"Jim Carter" wrote in message
...

"NOYB" wrote in message
nk.net...
Nearly 18% of Chinese exports go to the US. Since we're discussing the
effect that Chinese aggression against Taiwan would have, then it's safe
to
say that China would lose the following trade partners in the event of a
war
with Taiwan: US, Japan, and Taiwan. Together, those three countries
make
up 3 of China's top 5 trade partners...and almost 44% of China's total
exports. It's also likely that China would lose the following as trade
partners: Hong Kong, S. Korea, and Germany. That'd account for 70% of
China's trade.
Keep in mind, that this says nothing about the effect that our
corporations
would have in pulling their factories out China.

I do think your calculations are very incorrect.

If the PRC would be taking Taiwan back into the fold, they don't lose
Taiwan
as a trading partner, then gain it. Japan would not be lost as a trading
partner for China as Japan has too much to lose with their trade with
China
to worry about the little bit with Taiwan. Also, the Japanese people are
opposed to any war and their government would topple if there was any hint
of an impending war. The exact same can be said of Germany as well as the
rest of the European Economic Community.

Where have you been when you are mentioning Hong Kong in your
calculations?
Hong Kong "is" a part of the PRC and has been since July 1, 1997.

The American corporations pulling out of China would have almost no effect
as they would be immediately replaced by corporations from The European
Economic Community, Brazil and from Japan.


This is the silliest statement of your post. Who would the EU, Brazilian,
and Japanese Corporations sell their products to if the US quit doing
business with China?

First of all, overnight, China would lose almost 20% of its export business.
There'd be a huge surplus of goods with nobody to sell them to.

Secondly, the EU and Brazil have unemployment rates that are around 10%.
(Germany's is up over 12%) Suppose the EU and Brazil rushed to fill the
void left by American companies. How high would that push the current rate?
15% unemployment? 20%? As Henry Ford pointed out, you have to pay your
workers enough that they can afford to buy your product. The Chinese don't;
consequently, they must rely on export. Who will they export to? Not the
US. And not the EU because the EU will have too many unemployed people to
purchase the goods.

If the US pulled out of the Chinese economy, we'd be hurt, particularly in
the short term...but they'd be devastated to a point from which they'd never
recover.

"NOYB" wrote in message
ink.net...
This is the silliest statement of your post. Who would the EU, Brazilian,
and Japanese Corporations sell their products to if the US quit doing
business with China?

Why, China of course.


First of all, overnight, China would lose almost 20% of its export
business.
There'd be a huge surplus of goods with nobody to sell them to.

These goods would be immediately rerouted to other nations who could and
would immediately purchase them at a discount.

Secondly, the EU and Brazil have unemployment rates that are around 10%.
(Germany's is up over 12%) Suppose the EU and Brazil rushed to fill the
void left by American companies. How high would that push the current
rate?

Your knowledge of international trade needs to be upgraded. The trade with
China and the increased prescence of the European Economic Community and
Brazil into China would reduce the unemployment rate in those countries NOT
increase it.
15% unemployment? 20%? As Henry Ford pointed out, you have to pay your
workers enough that they can afford to buy your product. The Chinese
don't;
consequently, they must rely on export.

Now you are really showing you have limited knowledge of China. It has
the fastest growing economy in the world and it has the largest consumer
base in the world.

Who will they export to? Not the US.

True.....

And not the EU because the EU will have too many unemployed people to
purchase the goods.

Not true. Read again the trade figures for the EU


If the US pulled out of the Chinese economy, we'd be hurt, particularly in
the short term...

True......

but they'd be devastated to a point from which they'd never recover.

China would not be devastated at all if the US pulled out of the Chinese
economy. The US would be replaced by others that are willing to participate
in Global Trade.

Jim Carter

"DSK" wrote in message
.. .
Y'know, I really really *don't* want to find out by trying it... if
you're smart, you wouldn't either...



NOYB wrote:
Of course I don't want to find out by trying it.

Good. Let's both hope that the loudest voices in the Bush/Cheney cabinet
are at least as smart as you are...

... But it's important to debate the hypotheticals.

If you don't have your head stuck way way deep in the sand, sure.

