If China's growth is subsidized at all, it's surely subsidized by the amount of goods we buy from them.
But they are a growing competitor with the United States and clearly want to control Asia and the Pacific.
Meanwhile, we have a border problem with Mexico, another country with a lot of impoverished citizens. If we're going to do a lot of trade with a country, Mexico makes a lot more sense than China. Improving their economy could eventually totally eliminate the problem of undocumented "illegal" workers coming across the border for work.
Yet, I hear neither candidate promoting this idea? Why don't they?
While admittedly, I'm not the economist that you impressively appear to be, but I suspected as much.
I agree, and 'ballooning capitalism' is one of the best terms I've heard. I used to just call it a bubble. Bubbles and balloons both pop. My point wasn't in argument to yours, but that the only way to prevent such problems is for people to educate themselves about it, and tweak the system (by law) to work better. For example, require more transparency in accounting practices, so that the average investor (at least) isn't duped so easily into giving away their money to big-time opportunists. (The failed mortgage market was certainly a factor, but the players in the mortgage business took their profits back to their mansions while Fox News focused on ACORN.)
Another way to put this is that our ignorant population and its electorate have now enabled China to play the game the way they want to--or at least the way their government wants to, as we lose our capital to them.
Unseen, it may have something to do with the volume and quality of produce available from China. China also has some very large and efficient ports with which to ship their produce. As far as I am aware, no where else in the world is able to keep pace with China's production.
On the other hand, you are right... Mexico would be a far better place for American dollars to be going.
Yes, at least trying to keep the capital and profit (and production) nearby or local is a good goal. That's also what I say to people complaining about subsidizing methanol production from American corn. It's kind of a boondoggle, but it's still better than sending that money and power to overseas petrol producers and their rulers.
"On the other hand, you are right... Mexico would be a far better place for American dollars to be going."
Mexico as a manufacturing behemoth won't ever happen. I don't believe they have the abundance of natural resources, namely coal, to keep the factories belching out stack pollution 24/7 like China does. It would be bothersome to have a country such as China, with no regard for environmental impact, next door to us. People in New England can tell you all about the effects of acid rain.
You know, I'm trying to decide if you are serious or not here. You live in a country that is under the pressure of unprecedented debt, losing your first world credit rating, and now hitch hiking for a space program - yet you keep going on as though other nations owe you cheap labour. If the U.S. is the Saudi Arabia of coal, and has all the 'know how' to just whip up some factories - then how about you guys make your own shit and give your own people some jobs?
China also partly funds the Australian economy with all the raw materials they buy off us. It would only add to the shipping costs to have to ship that stuff to Mexico instead (thereby raising the prices of Mexico produced goods).
In god we trust indeed, lol!
Yes the doG has one large bill coming due one day. I sure hope he has deep pockets, we certainly don't have it. :(
Let us pray. LOL