china produces inferior products and our overflowing landfill sites are
testament to this. add the fact that wallmart/home depot and other such
robber baron corperations support the wholesale export of north american
jobs to asia and we have a receipe for financial disaster.
NEVER BUY CHINESE, DO WITHOUT AND SAVE YOUR HOMELAND FROM THE NEW YELLOW
MENACE.
wrote in message
oups.com...

wrote:
World Traveler wrote:
Nonsense. Fortunes are being made as we speak, in people doing
real
estate
business in the fast growing parts of China such as Shanghai. The
land is
owned by the government, but is "sold" on long-term lease. The
individual
buildings are owned by the leaseholder. This is similar to
arrangements in
many places in the world (including Hawaii).

You're wasting your time with these China bashers. They've formed
their
opinion already, even without any evidence.

Improvement that charles liu dont call others 'jokers' when they dont
agree with him. ^_^

I can just hear people say
"China's law and its application" this and that. Well, those who
believe China's court always side with the government, they are
wrong.
China is just like America, there is eminent domain abuse, and just
like US, China's courts have its own process.

Here are a few cases in China where victims of land use abuse sued
and
won:

http://www.china.org.cn/english/government/100939.htm

Residents suing city commision.



http://www.china-labour.org.hk/iso/a...&category_name
=Economic%20Reform

Village committee is sued.


http://www2.chinadaily.com.cn/englis...ent_338768.htm

Guanzhou municiapl government.

Come on, charles liu. U continue ur always trick. When others r talking
bout sueing PRC central government and provincial gov. (these gov owns
the land/lot), u wanna substitute in sues against village and city.
That's filthy already in scChina. U wanna make urself notorious outside
scChina?

wrote:


[text omitted]


You're wasting your time with these China bashers. They've formed their
opinion already, even without any evidence. I can just hear people say
"China's law and its application" this and that. Well, those who
believe China's court always side with the government, they are wrong.
China is just like America, there is eminent domain abuse, and just
like US, China's courts have its own process.

Here are a few cases in China where victims of land use abuse sued and
won:

http://www.china.org.cn/english/government/100939.htm


That's a typical land use and zoning code violation matter. There is plenty
of justification for creating zoning laws that protect individual rights.
Abuses of zoning laws by government power seekers and do-gooders are
common, and the cases wind up un the courts in the US. Private abuse is a
matter that requires the collusion of government officials - and that means
the taking of property or property rights or rights under zoning laws with
out the free volition of the individual property owner.

Issues such as that in the PRC masquerade as private property issues when,
in fact, all real estate land property except for collectives is owned by
the PRC and is leased or use priveledges granted by the PRC.


http://www.china-labour.org.hk/iso/a...mic %20Reform



Leasehold rights are legitimate real estate interests in a free society,
and they are identified and agreed to with volitional agreements that may
by defended in court. That case is one of an individual fight against the
PRC who had unlawfully taken her rights. In the PRC, however, rights, such
that Americans know, are unknown in the PRC. They only have priveledges
that are "lawfully" accorded by the state. Administrative decisions
determine the outcomes of disputes.

Good luck if you think that individual property owners have western rights
in the PRC. They don't.



http://www2.chinadaily.com.cn/englis...ent_338768.htm



[text omitted]

That is an example of Eminent Domain, and that is one of the more evil
types of statism, and that exist in the USA and in the PRC. Eminent Domain,
however, is the central principle of Communism, and in the USA Constitution
it is a carry over from the kingdoms of Europe. The Framers of the US
Constitution erred in establishing that principle in the USA. Nowadays we
in the USA are finding repeated examples of private firms who get local
governments to use the Federal Constitution principle of Eminent Domain in
order to obtain properties that don't belong to them and that they cannot
otherwise buy. That requires the bribery, clout, and suasion of government
officials. Several cases are currently being brought through courts, and
Supreme Court decisions will most certainly result. A Constitutional clash
will amount to opposition of the pragmatist-statists and the advocates of
individual rights and individual property rights.

There are a mix of type of disputes in each of these cases.

These examples in the PRC are similar to thousands of disputes that are
happening in the USA Local, State, and possibly Federal Courts every day.
The issues are the same: statism vs. the rights of individuals.

Most issues like those are routinely handled by the zoning boards, local
and state courts.

The people in the PRC are taking their first baby steps by resisting PRC
tanks, by writing ideas, and by bringing issues before the bureaucratic
courts of the PRC and its agencies. They have millions of cases to go
before enough quality decisions are considered to have the weight of law,
or Common Law, and that as defined as principles may also be enacted into
laws by free legislatures. It may take them one hundred years to get to
where the USA is in terms of the recognition of absolute individual rights
and the concept that the purpose of the state is to identify and to protect
the rights of individuals.