... And my best guess is that we'd have a recession that would compare
to the Carter years...and China would have a depression that would dwarf
even our Great Depression.


I think you've got it backwards. If our currency crashed, we'd be in the
same shape as the Weimar Republic (look it up)... maybe worse.

BTW take a look at some of the percentages here
http://en.ce.cn/Markets/Currencies/2..._2411132.shtml

This is the drop in the dollar caused merely by the slowing down of the
rate at which the Chinese are buying up our debt, not even selling off
any. BTW this article mentions the increase in Chinese cash holdings as
over $500 billion,

I'm pretty sure that figure is for all foreign exchange reserves...not just
US.

" Statistics from the US Treasury Department show Chinese mainland holdings
of treasury securities totalled US$174.7bn at the end of September, up from
US$172.3bn at the end of August. "


what percent of our GDP does that represent hmm? A bit more than 3% nyet?

4.26%

US GDP= 11.734 trillion=11,734 billion
500 billion/11,734 billion=4.26%

Either way...
Were'd you get the "7 times our annual GDP" number from?!?!?





BTW here's an interesting little bid'ness article
http://www.morganstanley.com/GEFdata...i.html#anchor3

Get the facts, NOBBY, get the facts.

Yes, definitely get the facts, Doug. China's US Treasury holdings are less
than 5% of our annual GDP...not "7 times our annual GDP" as you claimed.

"NOYB" wrote in message
ink.net...

Perhaps we can just make ICBM jammers and deflectors rather than missiles
that will blow them out of the air? A launch coming over the polar ice
caps
would be forced down before it hit our northern border. There's not much
worth saving north of Chicago anyhow.


So says the mayor of Swampville Florida

"Jim Carter" wrote in message
...


As I said before. Your opinions are too narrow minded and your grasp of
Global Politics is lacking.

Jim Carter

The facts have never gotten into the way of NOYB's fantasies before.

"Don White" wrote in message
...

"Jim Carter" wrote in message
...


As I said before. Your opinions are too narrow minded and your grasp of
Global Politics is lacking.

Jim Carter

The facts have never gotten into the way of NOYB's fantasies before.



2 posts, 2 insults. What have you ever contributed to this NG besides
insults and personal attacks Don?

"Jim Carter" wrote in message
...

"NOYB" wrote in message
ink.net...
This is the silliest statement of your post. Who would the EU,
Brazilian,
and Japanese Corporations sell their products to if the US quit doing
business with China?

Why, China of course.


The Chinese have no money to buy the things that the US manufacturers are
producing. Despite having more than four times our population, there's
still a $30 billion trade deficit between our countries. China should be
buying 4 times as much from us as we're buying from them, yet they're buying
less than half as much.



First of all, overnight, China would lose almost 20% of its export
business.
There'd be a huge surplus of goods with nobody to sell them to.

These goods would be immediately rerouted to other nations who could and
would immediately purchase them at a discount.

The other nations are already in economic hardship with record unemployment
right now. You're advocating EU, Brazilian, and Japanese companies moving to
China, which would only drive up the unemployment rate even higher.
Unemployed people don't buy very much.



Secondly, the EU and Brazil have unemployment rates that are around 10%.
(Germany's is up over 12%) Suppose the EU and Brazil rushed to fill the
void left by American companies. How high would that push the current
rate?

Your knowledge of international trade needs to be upgraded. The trade
with
China and the increased prescence of the European Economic Community and
Brazil into China would reduce the unemployment rate in those countries
NOT
increase it.

You're trying to tell me that when a German corporation moves its factory to
China, that reduces the unemployment rate in Germany? You may want to
rethink that.



15% unemployment? 20%? As Henry Ford pointed out, you have to pay your
workers enough that they can afford to buy your product. The Chinese
don't;
consequently, they must rely on export.

Now you are really showing you have limited knowledge of China. It has
the fastest growing economy in the world and it has the largest consumer
base in the world.

China's economy may or may not be the fastest growing. we're now realizing
that the Chinese may be concealing their true economic numbers (like they
did with the SARS outbreak):

http://www.latimes.com/business/la-f...ck=2&cset=true




Who will they export to? Not the US.

True.....

