David: Being anti-Red China it isn't exactly as if I want Beijing to become a raging success story. But to call the regime "Communist" any more is kind of archaic. Technically it is more like Italian Fascism than Communism these days. "State Capitalism" is terminology used not only for China but for Saudi Arabia, more-or-less Russia, Iran, Libya, Viet Nam ( at least it seems to be on the way ), Venezuela ( although it may be on the way out ), Oman ( where it is fairly benign ), etc and even Singapore ( where it is the most benign and really is mixed with actual Capitalism ). Would I like to see the regime in China tumble to the ground ? Of course. Not only is it state capitalist, it has an authoritarian gvt, its version of freedom of religion is mostly a joke ( if not as bad as before ), and it operates to significant measure via intellectual property rights theft. But its kinda like decades ago when the Russians had superior rockets. And they still aren't too shabby at that. The USA got busy and did everything we could to learn lessons and also to build NASA. What are we supposed to do ? " I hate the Chinese gvt and other crap in their system, therefore I will ignore a potential challenge to the US auto industry that just might really screw us royally " ? This outlook make sense , how ? Billy ====================================================== In a message dated 9/27/2010 9:05:44 P.M. Pacific Daylight Time, [email protected] writes:
I just find the semi-swooning over the example of China as a little much. This is the same country that abhors all religions, even the non-threatening ones (Dali Lama anyone?) and virtually rules its citizenry with an iron fist, down to how many children a couple can have. Frankly, that kind of control sickens me, but it, too, is part of the picture. I think you generously refer to it as "state capitalism" which I would term Communism, or Fascism of the Left if one prefers. I'm not sure that the Chinese public actually gets to buy all of the items that they export (or if they even want to). So sure, let's adopt the Chinese system, all the way to the Communist premier and military. [/sarcasm] If it requires that much government control, it's not worth it to me. David To compel a man to subsidize with his taxes the propagation of ideas which he disbelieves and abhors is sinful and tyrannical.--Thomas Jefferson On 9/27/2010 12:21 AM, [email protected]_ (mailto:[email protected]) wrote: So, we should give back the Interstate, NASA, and Boulder Dam ? And while we are at it, let's dismantle the ARPANET. Besides, who needs public transportation, public airports, rural electrification, and public funded hydro-electric dams ? Not sure what any of this has to do with Hitler. Except maybe the fact that the US military now uses neat-o German-looking helmets. Wilhelm ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- -------- In a message dated 9/26/2010 10:08:29 P.M. Pacific Daylight Time, [email protected]_ (mailto:[email protected]) writes: If the government steals enough private money with confiscatory taxes, then they will have the money instead of the private sector, so of course, it will not be built in the private sector. DUH!! It will eventually destroy the private sector and perhaps freedom as well, Comrade. China has barely started having a private sector under very tight government control. That's what you two want? It destroys Libertarian economics and my desire to live. SEIG HEIL MEIN FURHER!!! Commies. Personally, I don't really LIKE being told that I must have an electric car. Particularly if we don't start building more power plants soon, and the Obamessiah wants to bankrupt the coal industry (from the 2008 campaign), and raise the cost of all other fossil fuel, and not consider nuclear due to the environmentalist wackos, so how ARE we going to even charge the things if we have them?? David To compel a man to subsidize with his taxes the propagation of ideas which he disbelieves and abhors is sinful and tyrannical.--Thomas Jefferson On 9/26/2010 11:47 PM, [email protected]_ (mailto:[email protected]) wrote: I think your argument misses the point. Ernie made a relevant point of his own, though. Will maxi batteries actually become practical in the next X years ? If current rates of progress continue, all we can hope for are batteries that go from a 100 mile charge to 150 miles by 2020. But sounds like the Chinese are seeking to come up with a chargeable battery that would have gas-tank range. What if they actually succeed ? My own view is that their program will give them at least some good results, like new kinds of transmissions, or the like. Even partial success and you've got state capitalism doing something really good that simply cannot be done by private industry. What does that do to Libertarian economics, not to Friedman ? See further discussion Re myself and Ernie on this topic Billy --------------------------------------------------------- In a message dated 9/26/2010 9:32:13 P.M. Pacific Daylight Time, [email protected]_ (mailto:[email protected]) writes: Bull Hockey. Most of western China is uninhabited. The massive population is on the eastern side of the country. They can live with electric cars that go 50 miles a day-me, I commute more than that per day. And if energy prices go up, they tend to go up in general. My electric bill in the summer with the AC is bad enough already, I don't need to be charging 2 (or more) of them. Friedman's brain is fried. And please don't tell me that you were getting Libertarian Economics from this guy. Milton maybe, this guy??? He is a "journalist" specializing in "foreign affairs." Not an economic credit in his Wikipedia bio. David To compel a man to subsidize with his taxes the propagation of ideas which he disbelieves and abhors is sinful and tyrannical.