The Panama Canal Expansion will be online in a year or two. This will have a profound impact on the supply chain since huge cargo ships won't have to sail around the tip of South America.
Sounds boring, but this will have an impact on all of our lives.
How is the USA involved? We need to upgrade our ports, especially on the Gulf Coast and Charleston to handle the larger ships. Expensive infrastructure improvements, but will help the overall US economy.
Quote from: airboy on November 06, 2013, 09:30:14 AM
The Panama Canal Expansion will be online in a year or two. This will have a profound impact on the supply chain since huge cargo ships won't have to sail around the tip of South America.
Sounds boring, but this will have an impact on all of our lives.
How is the USA involved? We need to upgrade our ports, especially on the Gulf Coast and Charleston to handle the larger ships. Expensive infrastructure improvements, but will help the overall US economy.
Why just there? Shouldn't West coast ports get an upgrade too?
Quote from: Windigo on November 06, 2013, 11:54:59 AM
Quote from: airboy on November 06, 2013, 09:30:14 AM
The Panama Canal Expansion will be online in a year or two. This will have a profound impact on the supply chain since huge cargo ships won't have to sail around the tip of South America.
Sounds boring, but this will have an impact on all of our lives.
How is the USA involved? We need to upgrade our ports, especially on the Gulf Coast and Charleston to handle the larger ships. Expensive infrastructure improvements, but will help the overall US economy.
Why just there? Shouldn't West coast ports get an upgrade too?
I think ports like LA already have been upgraded for a while.
I read somewhere the Chinese wanted to pay to expand the canal so that their big oil tankers can navigate them for easier transport of oil from Venezuela to China.
I'll have to look and see where I read that.
Its been awhile since I first saw that story.
I used to be stationed at FT. Sherman Panama back in 1982 and I was looking up that fort after we gave the canal back to Panama and I think I ran across that story then.
I guess I was wrong it seems China wants to build a canal thru Nicaragua to rival the Panama canal.
China to Build Panama Canal Bypass Through Nicaragua.
http://www.economonitor.com/blog/2013/06/china-to-build-panama-canal-bypass-through-nicaragua/
One of the most extraordinary stories of the past decade largely overlooked by the U.S. media is how Central and Latin America have quietly escaped U.S. control since 9-11, as Washington focused on its global War on Terror (WoT). The WoT diverted Washington's attention long enough that progressive governments established themselves throughout the southern Western hemisphere, from Venezuela through Brazil, Paraguay and Bolivia, which were far less inclined than previous administrations to listen to advice from their giant "el Norte" neighbor. A crucial element in this process has been Central and Latin America expanding their trading opportunities with states frowned upon by Washington, from Iran to China. Now, in the latest sign that Washington's sway over the region is diminishing still further, Nicaragua has announced that it will soon begin construction of a canal to compete directly with the Panama Canal further south, to be financed by ... China. - See more at: http://www.economonitor.com/blog/2013/06/china-to-build-panama-canal-bypass-through-nicaragua/#sthash.MuaqGg4X.dpuf
Quote from: Dolan50 on November 06, 2013, 12:39:46 PM
I guess I was wrong it seems China wants to build a canal thru Nicaragua to rival the Panama canal.
China to Build Panama Canal Bypass Through Nicaragua.
http://www.economonitor.com/blog/2013/06/china-to-build-panama-canal-bypass-through-nicaragua/
One of the most extraordinary stories of the past decade largely overlooked by the U.S. media is how Central and Latin America have quietly escaped U.S. control since 9-11, as Washington focused on its global War on Terror (WoT). The WoT diverted Washington's attention long enough that progressive governments established themselves throughout the southern Western hemisphere, from Venezuela through Brazil, Paraguay and Bolivia, which were far less inclined than previous administrations to listen to advice from their giant "el Norte" neighbor. A crucial element in this process has been Central and Latin America expanding their trading opportunities with states frowned upon by Washington, from Iran to China. Now, in the latest sign that Washington's sway over the region is diminishing still further, Nicaragua has announced that it will soon begin construction of a canal to compete directly with the Panama Canal further south, to be financed by ... China. - See more at: http://www.economonitor.com/blog/2013/06/china-to-build-panama-canal-bypass-through-nicaragua/#sthash.MuaqGg4X.dpuf
competition is good...
Not boring at all, to me. Love stuff like this.
Given Africa and South America are doing their trade with China, if not falling into the Chinese "sphere of influence", it makes sense that they would want a route that cannot be cutoff. As any RTS player knows you need the constant stream of gold to keep the expansion going.
yet another indicator of US diminishment and relevancy ...
sooner or later the citizens of the US will galvinize and take responsibility for their government and start kicking out 'establishment' leaders and vote in new (time for a change) leaders with fresh visions and ideas.
Greed and corruption throughout history has always been the cancer that has led to the demise of great empires.
still more good and decent people than IDGAF people.... alignment and agreement takes time, ordinary folk are very tolerant... to a point
IMO the Teaparty was doing well early on, then the Koch brothers got it and perverted its intent
I look at this country today and I see Detroit.
A once great city that was also brought to ruin by indifference,greed and corruption.
I doubt I'll live long enough to witness this country in its death throes,but the seeds of its destruction have already been sown.
.
Quote from: eyebiter on November 06, 2013, 05:48:00 PM
China has more pressing issues, including several large dam construction projects. Would think funding an alternative to the Panama Canal would be far down the list.
Anything domestic is not paid for in US $ or treasuries. Buying a stake overseas lets them whittle down their US treasure pile that is slowly melting.
Quote from: eyebiter on November 06, 2013, 05:48:00 PM
China has more pressing issues, including several large dam construction projects. Would think funding an alternative to the Panama Canal would be far down the list.
they're building a foreign affairs tripwire ... not good!
are you high? they couldnt support it by force of arms if they wanted to. China is and will be a regional power for decades to come. thats just the simple reality of their position.
Quote from: GDS_Starfury on November 06, 2013, 08:12:11 PM
are you high? they couldnt support it by force of arms if they wanted to. China is and will be a regional power for decades to come. thats just the simple reality of their position.
ever look at how many 'advisors' they have in Africa??? You think its just about present day military strength??? Shit... read Sun Tzu again... Chinese play the long game
they can advise all they want. look at how many advisors Cuba had in Angola and Russia had in Egypt. if you think Im talking about present day strength then you should reread what I wrote.
interlopers may come and go but this hemisphere is Americas.
Quote from: GDS_Starfury on November 06, 2013, 08:25:39 PM
they can advise all they want. look at how many advisors Cuba had in Angola and Russia had in Egypt. if you think Im talking about present day strength then you should reread what I wrote.
The US cannot economically support its current armed forces levels.... what do you think the military in 20 years will be like??? The long view.... baby
you're also making the mistake of thinking our economy will be the same in 20 years or that our Navy still wont be the most capable in the world. youre also comparing the most advanced country on the planet with a country that has a hard time copying a 20 year old Russian fighter or getting a 30 year old carrier operational.
good luck with that.
Quote from: GDS_Starfury on November 06, 2013, 08:36:36 PM
you're also making the mistake of thinking our economy will be the same in 20 years or that our Navy still wont be the most capable in the world. youre also comparing the most advanced country on the planet with a country that has a hard time copying a 20 year old Russian fighter or getting a 30 year old carrier operational.
good luck with that.
china doesn't need an army navy or airforce, to do what its doing..... like you said in another thread.... there's no substitute for experience
then you ignore all of the financial problems that China sweeps under the rug. any way you slice it youre vastly overrating Chinas ability. the Chinese long game has kept them as a regional power for the last 3000 years.
maybe they dont play it very well.
