What Part Of China You From?
I’m trying to understand, per this post by Matt Yglesias, why when China asks us to reduce our indebtedness that reflects “confusion” on their part (since their currency policy depends on there being lots of American debt to purchase) while when we ask China to reduce their trade surplus we’re just being clear and honest (even though we’re dependent on Chinese debt purchases to keep long-term rates as low as they are).
It seems to me both countries are dependent on a policy that has risks and unpleasant side effects for both countries. I happen to think the short-term costs are more serious for the Chinese while the long-term risks are new serious for us – but it’s pretty clear that both countries manifest a high degree of policy confusion, at least with respect to our public statements. I see no reason to single out the Chinese for talking “nonsense.”
Especially when China’s trade surplus is narrowing and U.S. debt is growing. Forget whose saying it — China is giving better advice.
— walker frost · Aug 6, 08:46 PM · #
China has made lemonade out of the lemons of the Great Recession in developed world by dramatically ramping up spending on domestic development. Which is exactly what the United States did in the Great Depression, to our huge benefit in the decades thereafter.
China’s advice is more credible these days because they have been, to some extent, taking our advice: developing their internal market instead of relying so predominantly on export-led development, and allowing their currency to appreciate, at least modestly.
— Noah Millman · Aug 6, 11:58 PM · #
“…ramping up spending on domestic development. Which is exactly what the United States did in the Great Depression.”
Huh? Must be a very special definition of “domestic development.”
— The Reticulator · Aug 7, 04:22 PM · #
Commenting is closed for Alan Jacobs’ post on MLK and Christianism? What kind of cowardly BS is that?
— Gold Star for Robot Boy · Aug 9, 06:08 PM · #
It’s been Alan’s longstanding policy, and given the past problems with commenters around here— I include myself in that— I understand.
— Freddie · Aug 9, 08:39 PM · #
Sorry, but you shouldn’t get to write something so confrontational and then hide like a wimp from the reaction. It’s one thing to try and shield even-tempered commentary from the hoi polloi. It’s another thing to dickishly lash out and then cower behind a comment ban. The former might be an effort to improve the quality of the discussion. The latter is the act of a weak mind and heart.
Mike
— MBunge · Aug 10, 03:00 PM · #
Yeah, but Alan never allows comments, either here or at Text Patterns. That’s consistency that I can understand. (And so can Sully, apparently.)
— Freddie · Aug 10, 11:48 PM · #
“(And so can Sully, apparently.)”
And has Alan ever run reader comments strongly disagreeing with him and challenging his arguments? At least Sully does that. Has Alan ever come out and apologized for an excessively inflamatory, insulting or just plain wrong blog post? Sully does that too.
I’m a big believer in the need to police the discourse, but there’s a big difference between that and essentially refusing to engage in meaninful discourse.
Mike
— MBunge · Aug 11, 02:18 PM · #
I just went over to Text Patterns and comments are allowed.
Mike
— MBunge · Aug 11, 02:23 PM · #