--Thomas Jefferson On 9/26/2010 12:13 PM, [email protected]_ (mailto:[email protected]) wrote: OK, probably no argument at all that financing the development of electric cars by raising gas prices through the roof is a REALY BAD IDEA. This said, what about Friedman's argument that we need an electric car industry ? Without it, China wins. That is doubtless an excessive conclusion, but to dramatize the problem. China is developing its electric car industry using the power of state capitalism. The question is : How can America compete ? To do this requires multi-billions in investment. For the life of me, I don't see where the libertarian model of economics is relevant. Just thought I'd make this observation. Billy ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- --- (http://www.nytimes.com/) ____________________________________ September 25, 2010 Their Moon Shot and Ours By _THOMAS L. FRIEDMAN_ (http://topics.nytimes.com/top/opinion/editorialsandoped/oped/columnists/thomaslfriedman/index.html?inline=nyt-per) China is doing moon shots. Yes, that’s plural. When I say “moon shots” I mean big, multibillion-dollar, 25-year-horizon, game-changing investments. China has at least four going now: one is building a network of ultramodern airports; another is building a web of high-speed trains connecting major cities; a third is in bioscience, where the Beijing Genomics Institute this year ordered 128 DNA sequencers — from America — giving China the largest number in the world in one institute to launch its own stem cell/genetic engineering industry; and, finally, Beijing just announced that it was providing $15 billion in seed money for the country’s leading auto and battery companies to create an electric car industry, starting in 20 pilot cities. In essence, China Inc. just named its dream team of 16-state-owned enterprises to move China off oil and into the next industrial growth engine: electric cars. Not to worry. America today also has its own multibillion-dollar, 25-year-horizon, game-changing moon shot: fixing Afghanistan. This contrast is not good. I was recently at a Washington Nationals baseball game. While waiting for a hot dog, I overheard the conversation behind me. A management consultant for a big national firm was telling his colleagues that his job was to “market products to the Department of Homeland Security.” I thought to myself: “Oh, my! Inventing studies about terrorist threats and selling them to the U.S. government, is that an industry now?” We’re out of balance — the balance between security and prosperity. We need to be in a race with China, not just Al Qaeda. Let’s start with electric cars. The electric car industry is pivotal for three reasons, argues Shai Agassi, the C.E.O. of Better Place, a global electric car company that next year will begin operating national electric car networks in Israel and Denmark. First, the auto industry was the foundation for America’s manufacturing middle class. Second, the country that replaces gasoline-powered vehicles with electric-powered vehicles — in an age of steadily rising oil prices and steadily falling battery prices — will have a huge cost advantage and independence from imported oil. Third, electric cars are full of power electronics and software. “Think of the applications industry that will be spun out from electric cars,” says Agassi. It will be the iPhone on steroids. Europe is using $7-a-gallon gasoline to stimulate the market for electric cars; China is using $5-a-gallon and naming electric cars as one of the industrial pillars for its five-year growth plan. And America? President Obama has directed stimulus money at electric cars, but he is unwilling to do the one thing that would create the sustained consumer pull required to grow an electric car industry here: raise taxes on gasoline. Price matters. Sure, the Moore’s Law of electric cars — “the cost per mile of the electric car battery will be cut in half every 18 months” — will steadily drive the cost down, says Agassi, but only once we get scale production going. U.S. companies can do that on their own or in collaboration with Chinese ones. But God save us if we don’t do it at all. Two weeks ago, I visited the Coda Automotive battery facility in Tianjin, China — a joint venture between U.S. innovators and investors, China’s Lishen battery company and China National Offshore Oil Company. Yes, China’s oil company is using profits to develop batteries. Kevin Czinger, Coda’s C.E.O., who drove me around Manhattan in his company’ s soon-to-be-in-production electric car last week, laid out what is going on. The backbone of the modern U.S. economy was locally made cars powered by locally produced oil. It started us on a huge growth spurt. In recent decades, though, that industry was supplanted by foreign-made cars run on foreign oil, so “now every time we buy a car we’re exporting $15,000 of capital, paying for it with borrowed money and running it on foreign energy sources,” says Czinger. “We’ve gone from autos being a middle-class-making-machine to a middle-class-destroying-machine.” A U.S. electric car/battery industry would reverse that. The Coda, 14,000 of which will be on the road in California over the next year and can travel 100 miles on one overnight charge, is a combination of Chinese-made batteries and complex American-system electronics — all final-assembled in Oakland (price: $37,000). It is a win-win start-up for both countries. If we both now create the market incentives for consumers to buy electric cars, and the plug-in infrastructure for people to drive them everywhere, it will be a win-win moon shot for both countries. The electric car industry will flourish in the U.S. and China, and together we’ll tackle the next challenge: using auto battery innovations to build big storage batteries for wind and solar. However, if only China puts the gasoline prices and infrastructure in place, the industry will gravitate there. It will be a moon shot for them, a hobby for us, and you’ll import your new electric car from China just like you’re now importing your oil from Saudi Arabia -- -- Centroids: The Center of the Radical Centrist Community <[email protected]> Google Group: http://groups.google.com/group/RadicalCentrism Radical Centrism website and blog: http://RadicalCentrism.org
