising Chinese students and grads that hitherto wanted to build in the United States and be away from Chinese Communist Party

These guys don't understand the complexities of international diplomacy

Gosh

US spooks and generals routinely label China as their primary 21st century foe.
Just yesterday, the US expanded export restrictions on China.
Jet engine parts, semiconductor design software, specialized chemicals, and industrial machinery are no bueno.

China's fortuitous integration into the global economy is the premier reason why the US has not forced through a clean break.
It is not a question of will. The US will cleave all links to China if it could.

China is public enemy #1.
Ergo, it is state policy to sabotage any opportunity that could conceivably be leveraged to further China's progress.
Chinese STEM students and academics have had a target on their back since Bush.
It's no secret that they're the favorite punching bag of China hawks.
A Dem president will hesitate primarily because of racial underpinnings.
A Republic president, especially a populist like Trump, has no such scruples.
Put simply, they're two sides of a coin. Two peas in a pond. One is slicker but both have the same broad objectives.

-Lord

LordAdam16:


US spooks and generals routinely label China as their primary 21st century foe.
Just yesterday, the US expanded export restrictions on China.
Jet engine parts, semiconductor design software, specialized chemicals, and industrial machinery are no bueno.

China's fortuitous integration into the global economy is the premier reason why the US has not forced through a clean break.
It is not a question of will. The US will cleave all links to China if it could.

China is public enemy #1.
Ergo, it is state policy to sabotage any opportunity that could conceivably be leveraged to further China's progress.
Chinese STEM students and academics have had a target on their back since Bush.
It's no secret that they're the favorite punching bag of China hawks.
A Dem president will hesitate primarily because of racial underpinnings.
A Republic president, especially a populist like Trump, has no such scruples.
Put simply, they're two sides of a coin. Two peas in a pond. One is slicker but both have the same broad objectives.

-Lord

But the thing is....
Many of these guys are ALREADY anti C.

I mean, the vast majority of the Chinese students who came here themselves and not via scholarship are anti C in my uni

The Chinese ambassador has been here TWICE since I started here

China (well actually the C) is an adversary. yes
But moving this way does not make any sense at all.

If you want to break the C, you have to create as many Chinese people who are anti C and your uni is the most potent weapon to that effect

If you are worried about the market manipulations by the Chinese, then take the bull by the horns and present a cogent case as to why the Chinese should be ousted from the WTO.

There are many methods to this thing that does not have to be damaging to the American state

They should come learn from Britain in how they are using underhand tactics on the Chinese govt and agenda

RodgersAkpafu:


But the thing is....
Many of these guys are ALREADY anti C.

I mean, the vast majority of the Chinese students who came here themselves and not via scholarship are anti C in my uni

The Chinese ambassador has been here TWICE since I started here

China (well actually the C) is an adversary. yes
But moving this way does not make any sense at all.

If you want to break the C, you have to create as many Chinese people who are anti C and your uni is the most potent weapon to that effect

If you are worried about the market manipulations by the Chinese, then take the bull by the horns and present a cogent case as to why the Chinese should be ousted from the WTO.

There are many methods to this thing that does not have to be damaging to the American state

They should come learn from Britain in how they are using underhand tactics on the Chinese govt and agenda

I wager they've looked at the numbers, taken stock of existing programs, and find it arguable that the juice is not worth the squeeze.

The C has an iron grip on Chinese internal affairs.
They have their tech billionaires on a leash. No one in Chinese intelligence frets -educated STEM grads.

Moreover, China has had decades to work around the potential pitfalls of welcoming or having a teeming gaggle of foe-educated Chinese.
You make trouble; you disappear. It's a simple, effective kludge.

My point is: this is not a sudden Trump shock move.
It's been an item on every "To-Do During a Cold War with China" checklist since forever.
The China-skeptic bloc in Washington only care about hurting China.
If existing policies have done nothing to halt China's epic rise, change is necessary.

In the past, the pushback would be loss of Chinese talent.
That does not move the needle anymore because they believe the US and China are in a cold war.
A cold war started by the US.
China has the higher ceiling.
The canons that should have crippled China turned out to be mere speedbumps.
They're scraping the barrel and scrambling for more punitive measures that'll increasingly appear absurd.