The poster's quotation of URLs does a dis-service to individual rights
everywhere by not explaining the relevance, meaning, and consequences of
these issues.

Those people may or may not succeed in their cases, but the general sense
of the omnipresent dictatorship sure as hell makes it self known in those
reports. Note, also, that the news writers had to dance around the
politically sensitive issues regarding confrontations to the authority of
the state and its bureaucrats.

Writer, Charles Liu, of , is an obvious apologist of
the PRC.

Note that Mr. Liu has not come out in defense of individual rights, and
rather, he has provided a vigorous and mixed implied defense of the
omnipresent propriety of the PRC state. Just because the little guy is
fighting for some semblance of rights, does not mean that Mr. Liu is
against the dictatorship. It is clear that the PRC state determines what is
justice and that it is always omnipowerful.

Mr. Liu does, however, imply that Eminent Domain is a violation of rights,
and that it should be opposed. That is a rare viewpoint, and Liu should be
commended for that.

Mr. Liu may have more to say.

Ralph Hertle

Ralph Hertle wrote:
wrote:

(snip)
Thank u for ur analysis on land issues.

Writer, Charles Liu, of , is an obvious
apologist of
the PRC.

People in soc.culture.china know that for years.

Note that Mr. Liu has not come out in defense of individual rights,
and
rather, he has provided a vigorous and mixed implied defense of the
omnipresent propriety of the PRC state. Just because the little guy
is
fighting for some semblance of rights, does not mean that Mr. Liu is
against the dictatorship. It is clear that the PRC state determines
what is
justice and that it is always omnipowerful.

For people's information in alt.building.construction and
alt.home.repair, Charles Liu is active poster in soc.culture.china. His
frequent defense of PRC/CCP is -- when someone mention what chinese
commuinist party do wrong, what PRC do wrong, within 3 or 4 posts
(depend on his mood), he'll
-- argue how USA treat native americans;
-- argue how USA drop dirty bombs and radioactive waste to others;
-- argue what US patriot act is a bad law;
anyhow, his strategy is moving the criticism of PRC/CCP to attack on
USA, and then he achieve his defense of PRC when others are arguing on
USA. This time his moving to Hawaii is one example.

As a naturalized USA citizen, he like to say "we americans". but when
asked since USA is so bad, how come he became a USA citizen, and his
reply is "my father wanna me so".

Okie dokie. I still read ur good article on land issues. ^_^

Mr. Liu does, however, imply that Eminent Domain is a violation of
rights,
and that it should be opposed. That is a rare viewpoint, and Liu
should be
commended for that.

Mr. Liu may have more to say.

Ralph Hertle

Ralph, I think you made a very fundamental mistake - I said "eminent
domain *abuse*". That's very different than "eminent domain". Just like
America, China too have such abuse, and the three cases where the
government was judged as wrong demonstrate that China do in fact have
its own process, and protection of individual's rights to property,
including real property, in practice and in law (as demonstrated by
China's recent contitution amendments regarding protection of real
property.)

Your anit-communism indoctrination, likely ingrained from yester years
of cold war ideology, is out dated and far from reality. Go to China
and see for yourself.

Ralph Hertle wrote:
wrote:


[text omitted]


You're wasting your time with these China bashers. They've formed
their
opinion already, even without any evidence. I can just hear people
say
"China's law and its application" this and that. Well, those who
believe China's court always side with the government, they are
wrong.
China is just like America, there is eminent domain abuse, and just
like US, China's courts have its own process.

Here are a few cases in China where victims of land use abuse sued
and
won:

http://www.china.org.cn/english/government/100939.htm


That's a typical land use and zoning code violation matter. There is
plenty
of justification for creating zoning laws that protect individual
rights.
Abuses of zoning laws by government power seekers and do-gooders are
common, and the cases wind up un the courts in the US. Private abuse
is a
matter that requires the collusion of government officials - and that
means
the taking of property or property rights or rights under zoning laws
with
out the free volition of the individual property owner.

Issues such as that in the PRC masquerade as private property issues
when,
in fact, all real estate land property except for collectives is
owned by
the PRC and is leased or use priveledges granted by the PRC.



http://www.china-labour.org.hk/iso/a...mic %20Reform



Leasehold rights are legitimate real estate interests in a free
society,
and they are identified and agreed to with volitional agreements that
may
by defended in court. That case is one of an individual fight against
the
PRC who had unlawfully taken her rights. In the PRC, however, rights,
such
that Americans know, are unknown in the PRC. They only have
priveledges
that are "lawfully" accorded by the state. Administrative decisions
determine the outcomes of disputes.

