Australia - you're standing in it
if you have to pick a team, maybe don't choose the one that says you are gum on their shoe
@gsco.
Have you read Alex Joske’s book? I’d say it’s less fear mongering, and more of an expose on the naïveté of the West to how China was / is willing to ‘play the game’.
While the subject of his book is the CCP and its closely intertwined apparatus for foreign intelligence, subversion and influence, the target of his criticism isn’t China. It’s us.
It’s all part of the strategy. It’s smart. Couple that with the ruthless approach to the game of ‘trade’ as outlined in this article I posted a few weeks back https://tnsr.org/2022/12/chinas-brute-force-economics-waking-up-from-the... it’s a fully fledged assault on the existing system and it’s players. It isn’t a military assault, but it doesn’t have to be.
What’s your recommended approach? Just bend over and take it? Hope that it’s going to be OK?
Don’t play the racism card. The vast majority of thinking people can make the distinction between Chinese people and the CCP. Some idiots can’t / won’t, but I’m sure that there are simple-minded people in China too. This is systemic competition. The world has woken up to it. It’s not just the US. Everyone has clued on.
What happened to bide and hide? What’s with the development of a blue water navy if they’re as peaceful as you say. What’s with the militarisation of the SCS. What’s with the employment of lasers by coast guard, water cannon by the Maritime Militia against Vietnamese, and Filipino fishermen? What’s with the shadowing of Indonesian hydrocarbon exploration vessels by Chinese Coast Guard within the Indonesian EEZ?
There’s a level of naïveté that is at odds with your obvious intelligence.
I know you’ve spent plenty of time in China and have personal relationships with everyday peoples. You’ve mentioned interactions with local Party officials too, iirc. I value your perspective, but I balance that against the experiences and opinions of people who’ve grown up in China, studied China deeply, have served as diplomats and journalists in China. They love the Chinese people and culture. But they know the system better, and are pulling no punches about the intentions and actions of the CCP.
Interested what you think of John Garnaut?
Finally, subs / AUKUS. I don’t know if it’s the right call. Or whether it’s ‘good value’. I’ve got some thoughts on alternative approaches to submarines, but they all have strengths and weaknesses. But talk of ‘invasion’ is a complete straw man argument. Japan lacked the capability and will to invade Australia in WW2. It would be hard to argue that there wasn’t a significant threat to Australia at that point.
When @gsco talks about China and its worldview he conveniently narrows it down to current/recent issues with Taiwan being the obvious one. But when he talks about the west he goes decades, hundreds of years in the past, and aggregates all sorts of stuff to paint the horrible picture of pure evil.
Somehow, he and Keating have completely forgotten that the CCP controls the regime that committed unimaginable atrocities against humankind. If you narrow down the discussion to modern times and Taiwan some would say that I'm spreading some rubbish. But one doesn't need to go too far in the past (as @gsco always does with the west) to support my claims. I believe one of their first 'innovative' creations was the 'Anti-Right Campaign' followed by the 'Great Leap forward'. And if those purges were not enough mid-sixties to mid-seventies were spent on the 'Cultural Revolution' to make sure everyone 'gets the message'. And while Australians lived through the surfing revolution, enjoyed and explored our coastline, and traveled to Hawaii, the Chinese were prosecuted, murdered, exiled, put on a wall of shame, or died of famine at the count of millions. And as a cherry on the cake, the regime heavily supported the murderous of them all in Cambodia - Pol Pot and the Khmer Rouge who did not hesitate to purge ~25% of their own population in the span of ~3 years.
When Nazi Germany fell in 1945 Nazi party was abolished, and made illegal. Nuremberg trials were held and we know the outcome of that. Pretty much the whole of Europe, including Germany banned Nazi symbols. But here we are in 2023 and CCP is still kicking strong. The main organisational architect of some of the worst atrocities the world has ever seen is very well alive. Sure, the main protagonists are long gone, and their successors have taken a more strategic approach. But let's be real here; if the worry of the world are local banks ripping people off or Pfizer shoving medications down our throats we should most definitely be worried or at least have some reservations about the CCP. It is perfectly reasonable and well justified as history indicates. And signing praises to them and presenting them like some higher moral ground is absurd.
etarip's linked article:
https://tnsr.org/2022/12/chinas-brute-force-economics-waking-up-from-the...
spells out where the real war has been fought right under our noses for two decades.