Quote from: Windigo on November 06, 2013, 08:31:06 PM
The US cannot economically support its current armed forces levels....
and yes, the US can support its current force levels. its a matter of politics not money.
All is not well in the middle kingdom.
Star is correct. The Chinese would face a helluva fight trying to take Taiwan. They have zero ability to force project further.
30 years from now it's doubtful their dictatorship will still be in power. Their economy is much less stable than anyone has been led to believe.
I usually don't get in the middle of these things (well, sometimes I do...) but I happen to agree that there is something very rotten in the Chinese economy. They have poured so much capital into infrastructure projects which bring insufficient economic return (while benefiting certain individuals handsomely) that sooner or later they will suddenly run out of money to spend and the great implosion will begin. China seems to be run very much like a dysfunctional multidivisional corporation where various departments spend as much time intriguing against each other as they do trying to compete with their actual business rivals. Middle managers are feathering their nests while upper level players are angling for top jobs and every one is trying to claim a chair before the music stops while the PLA has been thoroughly infiltrated by get-rich-now types who are no more than robber barons in uniform.
Quote from: GDS_Starfury on November 06, 2013, 09:15:54 PM
Quote from: Windigo on November 06, 2013, 08:31:06 PM
The US cannot economically support its current armed forces levels....
and yes, the US can support its current force levels. its a matter of politics not money.
you know the cuts in all other programs the US would need and the kind of economic growth it'd need to sustain current levels? Where are you going to find that serious coin?
(https://www.grogheads.com/forums/proxy.php?request=http%3A%2F%2Fupload.wikimedia.org%2Fwikipedia%2Fen%2Fc%2Fce%2FFy2010_spending_by_category.jpg&hash=f94fb4f8b7d68cfcb4ca795d93578e631a59320e)and you're not reading true and square my friend - I said "foreign affairs trip wire" ... that does not mean military action... in case you haven't noticed -
Quote from: LongBlade on November 06, 2013, 09:31:57 PM
All is not well in the middle kingdom.
Star is correct. The Chinese would face a helluva fight trying to take Taiwan. They have zero ability to force project further.
30 years from now it's doubtful their dictatorship will still be in power. Their economy is much less stable than anyone has been led to believe.
as I said to Star 'foreign affairs trip wire' does not equate to military action, read and comprehend more, react less
comprehend more Windy.
a foreign affairs tripwire needs a military component to back it up or make the other person back off. the Chinese dont and wont have that ability for a loooong time.
as for the money for the military... easy. time to crack down on procurement and r&d waste. a pipe dream I know but the money is there. it would also help if our allies actually tried to maintain credible military's.
keep in mind your talking about a 'trip wire' involving a duel ocean canal that competes with the Panama Canal and all the cargo, oil, fees and strategic flexibility that goes with it. if someone wants to use that as a trip wire they better have the muscle to back up their ambitions and hold it. the Chinese dont, its our hemisphere.
they can suck it.
The love shack is a little site where... we can get together.
Quote from: GDS_Starfury on November 06, 2013, 11:53:01 PM
keep in mind your talking about a 'trip wire' involving a duel ocean canal that competes with the Panama Canal and all the cargo, oil, fees and strategic flexibility that goes with it. if someone wants to use that as a trip wire they better have the muscle to back up their ambitions and hold it. the Chinese dont, its our hemisphere.
they can suck it.
Except the Chinese have been watching, seeing that it is better to fight guerrilla style overseas than risk a fight on their homeland. The jungles of Nicaragua would be hellish terrain for foot soldiers just like Vietnam. Except they have billions. They are less squeamish about troop loses than we have become.
and whos troops are they using?
There were some posts here about corruption in the US. I can assure you there is as much or more corruption in a state like China. You guys are fairly open compared to them, it's just the way it is and how business is done there. There's some cities where the government knows there's an entire different economy or lending system, and they can't do anything about it (i.e. Wenzhou).
China today has a large aging population, just like many other states. They will have to deal with the added cost of this, yet they want to continue huge military spending budgets. I've got my doubts about that. Manufacturing costs are more expensive now compared to the heyday +10-15 years ago.
A lot of manufacturing has gone to where it's cheaper (Vietnam, Thailand, Myanmar/Burma, Bangladesh etc). My mother-in-law used to have a factory for t-shirts etc back in the 90's - 2000's. Later on the government started forcing employers to pay for health insurance etc, and the cost of business just went up.
A lot of manufacturing closed up shop on the coast and went to South East Asia. Another alternative the government is pushing it to try and convince workers in the central or western part of the country to and work there rather than on the big coastal cities, albeit at a price (reduced wages in order to be closer to home, which doesn't always float well with people).
It costs a lot to have a family in China - you need cash not credit. From an early age, you may already have your future social group defined for you, and it's hard to get out of that if you don't have the right background.
All in all, it's not as bright a picture as some of the news would have you believe. Food is still pretty good though, I can vouch for that :)
Don't forget the US Monroe Doctrine...it's been a core foregin policy principle for almost 200 years. We're not going to give it up now.
It is far easier to destroy than to create (or protect). Especially for pipelines and canals.
Quote from: endfire79 on November 07, 2013, 06:16:06 AM
Food is still pretty good though, I can vouch for that :)
(https://www.grogheads.com/forums/proxy.php?request=http%3A%2F%2Fwww.epodcentral.com.au%2Fjokes%2Fpicwasntchicken.jpg&hash=230f33a435b67c0f8c6ba43995e908516c181785)
;)
Quote from: GDS_Starfury on November 06, 2013, 11:53:01 PM
keep in mind your talking about a 'trip wire' involving a duel ocean canal that competes with the Panama Canal and all the cargo, oil, fees and strategic flexibility that goes with it. if someone wants to use that as a trip wire they better have the muscle to back up their ambitions and hold it. the Chinese dont, its our hemisphere.
they can suck it.
yet here they come....
I have no problem with them building it. let them spend the money. Im just saying that if push comes to shove it will either be nationalized, blockaded or taken and there wont be a damn thing they could do about it.
Quote from: GDS_Starfury on November 07, 2013, 10:01:03 AM
I have no problem with them building it. let them spend the money. Im just saying that if push comes to shove it will either be nationalized, blockaded or taken and there wont be a damn thing they could do about it.
it wont come to pushing or shoving, because the Chinese are playing the long game
what long game? you keep stating that like its some kind of mantra. I said before, their long game has kept them a regional power for 1000's of years. you dont even know what the long game is.
were they playing the long game during the opium wars or the Boxers?
were they playing the long game during Japanese occupation?
wait wait...
their long game is infiltrating the US through shoddy take out in strip malls.
Quote from: GDS_Starfury on November 07, 2013, 10:22:15 AM
what long game? you keep stating that like its some kind of mantra. I said before, their long game has kept them a regional power for 1000's of years. you dont even know what the long game is.
were they playing the long game during the opium wars or the Boxers?
were they playing the long game during Japanese occupation?
wait wait...
their long game is infiltrating the US through shoddy take out in strip malls.
for thousands of years they had technology, but no political expansionist ideology and no ambition.... hello??? now they are communist doctrine driven and they have the technology
they had the ambition Windy but they were hemmed in by countries and tribes that wouldnt let them expand. the Mongols... hello... and no, they dont have the technology. theyre ok at copying some things but not all things. as Ive said, theyve had real problems making their Su-27 knock off and thats a 20+ year old design.
the main flaw in your logic here is that you take it for granted that everyone else will stay stagnant while the Chinese advance.
the secondary flaw in your logic is thinking that no one else has your beloved 'long game'. as Gus pointed out, the Monroe Doctrine is part of the US 'long game' as is our Navy. Mahan... hello..... ever heard of him?
the third flaw in your logic is that youre ignoring both Russia to the north and India to the west. one of the reasons the Chinese are trying to be dicks about the Spratlys is they cant go in any other direction.
