Democratic Underground Latest Greatest Lobby Journals Search Options Help Login
Google

Clinton says China holdings threaten U.S. security

Printer-friendly format Printer-friendly format
Printer-friendly format Email this thread to a friend
Printer-friendly format Bookmark this thread
This topic is archived.
Home » Discuss » Archives » General Discussion: Presidential (Through Nov 2009) Donate to DU
 
slipslidingaway Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sat Mar-29-08 05:47 PM
Original message
Clinton says China holdings threaten U.S. security
http://news.yahoo.com/s/nm/20080329/pl_nm/usa_politics_clinton_china_dc;_ylt=AnLXJobyQnfV_WLHzbfFn5.s0NUE

"...Clinton made China the focus of her criticism, which she has repeated throughout Indiana, a state that has suffered from manufacturing job losses that many blame on unfair trade practices and companies outsourcing jobs to China...

Clinton accused Beijing of manipulating its currency and of not holding its exporters to the same health and environmental standards that U.S. companies must meet..."


Clinton hails Senate vote on China trade
September 19, 2000

http://archives.cnn.com/2000/ALLPOLITICS/stories/09/19/pntr.vote.hfr/index.html

"...Critics argued that opening trade with China would reward a repressive communist state, undermine labor and environmental protections and cost jobs for U.S. workers. But Clinton said bringing China into the global trade regime will help make Beijing a more responsible and accountable member of the world community..."



US-China trade deal, or PNTR, clears Senate hurdles (09/08/2000)

http://www.chinahouston.org/news/2000907195742.html

"...The Senate then went on to reject three proposed amendments that threatened to scuttle the trade bill. Once approved by the Senate and signed into law by Clinton, the bill would end the annual ritual of reviewing Beijing's trade status and guarantee Chinese goods the same low-tariff access to the US market as products from nearly every other nation.

The amendments, by Democrats Paul Wellstone of Minnesota, Robert Byrd of West Virginia and Ernest Hollings of South Carolina, called on China to increase religious freedom, use environmentally-friendly fuels and for Washington to continue to review trade relations with Beijing.


...If any amendments are adopted, the trade bill would be sent back to a bitterly divided House of Representatives, which approved the controversial measure in May..."











Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
anonymous171 Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sat Mar-29-08 05:48 PM
Response to Original message
1. How can anyone of our canddiates do anything to China when they have us in their pocket (debtwise)?
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
slipslidingaway Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sat Mar-29-08 06:34 PM
Response to Reply #1
8. True, although we also purchase many of their goods, but I would
rather be the one without the large debt.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
niceypoo Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sat Mar-29-08 06:35 PM
Response to Reply #1
10. By paying it back...
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Muttocracy Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sat Mar-29-08 05:50 PM
Response to Original message
2. interesting. Haven't heard as much on China as we should this election cycle. nt
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
slipslidingaway Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sat Mar-29-08 06:35 PM
Response to Reply #2
9. Agree, there was more discussion in the Republican debates.n/t
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
KittyWampus Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sat Mar-29-08 05:52 PM
Response to Original message
3. October 2000, Clinton signs China trade bill. When was it he sold those supercomputers to China?
Clinton signs China trade bill

October 10, 2000
Web posted at: 6:28 p.m. EDT (2228 GMT)

By Matt Smith/CNN

WASHINGTON (CNN) -- President Clinton closed years of political and economic debate Tuesday, and sealed a major achievement of his administration by signing a bill extending permanent, normal trade status to China.


"Today we take a major step toward China's entry into the World Trade Organization and a major step toward answering some of the central challenges of this new century," Clinton said in a bipartisan White House ceremony Tuesday afternoon.

"Trade with China will not only extend our nation's unprecedented economic growth, it offers us a chance to help shape the future of the world's most prosperous nation and to reaffirm our own global leadership for peace and prosperity."

The measure is considered the most important U.S. trade legislation since passage of the North American Free Trade Agreement in 1993. But it faced a long campaign of opposition from labor, human rights and conservative groups who wanted to retain the annual review of trade relations with China.

U.S. business interests wanted the agreement in order to gain access to China's market of 1-billion-plus people. But critics argued that such an agreement would reward a repressive communist state, undermine the country's labor and environmental protections and cost jobs for U.S. workers.


Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
FrenchieCat Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sat Mar-29-08 05:57 PM
Response to Reply #3
5. That's why when I heard her say this....I gringed......
I wonder how many really remember this.