And not the EU because the EU will have too many unemployed people to
purchase the goods.

Not true. Read again the trade figures for the EU

I read them. China exports 15% more to the US than to all of the EU
countries combined:
http://www.chinaembassy.org.in/eng/zgbd/t172961.htm



Germany, the Netherlands, the UK, and France are the only EU countries to
make a list of China's top 10 trade partners...and they place 5th, 6th, 7th,
and 10th respectively on that list. Combined, they import $28.955 billion
from China...which is $25 billion *less* than what the US imports alone from
China.
http://www.uschina.org/statistics/fo...rade_2004.html




If the US pulled out of the Chinese economy, we'd be hurt, particularly
in
the short term...

True......

but they'd be devastated to a point from which they'd never recover.

China would not be devastated at all if the US pulled out of the Chinese
economy. The US would be replaced by others that are willing to
participate
in Global Trade.

Not a chance. As the US economy goes, so goes the World economy...but we're
better at bouncing back.

"Don White" wrote in message
...

"Jim Carter" wrote in message
...


As I said before. Your opinions are too narrow minded and your grasp of
Global Politics is lacking.

Jim Carter

The facts have never gotten into the way of NOYB's fantasies before.


The funny thing is, Don, that once we start arguing facts, I always post the
links to prove my point...and my opposition moves on to another thread.

"JimH" wrote in message
...


2 posts, 2 insults. What have you ever contributed to this NG besides
insults and personal attacks Don?


I try to balance out your crap Jimmy.

''''' Bush needs China's contribution to any solution to the N. Korean
problem.
Maybe. "'"'"'



kanter,,, as a lead puppet of krause's,, you have said some stupid,, stupid
,,, embarrassing statements at times,, this one actually surprises me. I am
not sure if krause will be happy with it though,,,







"Doug Kanter" wrote in message
...
Bush needs China's contribution to any solution to the N. Korean problem.
Maybe.

" Tuuk" wrote in message
...
''''' Bush needs China's contribution to any solution to the N. Korean
problem.
Maybe. "'"'"'



kanter,,, as a lead puppet of krause's,, you have said some stupid,,
stupid ,,, embarrassing statements at times,, this one actually surprises
me. I am not sure if krause will be happy with it though,,,

What exactly do you find wrong with my statement, shmuck?

"Don White" wrote in message
...

"JimH" wrote in message
...


2 posts, 2 insults. What have you ever contributed to this NG besides
insults and personal attacks Don?


I try to balance out your crap Jimmy.



Balance out my posts?

Let's see. I post positive things. You post negative things. I post
things that contribute to the group. You post trash. I post my own
thoughts. Your posts are mainly high fives to something Krause said.

Yes, I can see your point Don.

The facts have never gotten into the way of NOYB's fantasies before.



NOYB wrote:
The funny thing is, Don, that once we start arguing facts, I always post the
links to prove my point...and my opposition moves on to another thread.


That's just another fantasy... look at the record. When posting your
opinions, you usually flee as soon as facts enter the discussion. When
posting links to "prove your point" it usually turns out that you are
referencing either something totally unrelated or more right-wingnut
fantasy... it's often been pointed out to you that you don't read your
references very thoroughly, because info contradictory to your
statements is right there.

Then you move on to another thread.

DSK

"JimH" wrote in message
...


Let's see. I post positive things. You post negative things. I post
things that contribute to the group. You post trash. I post my own
thoughts. Your posts are mainly high fives to something Krause said.

Gee Jimmy...you got digital cable there in Avon Pond?? Try some of the old
channels...you should find the 'Twilight Zone'.....memorize the theme music.
That's what I hear when I read your posts.

"Don White" wrote in message
...

"JimH" wrote in message
...
2 posts, 2 insults. What have you ever contributed to this NG besides
insults and personal attacks Don?


I try to balance out your crap Jimmy.



Balance out my posts?

Let's see. I post positive things. You post negative things. I post
things that contribute to the group. You post trash. I post my own
thoughts. Your posts are mainly high fives to something Krause said.

Yes, I can see your point Don.



Gee Jimmy...you got digital cable there in Avon Pond?? Try some of the
old
channels...you should find the 'Twilight Zone'.....memorize the theme
music.
That's what I hear when I read your posts.