Quote from: GDS_Starfury on November 07, 2013, 10:01:03 AM
I have no problem with them building it. let them spend the money. Im just saying that if push comes to shove it will either be nationalized, blockaded or taken and there wont be a damn thing they could do about it.
Just like oil rigs: they should have known better from the start.
according to Windy the vaunted Chinese Navy will come to save the day. ::)
Quote from: GDS_Starfury on November 07, 2013, 01:38:20 AM
and whos troops are they using?
I would guess their own landed immigrants, Venezuelans, Colombians, El Salvadorans, drug barons...
my dad was stationed in the Canal Zone during the late 60's. what held true then still holds true today. you dont need to control the country, you just need to control the canal.
Quote from: GDS_Starfury on November 07, 2013, 12:18:05 PM
according to Windy the vaunted Chinese Navy will come to save the day. ::)
don't put words in my mouth or attribute ideas to me that are not true.... thats a bullshit move and you know it
Quote from: GDS_Starfury on November 07, 2013, 12:47:24 PM
my dad was stationed in the Canal Zone during the late 60's. what held true then still holds true today. you dont need to control the country, you just need to control the canal.
and here comes the chinese with a new canal, new buds in venezuala and if I am attributing right, growing numbers of pals in Brazil and Argentina and Chile
do you know whats going on in africa right now???? its starting in central and south america
you really dont understand the Monroe Doctrine do you?
Quotedon't put words in my mouth or attribute ideas to me that are not true.... thats a bullshit move and you know it
you said it was being done to act as a trip wire. that only works in international politics if you can back up your trap. ergo they'll need a military presence or the ability to project force. the Chines can do neither nor will they be able to do either for decades. stick to fossils, this geopolitical military stuff is out of your league.
Quote from: GDS_Starfury on November 07, 2013, 01:48:59 PM
you really dont understand the Monroe Doctrine do you?
Quotedon't put words in my mouth or attribute ideas to me that are not true.... thats a bullshit move and you know it
you said it was being done to act as a trip wire. that only works in international politics if you can back up your trap. ergo they'll need a military presence or the ability to project force. the Chines can do neither nor will they be able to do either for decades. stick to fossils, this geopolitical military stuff is out of your league.
and I said I disagree with that premisegeopolitics is not solely military, in fact its largely economics
Quote from: GDS_Starfury on November 07, 2013, 12:18:05 PM
according to Windy the vaunted Chinese Navy will come to save the day. ::)
According to Windy...
That could be a title of a book.
A comic book.
Quote from: Windigo on November 07, 2013, 01:52:02 PM
geopolitics is not solely military, in fact its largely economics
so you think the real Chinese economy is all sunshine and roses?
Quotedo you know whats going on in africa right now???? its starting in central and south america
yeah, mineral rights for construction projects. have you bothered yourself to ask why China needs to go so far abroad to get certain trace elements.
Quote from: GDS_Starfury on November 07, 2013, 01:54:04 PM
Quote from: Windigo on November 07, 2013, 01:52:02 PM
geopolitics is not solely military, in fact its largely economics
so you think the real Chinese economy is all sunshine and roses?
didn't say that did I? it just has to stay at double the US rate ... a fairly easy task IMO
Quote from: GDS_Starfury on November 07, 2013, 01:56:12 PM
Quotedo you know whats going on in africa right now???? its starting in central and south america
yeah, mineral rights for construction projects. have you bothered yourself to ask why China needs to go so far abroad to get certain trace elements.
same reason the the rest of us do
Quote from: Windigo on November 07, 2013, 02:00:21 PM
Quote from: GDS_Starfury on November 07, 2013, 01:54:04 PM
Quote from: Windigo on November 07, 2013, 01:52:02 PM
geopolitics is not solely military, in fact its largely economics
so you think the real Chinese economy is all sunshine and roses?
didn't say that did I? it just has to stay at double the US rate ... a fairly easy task IMO
I didnt say you said it, I asked you a question. hence the question mark.
and no the Chinese economy isnt staying at double the US rate nor can it. its artificially propped up by bullshit and lies. if it was traded at its actual worth the Chinese economy would collapse.
Quote from: GDS_Starfury on November 07, 2013, 02:04:40 PM
Quote from: Windigo on November 07, 2013, 02:00:21 PM
Quote from: GDS_Starfury on November 07, 2013, 01:54:04 PM
Quote from: Windigo on November 07, 2013, 01:52:02 PM
geopolitics is not solely military, in fact its largely economics
so you think the real Chinese economy is all sunshine and roses?
didn't say that did I? it just has to stay at double the US rate ... a fairly easy task IMO
I didnt say you said it, I asked you a question. hence the question mark.
Don't feel bad. Those are the games he plays when he's losing the argument.
Quote from: GDS_Starfury on November 07, 2013, 02:04:40 PM
Quote from: Windigo on November 07, 2013, 02:00:21 PM
Quote from: GDS_Starfury on November 07, 2013, 01:54:04 PM
Quote from: Windigo on November 07, 2013, 01:52:02 PM
geopolitics is not solely military, in fact its largely economics
so you think the real Chinese economy is all sunshine and roses?
didn't say that did I? it just has to stay at double the US rate ... a fairly easy task IMO
I didnt say you said it, I asked you a question. hence the question mark.
and no the Chinese economy isnt staying at double the US rate nor can it. its artificially propped up by bullshit and lies. if it was traded at its actual worth the Chinese economy would collapse.
the currency is worth what people are willing to pay for it... people are still willing to pay for it
and china's growth is still pretty much locked in,
it built up economicly on its export market, without much internal economic development... now thats taking off
Quote from: Windigo on November 07, 2013, 01:41:16 PMthats a bullshit move and you know it
Quote from: GDS_Starfury on November 07, 2013, 01:48:59 PMstick to fossils, this geopolitical military stuff is out of your league.
Hey chil'rens! Calm down. Do some situps. Ogle the babes on the lingerie threads. Throw darts at your Curtis dartboards. Either way, take a few deep breaths and then come back and have a discussion, not a shouting match.
Keep it up and we'll send you back to WGer ;)
{/mod hat off}
Quote from: Windigo on November 07, 2013, 02:29:05 PM
and china's growth is still pretty much locked in,
o'rly ::)
http://www.imf.org/external/pubs/ft/survey/so/2013/new100813a.htm
QuoteIn China, growth is projected to decelerate slightly from 7½ percent this year to 7¼ percent in 2014. Policymakers have refrained from stimulating activity amid concerns for financial stability and the need to support a more balanced and sustainable growth path.
http://www.nytimes.com/2013/10/08/business/economy/world-bank-scales-back-east-asia-growth-forecasts.html
QuoteThe World Bank lowered its growth forecast for large parts of eastern Asia, saying on Monday that the rebalancing of the once red-hot Chinese economy, lower commodity prices and weaker-than-expected exports were holding back expansion in countries like Indonesia, Malaysia and China itself.
what was that about locking in growth?
an article from April of this year:
http://www.scmp.com/business/economy/article/1279091/imf-cuts-chinese-growth-projections
QuoteThe IMF projected China's growth will be 7.8 per cent in 2013, down from an 8 per cent April projection
so in 6 months the projected growth fell from 8% to 7.25%. thats no bueno Mr Manchuria.
http://economy.money.cnn.com/2013/07/12/china-gdp-target/
QuoteChinese finance minister Lou Jiwei was the source of this confusion. Speaking at a press conference in Washington, Lou told reporters on Thursday that China was shooting for economic growth of 7% this year.
