|
they own less than japan and the two of them together own less than 20% iirc anyways. almost all of it is loaned from ourselves
|
#
?
Jun 11, 2015 19:09
|
|
|
|
| # ? Apr 26, 2024 11:17 |
|
|
Fojar38 posted:i read that Devaluation will spike with suddenly reduced demand, but pick up again as people pick up on that. But China and USA aren't the only economies in the world. Brazil, Mexico, Canada, UK, EU, etc will start buying up cheap bonds. Bonds will probably never be unprofitable, despite what preppers think, or despite wars. Or even because of wars. Oh ho ho ho! Remember the socialist utopia of the 40s when the rich were taxed to the limit to pay for the war? I've changed my mind, a total war with China would not be a bad thing, if it got the top marginal tax rates above 90% again, but this time involved a minimal loss of life. Wealth would be allocated to education, kids would be taught physics in places like Texas again. You need physics to pilot drones after all. War was the only time the rich fuckers started paying their fair share and people were actually looked after. Hmm, war is still stupid but the irony of all that is palpable. IronClaymore fucked around with this message at 19:11 on Jun 11, 2015 |
|
#
?
Jun 11, 2015 19:09
|
|
|
Beef Turret posted:Hm. Well, you're probably more knowledgeable than me since the only econ book I read was by thomas sowell. However, how come every1 is saying the same thing For one thing China is definitely not the largest debt holder or banker or whatever they're trying to say. For another I doubt China trying to cash in all their bonds at once would cause the dollar to collapse.
|
|
#
?
Jun 11, 2015 19:09
|
|
|
Beef Turret posted:If China called in their loans given to the US all at once the value of the dollar would collapse almost immediately China owns approximately 4% of US debt. Most of America's debt is owed "to America" Cake Smashing Boob posted:for real tho the world figuring out that rough and tumble world sheriff USA ain't got no bullets in his gun is probably pretty bad THIS is a major issue because it will require us to ACTUALLY GO FIGHT some dudes. If bad guys perceive the U.S. as in some way weak and rampages around we have to go gently caress poo poo up and disabuse them of that notion; no more soft power just actual power. And that means killing people.
|
|
#
?
Jun 11, 2015 19:13
|
|
|
Well I just googled it for real and it seems that once again goons are correct and me, Forbes, Reuters and the other jews are wrong. http://rationalwiki.org/wiki/Chinese-owned_US_debt
|
|
#
?
Jun 11, 2015 19:13
|
|
|
getting china to do all our work for us for useless paper was the con of the 20th and now 21st century it owns super hard
|
|
#
?
Jun 11, 2015 19:15
|
|
|
Pox posted:They're smoking cigarettes and yelling they're not yelling, that's their normal conversational tone
|
|
#
?
Jun 11, 2015 19:16
|
|
|
what can you expect ... Obama's america 
|
|
#
?
Jun 11, 2015 19:16
|
|
|
Reuters, The Economist, and (to a lesser extent but not by much) Forbes are all fairly conservatively slanted. Be wary about their economic theories.
|
|
#
?
Jun 11, 2015 19:17
|
|
|
China has some scary missiles that could do a lot of damage to the US Navy if the ships got close enough to the mainland, that's why the Navy is going to put fuckoff lasers on their ships in a decade so they can just shoot any missiles or planes down and sail everywhere with impunity
|
|
#
?
Jun 11, 2015 19:17
|
|
|
gotta say it feels like these China threads are changing over time and the overall vibe ITT is pretty interesting in itself
|
|
#
?
Jun 11, 2015 19:18
|
|
|
Chinaman7000 posted:gotta say it feels like these China threads are changing over time and the overall vibe ITT is pretty interesting in itself more shitposters on the chinese payroll
|
|
#
?
Jun 11, 2015 19:19
|
|
|
Zeno-25 posted:China has some scary missiles that could do a lot of damage to the US Navy if the ships got close enough to the mainland, that's why the Navy is going to put fuckoff lasers on their ships in a decade so they can just shoot any missiles or planes down and sail everywhere with impunity Basically all our capital ships are obsolete for this reason, actually. Build an aircraft carrier for like $5 billion then load it with a couple hundred planes that all cost $500m each and watch as 100 speedboats loaded with high explosives driven by remote bumrush it and sink it. Yeah, terrorist groups don't really have that capability true. Another actual country though? $5 billion wreck at the bottom of the ocean. Not to mention the missiles. No missile defense system is perfect. You can knock out 99% of incoming ordinance but when all it takes is one to sink the whole drat ship then lol. And missiles are cheap. It's like in EVE when a bunch of cheap rear end poo poo frigates manage to bring down something really expensive. Yeah you'll get most of the frigates killed but so what they cost nothing in comparison. Moridin920 fucked around with this message at 19:22 on Jun 11, 2015 |
|
#
?