Chinese academics and civil servants in sensitive industries cannot leave China without obtaining authorization.
Chinese who want to study and be employed in sensitive sectors in the US may have to voluntarily give up their Chinese citizenship, avoid trips to the Mainland in perpetuity, and meet onerous reporting requirements to get a fair shake.

Discriminatory behavior is a latent human trait.
Always simmering under the surface.
It reliably pops up whenever we face adversity.
It is our favorite go-to card.

-Lord

LordAdam16:


I wager they've looked at the numbers, taken stock of existing programs, and find it arguable that the juice is not worth the squeeze.

The C has an iron grip on Chinese internal affairs.
They have their tech billionaires on a leash. No one in Chinese intelligence frets -educated STEM grads.

Moreover, China has had decades to work around the potential pitfalls of welcoming or having a teeming gaggle of foe-educated Chinese.
You make trouble; you disappear. It's a simple, effective kludge.

My point is: this is not a sudden Trump shock move.
It's been an item on every "To-Do During a Cold War with China" checklist since forever.
The China-skeptic bloc in Washington only care about hurting China.
If existing policies have done nothing to halt China's epic rise, change is necessary.

In the past, the pushback would be loss of Chinese talent.
That does not move the needle anymore because they believe the US and China are in a cold war.
A cold war started by the US.
China has the higher ceiling.
The canons that should have crippled China turned out to be mere speedbumps.
They're scraping the barrel and scrambling for more punitive measures that'll increasingly appear absurd.

Chinese academics and civil servants in sensitive industries cannot leave China without obtaining authorization.
Chinese who want to study and be employed in sensitive sectors in the US may have to voluntarily give up their Chinese citizenship, avoid trips to the Mainland in perpetuity, and meet onerous reporting requirements to get a fair shake.

Discriminatory behavior is a latent human trait.
Always simmering under the surface.
It reliably pops up whenever we face adversity.
It is our favorite go-to card.

-Lord

You are giving Trump too much credit
That guy does nor think before acting

As per your assertion about the C neutralising anti c elements in china, that one is far fetched

The more people that disappear, the more discontent you will be creating

The C already is losing face among Chinese people, that's why the censorship is tight there...
They only tolerate them because of the pact to create economic growth and all

But again, let's watch and see how things play out

RodgersAkpafu:

You are giving Trump too much credit
That guy does nor think before acting

As per your assertion about the C neutralising anti c elements in china, that one is far fetched

The more people that disappear, the more discontent you will be creating

The C already is losing face among Chinese people, that's why the censorship is tight there...
They only tolerate them because of the pact to create economic growth and all

But again, let's watch and see how things play out

I've ed Trump since he came down the elevator in 2015.
I am a Day 1 ally.
You'd have to be within 2 degrees of separation from Trump to be as versed about his defining traits.

Trump is a sponge.
Virtually all of his "controversial" policies had their start and cheerleaders somewhere in the electron cloud of policy circles.
Going after Chinese in sensitive sectors, employed or learning, is a longtime demand of ultra-conservative China hawks.
Why? Because the US has prosecuted several unsuspecting Chinese for espionage going back more than a decade.
It is long established that this an opening the Chinese habitually exploit and shutting off access has been the obvious nuclear option.
By definition, it is a nuclear option because there are ittedly less kinetic alternatives higher up on the checklist.
The US has run through the checklist since Obama. Today, only policy moves like this nuclear option remain on the docket.

On your comment about the internal workings of China, you couldn't be more wrong.
The Chinese value leadership that is simultaneous competent and ruthless.
Everyone has their eye on the ball. That ball is the wellbeing of 1.3 million people, 800m of whom were elevated from poverty in a generation.
Only 7% of China has a Bachelor degree or higher. US-educated Chinese are the very definition of bourgeoise.
The C will have no trouble whatsoever in a million years disappearing as many of them as is necessary so long as they frame it in the context of maintaining China's rapturous trajectory. The average Chinese will cheer... enthusiastically.

Censorship is not fierce in China because the C is losing face.
Far from that. The C has earned the life long loyalty of several generations of Chinese on of the last 30 years.
For very similar reasons to why the democrats can count on 80+% of AA votes every election cycle because of the civil rights movement.
Censorship is fierce because the C is mindful of Pacific 5th columnists.
In light of its population and the propensity of Chinese to be dogmatic about any interest they have, it would take a tiny percentage of its population to grind things to a halt if China was "freer".
Tiananmen Square is a cautionary tale. It is seared into the memory of everyone in the C leadership cadre.
One look at Singapore, yes that celebrated Singapore, and you realize the C's approach is the furthest thing from unnatural or irrational for that region. Competence and ruthlessness.