Lou's comments are newsworthy because a 7% expansion would be among the worst rates in more than 20 years, and would carry major implications for economies around the world. The comments are extra puzzling because China set an official growth target of 7.5% just a few months ago.
while we here in the US might be sluggish our economy is still pretty deep and robust and the average person makes far more then the average Chinese. they need to keep expanding to merely survive and keep the peasants from revolting, again, and they cant. also, as Chinese products become more expensive to fuel their domestic growth the west will stop buying them and turn to other cheaper sources. if I walk into the Gap right now to buy a shirt the label will say made in Vietnam not made in China. thats a trend thats going to continue.
Quote from: GDS_Starfury on November 07, 2013, 02:40:08 PM
Quote from: Windigo on November 07, 2013, 02:29:05 PM
and china's growth is still pretty much locked in,
o'rly ::)
http://www.imf.org/external/pubs/ft/survey/so/2013/new100813a.htm
QuoteIn China, growth is projected to decelerate slightly from 7½ percent this year to 7¼ percent in 2014. Policymakers have refrained from stimulating activity amid concerns for financial stability and the need to support a more balanced and sustainable growth path.
http://www.nytimes.com/2013/10/08/business/economy/world-bank-scales-back-east-asia-growth-forecasts.html
QuoteThe World Bank lowered its growth forecast for large parts of eastern Asia, saying on Monday that the rebalancing of the once red-hot Chinese economy, lower commodity prices and weaker-than-expected exports were holding back expansion in countries like Indonesia, Malaysia and China itself.
what was that about locking in growth?
7% growth is not good enough for you?.... like I said, China's internal economy is just really starting to get rolling - as an example they really have no internal tourism...
and I did say it just has to be double the US'.... when was the last time the US had 3% growth
7% isnt good enough for them by their own admission and the projections have fallen over the course of the year. its also not very good for foreign investors looking to place their money in growth markets.
because whats really needed is a graph!
(https://www.grogheads.com/forums/proxy.php?request=http%3A%2F%2Fcdn.static-economist.com%2Fsites%2Fdefault%2Ffiles%2Fimagecache%2Ffull-width%2Fimages%2F2012%2F11%2Fblogs%2Fgraphic-detail%2F20121229_woc478.png&hash=57cb153f2cf0e76ec7668ae85788328d64252450)
now that was done in December of last year Windy and the 2013 rate of growth is less then 7.5%.
that mean the shiny red line is doing what?
thats right, its going down. very good Windy, you get a silver star.
heres another graph Windy. notice what commodities are going down and which are going up:
(https://www.grogheads.com/forums/proxy.php?request=http%3A%2F%2Fav.r.ftdata.co.uk%2Ffiles%2F2012%2F04%2FChina_commods_growthrates_BarclaysCapital.gif&hash=98f205385191930de0ebb397085067164b1beab0)
I bet those growing gas prices are going slow something down. guess what that is?
all very interesting, but where does it show the part about GDP growth of the US going up to and surpassing 3.5 % to be half of the 7% Chinese growth rate...
at 7% growth, the economy doubles every ten years, the US's at 2% means roughly every 35 years to double.
Since china's economy is about 1/2 the size of the US economy currently, it'll be damn close in size in about 15-20 years (giving you a benefit of a doubt +/- a percent either way)
20 years is not that long... its 5 election cycles for you guys.... you think someone is going to come along and wave a magic fairy wand and get the economy going past 2-3%? Not with the quantitative hangover coming your way....
I think there's a greater chance that China's economic growth will slide below 7% before yours rises to 3.5%
again you make the mistake of thinking everything else will be stagnant.
youre also ignoring that China is still developing so its growth is to be expected as is its slowdown.
QuoteI think there's a greater chance that China's economic growth will slide below 7% before yours rises to 3.5%
1. in absolutes thats still a lot more money then China has.
2. the US and Europe account for roughly 50% of Chinas exports. if our economy is still creeping along we'll be buying less and less Chinese crap thereby further slowing down their growth.
From today's Findlay Courier
Quote
NORTH BALTIMORE (OH) -- In a visit Wednesday to the CSX railyard in North Baltimore, Vice President Joe Biden linked federal spending to improve rail and other public works with growth in manufacturing jobs.
Federally-funded upgrades since 2009 to rail, roads, bridges and ports have helped create 500,000 new manufacturing jobs nationwide and 45,000 in Ohio, he said. The upgrades reduce companies' transportation costs and increase exports.
"Manufacturers locate where they can operate, where they can get products to market safely, efficiently, more cheaply. That's where they go," Biden said.
It was not only lower wages elsewhere that caused some companies to leave the United States, Biden said. It was better rail, ports and other infrastructure, he said. Now that U.S. infrastucture has improved, jobs are returning, he said.
"We're beginning to move from outsourcing to insourcing. Ohio is back. America is back," Biden said. "I promise you, we will be the 21st century manufacturing center of the world."
"We're just getting started, man. (China and other countries) have awakened a giant. They have awakened us," he said. "They have awakened this country, and we're ready to compete."
The CSX railyard, which Biden toured, employs nearly 300. Cranes at the CSX railyard, which opened in early 2011, load hundreds of containers onto 30 trains a day.
Much of the cargo is now double-stacked on railroad cars. Federal funding of rail and bridge upgrades and tunnel heightening enables the double-stacking, which makes transportation cheaper and more efficient.
"It used to take over a week for a Whirlpool dishwasher to get off the floor of a factory here and ... to port. Now it takes two to three days," Biden said. "That means profit for Whirlpool. That means the (2,000) jobs in the Findlay plant are going to continue because they are going to continue to make money."
Biden said the Obama administration is proposing $50 billion more in repairs to railroads, bridges, dams, ports and airports. It would create 650,000 new "good-paying" jobs, he said.
Continued improvements to rail, bridges, roads and other public works will spur more jobs growth when an expansion of the Panama Canal is completed in 2015, he said. The canal expansion will enable larger ships, carrying more cargo, to transit the canal. Two-thirds of ships transiting the canal start or arrive at the U.S., he said. So when the canal is expanded, the U.S. will be able to double its exports and do it more cheaply if its own infrastructure is improved, Biden said.
"It's about how you get product cheaply from manufacturers, all the way from Memphis to Findlay, how do you get those products to the ships to be able to be exported and do it economically?" he said. "This is the inland version of the widening of the Panama Canal, connecting the great manufacturing centers in the Midwest with ports in the East Coast, creating jobs in places like North Baltimore and in Baltimore, Toledo and in Philadelphia, Findlay and in Charleston, S.C."
"It's helping spark a revitalization of manufacturing in what has historically been the heart of manufacturing in the world, right where we are now," Biden said. "This historically has been the heartbeat of manufacturing in the world. This means jobs coming home ... good-paying jobs."
Quote from: GDS_Starfury on November 07, 2013, 03:18:35 PM
because whats really needed is a graph!