It was easy pickings aided by many in the west until very recently.
Buying some subs and making big military alliance announcements is much simpler than dealing with the non military threats.
If the subs are ‘throwing toothpicks at a mountain’ in the eyes of China, and a grave financial mistake that will lead to the ruin of Australia, why are they campaigning so hard against it? Aren’t you supposed to not interrupt an enemy when they are making a mistake?
Secondly, if DE subs are all you need for defensive operations, and China is not an aggressive country, and submarines will be rendered obsolete by emerging tech, why does China have so many of their own in service and in production? https://www.nti.org/analysis/articles/china-submarine-capabilities/#:~:t....
Subs are more vulnerable to detection and attack when they surface. DE (conventional) subs have to surface every 3-4 days. Nuke subs don’t have to surface while on deployment. At all.
Finally, the emergence of drone and underwater surveillance tech does not spell the end of submarine viability and utility. Underwater Drones will be used as extended range sensors, escorts and torpedo catchers partners with crewed submarines within the next decade, same as manned combat aircraft will be complemented with unmanned aircraft like the Australian designed loyal wingman.
*standard caveat. I don’t know whether this deal is a good one. But I can understand the logic.
Thanks for the long responses.
The problem I have with our China debate in here is I can't tell if you're serious and actually believe what you're writing, or if you're just engaging in further biased, one-sided information warfare and narrative control.
The reason I have this problem is that in the past 3 years since I came back at the start of covid from living in China to living in Australia again and started checking the surfcams and contributing in these forums, nothing anyone has written on China in here can't be found in a news.com.au fear-mongering article or some fictional work of fear porn like the ones you, Stu, bonza etc keep mentioning (and yes I've read 'em all).
I'll assume you actually do believe what you're writing.
We in the West are in a warfare mode with China, in a great power and ideological rivalry. China is the only country with the economic, political and military power and might to stand up to the West, Yet ideologically, economically and politically, China is very different to us. China wants to participate in the international order and stand on the world stage as an equal among peers and be shown equal respect and given equal consideration. It believes its views, intentions, diplomacy, development model, ideas for the planet, etc, are equally valid and will be beneficial to the peace, wellbeing and prosperity of the world.
The West understandably doesn't want to have a bar of this; it wants to retain its hegemony and control, and not let China have a say. China's political and economic ideology is also a threat to and contradicts the West's.
As a result we are living squarely in the fog of war in which information is another weapon and the truth is lost. We particularly in Australia are squarely on one side of this battle. In fact it can be argued that we are the main country in the thick of it at war with China. Everything we see, read and hear about China is biased and one-sided due to being squarely within our side's attempt to control the information and narrative and in general within our side's information bubble and groupthink. We are completely indoctrinated into believing this one-sided and biased narrative. It is narrative control and groupthink at its absolutely cringeworthy worst. It is all horrible slandering, defaming, abusing and attacking of China (and China gives its best back in return).
flollo's last long post is a great case in point and illustrates things perfectly. It is so full of inaccuracies I wouldn't know where to start. I would highly recommend asking yourselves: Exactly where did you get your thoughts and beliefs about China from? Why do you believe these thoughts? What hard evidence do you have for them? Are you absolutely sure that any of these thoughts are even remotely accurate or true?
Every time someone in here writes something on China, all it confirms in my mind is that the overwhelming majority of people in Australia have no thoughts on China outside of the Western thought bubble, groupthink and narrative control, and abuse of China. Everyone just keeps posting links of articles and think tank pieces that echo the Western thought bubble. I believe the reason I think this is I've read and deeply studied both sides of the picture - both ours and China's thought bubbles, groupthinks and narratives - and I have some independent personal experience in China by which I'm also also able to make up my own mind, have independent thoughts, and form my own independent perspective on things. Paul Keating is in the same boat (but of course he is infinitely more experienced and wiser, has an infinitely deeper background in all areas of life, etc, than me).
