Quote:
|
When engaged in a global economy, they are far less likely to "piss in our rice crispies". The chance of a war with China is darn near nil. Why? Because we need them and they need us, economically. And they know it.
|
I would argue that our rice crispies already smell of urine. China's agreements with Venezuela, Iran, Syria. Weapon shipments to Iran, etc. Instead of the Russian velvet glove, this is more like someone offering us cheap goods with one hand, ready to smack us with a closed fist that's hidden behind their back. Both Iran and Venezuela are appearing pretty cocky. I think it has something to do with having acquired fairly substantial and complex weapon systems. They seemed to have adopted an "all in" poker attitude. I cannot buy the world peace through economic interdependence argument.
Regardless, we still haven't addressed the issue of national interest versus profit motive. I'm not bashing capitalism, but where should the loyalty reside? Is maximizing the bottom line a corporation's only concern? I'm not trying to hijack this thread, but it's appears to be related to globilization.
Also, how can a specific business sector compete on a world market if foreign businesses are subsidized (cheaper acquistion of technology and state sponsored exportation of goods)? I know Friedman would say it provides Americans with cheaper goods. But what about the economic unrest during the transition period? Also, why do we need China? Cheaper Barbie dolls? Lastly, do you believe the economic benefit we receive truly has a trickle down effect?