Good luck if you think that individual property owners have western
rights
in the PRC. They don't.




http://www2.chinadaily.com.cn/englis...ent_338768.htm



[text omitted]

That is an example of Eminent Domain, and that is one of the more
evil
types of statism, and that exist in the USA and in the PRC. Eminent
Domain,
however, is the central principle of Communism, and in the USA
Constitution
it is a carry over from the kingdoms of Europe. The Framers of the US

Constitution erred in establishing that principle in the USA.
Nowadays we
in the USA are finding repeated examples of private firms who get
local
governments to use the Federal Constitution principle of Eminent
Domain in
order to obtain properties that don't belong to them and that they
cannot
otherwise buy. That requires the bribery, clout, and suasion of
government
officials. Several cases are currently being brought through courts,
and
Supreme Court decisions will most certainly result. A Constitutional
clash
will amount to opposition of the pragmatist-statists and the
advocates of
individual rights and individual property rights.

There are a mix of type of disputes in each of these cases.

These examples in the PRC are similar to thousands of disputes that
are
happening in the USA Local, State, and possibly Federal Courts every
day.
The issues are the same: statism vs. the rights of individuals.

Most issues like those are routinely handled by the zoning boards,
local
and state courts.

The people in the PRC are taking their first baby steps by resisting
PRC
tanks, by writing ideas, and by bringing issues before the
bureaucratic
courts of the PRC and its agencies. They have millions of cases to go

before enough quality decisions are considered to have the weight of
law,
or Common Law, and that as defined as principles may also be enacted
into
laws by free legislatures. It may take them one hundred years to get
to
where the USA is in terms of the recognition of absolute individual
rights
and the concept that the purpose of the state is to identify and to
protect
the rights of individuals.

The poster's quotation of URLs does a dis-service to individual
rights
everywhere by not explaining the relevance, meaning, and consequences
of
these issues.

Those people may or may not succeed in their cases, but the general
sense
of the omnipresent dictatorship sure as hell makes it self known in
those
reports. Note, also, that the news writers had to dance around the
politically sensitive issues regarding confrontations to the
authority of
the state and its bureaucrats.

Writer, Charles Liu, of , is an obvious
apologist of
the PRC.

Note that Mr. Liu has not come out in defense of individual rights,
and
rather, he has provided a vigorous and mixed implied defense of the
omnipresent propriety of the PRC state. Just because the little guy
is
fighting for some semblance of rights, does not mean that Mr. Liu is
against the dictatorship. It is clear that the PRC state determines
what is
justice and that it is always omnipowerful.

Mr. Liu does, however, imply that Eminent Domain is a violation of
rights,
and that it should be opposed. That is a rare viewpoint, and Liu
should be
commended for that.

Mr. Liu may have more to say.

Ralph Hertle

OB wrote:
china produces inferior products and our overflowing landfill sites
are
testament to this. add the fact that wallmart/home depot and other
such
robber baron corperations support the wholesale export of north
american
jobs to asia and we have a receipe for financial disaster.
NEVER BUY CHINESE, DO WITHOUT AND SAVE YOUR HOMELAND FROM THE NEW
YELLOW
MENACE.

See how the anti-China promotion made you forget about our Benedict
Arnold WASP CEOs and decision makers that exported jobs in the first
place, and the congress who takes money from them and only do things
out of appearances, like scapegoating China for our problems. If we
destroy this "yellow menace", our sell-out corporations will simply
export America's jobs elsewhere. Then what?

Instead of falling in line like lemmings and toe the China-bashing
line, it's time to kick some of our won WASP homeboy asses, y'all.

wrote in message
oups.com...

wrote:
World Traveler wrote:
Nonsense. Fortunes are being made as we speak, in people doing
real
estate
business in the fast growing parts of China such as Shanghai.
The
land is
owned by the government, but is "sold" on long-term lease. The
individual
buildings are owned by the leaseholder. This is similar to
arrangements in
many places in the world (including Hawaii).

You're wasting your time with these China bashers. They've formed
their
opinion already, even without any evidence.

Improvement that charles liu dont call others 'jokers' when they
dont
agree with him. ^_^

I can just hear people say
"China's law and its application" this and that. Well, those who
believe China's court always side with the government, they are
wrong.
China is just like America, there is eminent domain abuse, and
just
like US, China's courts have its own process.

Here are a few cases in China where victims of land use abuse
sued
and
won:

http://www.china.org.cn/english/government/100939.htm

Residents suing city commision.




http://www.china-labour.org.hk/iso/a...&category_name
=Economic%20Reform

Village committee is sued.



http://www2.chinadaily.com.cn/englis...ent_338768.htm

Guanzhou municiapl government.

Come on, charles liu. U continue ur always trick. When others r
talking
bout sueing PRC central government and provincial gov. (these gov
owns
the land/lot), u wanna substitute in sues against village and city.
That's filthy already in scChina. U wanna make urself notorious
outside
scChina?