You have nothing positive to offer this NG.....in you go with Krause and
company......*plonk*

"JimH" wrote in message
...

"Don White" wrote in message
...

"JimH" wrote in message
...
2 posts, 2 insults. What have you ever contributed to this NG besides
insults and personal attacks Don?


I try to balance out your crap Jimmy.



Balance out my posts?

Let's see. I post positive things. You post negative things. I post
things that contribute to the group. You post trash. I post my own
thoughts. Your posts are mainly high fives to something Krause said.

Yes, I can see your point Don.



Gee Jimmy...you got digital cable there in Avon Pond?? Try some of the
old
channels...you should find the 'Twilight Zone'.....memorize the theme
music.
That's what I hear when I read your posts.




You have nothing positive to offer this NG.....in you go with Krause and
company......*plonk*


Bull****. You supposedly plonk those guys on a regular basis, but you always
respond to them. You can't resist the urge.

"Doug Kanter" wrote in message
...


Bull****. You supposedly plonk those guys on a regular basis, but you
always
respond to them. You can't resist the urge.


That's exactly right. Three times since Christmas he issues a truce, then
within a week he's back to taking potshots. He can't help himself. More to
be pitied than punished!

"JimH" wrote in message
...

You have nothing positive to offer this NG.....in you go with Krause and
company......*plonk*


Thank you...thank you very much. I thought I was going to have to finally
open my own bin ('toilet bowl') and flush you down to 'dissolve in peace'
in the murky frigid North Atlantic. This is much better as our harbour is
already seriously polluted.

"HarryKrause" wrote in message
...

There's little in here funnier than Hertvik, aka the nattering nabob of
negativity, callng the kettle black. Well, there's Herring...he does it,
too.

At least JohnH has a boat & uses it. We don't agree on a lot but I have to
respect his right to say it. (free speech & all).
What bugs me is the non-boaters who hover in here to harass legit members.

On Tue, 15 Mar 2005 07:48:24 -0500, DSK wrote:

The facts have never gotten into the way of NOYB's fantasies before.



NOYB wrote:
The funny thing is, Don, that once we start arguing facts, I always post the
links to prove my point...and my opposition moves on to another thread.


That's just another fantasy... look at the record. When posting your
opinions, you usually flee as soon as facts enter the discussion. When
posting links to "prove your point" it usually turns out that you are
referencing either something totally unrelated or more right-wingnut
fantasy... it's often been pointed out to you that you don't read your
references very thoroughly, because info contradictory to your
statements is right there.

Then you move on to another thread.

DSK

No Doug, you're wrong. Nobby and Dave Hall tie you folks in knots. They do it
repeatedly. Just sit back and watch some of the threads without getting involved
in it. It's laughable.
--
John H

"All decisions are the result of binary thinking."

"John H" wrote in message
...
On Tue, 15 Mar 2005 07:48:24 -0500, DSK wrote:

The facts have never gotten into the way of NOYB's fantasies before.



NOYB wrote:
The funny thing is, Don, that once we start arguing facts, I always post
the
links to prove my point...and my opposition moves on to another thread.


That's just another fantasy... look at the record. When posting your
opinions, you usually flee as soon as facts enter the discussion. When
posting links to "prove your point" it usually turns out that you are
referencing either something totally unrelated or more right-wingnut
fantasy... it's often been pointed out to you that you don't read your
references very thoroughly, because info contradictory to your
statements is right there.

Then you move on to another thread.

DSK

No Doug, you're wrong. Nobby and Dave Hall tie you folks in knots. They do
it
repeatedly. Just sit back and watch some of the threads without getting
involved
in it. It's laughable.

Once again a liebral complains about the very thing they are guilty of.


--
John H

"All decisions are the result of binary thinking."

"John H" wrote in message
...
On Tue, 15 Mar 2005 07:48:24 -0500, DSK wrote:

The facts have never gotten into the way of NOYB's fantasies before.



NOYB wrote:
The funny thing is, Don, that once we start arguing facts, I always post
the
links to prove my point...and my opposition moves on to another thread.