The reason I continue to persist with these forums and in particular with our China debate is that we in the West are moving towards going to war with China based on a gigantic, monumental inaccurate, biased and one-sided thought bubble and groupthink, which is driven by an attempt of the US to retain its hegemony and not allow China to participate in the international order and on the world stage in its own way, on its own terms and with its own ideas. The West does not want to relinquish its and power or control over the peoples of this planet, or let China in as an equal.
The problem - and the main point I'm trying to make - is that I genuinely believe (as does Paul Keating and many others) that the West's fear, thought bubble and groupthink about China are an absolutely massive, monumental misread of China - of Chinese civilisation, its development path and model, its culture and people, its current trajectory and intentions on the world stage, and in particular its 5,000 year history.
Even a superficial reading of Chinese history in the standard, classical English language textbooks (ignoring Chinese history books) will result in one immediately realising that our Western thought bubble, group think and narrative is a monumental misread of Chinese civilisation and history. Chinese history does not in any way support whatsoever what we are indoctrinated and brainwashed into thinking about China and its intentions on the world stage. Our side's groupthink, thought bubble and narrative of Chinese history and civilisation is seriously inaccurate (even based on the classical English language historical textbooks). This is what Paul Keating is trying to argue.
I genuinely believe the West needs to make a gigantic U-turn on its course with China. The West doesn't understand or get China. The West has gotten China very badly wrong. It's a huge misread. We're heading towards war with China based on a huge groupthink mistake and misread, simply in an attempt to retain hegemony and try to control, oppress and subjugate China, hold it back from its growth and development, and not let it participate on the world stage with its own ideas.
At a time like this, in which we're heading for war, understanding, facts, truth, honesty, learning, cooperation, diplomacy, statecraft, communication, etc, are most important and crucial - not military blocs or outright slandering, abuse, defaming and personal attacks of China.
Instead of reading fictional fear porn narratives that stroke our most deeply held fears of the unknown, I'd suggest actually learning about China. To do this I'd suggest starting with spending the time and effort to slog through the standard, classical English language textbooks on Chinese history and civilisation (below). Then I'd suggest learning Mandarin Chinese and travelling around China (and Tibet) while reading Chinese history, visiting all the spots in the books you're reading, talking to Chinese people, reading history in the Chinese language in order to understand their perspective (and indeed their own biased, one-sided narrative, thought bubble and groupthink). I'd suggest spending some solid time in China working and learning with an open, beginner's mind. I'd suggest forming some independent thoughts for yourself outside of the Western narrative control and groupthink.
You will realise just how badly the West has gotten things with China. And heaven forbid, you might even grow to like China and see some positives in the civilisation.
Short, two-part question in response to your post, and an observation.
Q1. Is this misunderstanding entirely one-sided? Have Chinas actions contributed to this tension?
Q2. Do you expect that ‘the West’ (which is more than the US and Australia) and the rest of the world should / would stand by and allow the system that has been created to be upended and exploited by an emerging power that doesn’t play by the same rule book?
Observation. You seem to be mounting an argument that says that if you don’t have deep expertise in an area, country or culture, that you’re entirely unqualified to make observation or assessment about it. But then you discount the views of those who have greater experience and expertise than yourself where there conclusions differ from your own.
I’d put Joske and Garnaut in that category, two people I’ve met and spoken to about this topic. What are your criticisms of their experiences?
Great post gsco.
You are the most informed and intelligent person here, by far.
The talk by most commentators here is just that - all talk ;)
I have also travelled extensively in China and immersed myself in the culture. The real culture ;) Chinese people are amongst the most hard working and respectful people I have encountered. Same as my experience in Muslim countries and Muslim culture.
The narrative we create here is false. Complete lies. No different to our take on russians etc.
Australia is still a deeply racist and divided country - just like the US. Yes, we have an excellent standard of living and yes we have been on the ‘winning’ side of history for a while.
It’s not about picking a team. It is idiotic and short sighted to think so. China is not perfect - and neither are we. Both populations are being drawn into a political shitfight and both do not accurately represent the sentiment of either people.
Thinking we know stuff from propaganda driven fear mongering (on both sides) are burning the true capabilities of us existing together peacefully and respectfully. It is still possible.
And DAW.
Definitely A Wanker.
;)
https://m.
