Welcome to DU! The truly grassroots left-of-center political community where regular people, not algorithms, drive the discussions and set the standards. Join the community: Create a free account Support DU (and get rid of ads!): Become a Star Member Latest Breaking News Editorials & Other Articles General Discussion The DU Lounge All Forums Issue Forums Culture Forums Alliance Forums Region Forums Support Forums Help & Search
 

Yorktown

(2,884 posts)
16. Kindly do not call my arguments worth zero upfront
Wed May 13, 2015, 06:49 AM
May 2015

I was unaware it was requested to automatically provide back up data for any assertion.
I made some assertions which I believe are correct based on my general knowledge.
Below some back up data as requested:

1- "the TPP does create an enticement for China to lurk out of its nationalistic wood."

This would request a compilation of data far too great. I am simply making the relatively intuitive satement that large trade blocs have traditionally enticed independent nations around to trade with them. That holds ture of the large historical free trade zones I mentioned earlier: Roman Empire, Caliphate, Imperial China. I did not make the clai it repelled third parties intent on waging war. If China wants to attack the US, the TPP won't be a deterrent.

2- undervaluation of China's military. Articles all over the place. One here:

Various government and independent calculations for the PLA's expenditures for 2003 - the most recent year for which a significant number of institutions published estimates - ranged from $30.6 billion to $141 billion based on official exchange rates or purchasing power parity (PPP) models. China's declared military budget in 2003 was $22.3 billion at official exchange rates. In 2003 IISS estimated Chinese PPP-based military spending at about $85 billion, while SIPRI's PPP estimate was $140 billion. In 2003 the official budget was RMB 185.3 billion, which was $22.4 billion at current exchange rates. In 2010 IISS estimated Chinese PPP-based military spending at about $114 billion, or 1.88% of GDP. By 2010 the official budget had increased to RMB 532.1 billion, or $77.9 billion at official exchange rates. In Military and Security Developments Involving the People's Republic of China 2010 the US Defense Department estimated that actual Chinese military spending was double this about, over $150 billion on an official exchange rate (OER) basis.

3- impact of the insane Iraq invasion on bringing US military budgets upwards:

Recommendations

0 members have recommended this reply (displayed in chronological order):

As I said this is all about China malaise May 2015 #1
I think it's far more that China is being used as a pretext, a boogeyman cali May 2015 #2
Maybe it's more about China than trade, that's what I was getting from reading jakeXT May 2015 #7
Precisely n/t malaise May 2015 #14
Chinese are smarter than many "democrats".... MaggieD May 2015 #22
I think Obama is 100% correct on the TPP Yorktown May 2015 #3
And what about the US? TM99 May 2015 #4
+1. thanks for making those important points. cali May 2015 #6
Yes, I thought of that objection when typing my previous post Yorktown May 2015 #8
please post some evidence to support this claim: cali May 2015 #11
Kindly do not call my arguments worth zero upfront Yorktown May 2015 #16
Please elaborate on: cali May 2015 #5
Some answers Yorktown May 2015 #10
compared to our military interventions, that's some weak sauce. cali May 2015 #13
You ask too many questions too fast Yorktown May 2015 #19
It may be about China, but maybe not about territorial claims HereSince1628 May 2015 #21
Obama is dead on right about China MaggieD May 2015 #9
Declarative statements without any supporting evidence are as worthless as a scrap cali May 2015 #12
He's still correct on that point MaggieD May 2015 #15
Declarative statements without any supporting evidence are as worthless cali May 2015 #17
So is it secret or not secret? MaggieD May 2015 #18
Cali... C'mon.... That's kinda gross. Adrahil May 2015 #20
Latest Discussions»General Discussion»President Obama plays the...»Reply #16