That's just another fantasy... look at the record. When posting your
opinions, you usually flee as soon as facts enter the discussion. When
posting links to "prove your point" it usually turns out that you are
referencing either something totally unrelated or more right-wingnut
fantasy... it's often been pointed out to you that you don't read your
references very thoroughly, because info contradictory to your
statements is right there.

Then you move on to another thread.

DSK

No Doug, you're wrong. Nobby and Dave Hall tie you folks in knots. They do
it
repeatedly. Just sit back and watch some of the threads without getting
involved
in it. It's laughable.
--


I'm still waiting to see Doug's "proof" that the value of China's US
Treasury holdings is "7 times the United States' annual GDP". By my
calculations, that should put their holdings up around $82 trillion. That's
*TRILLION* with a "tr".

The odd thing is that after making that statement, he continued to stick
with it...even after he posted a link that cited their holdings at $500
billion. His own sources refute his argument, so I don't know why I even
bother citing *my* sources.

NOYB wrote:
I'm still waiting to see Doug's "proof" that the value of China's US
Treasury holdings is "7 times the United States' annual GDP". By my
calculations, that should put their holdings up around $82 trillion. That's
*TRILLION* with a "tr".

Can you not use Google?


The odd thing is that after making that statement, he continued to stick
with it...even after he posted a link that cited their holdings at $500
billion.

Wrong.

Can you not read?

That reference said that Chinese *cash reserves* were $500 billion.
That's dollars, not debt instruments (ie Treasuries).

Surely a man with your fiscal savvy knows the difference.

... His own sources refute his argument, so I don't know why I even
bother citing *my* sources.


I don't either. Probably because you can't read very well, and don't
have any patience for facts which contradict your prejudices. Same
reason why you think you're winning our little debates... until you run
away...

DSK

On Tue, 15 Mar 2005 22:13:56 GMT, "NOYB" wrote:


"John H" wrote in message
.. .
On Tue, 15 Mar 2005 07:48:24 -0500, DSK wrote:

The facts have never gotten into the way of NOYB's fantasies before.



NOYB wrote:
The funny thing is, Don, that once we start arguing facts, I always post
the
links to prove my point...and my opposition moves on to another thread.


That's just another fantasy... look at the record. When posting your
opinions, you usually flee as soon as facts enter the discussion. When
posting links to "prove your point" it usually turns out that you are
referencing either something totally unrelated or more right-wingnut
fantasy... it's often been pointed out to you that you don't read your
references very thoroughly, because info contradictory to your
statements is right there.

Then you move on to another thread.

DSK

No Doug, you're wrong. Nobby and Dave Hall tie you folks in knots. They do
it
repeatedly. Just sit back and watch some of the threads without getting
involved
in it. It's laughable.
--


I'm still waiting to see Doug's "proof" that the value of China's US
Treasury holdings is "7 times the United States' annual GDP". By my
calculations, that should put their holdings up around $82 trillion. That's
*TRILLION* with a "tr".

The odd thing is that after making that statement, he continued to stick
with it...even after he posted a link that cited their holdings at $500
billion. His own sources refute his argument, so I don't know why I even
bother citing *my* sources.

Strange stuff happens in Never, Never Land!

--
John H

"All decisions are the result of binary thinking."

On Tue, 15 Mar 2005 17:52:13 -0500, DSK wrote:

NOYB wrote:
I'm still waiting to see Doug's "proof" that the value of China's US
Treasury holdings is "7 times the United States' annual GDP". By my
calculations, that should put their holdings up around $82 trillion. That's
*TRILLION* with a "tr".

Can you not use Google?


The odd thing is that after making that statement, he continued to stick
with it...even after he posted a link that cited their holdings at $500
billion.

Wrong.

Can you not read?

That reference said that Chinese *cash reserves* were $500 billion.
That's dollars, not debt instruments (ie Treasuries).

Surely a man with your fiscal savvy knows the difference.

... His own sources refute his argument, so I don't know why I even
bother citing *my* sources.


I don't either. Probably because you can't read very well, and don't
have any patience for facts which contradict your prejudices. Same
reason why you think you're winning our little debates... until you run
away...