Money to burn . https://www.abc.net.au/news/2023-03-17/tomahawk-guided-missile-us-sale-t... will we gift some to Ukraine ?
You know it is possible to separate the everyday people you meet from the actions and intentions of the leadership of their country, right?
Despite some of the very valid points put forward by Gsco and others above, and Keating is right about AUKUS, China is still a communist authoritarian state, like Russia, the West has democracy and freedom at it's core. I can go out in public or go on public forums like this and call Scott Morrison a fucking idiot, I can start a political party, I can vote, I can protest, I can practice Qigong, I could own Alibaba. In China if I tried any of that they would disappear me. So I support Western hegemony and Chinese containment, despite it's failings.
@gsco doesn’t even know where to start to address my claims? I suggest explaining the cultural revolution. It happened, didn’t happen? Was it good, bad? Enlighten us please?
According to him I need to learn end to end history of China and make sure I’m using specific sources. And once I master that in English I have to learn Mandarin and do the exact same thing. And once all of that is done I need to physically move to China and live there for some time. Finally, once all that is mastered I can ask a question about campaigns like cultural revolution. Actually, before asking a question I need to submit a detailed CV highlighting my ‘educational’ journey.
What a crazy logic that is.
“nothing anyone has written on China in here can't be found in a news.com.au fear-mongering article or some fictional work of fear porn like the ones you, Stu, bonza etc keep mentioning (and yes I've read 'em all).”
Seriously? The arrogance is next level. If it’s not labelling those who dare criticise the CCP as racist its labelling them with lacking the critical thinking skills to assess the information being presented and form an opinion. That’s a classic narcissistic characteristic where one holds the belief, they have been gifted with special access to some secret knowledge that the plebs around them can’t get.
It’s s such a dumb argument. Its dumb because we can easily throw it back at you e.g.:
“Everything gsco has written on China in here can't be found in a global times fear-mongering article or some fictional work of pro CCP porn like the ones…. keep mentioning (and yes I've read 'em all).”
Do you apply the same argument on everything else you observe? Does one have to live or immerse themselves with every experience or setting before they can dare form a judgement. You spent a few years in China. whoopeedo.
I can't add anything further than what etarip has put forward. He nails it. I haven’t seen anything from etarip, stunet nor me that can be considered abusive or attacking. We are simply commentating on what has been written by many experts. The arguments and observations they make are robust. Your responses show a lack of a maturity and a thin skin when dealing with criticism – an attitude which can be found in the Global times and other pro CCP media every day of the week. See what I did there.
Supafreak wrote:Money to burn . https://www.abc.net.au/news/2023-03-17/tomahawk-guided-missile-us-sale-t... will we gift some to Ukraine ?
This is getting really fucked up.
Americas puppets 52nd state
Yeah lets go to war with China, what a fucken great idea
The US is a fast sinking ship, getting increasingly desperate as time goes on. The sooner we detach from them the better off as a nation we'll be. If you think cost of living is bad now...
Another perspective.....
https://michaelwest.com.au/i-just-want-a-nuclear-submarine-no-matter-the...
"You'e either with us or against us" showed us the real U.S.
"With them" means AUKUS and Trans-Pacific Partnership-style one way agreements and forced purchase of military gear.
And we all know what happens when the U.S. sees a someone as being against them.
https://www.abc.net.au/news/2023-03-16/mark-humphries-looks-at-australia’s-new-submarine/102108094
AndyM wrote:"You'e either with us or against us" showed us the real U.S.
"With them" means AUKUS and Trans-Pacific Partnership-style one way agreements and forced purchase of military gear.
And we all know what happens when the U.S. sees a someone as being against them.
I’m not sure this is true with respect to the submarines. Pretty sure Australia were the ones pushing access to US sub tech and US were super reluctant. This is one of the major risks for the recently announcement acquisition. All subject to congressional approval at the point of sale.
US don’t make DE subs anymore. They weren’t in the original Collins’s replacement competition.
Reality is, if the Naval Group French submarine hadn’t been such a fkfight and so far behind schedule and over budget they wouldn’t have even thought about the nuke option. From what I understand, if the French hadn’t been such c*nts, Australia wouldn’t have walked away from it. Even if they still planned to try for nuke boats.