We can't even compete in the information age. Third world countries
like India are taking our "call center" jobs and programming jobs, etc.
We will soon have nothing to sell anyone. Then all the wags will say
"Who could have known?". Then we will become a third world country.
No country stays great forever. Look at past history. We are no
exception. Look at the last days of the Roman empire. The excesses
continued up to the end. It will be the same here.

Stretch

wrote:
OB wrote:
china produces inferior products and our overflowing landfill sites
are
testament to this. add the fact that wallmart/home depot and other
such
robber baron corperations support the wholesale export of north
american
jobs to asia and we have a receipe for financial disaster.
NEVER BUY CHINESE, DO WITHOUT AND SAVE YOUR HOMELAND FROM THE NEW
YELLOW
MENACE.

See how the anti-China promotion made you forget about our Benedict
Arnold WASP CEOs and decision makers that exported jobs in the first
place, and the congress who takes money from them and only do things
out of appearances, like scapegoating China for our problems. If we
destroy this "yellow menace", our sell-out corporations will simply
export America's jobs elsewhere. Then what?

Then what? Can u focus on PRC court and law on labor and land dispute?

Instead of falling in line like lemmings and toe the China-bashing
line, it's time to kick some of our won WASP homeboy asses, y'all.

I think u better comment on PRC law on land ownership first. ^_^
Switching topics is ur favorite in soc.culture.china, but other people
in the home building NGs dont like that. :^))

wrote:
wrote:
It's actually starting to decrease, the trade deficit with China due
to
increased construction, requiring more imports from other countries,
US
included.

The real problem lies in their currency, pegged to the U.S. dollar.
They need to let their currency free-float on the market before
things
can really even out.

Here's another article explaining why China's currency isn't
undervalued, by Prof. Michael Connolly, U Maimi Chair of Economics:

http://cet.hnu.net.cn/ca_fx22.ppt

"The Current Account and the Exchange Rate: The tail does not wag the
dog"

"the real exchange rate has remained relatively stable since 1986, due
largely to greater inflation in China that has offset yuan devaluation.

He and u must explain where PRC got the money to buy US treasury. by
buying US bond and treasury, efectively beijing is lending money to USA
government to avoid RMB revaluation.

In fact, in 2004 it only appreciated 2%. The RMB has in fact slightly

depreciated in real terms since 1986."

Because RMB pegged to USA dollar and us dollar is falling?

So China's currency isn't the IMF-style "dig your own grave" free float
(just ask Thailand and George Soros.) US monetary policy intervenes all
the time to control the dollar. EU member currencies are pegged to the
EU, and EU itself is heavily regulated by crawling peg.

EU member currency pegged to the EU? That's the biggest joke today.
Where is the "EU member currency" in 2005?

If "free float" is so good, how come we ain't doing it? I needn't
remind you our US$ was pegged to gold for hundreds of years, and the
PRC is only around for 50 some years.

Hahaha. Now charles liu is citing history here. PRC is only around for
50 years and wonder how many of them RMB is pegged to usa dollar.

Give them a chance to do it on their own, for their own interest.
That's what we'd do.

Beijing should peg RMB so 828 yuans equal 1 USA dollar.

Then it begs the question why are we bashing China and scapegoating
their currency for our problems. Because when it comes to our problem,
it's to hell with everybody else - especially for our leaders of
society to keep their wealth.

But now EU is also having problem with chinese textile. Is the whole
world having problem with PRC?

Have you seen what happened to the oil stocks since we invaded Iraq on
false WMD accusation and dirty bombed Iraq from highest living standard
in region back to the stone age? The stocks are going thru the roof:

http://money.cnn.com/quote/quote.htm...HAL&time=3year

Oh yap. Finally charles liu mention dirty bomb and Iraq. He always say
this when people criticize the communis in Beijing to deflat people's
attention. But since Kelvin Mok comment ur science is atrocious that u
worry the bad effect of hydrogen to human bodies, I bet others can
ignore ur story on dirty bomb.

One question for ya. If today u dont live in USA but live in Shanghai,
and u wanna visit other countries for a trip. Do u like to see chinese
RMB appreciate or depreciate?

On 24 May 2005 23:45:29 -0700, in alt.home.repair Paslode
Nail Gun - Being Made in China ! - OT wrote:

Here's another article explaining why China's currency isn't
undervalued, by Prof. Michael Connolly, U Maimi Chair of Economics:

Even if it is undervalued, so what? Undervaluing their currency makes
their exports cheaper to the U.S. vis-a-vis the US$. Effectively,
undervaluation is a way to make their labor subsidize our life style.

The only problems a

1) Loss of U.S. jobs
2) We become a debtor nation to China and thus must "kow-tow" to their
whims. We thus become their economic hostages.

We are trading luxury, ease and consumerism for freedom. We've never
had a problem with that before (at least not in the last 75 years).

--
To reply to me directly, remove the CLUTTER from my email address.