DSK

Or maybe 'cause you lost again?
--
John H

"All decisions are the result of binary thinking."

John H wrote:
No Doug, you're wrong.

No, John, I'm not. Unfortunately.

... Nobby and Dave Hall tie you folks in knots. They do it
repeatedly. Just sit back and watch some of the threads without getting involved
in it. It's laughable.

What's laughable is that you think you're "winning."

Take a look at Dave Hall's increasingly petulant (look it up) posts
insisting that Iraq really really does have WMDs hidden *somewhere* long
after President Bush himself has admitted they were never there.

Take a look at Nobby (why do you call him that, too) floundering around
assuming that the Clinton Administration were the real pros at foreign
policy, who set the bar unrealisitically high for Bush/Cheney; and his
attempts to "prove" that we have an economic stranglehold over mainland
China thru Wal-Mart.

Take a look at yourself, who can do nothing more constructive than add
"me too, nyaa nyaa nyaa" to threads where the Bush/Cheney cheerleaders
are piling on.

All you guys can prove is that perhaps the average American really is so
ignorant and so gullible that Bush's recent election was not all that
difficult.

DSK

John H wrote:
Or maybe 'cause you lost again?

Or maybe because you don't know the difference between cash money and a
bond, either?

Dang, I was hoping you'd explain it to Nobby and save me the trouble.

DSK

Actually it made sense and was logical,

Very untypical for your style





"Doug Kanter" wrote in message
...
" Tuuk" wrote in message
...
''''' Bush needs China's contribution to any solution to the N. Korean
problem.
Maybe. "'"'"'



kanter,,, as a lead puppet of krause's,, you have said some stupid,,
stupid ,,, embarrassing statements at times,, this one actually surprises
me. I am not sure if krause will be happy with it though,,,

What exactly do you find wrong with my statement, shmuck?

" Tuuk" wrote in message
...
Actually it made sense and was logical,

Very untypical for your style

It's about time you got down on your knees and worshipped, you worthless
bucket of phlegm.











"Doug Kanter" wrote in message
...
" Tuuk" wrote in message
.. .
''''' Bush needs China's contribution to any solution to the N. Korean
problem.
Maybe. "'"'"'



kanter,,, as a lead puppet of krause's,, you have said some stupid,,
stupid ,,, embarrassing statements at times,, this one actually
surprises me. I am not sure if krause will be happy with it though,,,

What exactly do you find wrong with my statement, shmuck?

"DSK" wrote in message
.. .
John H wrote:
Or maybe 'cause you lost again?

Or maybe because you don't know the difference between cash money and a
bond, either?

Dang, I was hoping you'd explain it to Nobby and save me the trouble.

DSK


A bond is what the government sells to raise money to cover the national
debt, or for temporary money. Since the national debt is about 7 trillion
dollars, that says there are 7 trillion in bonds outstanding. Since Savings
bonds are part of this, and lots of Americans have them, it would be hard to
have even the GDP value of the USA held by China.

"Calif Bill" wrote in message
ink.net...

"DSK" wrote in message
.. .
John H wrote:
Or maybe 'cause you lost again?

Or maybe because you don't know the difference between cash money and a
bond, either?

Dang, I was hoping you'd explain it to Nobby and save me the trouble.

DSK


A bond is what the government sells to raise money to cover the national
debt, or for temporary money. Since the national debt is about 7 trillion
dollars, that says there are 7 trillion in bonds outstanding. Since
Savings
bonds are part of this, and lots of Americans have them, it would be hard
to
have even the GDP value of the USA held by China.



Whoa! Did I say that Doug claimed US debt held by the Chinese was "7 times
our annual GDP"? I googled what he said, and here it is:

""Their thirst for US dollars" is already way way oversatisfied... they
are holding approximately 17 times our annual GDP in US debt.."

17 times our GDP!?!? Our annual GDP is roughly $11.73 TRILLION. That'd put
the debt figure at $199.46 TRILLION.

So, Dougie...
Are you sticking with your story that China holds $199.46 TRILLION in US
debt?

"DSK" wrote in message
.. .
John H wrote:
No Doug, you're wrong.

No, John, I'm not. Unfortunately.

Yes, you are wrong, Doug.


