On 5/30/2010 8:25 AM, HeyBub wrote:
harry wrote:


No, the idea is not to subsidise manufacturing. The idea is what we
do best. Innovation.

Ah, good. I didn't understand what it was you were subsidizing.

The banking/commerce wheeze being such a
failure. We still do a lot of manufacturing in the UK.

The problem is the Chinese slave workforce.

No, the Chinese workforce is not a slave group. They are more free than the
workforces in either the U.S. or the U.K. For example, there are no trade
unions or minimum wage. The worker is free to negotiate his remuneration to
the advantage of both himself and the company.


And that certainly is a good thing for people who aren't affected by it
except in a good way. You can get cheap stuff at Harbor Freight because
workers in China are able to "negotiate" for $0.80/hour jobs and sleep
in the factory at night. If we could only lower ourselves that far here
so we can compete..



And the fact they hold
don't allow their currency to float. These sort of things never went
on in Smith's day.

Uh, there was not such thing as currency float, at all, in Smith's day.
Transactions were based on credit, gold, or silver. There was no "I'll give
you so many pounds for so many francs."

They are bent on destroying the West. They don't care how many
Chinese have to die to achieve this. Given this, protectionism might
help until they desist.


Destroying the west is the farthest thing from the Chinese mind. If the west
ceased to exist, to whom would China sell its products?