FDP Home Page / FDP Forum / FAQ's

The FDP is made possible by the following companies and individual members like you.
Please use the links below to show them we value their sponsorship.

Yellowjackets Tube Converters

Musician's Friend

Jensen Loudspeakers

Sweetwater

MOD KITS DIY

Amplified Parts

WD Music

Advertise here

Apex Tube Matching

Guitar Center

Antique Electronics Supply


* God bless America and our men and women in uniform *

* Illegitimi non carborundum! *

If you benefit and learn from the FDP and enjoy our site, please help support us and become a Contributing Member or make a Donation today! The FDP counts on YOU to help keep the site going with an annual contribution. It's quick and easy with PayPal. Please do it TODAY!

Chris Greene, Host & Founder

LOST YOUR PASSWORD?

......................................................................

   
FDP Jam
Calendar
Find musicians
in your area!
  Search the Forums  

FDP Forum / Moe's Tavern (_8^(I) / Steel / Aluminum ... Dependency and National Security

Previous 20 Messages  
professor
Contributing Member
**********
**********
******

North Gnarlyington

Mar 4th, 2018 10:21 AM   Edit   Profile   Print Topic   Search Topic

I don’t see why the Chinese would withold steel in an attempt to gain some strategic leverage or economic advantage. They don’t have a monopoly on its manufacture. If Saudi Arabia decided to withold oil from the world market, it would cause some short term disruption, but long term other sources would make up the difference, and the Saudis would be economically weakened. Like the Chicoms, they need to maintain cash flow.

(This message was last edited by professor at 12:23 PM, Mar 4th, 2018)

BlondeStrat
Contributing Member
**********
**********
******

Las Vegas NV

Can't complain but sometimes I still do
Mar 4th, 2018 11:18 AM   Edit   Profile   Print Topic   Search Topic

"I don’t see why the Chinese would withold steel in an attempt to gain some strategic leverage or economic advantage."

Under *normal*circumstances, I agree, it seems far fetched.

Should a situation come where a Country (or Countries) might decide to forcibly impose their will ... all bets are off.

I just wonder if it's in the best interest of America and her Allies to stand by and passively watch as circumstances come to allow that as a possibility. We probably are already at that point.

Some might argue that it's better to insure these World dynamics are arranged such that they prohibit the possibility ... as opposed to paving the way for the possibility.

professor
Contributing Member
**********
**********
******

North Gnarlyington

Mar 4th, 2018 11:30 AM   Edit   Profile   Print Topic   Search Topic

"Should a situation come where a Country (or Countries) might decide to forcibly impose their will ... all bets are off."

This applies to so many possibilities, from so many directions. A much more obvious version is the attempt by the Russians to use their natural gas for political leverage in Europe. All that has done is diminish their own economic needs and forced European countries to develop alternate sources.

The Chinese are trying to maximize their advantages, but they are also burdened with tremendous constraints.

professor
Contributing Member
**********
**********
******

North Gnarlyington

Mar 4th, 2018 11:35 AM   Edit   Profile   Print Topic   Search Topic

The Chinese are also quite dependent on imported iron ore for their steel industry.

Steel industry in China

henrycat
Contributing Member
**********
**

Ch'town, PEI, Canada

He said he was a wit. He was half right.
Mar 5th, 2018 08:35 AM   Edit   Profile   Print Topic   Search Topic

It gets complicated. China is a significant purchaser of US Treasury issues and they need US dollars to do this. Punishing them with restrictive tariffs could have a "boomerang" effect.

The World Trade organization needs to be re-vamped in order to deal with these issues on a more timely and less political basis.

Just my two cents worth.

Jake
Contributing Member
**********
******

West Chester PA

Wait, what?
Mar 6th, 2018 06:13 AM   Edit   Profile   Print Topic   Search Topic

"security is a mirage."

And so may be self sufficiency.

professor
Contributing Member
**********
**********
******

North Gnarlyington

Mar 6th, 2018 07:37 AM   Edit   Profile   Print Topic   Search Topic

The North Koreans call it

Juche

Moose0130
Contributing Member
*******

USA

DOAIHPS
Mar 6th, 2018 07:44 AM   Edit   Profile   Print Topic   Search Topic

A very respectful discussion, cool to read.

My $0.02

While I do believe security requires a certain amounts of domestic capability in key areas, I also believe that the pathway to longer lasting and 'stronger' security is robust trade to create a certain 'codependency' between nations.

China and the US are clear natural rivals; however, the more it remains mutually beneficial to work together the harder it is to break those bonds. How to strike the 'fair' balance in that relationship is exceptionally challenging and veers too close to political discussions for this setting.

Hope my views are received in the spirit intended and that I did not wander off acceptable guardrails. Please DOB this post if interpreted otherwise, this is an interesting thread and I don't want to mess it up.

RKSTRAT
Contributing Member
**********
****

USA

"Clapton is Good"
Mar 6th, 2018 08:06 AM   Edit   Profile   Print Topic   Search Topic



"The last trade war was in the 1930s, and intensified the effects of the Great Depression, according to economists and trade experts. It started after President Herbert Hoover signed the Smoot Hawley Tariff Act into law in 1930, which raised tariffs on more than 20,000 products."

Just saying'........

stl80
Contributing Member
*****

USA

stl80
Mar 6th, 2018 08:07 AM   Edit   Profile   Print Topic   Search Topic

I use stainless flanges. They are marked China, India, and Philippines in about even ratios.
Jim

BlondeStrat
Contributing Member
**********
**********
******

Las Vegas NV

Can't complain but sometimes I still do
Mar 6th, 2018 09:26 AM   Edit   Profile   Print Topic   Search Topic

"I also believe that the pathway to longer lasting and 'stronger' security is robust trade to create a certain 'codependency' between nations."

That right there is the ideal situation. Creating and even more so maintaining that dynamic of codependency is the tightrope we walk.

I really think that we here in America are tuned to only think in terms of the economic value to society in a perfect World.

My attempt to wrap my head around the flip side of this is driven by the realization that our basic nature (in that regard) can be and is easily exploited by those of an authoritarian mindset.

(This message was last edited by BlondeStrat at 12:56 PM, Mar 6th, 2018)

professor
Contributing Member
**********
**********
******

North Gnarlyington

Mar 6th, 2018 09:54 AM   Edit   Profile   Print Topic   Search Topic

^ word

Moose0130
Contributing Member
*******

USA

DOAIHPS
Mar 6th, 2018 11:06 AM   Edit   Profile   Print Topic   Search Topic

^ word, word



Previous 20 Messages  

FDP Forum / Moe's Tavern (_8^(I) / Steel / Aluminum ... Dependency and National Security




Reply to this Topic
Display my email address             Lost your password?
Your Message:
Link Address (URL):
Link Title:




Moderators: Chris Greene  Iron Man  reverendrob  

FDP, LLC Privacy Policy: Your real name, username, and email
are held in confidence and not disclosed to any third parties, sold, or
used for anything other than FDP Forum registration unless you specifically authorize disclosure.

Furtkamp.com 
Internet Application Development

Copyright © 1999-2018 Fender Discussion Page, LLC   All Rights Reserved