(https://www.grogheads.com/forums/proxy.php?request=http%3A%2F%2Fcdn.static-economist.com%2Fsites%2Fdefault%2Ffiles%2Fimagecache%2Ffull-width%2Fimages%2F2012%2F11%2Fblogs%2Fgraphic-detail%2F20121229_woc478.png&hash=57cb153f2cf0e76ec7668ae85788328d64252450)
now that was done in December of last year Windy and the 2013 rate of growth is less then 7.5%.
that mean the shiny red line is doing what?
thats right, its going down. very good Windy, you get a silver star.
heres another graph Windy. notice what commodities are going down and which are going up:
(https://www.grogheads.com/forums/proxy.php?request=http%3A%2F%2Fav.r.ftdata.co.uk%2Ffiles%2F2012%2F04%2FChina_commods_growthrates_BarclaysCapital.gif&hash=98f205385191930de0ebb397085067164b1beab0)
I bet those growing gas prices are going slow something down. guess what that is?
What's up with the condescending tone? Do you really think that makes your argument more convincing?
its me talking to Windy dont read into it. :)
exhibit A:
(https://www.grogheads.com/forums/proxy.php?request=http%3A%2F%2Fi.imgur.com%2FqZ0EW0T.jpg&hash=dace20a47ca8dfe18ba92bbf74aba1be3ece5515)
It sounds like a Nicaragua Canal has been proposed and studied as long as the Panama Canal and never been built. Frankly it sounds like another left wing ding bats desperate grasp at glory.
If, however, shipping growth continues, then it may be needed.
Quote from: GDS_Starfury on November 07, 2013, 05:45:34 PM
its me talking to Windy dont read into it. :)
exhibit A:
(https://www.grogheads.com/forums/proxy.php?request=http%3A%2F%2Fi.imgur.com%2FqZ0EW0T.jpg&hash=dace20a47ca8dfe18ba92bbf74aba1be3ece5515)
Some pals of mine had a different, yet similar sounding argument over a game of risk a few years ago. It all could have been just a case of 'Ukraine is weak', but it just didn't end there. Eventually someone wasn't happy and the board got flipped, and one guy ended in the hospital with a busted collar bone. Good times.
Quote from: GDS_Starfury on November 07, 2013, 04:18:29 PM
again you make the mistake of thinking everything else will be stagnant.
youre also ignoring that China is still developing so its growth is to be expected as is its slowdown.
QuoteI think there's a greater chance that China's economic growth will slide below 7% before yours rises to 3.5%
1. in absolutes thats still a lot more money then China has.
2. the US and Europe account for roughly 50% of Chinas exports. if our economy is still creeping along we'll be buying less and less Chinese crap thereby further slowing down their growth.
that's why I said 20 years... China's double double will match your 2-3 percent
and China will become less dependent on exports for growth as time goes forward too
Forecasting economic futures is next to impossible.
That being said, I have one critical observation for Chinese economic growth.
In the history of man, there has never been an economy with sustained rapid growth with a falling population.
China's population is starting to decline due to the one child policy and the intentional killing of female infants.
I could be wrong, but given what I know about long term economic growth the Chinese will start slowing pretty soon.
Quote from: airboy on November 07, 2013, 10:41:14 PM
Forecasting economic futures is next to impossible.
That being said, I have one critical observation for Chinese economic growth.
In the history of man, there has never been an economy with sustained rapid growth with a falling population.
China's population is starting to decline due to the one child policy and the intentional killing of female infants.
I could be wrong, but given what I know about long term economic growth the Chinese will start slowing pretty soon.
You're absolutely correct, Airboy. There are a large number of fundamentals going wrong for the Chinese right now.
Quote from: airboy on November 07, 2013, 10:41:14 PM
Forecasting economic futures is next to impossible.
That being said, I have one critical observation for Chinese economic growth.
In the history of man, there has never been an economy with sustained rapid growth with a falling population.
China's population is starting to decline due to the one child policy and the intentional killing of female infants.
I could be wrong, but given what I know about long term economic growth the Chinese will start slowing pretty soon.
I will agree with that, provided you give me a time frame for what you consider sustained rapid growth. 10 years? 20? 30?
my rationale for thinking China is a safe bet for at least 7% is based on the development of their internal economy (rise of middle class), its a long way from maturation.
we could call it the Advanced Genghis Warning thread.
for consistency... :P
Quote from: Windigo on November 08, 2013, 12:37:25 AM
Quote from: airboy on November 07, 2013, 10:41:14 PM
Forecasting economic futures is next to impossible.
That being said, I have one critical observation for Chinese economic growth.
In the history of man, there has never been an economy with sustained rapid growth with a falling population.
China's population is starting to decline due to the one child policy and the intentional killing of female infants.
I could be wrong, but given what I know about long term economic growth the Chinese will start slowing pretty soon.
I will agree with that, provided you give me a time frame for what you consider sustained rapid growth. 10 years? 20? 30?
my rationale for thinking China is a safe bet for at least 7% is based on the development of their internal economy (rise of middle class), its a long way from maturation.
Economic growth rates slow, then turn negative with a declining population. Japan is a classic example. China is more complex because they have (had) a large, rural population that was engaged in marginal farming. But what I have been reading in the Wall St. Journal over the last 3 years is that the marginal, rural farmers are drying up as an economic source and that China has had consistent high wage inflation.
Also, it is incredibly hard to keep up a high growth rate once your economy grows to medium size or above. The base is so big a huge growth rate becomes almost impossible.
So, I think that China continuing 7%+ growth rates for another 10 years is pretty improbable. Not saying it can't happen because I have not done a comprehensive study of their population and employment demographics. But I doubt it. Japan was going to take over the world economically in the 70s and 80s - and that plan collapsed when their population began to age & numbers declined.
In sum, I strongly doubt 7% growth rates over the next 10 years.
Quote from: airboy on November 08, 2013, 10:24:03 AM
Quote from: Windigo on November 08, 2013, 12:37:25 AM
Quote from: airboy on November 07, 2013, 10:41:14 PM
Forecasting economic futures is next to impossible.
That being said, I have one critical observation for Chinese economic growth.
In the history of man, there has never been an economy with sustained rapid growth with a falling population.
China's population is starting to decline due to the one child policy and the intentional killing of female infants.
I could be wrong, but given what I know about long term economic growth the Chinese will start slowing pretty soon.
I will agree with that, provided you give me a time frame for what you consider sustained rapid growth. 10 years? 20? 30?
my rationale for thinking China is a safe bet for at least 7% is based on the development of their internal economy (rise of middle class), its a long way from maturation.
Economic growth rates slow, then turn negative with a declining population. Japan is a classic example. China is more complex because they have (had) a large, rural population that was engaged in marginal farming. But what I have been reading in the Wall St. Journal over the last 3 years is that the marginal, rural farmers are drying up as an economic source and that China has had consistent high wage inflation.
Also, it is incredibly hard to keep up a high growth rate once your economy grows to medium size or above. The base is so big a huge growth rate becomes almost impossible.
So, I think that China continuing 7% growth rates for another 10 years is pretty improbable. Not saying it can't happen because I have not done a comprehensive study of their population and employment demographics. But I doubt it. Japan was going to take over the world economically in the 70s and 80s - and that plan collapsed when their population began to age & numbers declined.
In sum, I strongly doubt 7% growth rates over the next 10 years.
Well said, the shift from peasant farmer to educated worker is the critical input for normally measured economic growth. Even the small village kids are now getting good levels of education comparable in quality to the rest of the world. More advanced in math and science. IMO that is the source of potential growth. What do those people decide to do with their lives? Many will not stay farming. Many in the cities sick of the shitty slave live will return to rural communities with money. The potential is there for a new type of lifestyle in those areas.