You're approaching this topic with a set of faulty axioms.
On Trump. On the interplay of the power blocs in Washington. On China. On the nature and peculiarities of the US-China cold war.

-Lord

@LordAdam16

How many Chinese people have you interacted with on a personal basis ?

Let's start with that?

If you have really interacted with them
You will know that the ONLY reason why the C is still in place is the "economic deliverables"

Not all that thing that you typed

If China experiences a lost decade, let's see how popular C will be

BTW I will be posted to China next year to do an exchange with a partner uni there
I'll go have a look for myself and get first hand s
Because my scope so far are Chinese students and faculty in my uni

RodgersAkpafu:


But the thing is....
Many of these guys are ALREADY anti C.
versary. yes
But moving this way does not make any sense at all.

If you want to break the C, you have to create as many Chinese people who are anti C and your uni is the most potent weapon to that effect If you are worried about the market manipulations by the Chinese, then take the bull by the horns and present a cogent case as to why the Chinese should be ousted from the WTO.

There are many methods to this thing that does not have to be damaging to the American state. They should come learn from Britain in how they are using underhand tactics on the Chinese govt and agenda

I am geninuely curious why do you believe citizens of a country like China can be made anti-C when you sanction their companies, restrict ission of their kith into your universities, bar their exports? Why do you believe Chinese citizens in the West are so unpatriotic or vehemently anti-China's progress? Don't they have parents and relatives in China? Or do you believe every Chinese student in the West will remain there till thy kingdom come?

LordAdam16:


I wager they've looked at the numbers, taken stock of existing programs, and find it arguable that the juice is not worth the squeeze.

The C has an iron grip on Chinese internal affairs.
They have their tech billionaires on a leash. No one in Chinese intelligence frets -educated STEM grads. Moreover, China has had decades to work around the potential pitfalls of welcoming or having a teeming gaggle of foe-educated Chinese.
You make trouble; you disappear. It's a simple, effective kludge.

My point is: this is not a sudden Trump shock move.
It's been an item on every "To-Do During a Cold War with China" checklist since forever.
The China-skeptic bloc in Washington only care about hurting China.
If existing policies have done nothing to halt China's epic rise, change is necessary.

In the past, the pushback would be loss of Chinese talent.
That does not move the needle anymore because they believe the US and China are in a cold war.
A cold war started by the US.
China has the higher ceiling.
The canons that should have crippled China turned out to be mere speedbumps.
They're scraping the barrel and scrambling for more punitive measures that'll increasingly appear absurd.

Chinese academics and civil servants in sensitive industries cannot leave China without obtaining authorization.
Chinese who want to study and be employed in sensitive sectors in the US may have to voluntarily give up their Chinese citizenship, avoid trips to the Mainland in perpetuity, and meet onerous reporting requirements to get a fair shake.

Discriminatory behavior is a latent human trait.
Always simmering under the surface.
It reliably pops up whenever we face adversity.
It is our favorite go-to card.

-Lord

Fair argument. Already, there is a study that shows mnany ethnic Chinese researchers were/are planning on leaving their jobs and the US for elsewhere due to the anti-China rhetoric. It is a bipartisan affair just that one is not a hypocrite - one of the strong reasons I like the GOP and Donald Trump - they and he say it as it is. I prefer people who are clear and open about their intentions towards me. Tell it to my face.

RodgersAkpafu:

You are giving Trump too much credit
That guy does nor think before acting

As per your assertion about the C neutralising anti c elements in china, that one is far fetched

The more people that disappear, the more discontent you will be creating

The C already is losing face among Chinese people, that's why the censorship is tight there...
They only tolerate them because of the pact to create economic growth and all

But again, let's watch and see how things play out

lol
So the solution is to revolt and allow foreign powers to disrupt their hard-fought progress and society?

Like I knew, you mistake the Chinese in China and all over Asia, not some disgruntled Hong Kongers in the UK, to be Nigerians.