In the last couple of decades Australia has bought:
- German Armoured Fighting Vehicles
- Korean Self-Propelled Artillery
- British Frigates
- European helicopters (which completely sucked and are now being replaced by US platforms that they were acquired to replace…)
- Spanish Amphibious Assault ships.
- Italian tactical transport aircraft
Defence procurement is completely dysfunctional. If it were as easy as ‘buy what the US tells us to’ it would actually cost so much less. Instead we end up with Frankenstein’s monster programs that try to integrate disparate platforms, combat systems and local industry content. The main reason Defence programs are so shithouse is political shenanigans. Local Industry Content sounds great on paper, but because we lack a viable industrial base, it’s really f*king hard to pull off, so we taxpayers pay a shitload more for a substandard product (in a lot of cases) that requires *additional* money to integrate into whatever platform that has been directed that be bought.
What better place for a nuclear waste dump than the pristine Eyre Peninsula. Come to S.A. the glow in the dark state, two heads are better than one.
Good article by LT . https://www.abc.net.au/news/2023-03-18/paul-keating-savage-mouth-aukus-q... If China starts ramping up its iron ore import do we simply keep sending it ?
Another strategy link, this is how submarines were used by the USN in the last Pacific conflict to choke off Japan's maritime trade, and win the war:
old-dog wrote:What better place for a nuclear waste dump than the pristine Eyre Peninsula. Come to S.A. the glow in the dark state, two heads are better than one.
I was always concerned they'd build a port at Oakagee, then in an IO bust it would turn into a terminus for said waste. Thankfully, no port yet.
One note on being an island power. I can think of two others in recent history: the UK, and Japan. In both cases, when independent you are going to need very strong sea power if you wish to remain sovereign. 1588, 1805, 1940 come to mind in the UK perspective. 1274, 1281 for the 'divine wind' saving Japan, and 1945 for when their sea power was broken. Throw in a successful siege breaking effort of Malta by the RN in 1942, and an unsuccessful defence of Singapore, and a successful Solomons/PNG campaign by Australia and allies in 1942-3.
If we are to turn away from the US, maybe more neutral, on our own, we're going to need even more force than these subs. Especially as the world seems to be returning to great power competition.
If you want to be truly independent as an island power, you are going to need a navy bigger than the next two nearest rivals, combined. The Royal Navy achieved this for much of the 'Pax Britannica' of the 19th century (until Imperial Germany build a huge fleet much like China has now) - and this Pax Britannica allowed them to pursue what Lord Salisbury called 'Splendid Isolation'. This was a foreign policy dependent on no alliances. It was bought by the overwhelming guns of the navy.
I'm glad I don't live down Port Adelaide way. That would be the first target in the event of war, although it would get rid of a lot of the Port Power supporters and reduce the crime rate to almost zero.
old-dog wrote:I'm glad I don't live down Port Adelaide way. That would be the first target in the event of war, although it would get rid of a lot of the Port Power supporters and reduce the crime rate to almost zero.
haha!
Harsh but fair.
velocityjohnno wrote:One note on being an island power. I can think of two others in recent history: the UK, and Japan. In both cases, when independent you are going to need very strong sea power if you wish to remain sovereign…..
If we are to turn away from the US, maybe more neutral, on our own, we're going to need even more force than these subs. Especially as the world seems to be returning to great power competition.
If you want to be truly independent as an island power, you are going to need a navy bigger than the next two nearest rivals, combined. .
If Australia wants a sovereign and truly independent defence capability, it’s going to have to stump up far more that 2% of GDP.
And develop a viable industrial, tech and innovation base. Which is a good idea btw.
Who votes for that stuff though? Who actually reaches into their pocket and pays extra for Australian Made?
Me? ;)
Which party is presenting that option!?!
So CIA tells Biden that China will take over Taiwan by 2027 and apparently Australian must join with US in defending Taiwan. Meanwhile Australia can send as much iron ore as they can take. It all makes perfect sense .
Supafreak wrote:So CIA tells Biden that China will take over Taiwan by 2027 and apparently Australian must join with US in defending Taiwan. Meanwhile Australia can send as much iron ore as they can take. It all makes perfect sense .
Cool n normal....
This could really fuck up Australia....