You said: "they (the Chinese) are holding approximately 17 times our annual
GDP in US debt."

That means they'd have to be holding over $199 trillion in US debt...which
is a number that doesn't even meet the commonsense test. You do know what
commonsense is, right?

On Tue, 15 Mar 2005 17:59:00 -0500, DSK wrote:

John H wrote:
No Doug, you're wrong.

No, John, I'm not. Unfortunately.

... Nobby and Dave Hall tie you folks in knots. They do it
repeatedly. Just sit back and watch some of the threads without getting involved
in it. It's laughable.

What's laughable is that you think you're "winning."

Take a look at Dave Hall's increasingly petulant (look it up) posts
insisting that Iraq really really does have WMDs hidden *somewhere* long
after President Bush himself has admitted they were never there.

Take a look at Nobby (why do you call him that, too) floundering around
assuming that the Clinton Administration were the real pros at foreign
policy, who set the bar unrealisitically high for Bush/Cheney; and his
attempts to "prove" that we have an economic stranglehold over mainland
China thru Wal-Mart.

Take a look at yourself, who can do nothing more constructive than add
"me too, nyaa nyaa nyaa" to threads where the Bush/Cheney cheerleaders
are piling on.

All you guys can prove is that perhaps the average American really is so
ignorant and so gullible that Bush's recent election was not all that
difficult.

DSK

My responses to your posts are what the posts deserve.

Nobly has not attempted to prove what you say. He pointed out that your argument
was ridiculous.

Bush has never stated that Iraq never had WMD.

You state untruths and then expect people to take you seriously.

Bye.

--
John H

"All decisions are the result of binary thinking."

On Wed, 16 Mar 2005 08:39:42 -0500, John H wrote:

On Tue, 15 Mar 2005 17:59:00 -0500, DSK wrote:

John H wrote:
No Doug, you're wrong.

No, John, I'm not. Unfortunately.

... Nobby and Dave Hall tie you folks in knots. They do it
repeatedly. Just sit back and watch some of the threads without getting involved
in it. It's laughable.

What's laughable is that you think you're "winning."

Take a look at Dave Hall's increasingly petulant (look it up) posts
insisting that Iraq really really does have WMDs hidden *somewhere* long
after President Bush himself has admitted they were never there.

Take a look at Nobby (why do you call him that, too) floundering around
assuming that the Clinton Administration were the real pros at foreign
policy, who set the bar unrealisitically high for Bush/Cheney; and his
attempts to "prove" that we have an economic stranglehold over mainland
China thru Wal-Mart.

Take a look at yourself, who can do nothing more constructive than add
"me too, nyaa nyaa nyaa" to threads where the Bush/Cheney cheerleaders
are piling on.

All you guys can prove is that perhaps the average American really is so
ignorant and so gullible that Bush's recent election was not all that
difficult.

DSK

My responses to your posts are what the posts deserve.

Nobly has not attempted to prove what you say. He pointed out that your argument
was ridiculous.

Bush has never stated that Iraq never had WMD.

You state untruths and then expect people to take you seriously.

Bye.

Whoops, meant to type Nobby.
--
John H

"All decisions are the result of binary thinking."

On Wed, 16 Mar 2005 12:29:46 GMT, "NOYB" wrote:


"Calif Bill" wrote in message
link.net...

"DSK" wrote in message
.. .
John H wrote:
Or maybe 'cause you lost again?

Or maybe because you don't know the difference between cash money and a
bond, either?

Dang, I was hoping you'd explain it to Nobby and save me the trouble.

DSK


A bond is what the government sells to raise money to cover the national
debt, or for temporary money. Since the national debt is about 7 trillion
dollars, that says there are 7 trillion in bonds outstanding. Since
Savings
bonds are part of this, and lots of Americans have them, it would be hard
to
have even the GDP value of the USA held by China.



Whoa! Did I say that Doug claimed US debt held by the Chinese was "7 times
our annual GDP"? I googled what he said, and here it is:

""Their thirst for US dollars" is already way way oversatisfied... they
are holding approximately 17 times our annual GDP in US debt.."

17 times our GDP!?!? Our annual GDP is roughly $11.73 TRILLION. That'd put
the debt figure at $199.46 TRILLION.