You want a repeat of the effects of Buhari's presidency on Nigeria on the Chinese all in the name of "the C is e.vil".

RodgersAkpafu:
@LordAdam16

How many Chinese people have you interacted with on a personal basis ?

Let's start with that? If you have really interacted with them You will know that the ONLY reason why the C is still in place is the "economic deliverables"

The ones in Manchester are not the majority Chinese who have witnessed the upliftment of an entire race and a billion people from servitude. The ones who don't mind their companies strangled all in the name of containing their progress. The ones who have watched the bitter rhetoric of US politicians towards ethnic Han Chinese, regardless of nationality (see TikTok CEO episode). I follow r/Singapore and some are now "against the West" because they perceive an anti-Chinese rhetoric, even though Singaporean Chinese are very westernised, way more than any group of ethnic Han Chinese. The TikTok episode revealed everything. If this could happen to a fellow Singaporean simply because he is Chinese, then the C isn't bad at all, and the West is against Motherland China's progress.

Not all that thing that you typed

If China experiences a lost decade, let's see how popular C will be

Japan experienced that because Japanese companies were roaring as Chinese companies are doing, and they signed what is known as the Plaza Accord, an accord the C wouldn't sign. If that could occur to the Japanese, a literal baby of the US and accommodating its military bases, how much China that suffered the COH? During the '80s, Donald Trump complained about Japanese cars outdoing their American counterparts and for tariffs on them. Already, the negotiating talks have broken down. Huawei was a.ttacked and the daughter of the founder arrested, yet Huawei has soared ever since. It is a fight to the end. Mainland Chinese are not Nigerians who campaigned and voted for Buhari in 2015 simply because he said he would phight kwarruption.

BTW I will be posted to China next year to do an exchange with a partner uni there
I'll go have a look for myself and get first hand s
Because my scope so far are Chinese students and faculty in my uni

Good gracious Lord! Thank God!

It is always better to be in the know so you gauge every day people's responses, not like those in r/Nigeria who argued that no Nigerian warms their soups because every Nigerian has a refrigerator and 24/7 electricity. Thank God you won't be like so-called China experts who have never studied in China nor speak Chinese. So far, all the so-called China experts I have read their profiles, NONE has it stated that s/he speak Chinese. How does one become an expert on a country that s/he does not speak the native language?

Gerrard59:

Fair argument. Already, there is a study that shows mnany ethnic Chinese researchers were/are planning on leaving their jobs and the US for elsewhere due to the anti-China rhetoric. It is a bipartisan affair just that one is not a hypocrite - one of the strong reasons I like the GOP and Donald Trump - they and he say it as it is. I prefer people who are clear and open about their intentions towards me. Tell it to my face.

Europe and AU/CA will welcome them.
A few Asian options may open up.
But there's no like-for-like replacement for the US.
Ethnic Chinese in the US will feel the squeeze.
Every ethnicity has their fiefdom in the US and the Chinese had walled that off as their castle.
The Koreans may move in. Wouldn't bet on the Indians but it wouldn't surprise me if they filled up spots.

What I'll say though is that the US will miss the raw brainpower and talent pipeline if they really go apesh*t with the restrictions.
They'll get past it. The US is still everyone's favorite destination on that count.
China will be a big winner. More talent without having to benchmark against generous Western offers.

As an aside, one of the successes of Western liberalism is furthering the notion that the US (and the West writ large) doES not operate on the primal action-reaction, push-pull paradigm.
They've created this air of moral superiority where folks, especially those who buy into their dogma, believe certain actions can only be taken by Others. The Golden Billion would never. All that yucky stuff does not align with their professed values.
When an unrefined character like Trump peels back the curtain, he is met with indignation.
Like we've curated this perfect make-believe matrix. Don't blow it up.
But we all know, they do -- at least the informed ones do, that when push comes to shove, we'll all get in the trenches and throw hands like cavemen.

Others don't acquiesce, you fall back to old habits of sanctions, discrimination, sabotage, and the good ol' Freedom aircraft carriers.
Their cheerleaders would think they're beyond that.
That there is some high-level thinking to all of this.
There isn't. It's all about a primal need to dominate when in a pole position and doing everything possible to stay ahead.
Democracy. Liberty. Rights. All fancy BS that'll be sidelined at the drop of a hat when conditions deteriorate.

-Lord