Bill Clinton really was the best Republican President ever!
His list of achievements is quite breathtaking:

NAFTA
China Trade Deal
DADT
DOMA
Welfare Reform
Telecommunications Act
Started Bankruptcy reform
Banking Deregulation


Was there anything that he didn't do for them?
And what did he do for Democrats, exactly? :shrug:
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
niceypoo Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sat Mar-29-08 06:39 PM
Response to Reply #3
11. The republican ABC rule...
A trade deal and borrowing cash from the Chinese to pump up a war that Bush started are two different matters entirely. Again, Obama supporters attempt to pin Bushes failures on Bill Clinton, effectively giving Bush a pass.

Shameful...hope my ass.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
slipslidingaway Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sat Mar-29-08 07:16 PM
Response to Reply #3
12. I had to use The Google for the sale of supercomputers...
"...U.S. business interests wanted the agreement in order to gain access to China's market of 1-billion-plus people. But critics argued that such an agreement would reward a repressive communist state, undermine the country's labor and environmental protections and cost jobs for U.S. workers..."

From what I have read the critics raised some valid concerns at the time, unfortunately they were the minority.



Clinton's Super Computer Push

http://www.wisconsinproject.org/pubs/editorials/2000/supers-awsj.htm

"U.S. companies are selling countries the super computers they need to build the weapons America will have to defend against."

by Gary Milhollin

Asian Wall Street Journal
September 19, 2000, p. 6


"Much has been made lately of the U.S. proposal for a national missile defense system, and whether U.S. taxpayers should pay billions of dollars to counter threats from China and other countries developing nuclear and missile arsenals. But what American taxpayers don't know is that U.S. companies could soon sell these countries the computers they need to build the missiles America will have to defend against.

Last month, after intensive lobbying by the U.S. computer industry, President Bill Clinton decided to lower once again the barriers that control the export of American-made, high-performance computers. As a result, arms makers in China and other countries will soon be able to buy computers up to 14 times more powerful than the ones they were able to get only eight months ago. Moreover, under the new regulations, which are scheduled to take effect in January, countries allowed to purchase such computers can do so without any security review by the U.S. government..."




Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
bhikkhu Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sat Mar-29-08 05:54 PM
Response to Original message
4. China is the main creditor for the US Federal Debt
It would be fine to say that something must be done about trade imbalances and so forth, but the cash that they take in trade is largely pumped back into our economy as treasuries purchases, financing the operation of the US government. It is fine to unwind one side of the equation, but what about the other?
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
slipslidingaway Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sat Mar-29-08 07:20 PM
Response to Reply #4
13. Too bad this issue was not discussed more during the debates...
instead the same topics were covered again and again.

:(
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
liberaltrucker Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sat Mar-29-08 06:02 PM
Response to Original message
6. No shit Sherlock
Edited on Sat Mar-29-08 06:03 PM by liberaltrucker
If this were Fark, the "obvious" tag would asplode.

:banghead:
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
RichardRay Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sat Mar-29-08 06:21 PM
Response to Original message
7. It's not a GOOD place to be, but...
it's not all bad, either. China's economy is not stable, the folks trying to 'manage' it have a tiger by the tail. Their growth is not coming from internal increases in productivity that serve their own markets, it's coming from a hell bent for leather 'growth at any cost' model that ignores a lot of costs that will be coming home to roost in the next 10 - 20 years.

They've invested in US Treasury securities; ownership of bonds isn't like an equity stake. They don't have input on how we run our economy. All it gives them is a reasonable return on the investment as long as the U.S. economy is healthy. It's true that our economy depends on them, but it's also true that their's is at least equally dependent (and probably more so) on ours. They're in danger of becoming a 'captive vendor', if they haven't already.

That reality is another reason I support Obama - he realizes the inter-related nature of the world's realities - as much as it might be nice to imagine a return to Fortress America, it just ain't gonna happen.

Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
slipslidingaway Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sat Mar-29-08 07:26 PM
Response to Reply #7
14. Given a choice I would rather be the creditor...
:shrug:
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
DU AdBot (1000+ posts) Click to send private message to this author Click to view 
this author's profile Click to add 
this author to your buddy list Click to add 
this author to your Ignore list Fri Apr 26th 2024, 01:49 PM
Response to Original message
Advertisements [?]
 Top

Home » Discuss » Archives » General Discussion: Presidential (Through Nov 2009) Donate to DU

Powered by DCForum+ Version 1.1 Copyright 1997-2002 DCScripts.com
Software has been extensively modified by the DU administrators


Important Notices: By participating on this discussion board, visitors agree to abide by the rules outlined on our Rules page. Messages posted on the Democratic Underground Discussion Forums are the opinions of the individuals who post them, and do not necessarily represent the opinions of Democratic Underground, LLC.

Home  |  Discussion Forums  |  Journals |  Store  |  Donate

About DU  |  Contact Us  |  Privacy Policy

Got a message for Democratic Underground? Click here to send us a message.

© 2001 - 2011 Democratic Underground, LLC