Send Greg Sheridan and Peter Hartcher over to Taiwan on first military intervention, they seem to be the biggest cheer leaders!
etarip wrote:Which party is presenting that option!?!
You mean the option of me reaching into my pocket and paying extra? Jokes.
I know what you mean.
"If Australia wants a sovereign and truly independent defence capability, it’s going to have to stump up far more that 2% of GDP.
And develop a viable industrial, tech and innovation base. Which is a good idea btw."
A party that would develop that kind of policy would be a lot like Australian governments WW2 and postwar. They invested to build and nurture Australian industry, Australian science, create a diversified (not 'diverse') economy that would better withstand shocks to raw materials like they saw as young adults in the 1920's/30's. Compared to other nations, we actually produce the potential trade surpluses to do this.
While I'm at it, throw in proper funding for health, better funding for education so they don't have to become a citizenship ponzi, reduce the immigration to levels the environment can sustain, reduce assistance to property ponzi so housing is affordable for young Australians' family formation, and keep going with the renewable energy, and put in some oil storage tanks in the meantime. Keep capital markets open but be sovereign in what bits do get sold off, and to whom. Establish metrics of overseas ownership. Yeah, let's throw in 100% gold backed reserve banking, cos banking is the flavour of the moment. It'd be really boring with no mad booms, but it'd be a lot more stable and moral - and the constitution defines the only money of the Commonwealth as gold and silver coin iirc.
vote 1 velocity party lol
"vote 1 velocity party lol"
Yep, agree with all that. I've got an even simpler solution. Just tax the rich, and the multi nationals. Even Menzies did that.
Be good too if we could have some cops that arrested Nazis sieg heiling on the steps of Parliament instead of providing them an escort. Slippery slope we are on these days.
Agree VJ. Maybe chuck in a financial transactions tax on applicable to certain types of trading (not legitimate capital raising).
Agree on the financial transactions tax, should not effect mum and dad buying 100BHP, but maybe more HFT. Umm, what more can I add? Accept Ukranian refugees, leave usury for now but review at some stage.
Adam12, did you mean be good if the cops were sieg hailing on the steps of parliament? I don't intend to become dictator for life until after my 2nd term...
velocityjohnno wrote:Agree on the financial transactions tax, should not effect mum and dad buying 100BHP, but maybe more HFT. Umm, what more can I add? Accept Ukranian refugees, leave usury for now but review at some stage.
Adam12, did you mean be good if the cops were sieg hailing on the steps of parliament? I don't intend to become dictator for life until after my 2nd term...
VJ. VOTE 1. VelocityJohnno Party. He’s got my vote for sure. AW.
Ya got a bit of a mess to clean up VJ!
Still a lot of LNP booby traps left by little Johnny....
https://www.abc.net.au/news/2023-03-19/ken-henry-australian-economy-mini...
So let me just get this right.
$75Million on a referendum, to include a SINGULAR indigenous voice in parliament.
yet...
$365B on a submarine program WITHOUT a referendum of the Australian taxpayers to decide if that's where they want their money spent.
I see a glaring disparity in political priorities here.
Why no referendum for such an obviously huge decision for Australias future?
And my personal take, is, it's a $365B friendship to keep the big dogs on our side, and we get 6 token submarines as a part of our prize.
I don't think China have ever nor will ever intend to invade us.
I think their history with taiwan and the South China sea, is something we probably need to keep our noses out of.
Or we could, with the U.S invade Russia for belting Ukraine.
It's one or the other.
But that's a lamens perspective.
Been enjoying the commentary and trying to learn more.
4
Don’t forget we need the subs to protect the shipping lanes to our trading partners, particularly our biggest trade partners .
Referenda are only held for issues that affect the constitution if I recall correctly.
Indigenous voice directly affects the constitution. It will need a 2/3 majority, in a majority of states to get up I think.
Submarines are not a constitutional issue. So this could only be a plebiscite, but neither side of politics is going to do that on this issue.
Also, and I’m not decided on whether this deal is good value or not myself, the projected timeline for this program is 30+ years, which is what’s costed. That figure needs to be divided by the # of years it’s expected to be spread over. (The chance of this NOT going over budget is close to zero though). It’s still eye-watering. Much of the initial cost will come from the Defence budget. Watch a lot of existing programs get cancelled.