Quote from: airboy on November 08, 2013, 10:24:03 AM
Quote from: Windigo on November 08, 2013, 12:37:25 AM
Quote from: airboy on November 07, 2013, 10:41:14 PM
Forecasting economic futures is next to impossible.
That being said, I have one critical observation for Chinese economic growth.
In the history of man, there has never been an economy with sustained rapid growth with a falling population.
China's population is starting to decline due to the one child policy and the intentional killing of female infants.
I could be wrong, but given what I know about long term economic growth the Chinese will start slowing pretty soon.
I will agree with that, provided you give me a time frame for what you consider sustained rapid growth. 10 years? 20? 30?
my rationale for thinking China is a safe bet for at least 7% is based on the development of their internal economy (rise of middle class), its a long way from maturation.
Economic growth rates slow, then turn negative with a declining population. Japan is a classic example. China is more complex because they have (had) a large, rural population that was engaged in marginal farming. But what I have been reading in the Wall St. Journal over the last 3 years is that the marginal, rural farmers are drying up as an economic source and that China has had consistent high wage inflation.
Also, it is incredibly hard to keep up a high growth rate once your economy grows to medium size or above. The base is so big a huge growth rate becomes almost impossible.
So, I think that China continuing 7%+ growth rates for another 10 years is pretty improbable. Not saying it can't happen because I have not done a comprehensive study of their population and employment demographics. But I doubt it. Japan was going to take over the world economically in the 70s and 80s - and that plan collapsed when their population began to age & numbers declined.
In sum, I strongly doubt 7% growth rates over the next 10 years.
you raise a good comparison with Japan... though I would argue that when Japan's economy took off they already had all the internal infrastructure and complexities of an internal economy going for them.... I think China will be 7% over the next 10 years
Japan had the advantage of restarting their industry and infrastructure with modern technology as we had razed the previous ones. China does not have that advantage.
Quote from: GDS_Starfury on November 08, 2013, 09:31:49 PM
Japan had the advantage of restarting their industry and infrastructure with modern technology as we had razed the previous ones. China does not have that advantage.
they have no fucking indigenous tech though... other than civil engineers.... most came with the Russians IIRC
From CNBC
Quote
China Showing Symptoms of Financial Crisis: Report
SOUTH AND SOUTHEAST ASIA, ASIA: NEWS, BUSINESS NEWS
CNBC.com | Monday, 18 Mar 2013 | 4:08 AM ET
Just as concerns over a hard landing in the world's second largest economy look to have faded,
economists at Nomura sounded a warning that the Chinese economy is exhibiting the same worrying
symptoms that triggered the 2008 financial crisis.
The country's rapid buildup of leverage, decline in potential growth and elevated property prices, are
three red flags that should not be downplayed, according to economists at the bank, Zhiwei Zhang and
Wendy Chen.
"China faces rising risks of a systemic financial crisis and the government needs to take action quickly
to contain such risks. We believe the true extent of financial risks in China is not fully appreciated by
investors," Zhang and Chen wrote in a report released over the weekend.
According to the analysts, if China maintains a loose policy stance this year it would heighten the risk
of a financial crisis in 2014. Easy monetary policy risks pushing up inflation and leverage in the
economy, making the eventual de-leveraging process more disruptive.
"This is clearly a dangerous choice, but we cannot rule it out given political pressures to maintain
strong growth," Nomura said in the report.
Leverage, a leading indicator of financial strain and measured as a ratio of domestic credit to gross
domestic product (GDP), has reached its highest level since records began in 1978. This ratio was 121
percent before the financial crisis of 2008 and has risen to 155 percent in 2012, as a result of the
government's fiscal and monetary policies to support growth.
(Read More: Time to Remove the Punch Bowl in China?)
"China's leverage rose by 34 percent of GDP in five years — a worrying sign given its history," they
said, noting leverage in the U.S. rose by around 30 percent of GDP in the five years before entering a
crisis.
The Chinese government has in the recent months sent a number of "unusually strong" signals that it
is concerned about financial risks in the economy, they said.
During the People's Bank of China's (PBOC) fourth-quarter monetary policy committee meeting, the
central bank said "controlling risks" was a top policy objective.
Last week, PBOC governor Zhou Xiaochuan said the risk banks face on loans to local governments
should not be underestimated. He noted that around 20 percent of loans to the financing arms of local
governments were risky, several media reported.
In addition to worrying levels of leverage, China is facing a decline in potential growth, according to the
economists, driven by a decline in the labor force and productivity growth. The country's working age
population began to decline in 2012, according to Nomura.
(Read More: China's Aging Population Threatens Its Manufacturing Might)
Last year, China's economy expanded 7.8 percent, its slowest pace in 13 years. In 2013, the
government has set an annual growth target of 7.5 percent.
Property Bubble? 11/9/13 China Showing Symptoms ofFinancial Crisis: Report
www.cnbc.com/id/100562024/print 2/2
Rapid property price inflation is the final warning sign in the economy, they said, noting that unusually
strong increases in asset prices have typically preceded banking crises.
According to official data, housing prices have risen 113 percent from 2004 to 2012 in major Chinese
cities. However, they deem the data highly "questionable" and "contradictory" to observations on the
ground.
(Read More: China February New Home Prices Rise for Second Month)
Citing a report by three professors in Tsinghua University and National University of Singapore,
Nomura said property prices rose by 250 percent from 2004 to 2009, far outstripping the level of
growth in the official index. This compares to a rise of 84 percent for the Case-Shiller U.S. housing
price index from 2001 to its peak in 2006.
(Read More: Why China's Property Market Is Getting Scary)
The government has acknowledged risks in the property sector through imposing a slew of measures
to stabilize prices earlier this month including the stricter enforcement of a 20 percent capital gains tax
on home sale profits.
However, Zhang and Chen, expect they will be ineffective in keeping a lid on prices in the long run.
"The pattern has been for house prices to initially dip after tightening policies are introduced, then to
rebound, which suggests that the risks have not been mitigated," they said.
© 2013 CNBC.com
URL: http://www.cnbc.com/100562024
An article from CNBC last year talking about China's declining population and manufacturing;
Quote
China's Aging Population Threatens Its Manufacturing Might
BUSINESS NEWS
By: Deirdre Wang Morris, Producer and Reporter, CNBC Asia Pacific
CNBC.com | Wednesday, 24 Oct 2012 | 4:20 PM ET
China, the manufacturing hub of the world, is in danger of losing that title.
Its population is aging fast as its one-child policy, begun in the 1970s, begins to bite. This, in turn,
could lead to a huge labor shortfall by 2050, according to experts.
China's workforce, those between the ages of 15 and 64, is expected to start contracting beginning in
2015. The number of new entrants into the workforce is already falling and will decline by 30 percent in
2020 compared to 2010, according to Beijing-based research firm GK Dragonomics.
"In the case of China, you have a shrinking number of people in the young adult workforce, shrinking
numbers of children feeding into this force, and a growing number of the aging workforce," Judith
Banister, senior demographer at Javelin Investments in Beijing, said.
In 2010, there were 110 million people 65 and above in China; by 2030, the number will increase by
more than 100 million, according to the United Nations. By 2050, more than a quarter of the population
will be over 65.
In an article published in the China Economic Quarterly earlier this year, Wang Feng, director of
Brookings-Tsinghua Center for Public Policy in Beijing, likens China's demographic structure to a bullet
train racing into the unknown.