Jun 11, 2015 19:20
|
|
|
Zeno-25 posted:China has some scary missiles that could do a lot of damage to the US Navy if the ships got close enough to the mainland, that's why the Navy is going to put fuckoff lasers on their ships in a decade so they can just shoot any missiles or planes down and sail everywhere with impunity  says right now that those lasers can't fire when it's raining. (Well they can fire but they disperse and suffer so much blooming that it's more likely some seaman gets blinded than that you shoot down a missile.)Edit: ^^^ actually you don't have to sink a carrier. They're pretty hard to sink anyway apparently, but every knot of speed you knock off them fucks up their ability to mess with you. Kill their speed enough or cause enough apparently minor damage and their only flight operations will be for self-defence, from then on who cares, it's like you've got a bunch of missile destroyers. IronClaymore fucked around with this message at 19:27 on Jun 11, 2015 |
|
#
?
Jun 11, 2015 19:20
|
|
|
Moridin920 posted:Reuters, The Economist, and (to a lesser but not by much) extent Forbes are all fairly conservatively slanted. Be wary about their economic theories. I'll never trust the jews again
|
|
#
?
Jun 11, 2015 19:23
|
|
|
Moridin920 posted:Reuters, The Economist, and (to a lesser extent but not by much) Forbes are all fairly conservatively slanted. Be wary about their economic theories. It's like EVE online,
|
|
#
?
Jun 11, 2015 19:23
|
|
|
Beef Turret posted:I'll never trust the jews again who do you think the chinese use for their banking needs? THATS RIGHT! us bonds
|
|
#
?
Jun 11, 2015 19:23
|
|
|
exspurt analcyst posted:They're not going pee-pee in my coke are they?
|
|
#
?
Jun 11, 2015 19:27
|
|
|
Moridin920 posted:Basically all our capital ships are obsolete for this reason, actually. good news is if the US can keep it up for a few months the chinese navy will get owned by desertion
|
|
#
?
Jun 11, 2015 19:27
|
|
|
Moridin920 posted:Basically all our capital ships are obsolete for this reason, actually. good luck finding and getting close enough to the carrier in the first place that "millennium challenge" bullshit is even less applicable because the south china sea is not the arabian gulf the ocean's a big place and when the air patrols and escort ships spot your gigantic speedboat swarm all the carrier has to do is point away and drive 35+ knots. that speedboat's not going to be nearly as speedy with a giant-rear end antiship missile wedged in there. also the navy's been getting ready to deal with missile swarm attacks since like the 70s back when it was "oh no the soviet bomber swarm is coming with antiship missiles"
|
|
#
?
Jun 11, 2015 19:30
|
|
|
IronClaymore posted:
Well you're right I think it is actually difficult to sink the whole ship but all you need is minor damage to the flight deck and its whole purpose is borked. Farmer Crack-rear end posted:good luck finding and getting close enough to the carrier in the first place Well first of all carriers aren't submarines. They are pretty easy to spot on radar and besides that they aren't ever alone. When you talk about a carrier, you're talking about a whole carrier group. If China can't spot a fleet of 20-30 ships then idk lol at them. That's something we have been able to do for decades. And yeah the navy has been getting ready to deal with missile swarms but on the other hand there's no missile defense system that is 100% perfect so the point still stands. They can't even deal with swarms of speedboats loaded with bombs as a recent war game showed. If China or whoever launched 1000 missiles at a carrier at least 1 is getting through at that 1 is all that is needed to make the carrier useless. Hit the flight deck and it won't be able to launch aircraft and there goes the whole point of the thing. Moridin920 fucked around with this message at 19:34 on Jun 11, 2015 |
|
#
?
Jun 11, 2015 19:30
|
|
|
IronClaymore posted:
there's enough energy there to shoot down anything regardless of weather, the problem is tracking what you're trying to shoot down and knowing it's there to be shot down in the first place. depending on the range, they can heat things up thousands of degrees in tenths of seconds, it's really cool stuff aside from it being used in warfare
|
|
#
?
Jun 11, 2015 19:30
|
|
|
it's kinda disappointing that people are oblivious to the fact that in US training exercises the absolute last thing you do is just fire indiscriminately on everything in sight because they might be civilians it's like the complete opposite of reality
|
|
#
?
Jun 11, 2015 19:30
|
|
|
besides i thought the favorite wonder weapon that totally destroys aircraft carriers was that non-nuclear ballistic missile i remember when the fan favorite was some experimental "supercavitating" torpedo that goes like 300+ knots and can't be outrun or some stupid bullshit like that (it also means there's no way in hell it can home in on poo poo either)
|
|
#
?
Jun 11, 2015 19:34
|
|
|
Just a reminder that Israel's Iron Dome (developed with the US) is supposedly the world's most advanced point defense system and it can't even stop 100% of lovely 70s era mortar fire.
|
|
#
?
Jun 11, 2015 19:35
|
|
|
Beef Turret posted:I'll never trust the jews again
|
|
#
?
Jun 11, 2015 19:36
|
|
|
my favorite weapon is the green lantern ring, because you can imagine things and it will make them.
|
|
#
?
Jun 11, 2015 19:38
|
|
|
I prefer the long blade myself
|
|
#
?