I’m all for the VJ regime. Where do we sign?
Thanks heaps Etarip.
That's why i'm the lamen and you're obviously much more well versed in this topic.
But fundamentally i see this as wrong, when you peel the red tape away.
How can something that affects us all, not be put to at least some kind of a vote, when something that plausibly is just and right, needs to be put to a ridiculous vote.
But i completely understand it from the current legal and constitutional perspective.
Just don't agree with it.
Thanks for the clarity though.
Have been enjoying your posts, as well as GSCO's. Some very differing, but thorough insights. Cheers fellas.
Supafreak wrote:Don’t forget we need the subs to protect the shipping lanes to our trading partners, particularly our biggest trade partners .
Yeah we'd be screwed if China stopped us shipping all that iron ore to them and then started stopping all their exports to us due to the CCP shutting down trade routes....
I too enjoy reading the views from etarip and gsco . Watching insiders this morning I couldn’t believe some of the shit that was being said . Laura Tingle was the only sane journalist amongst that lot .
https://www.abc.net.au/news/2023-03-19/keating-wong-china-aukus-subs/102...
Another perspective...
@southern - no worries. I’m glad we can all actually discuss this in a pretty open and mostly respectful way. I learn a shitload from the contributors on these forums. Can’t really follow all the finance talk tho.
Ditto, enjoy reading comments, learning different perspectives and having a venting outlet....
Thanks!
That Stan Grant article covers a lot of ground @andy-mac. Good summary of different takes on the situation.
I will offer two things - a multi-polar world is much more prone to major war. And I don’t think the CCP only aspires to being a ‘global heavyweight’. They want to be THE regional hegemon.
andy-mac wrote:Ya got a bit of a mess to clean up VJ!
Still a lot of LNP booby traps left by little Johnny....from article
https://www.abc.net.au/news/2023-03-19/ken-henry-australian-economy-mini...
"He said that pressure could have been released with a resources super profits tax or something similar, with the money reinvested in non-mining parts of the economy to boost productivity there, but it didn't happen.
Instead, governments just "let it rip."
"The collapse in the non-mining investment rate is remarkable," Henry said."
Gosh, what would I do in the case of non-mining investment? Let's say in value-adding. OK - industrial areas/parks with very little land cost and ongoing land cost (decree it!), keep the enviro-regulations, OH&S too because having standards is a good thing, globally. Government sets up conditions of taxation/regulation that encourage value adding enterprises...
(in the late 1970s there were 8 or 9 separate car manufacturers here, on a much smaller population base. The postwar governments had decreed local content rules and encouraged industry)
...and then within these, ensure good training (fund TAFE) and access to even high school programs, to place the locals in technical work within these organisations. Have a national fund of capital to support this (we have this, in the form of industry superannuation funds, or what the Commonwealth Bank was originally set up for: what do they invest in now?). Link CSIRO research into funding models that can be developed here with the supported technical base. Pursue foreign markets. The question will be 'what can we do better' (and Howard favoured mining as we do that better than most)... but we have created many good inventions and our environment selects for practical and rugged solutions to many situations - go with this, for the world values this, too.
make it more profitable potentially than sending the capital over for a punt on an SP500 tracking index...
If you look at some Australian inventions such as JORN or the more recent nano quantum computers, we really do punch above our weight. We even made our own light water reactor, our own design. Historically a lack of capital and falling back on primary production tends to see ideas flee. If you look into the capital support landscape of Silicon Valley (exposed in the bank's demise) you see that it is very liquid and deep - what would an Australian version look like? Melbourne's biomedical industry comes to mind in a way.
We still have a solar panel manufacturer left in Adelaide I think. How did the continent with the most free sun develop such a hostile environment to value-adding? I can still picture our pollies daring GM-H to leave. What needs changing, change.
Watch the productivity per capita figure like a hawk. Set policies to make it go up.
"Henry then told the audience of tax experts that the retreat of non-mining investment from Australia's economy had coincided with two decades of declining average living standards.
And it may have had a significant impact on wages, he said."
That was another good quote from article.
The "I can't believe it's not politics" thread.