"Profound demographic changes in China are redrawing the parameters of the country's future," Wang
wrote.
Over the past two decades, China has experienced what experts call "a demographic window of
opportunity." UN data show the country's working age population grew from 66 percent of China's total
population in 1990 to more than 72 percent in 2010 — fueling the nation's economic rise, when it grew
at an average rate of nearly 10 percent annually.
China's working age population is expected to decline to 61 percent of the total population by 2050,
according to the UN.
A one-child policy introduced in 1977 and rolled out nationwide two years later has contributed to
falling birth rates, while life expectancy has gone up.
(Read More: Asia Caught Off Guard by Its Aging Population)
Thomas Gatley of GK Dragonomics said those between 15 and 24 are "the cheapest, most mobile and
flexible in the Chinese workforce," but their numbers have been declining since 2005, a situation that
has led to significant wage growth and demand outstripping supply.
UN data show there were 225 million people in this age group in 2010. By 2025, the number will fall by
nearly 30 percent to 164 million. And in 2050, it will shrink to 124 million.
A cheap and young labor force that gave China its reputation as the manufacturing capital of the world
is fast eroding. Plus, China's youth are now reluctant to take up low-paying factory jobs that come with
long working hours under tough conditions.
Geoffrey Crothall, research director at Hong Kong-based China Labor Bulletin that tracks labor strikes11/9/13 China's Aging Population Threatens Its Manufacturing Might
www.cnbc.com/id/49498720/print 2/3
and protests in the mainland, said that "the number of young people going into the workforce is
declining. They're not willing to work 12 hours a day for minimum wages anymore. They're looking for
alternative employment or pushing for higher wages through strike action and protests."
According to the Bulletin, in the first eight months of the year there were on average 29 incidents of
labor unrest per month compared to 11 per month in the same period last year. Meanwhile, the
average minimum wage in China has been increasing — 12.5 percent per year over 2006-2010,
according to official data.
Over the past few years Apple supplier and contract electronics manufacturer Foxconn Technology
Group has come to symbolize the changes and challenges plaguing China's labor market.
Recent worker-related unrest at the company, which employs 1.2 million people at its factories, has
highlighted the fact that China's labor force is in the midst of a churn.
In mid-October, more than 200 workers at its plant in Zhengzhou refused to work in protest over their
working conditions. Less than two weeks earlier, the company's Taiyuan factory in central China, which
employs about 79,000 workers, had to shut down for a day after a riot left several workers hospitalized
and detained by the police.
Also in mid-October, Foxconn admitted to using underage interns at a site in Shandong province.
According to the Bulletin's Crothall, "the younger workers are leading a lot of the protests, as they
have higher expectations."
The rise in labor unrest is owing to greater awareness among workers about their rights and an
unwillingness among the new breed of workers to make sacrifices in return for low pay, said China
observers.
Migrant workers, one of the important components of China's labor force, are also declining as
improving employment conditions in rural areas keep them from moving to cities in search of work.
Foxconn told CNBC via email, "China has changed dramatically in recent years, and many migrant
workers who have been so important to the success of the manufacturing industry no longer want to be
migrants, preferring, instead, to have good employment opportunities in their home province."
(Read More: Can Japan's Elderly Become Its Growth Engine?)
As a result of this shift, factories have started to move away from the cities in China's industrial coastal
belt. Foxconn, for example, has been gradually shifting its manufacturing operations to China's inland
provinces to combat rising labor costs and shortages.
"Our goal in doing this is to give workers an opportunity to find employment and a competitive wage
near their families and friends," the company said.
As China ages, the mobility of its workforce will reduce further, said experts, forcing more factories to
rethink their location.
Moving Out
Many manufacturers, long used to a cheap and mobile workforce, are leaving the country for alternate
destinations like Thailand, Vietnam and Bangladesh.
According to U.S.-based financial consultancy firm Capital Business Credit's quarterly "Global Retail
Manufacturers and Importers Survey," released in September, 40 percent of U.S. importers and
manufacturers are thinking of moving their manufacturing bases away from China.
The survey cited concerns over the quality of goods made in China, rising operating costs and
competition from other manufacturing centers as the main reasons for moving out.
Over the past few years, several global manufacturers have closed factories in China. For example,
German sports goods manufacturer Adidas losed its last factory in China's eastern Jiangsu province
earlier this year. China's official news agency Xinhua quoted workers at the Adidas factory, saying they11/9/13 China's Aging Population Threatens Its Manufacturing Might
www.cnbc.com/id/49498720/print 3/3
suspected the closure was caused by rising salaries.
In mid-October, China Daily reported that British oil and gas major BP had transferred the last of its
solar business in China to the Chinese company it had joint ventures with, effectively exiting the
market.
While some are moving out of China, others are increasing their level of automation to make up for the
shortfall in labor supply.
For example, Chinese carmaker Great Wall Motors has Swiss robots and other machinery to weld
together car frames, while Apple supplier Foxconn plans to put a million robots in its factories in China
by 2014, according to a Reuters report.
China's changing demographic structure is like a rocky terrain the country's economy will have to
navigate over coming decades, according to Patrick Chovanec, associate professor at Tsinghua
University.
"If you have an uphill situation in terms of demographics, it's not like you can't climb the hill, but your
engine has to be in good condition," he said, implying that China has to build a strong economy to
overcome its demographic challenges.
© 2013 CNBC.com
URL: http://www.cnbc.com/49498720
thanks for those two articles.
heres another twist on the whole China issue.
http://money.msn.com/investing/news.aspx?feed=AP&date=20131113&id=17104538
so as our energy exports increase as Chinas need of foreign oil increases I see a rebalance of the debt/trade issue.
nothing stays static Windy. ;D
Quote from: GDS_Starfury on November 14, 2013, 01:45:40 PM
heres another twist on the whole China issue.
http://money.msn.com/investing/news.aspx?feed=AP&date=20131113&id=17104538
so as our energy exports increase as Chinas need of foreign oil increases I see a rebalance of the debt/trade issue.
nothing stays static Windy. ;D
don't bank on oil to turn the economy around...
your being myopic again.
Quote from: GDS_Starfury on November 14, 2013, 03:34:31 PM
your being myopic again.
(https://www.grogheads.com/forums/proxy.php?request=http%3A%2F%2Fwww.gkworld.com%2Fmedia%2Fimg%2Fgkworld%2FW377-H377-Bffffff%2FI%2Fitem81337_jpg.jpg&hash=f577c6edb4fcb41689a511647fe53521daa0fa0e)
Quote from: GDS_Starfury on November 14, 2013, 03:34:31 PM
your being myopic again.
naw.... just know how expensive it is to get that oil out of the ground and how much water its going to take
Quote from: Windigo on November 14, 2013, 07:52:39 PM
naw.... just know how expensive it is to get that oil out of the ground and how much water its going to take
Valid point. Hydrolic Fracking is more expensive than conventional drilling. But the water does not have to be "pure drinking water" to work. The economics totally depend on the price of oil. High price of oil - makes the break-even work very well. Low price of oil - does not get drilled.
and if China needs to import more and more oil we can use that to our advantage the same way they get minerals from Africa for construction projects. need another million barrels? ok, apply the cost to our dept plus 4%.
Quote from: airboy on November 15, 2013, 11:16:00 AM
Quote from: Windigo on November 14, 2013, 07:52:39 PM
naw.... just know how expensive it is to get that oil out of the ground and how much water its going to take
Valid point. Hydrolic Fracking is more expensive than conventional drilling. But the water does not have to be "pure drinking water" to work. The economics totally depend on the price of oil. High price of oil - makes the break-even work very well. Low price of oil - does not get drilled.