Jun 11, 2015 19:38
|
|
|
Chinaman7000 posted:my favorite weapon is the green lantern ring, because you can imagine things and it will make them. can you imagine a ring that can shoot lasers?
|
|
#
?
Jun 11, 2015 19:38
|
|
|
Seeing as the PRC is starting to try to make their citizens stop being queue jumping street shitters while at home and abroad maybe they as a society are gearing up to move their population beyond mere sustenance farming and production of cheap goods for export with a thick slice of upper class corruption and actually joining global society as full fledged participants. Not gonna work though because the first world is about to implode because we're also terrible.
|
|
#
?
Jun 11, 2015 19:39
|
|
|
solaranus posted:good news is if the US can keep it up for a few months the chinese navy will get owned by desertion Sure about that? Remember how convincing the idea is that a war is bad for both countries? Overall, it doesn't cost much to convince a United States officer that he shouldn't fight, that he's only bombing innocent people, and he's sending young boys off to fight. After all, that man is a true patriot, a son of America, a man (or woman) who safeguards that nation's freedom and prosperity. War is bad, and bloodshed, any bloodshed, but especially the loss of another vibrant young American, is wrong. Well whatever I'm not trained for this, but ideas can be introduced to certain people, making them receptive to the idea of helping the other side in order to achieve peace for everyone. So is Chinese nationalism really weaker than American? Maybe the ambassadors themselves will defect and produce peace. But men don't fight for a wage or medals, they fight for those beside them, and in that at least you are both equal.
|
|
#
?
Jun 11, 2015 19:39
|
|
|
Farmer Crack-rear end posted:besides i thought the favorite wonder weapon that totally destroys aircraft carriers was that non-nuclear ballistic missile kinetic weapons are probably going to gently caress fleets up pretty badly
|
|
#
?
Jun 11, 2015 19:39
|
|
|
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=qAkZT_4vL_Y
|
|
#
?
Jun 11, 2015 19:42
|
|
|
drink more ovaltine this is just a stupid commercial!
|
|
#
?
Jun 11, 2015 19:43
|
|
|
Robo Reagan posted:kinetic weapons are probably going to gently caress fleets up pretty badly problem with those is you actually need to know exactly where your target is. and if your target is beyond the horizon and 'somewhere in the ocean' then good luck
|
|
#
?
Jun 11, 2015 19:44
|
|
|
Necc0 posted:problem with those is you actually need to know exactly where your target is. and if your target is beyond the horizon and 'somewhere in the ocean' then good luck Isn't that what we have billions of dollars worth of spy satellites for? I imagine the heat signature is pretty hard to mask so just look for the blob of hot that's hauling rear end to your homebase
|
|
#
?
Jun 11, 2015 19:45
|
|
|
Robo Reagan posted:kinetic weapons are probably going to gently caress fleets up pretty badly Yeah, wouldn't want to be on the damage control detail of the ship that's firing the weapon, that's for sure. ... Oh who am I kidding, I'd take the job. drat railgun probably split the ship in half. Better get hazard pay though. (Ok I'd do it without hazard pay.)
|
|
#
?
Jun 11, 2015 19:47
|
|
|
IronClaymore posted:Sure about that? Remember how convincing the idea is that a war is bad for both countries? Overall, it doesn't cost much to convince a United States officer that he shouldn't fight, that he's only bombing innocent people, and he's sending young boys off to fight. After all, that man is a true patriot, a son of America, a man (or woman) who safeguards that nation's freedom and prosperity. War is bad, and bloodshed, any bloodshed, but especially the loss of another vibrant young American, is wrong. I was making an EVE online joke originally I don't think the US would have worry too much about Chinese propaganda though; they are like the ultimate "other" for the average American.
|
|
#
?
Jun 11, 2015 19:48
|
|
|
Beef Turret posted:Hm. Well, you're probably more knowledgeable than me since the only econ book I read was by thomas sowell. However, how come every1 is saying the same thing because lots of people post alarmist poo poo on the internet either because they have a political motive to do so or they are ignorant the actual facts of the matter are that the chinese cant "call in" us debt and china doesn't hold a significant amount of leverage over the us from its ownership of treasury bonds and the only people who think so are retards that think international finance works the same way as their car loans Moridin920 posted:Basically all our capital ships are obsolete for this reason, actually. http://www.forbes.com/sites/realspin/2014/08/04/our-aircraft-carriers-are-not-sitting-ducks/ real life naval warfare isnt like eve online and actually even hitting a ship with a missle is really loving hard let alone sinking the most massive ships on the seas
|
|
#
?
Jun 11, 2015 19:49
|
|
|
|
| # ? Apr 26, 2024 11:17 |
|
|
IronClaymore posted:Yeah, wouldn't want to be on the damage control detail of the ship that's firing the weapon, that's for sure. Doesn't seem like it'd do much damage to the ship that's firing them, railgun tech is advancing pretty rapidly from what I've seen in the past few years https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=eObepuHvYAw Also the nerds working on these things have named the amount of energy required to fire a railgun jelly donut which is good and cool and i hope it becomes an official unit of measurement
|
|
#
?
Jun 11, 2015 19:51
|
|