So, Dougie...
Are you sticking with your story that China holds $199.46 TRILLION in US
debt?


I can't believe you made such a mistake!

--
John H

"All decisions are the result of binary thinking."

"NOYB" wrote in message
nk.net...

"Calif Bill" wrote in message
ink.net...

"DSK" wrote in message
.. .
John H wrote:
Or maybe 'cause you lost again?

Or maybe because you don't know the difference between cash money and a
bond, either?

Dang, I was hoping you'd explain it to Nobby and save me the trouble.

DSK


A bond is what the government sells to raise money to cover the national
debt, or for temporary money. Since the national debt is about 7
trillion
dollars, that says there are 7 trillion in bonds outstanding. Since
Savings
bonds are part of this, and lots of Americans have them, it would be hard
to
have even the GDP value of the USA held by China.



Whoa! Did I say that Doug claimed US debt held by the Chinese was "7
times our annual GDP"? I googled what he said, and here it is:

""Their thirst for US dollars" is already way way oversatisfied... they
are holding approximately 17 times our annual GDP in US debt.."

17 times our GDP!?!? Our annual GDP is roughly $11.73 TRILLION. That'd
put the debt figure at $199.46 TRILLION.

So, Dougie...
Are you sticking with your story that China holds $199.46 TRILLION in US
debt?



And Doug (the man who thinks that China holds $199.46 trillion in US debt)
disappears from a thread once again...

On Wed, 16 Mar 2005 21:27:04 -0500, "NOYB" wrote:


"NOYB" wrote in message
ink.net...

"Calif Bill" wrote in message
ink.net...

"DSK" wrote in message
.. .
John H wrote:
Or maybe 'cause you lost again?

Or maybe because you don't know the difference between cash money and a
bond, either?

Dang, I was hoping you'd explain it to Nobby and save me the trouble.

DSK


A bond is what the government sells to raise money to cover the national
debt, or for temporary money. Since the national debt is about 7
trillion
dollars, that says there are 7 trillion in bonds outstanding. Since
Savings
bonds are part of this, and lots of Americans have them, it would be hard
to
have even the GDP value of the USA held by China.



Whoa! Did I say that Doug claimed US debt held by the Chinese was "7
times our annual GDP"? I googled what he said, and here it is:

""Their thirst for US dollars" is already way way oversatisfied... they
are holding approximately 17 times our annual GDP in US debt.."

17 times our GDP!?!? Our annual GDP is roughly $11.73 TRILLION. That'd
put the debt figure at $199.46 TRILLION.

So, Dougie...
Are you sticking with your story that China holds $199.46 TRILLION in US
debt?



And Doug (the man who thinks that China holds $199.46 trillion in US debt)
disappears from a thread once again...


It was a good show while it lasted, though!
--
John H

"All decisions are the result of binary thinking."

NOYB wrote:
And Doug (the man who thinks that China holds $199.46 trillion in US debt)
disappears from a thread once again...


I'm right here.

Let's see... you can't use Google... you can't do math... you don't know
the difference between bonds & cash... you think the U.S. can bankrupt
China via Wal-Mart...

You and JohnH are winning, all right.

DSK

On Thu, 17 Mar 2005 13:09:51 -0500, DSK wrote:

NOYB wrote:
And Doug (the man who thinks that China holds $199.46 trillion in US debt)
disappears from a thread once again...


I'm right here.

Let's see... you can't use Google... you can't do math... you don't know
the difference between bonds & cash... you think the U.S. can bankrupt
China via Wal-Mart...

Wow, that was one fancy dance. Fred Astaire would be proud.

Dave

Let's see... you can't use Google... you can't do math... you don't know
the difference between bonds & cash... you think the U.S. can bankrupt
China via Wal-Mart...


Dave Hall wrote:
Wow, that was one fancy dance. Fred Astaire would be proud.

WTF are you talking about? NOBBY has misquoted one of my posts... same
thing as lying in my book, but the Bushies seem to feel there's nothing
immoral about lying...

Then a big list of all his other errors and you accuse me of "dancing"?
Do you have anything at all to say other than moronic name-calling?

DSK