Oil prices are also tied to political stability.
Who's willing to bet that tensions are going to ease between the west and, say, Syria, Iran, and the various radicals over there? The political will to uncouple our energy supply from the cesspool of radicals is more than enough to encourage private and public interest in fracking's success.
what most people miss is that Iran and Syria supply almost no oil to the west. we're linked to mid east oil because of the Orient and Europe.
Quote from: GDS_Starfury on November 15, 2013, 11:32:30 AM
what most people miss is that Iran and Syria supply almost no oil to the west.
Oh I know.
However, when things get kinetic over there it doesn't matter how much oil they directly control - only how much oil logistics they can disrupt.
I think the perceived threat is far greater then reality. if push came to shove I think it would take maybe 48 hours to remove Irans ability to dick around in the Gulf for the next 15 years. part of me thinks the week of stock market bs might be worth it in the long run.
Quote from: airboy on November 15, 2013, 11:16:00 AM
Quote from: Windigo on November 14, 2013, 07:52:39 PM
naw.... just know how expensive it is to get that oil out of the ground and how much water its going to take
Valid point. Hydrolic Fracking is more expensive than conventional drilling. But the water does not have to be "pure drinking water" to work. The economics totally depend on the price of oil. High price of oil - makes the break-even work very well. Low price of oil - does not get drilled.
you really didn't mean to say that did you??? (
The economics totally depend on the price of oil. :o :o :o :o 8) kinda like saying gravity works (heh)
there are many things on the cost side of the ledger, that change as a well matures... e.g., there are reports that the north dakota plays are peaking quicker than anticipated and requiring addition services to keep them economical - and never underestimate people's ability to kill the golden goose (social factors)
then perhaps you should draft a white paper detailing all the problems and your solutions and send in your resume.
Quote from: GDS_Starfury on November 15, 2013, 01:38:56 PM
then perhaps you should draft a white paper detailing all the problems and your solutions and send in your resume.
I'm starting to work up a list that Windy's an expert in.
- Psychiatry: http://grogheads.com/forums/index.php?topic=4988.msg206014#msg206014
- Aviation engineering: http://grogheads.com/forums/index.php?topic=4824.msg205657#msg205657
- Combat Optics: http://grogheads.com/forums/index.php?topic=4824.msg206009#msg206009
- Sociology: http://grogheads.com/forums/index.php?topic=8174.msg204953#msg204953
- Satellite-based communications: http://grogheads.com/forums/index.php?topic=8194.msg204625#msg204625
- Disaster Planning: http://grogheads.com/forums/index.php?topic=8194.msg205196#msg205196
- Disaster Recovery: http://grogheads.com/forums/index.php?topic=8194.msg205341#msg205341
That doesn't even include his unrivaled position as the World's Leading Expert on Anthropogenic Global Warming.
We don't know how lucky we are to have him here.
Quote from: LongBlade on November 15, 2013, 01:59:01 PM
Quote from: GDS_Starfury on November 15, 2013, 01:38:56 PM
then perhaps you should draft a white paper detailing all the problems and your solutions and send in your resume.
I'm starting to work up a list that Windy's an expert in.
- Psychiatry: http://grogheads.com/forums/index.php?topic=4988.msg206014#msg206014
- Aviation engineering: http://grogheads.com/forums/index.php?topic=4824.msg205657#msg205657
- Combat Optics: http://grogheads.com/forums/index.php?topic=4824.msg206009#msg206009
- Sociology: http://grogheads.com/forums/index.php?topic=8174.msg204953#msg204953
- Satellite-based communications: http://grogheads.com/forums/index.php?topic=8194.msg204625#msg204625
- Disaster Planning: http://grogheads.com/forums/index.php?topic=8194.msg205196#msg205196
- Disaster Recovery: http://grogheads.com/forums/index.php?topic=8194.msg205341#msg205341
That doesn't even include his unrivaled position as the World's Leading Expert on Anthropogenic Global Warming.
We don't know how lucky we are to have him here.
.... even dripped in sarcasm, its still a compliment - thank you; it's a blessing when one's career path has been has been wide and varied and taken me places where you need to know that stuff
I'm sure I missed a couple dozen other areas. I only spent about two minutes compiling that list. My apology for any omissions.
Quote from: LongBlade on November 15, 2013, 02:08:31 PM
I'm sure I missed a couple dozen other areas. I only spent about two minutes compiling that list. My apology for any omissions.
well at least you've managed to hit some of the cooler ones....
Quote from: Windigo on November 15, 2013, 01:20:03 PM
Quote from: airboy on November 15, 2013, 11:16:00 AM
Quote from: Windigo on November 14, 2013, 07:52:39 PM
naw.... just know how expensive it is to get that oil out of the ground and how much water its going to take
Valid point. Hydrolic Fracking is more expensive than conventional drilling. But the water does not have to be "pure drinking water" to work. The economics totally depend on the price of oil. High price of oil - makes the break-even work very well. Low price of oil - does not get drilled.
you really didn't mean to say that did you??? (The economics totally depend on the price of oil. :o :o :o :o 8) kinda like saying gravity works (heh)
there are many things on the cost side of the ledger, that change as a well matures... e.g., there are reports that the north dakota plays are peaking quicker than anticipated and requiring addition services to keep them economical - and never underestimate people's ability to kill the golden goose (social factors)
Actually I meant to say it and still do. People forget about the law of supply and demand all of the time. Just like Obama and the Dems forgot that when the incentives to get insurance are high (i.e. you are sick or need lots of health care) you rush to get subsidized insurance. But if you are well & healthy (say almost all under 30), then the incentive to buy health insurance is very low.
Or "cash for clunkers" will be a disaster which only shifts people's buying habits by a few months and takes lots of useful capital (functioning old cars) and destroys them. This costs the government a ton of money (only the worst cars will be destroyed) for minimum benefit (people still only buy when they think its a good deal).
Or that 7% growth rates are long term sustainable even as the size of the economic base gets bigger and bigger (China).
This is not to say I'm right in my forecasts. But in economics and business I can usually spot the general incentives and understand when the predictions are just nuts.
Quote from: Windigo on November 15, 2013, 02:15:21 PM
Quote from: LongBlade on November 15, 2013, 02:08:31 PM
I'm sure I missed a couple dozen other areas. I only spent about two minutes compiling that list. My apology for any omissions.
well at least you've managed to hit some of the cooler ones....
Everyone should have such broad interests.
Quote from: Mr. Bigglesworth on November 15, 2013, 05:22:29 PM
Quote from: Windigo on November 15, 2013, 02:15:21 PM
Quote from: LongBlade on November 15, 2013, 02:08:31 PM
I'm sure I missed a couple dozen other areas. I only spent about two minutes compiling that list. My apology for any omissions.
well at least you've managed to hit some of the cooler ones....
Everyone should have such broad interests.
I bet if LB pulled his socks off he'd have at least 20 subjects he could claim some level of expertise in.... as a website thing-a-ma-guru he needs to be pretty handy in many diversified areas
hell how many of us can claim to be the posterboy for a personal lubricant product ;D
kama sutra oil (https://www.grogheads.com/forums/proxy.php?request=http%3A%2F%2Fwargamer.com%2Fforums%2Fsmiley%2Fwall.gif&hash=071a28e5c4308221931e5324fed4cff50fb1312c)