Ink $45 billion in export deals.

__________________
CHILCUTT~
The secret to a long life. Is knowing when it is time to leave.

It'll never work-we're Doomed......

http://www.dailyfinance.com/story/investing/boeing-dreamliner-delays-outsourcing-goes-too-far/19808894/

Part of that problem, might be how much of that value is due to the cost of the product. Do we subtract the cost of imported parts, from that value. The Boeing article overlooks that to get sales in many countries, not just China, there are kickbacks as to how much content comes from that country. AirBus and the EruoUnion play the same game. So, Boeing has to support its competitors, to an extent. This is another form of protectionism.
Tom

My personal Urmel tells me, this isn't a good match. Something is just too fishy about it.

__________________

Obviously no-one wants to see confrontation between the 2 Giants. But truth be told, Asian nations are no fans of the "G-2" concept.
The notion that the U.S. and China should form an exclusive "G-2" grouping to take the lead on global issues may seem exciteing to some academics, but to leaders in the region, it sure sounds like a bad idea that could seriously marginalise their concerns and voices on a world stage.

__________________
CHILCUTT~
The secret to a long life. Is knowing when it is time to leave.

Also. India is not going to sit back and watch the world , or the U.S.-China pass them by.

__________________
CHILCUTT~
The secret to a long life. Is knowing when it is time to leave.

Our good friends the Chicoms..........

http://www.theepochtimes.com/n2/content/view/49822/


Looks like they put one over on Dear Leader.....

__________________
Palangi

2004 C240 Wagon 203.261 Baby Benz
2008 ML320 CDI Highway Cruiser
2006 Toyota Prius, Saving the Planet @ 48 mpg
2000 F-150, Destroying the Planet @ 20 mpg



TRUMP .......... WHITEHOUSE
HILLARY .........JAILHOUSE
BERNIE .......... NUTHOUSE
0BAMA .......... OUTHOUSE

I agree to a large extent on this. India has some measure of free market forces. Also, don't forget Brazil. They have been advancing economically. I think Latin and South America are starting to flex some political muscle. Also, Brazil has found two major oil reserves in the past few years. They are already engery neutral.
China might be one big, like El Giganta, Ponzi scheme. Yes, I said that. Others are saying it too. Thye might be worse off than the US. Yes, they are growing. But how much is actually subsidized? Are they facing a simular house of cards in their housing market? There are some political rumblings.
Tom

Trade is good. Better selling it to them than letting them steal it.
Boy, their first stealth fighter sure looks a lot like the F-22 some say.

There was a time we (including GE) sold them military equipment.
Now, we're probably selling them "commercial equipment" (Wink. Wink)
Probably not too much new here....

http://assets.opencrs.com/rpts/RL32496_20100722.pdf

Cooperation in the Cold War in the 1980s

Since the mid-1970s, even before the normalization of relations with Beijing, the debate over
policy toward the PRC has examined how military ties might advance U.S. security interests,
beginning with the imperatives of the Cold War.1 In January 1980, Secretary of Defense Harold
Brown visited China and laid the groundwork for a relationship with the PRC’s military,
collectively called the People’s Liberation Army (PLA), intended to consist of strategic dialogue,
reciprocal exchanges in functional areas, and arms sales. Furthermore, U.S. policy changed in
1981 to remove the ban on arms sales to China. Secretary of Defense Casper Weinberger visited
Beijing in September 1983. In 1984, U.S. policymakers worked to advance discussions on
military technological cooperation with China.2 There were commercial sales to the PLA that
included Sikorsky Aircraft’s sale of 24 S-70C transport helicopters (an unarmed version of the
Black Hawk helicopter) and General Electric’s sale of five gas turbine engines for two naval
destroyers.3 Between 1985 and 1987, the United States also agreed to four programs of
government-to-government Foreign Military Sales (FMS): modernization of artillery ammunition
production facilities; modernization of avionics in F-8 fighters; sale of four Mark-46 antisubmarine
torpedoes; and sale of four AN/TPQ-37 artillery-locating radars.4

I understand that the Chinese stealth fighter was partially reversed engineered from a downed US Nighthawk that was shot down over Serbia. How many have we lost so far?.

AFAIK, I think that was the only one to fall into unfriendly hands or be downed in action. I heard the same Bosnia pick & pull story on the news recently.

Here's Wiki

One F-117 has been lost in combat, to Serbian/Yugoslav forces. On March 27, 1999, during the Kosovo War, the 3rd Battalion of the 250th Missile Brigade, equipped with the Isayev S-125 'Neva-M' (NATO designation SA-3 'Goa'), downed F-117A serial number 82-806 with a Neva missile. According to Wesley Clark and other NATO generals, Yugoslav air defences tracked F-117s with old Russian radars operating on long wavelengths. This, combined with the loss of stealth when the jets got wet or opened their bomb bays, made them highly visible on radar screens. The pilot survived and was later rescued by NATO forces. However, the wreckage of the F-117 was not promptly bombed, and the Serbs are believed to have invited Russian personnel to inspect the remains, inevitably compromising the US stealth technology. [2]

A second F-117A was also damaged during a raid in the Kosovo War, and although it made it back to its base, it never flew again

Ah, those costs are reclaimed by the profit taker when the article is sold..... From a balance-of-trade perspective, you can ask any accountant, as long as the costs are reimbursed and the profit remains here, we win.

We still loose, as we are supporting our competition. We do not require companies import products to have a US content, as far as I know. There was even a proposal that certain airports in Europe would only allow AirBus aircraft to land there, or at least have preference.
Tom

What works best for Asia is a U.S.-China relationship that avoids both the unrealistic highs as well as the disruptive lows.
There are encourageing signs that Washington and Beijing are working towards this goal moving away from the early Obama days when Obama was eager to enlist Beijing as a strategic partner on Global issues prompting him and his diplomats to take a more conciliatory approach towards China.
I believe China saw this as a sign of weakness to be exploited, resulting in its more assertive posture on many issues last year.

__________________
CHILCUTT~
The secret to a long life. Is knowing when it is time to leave.

I don't think it was the US alone. I don't think many if any saw them as being this militaristic at this point. OK, maybe Tiawan.
Tom