Who says we owe the Chinese visits?

[Argus]

I have to wonder just where the Chinese get the gall to rebuke Harper for not coming to visit them sooner. This is a thoroughly corrupt, brutal, backwards regime which cloaks itself in the self-important respectability of a superpower while the majority of its people still think the ox is high-technology. We don't owe them any visits. There aren't any rules that say that as soon as possible, every world leader must rush to China to kneel before the powerful thugs who currently occupy high positions within the Communist Party.

You wouldn't know that from listening to the Liberals, of course. To hear them talk Harper has made a shocking breach of etiquette by not jetting off to China to kiss the feet of the party leaders the moment he was elected. No dought Ignatieff already has his itinerary scheduled in the unlikely event he ever gets into power. First thing he'll do is rush off to China to bow before his masters.

Just what exactly does anyone expect us to get from China? So we have a trade imbalance? Do they expect China to want to do anything to address that? Why would they? I mean, honestly! And everyone knows that sales to China always come with strings attached. Anything we sell them will almost certainly have to be made over there, and the profits kept over there. No doubt that helps the paper bottom lines of various conglomerates but I don't see how it helps Canada.

If we want to addres the trade imbalance we should work to cut Chinese imports. That shouldn't be too difficult. There's ample evidence to support the need to stop all Chinese imports for careful safety examinations, for example, before letting them through. Perhaps a special tax on these imports to cover the cost of such careful examination might be imposed, too.

[Riverwind]

I have to wonder just where the Chinese get the gall to rebuke Harper for not coming to visit them sooner.

Payback for the snub at the Olympics. I don't think they really cared about the 'time between visits'. Edited December 3, 2009 by Riverwind

[fellowtraveller]

I don't understand your OP. What do we sell them? Resources, of course.

[Jerry J. Fortin]

I don't understand your OP. What do we sell them? Resources, of course.

Canada sells them everything they can because they are buying.

[Shwa]

If we want to addres the trade imbalance we should work to cut Chinese imports

What, and kill Walmart? What are you - some kind of pinko lefty??

[Shady]

If we want to addres the trade imbalance we should work to cut Chinese imports.

Building trade walls and imposing tariffs is the last thing we need to do, especially when we're just coming out of a bad recession. Unless of course your goal is to create an even worse one.

[eyeball]

If we want to addres the trade imbalance we should work to cut Chinese imports. That shouldn't be too difficult. There's ample evidence to support the need to stop all Chinese imports for careful safety examinations, for example, before letting them through. Perhaps a special tax on these imports to cover the cost of such careful examination might be imposed, too.

Forget the trade imbalance, you said it yourself this is a thoroughly corrupt, brutal, backwards regime run by powerful thugs. Canada simply shouldn't be trading with any countries, including China, that don't respect human rights or the environment. I'd also extend this to countries who's arms exports find their way into the world's conflict regions and their thoroughly corrupt, brutal, backward regimes.

[wyly]

Forget the trade imbalance, you said it yourself this is a thoroughly corrupt, brutal, backwards regime run by powerful thugs. Canada simply shouldn't be trading with any countries, including China, that don't respect human rights or the environment. I'd also extend this to countries who's arms exports find their way into the world's conflict regions and their thoroughly corrupt, brutal, backward regimes.

which is why I had personal boycott of the Beijing Olympics...

[Argus]

Building trade walls and imposing tariffs is the last thing we need to do, especially when we're just coming out of a bad recession. Unless of course your goal is to create an even worse one.

Generally I agree, but China deals behind enormously high trade walls itself. It lies, cheats and steals corporate and commercial secrets, then reproduces counterfeits in its own factories and ships them under false labels. It sends goods produced in slave labour camps contrary to treaties. It ships goods with the labels of other countries in order to get around rules and regulations. Even if one ignores their human rights abuses, their abuses of trade rules, regulations and laws are legendary. They will by raw materials from us but that's about it. Well, we can ship raw materials to almost anyone. And the damage to our own industrial base from their predatory pricing, not to mention their often damaged, dangerous and carcinogenic goods is considerably greater than any benefit we derive from shipping them rocks and wood.

[Keepitsimple]

It has been quite clear that the Conservatives wanted to make a principled stand on how they viewed China's slow response to Human Rights. As opposed to Chretien's "don't worry, be happy" visits - which did nothing to spur trade, Canada changed its approach and publicly stood up to China. Having made our position clear, Canada is moving ahead with substantive trade discussions - but having set the table properly, we do not have to embarrassed to continue to forcefully press Human Rights issues. The Liberals past performance and Bob Rae's "nuanced" approach is simply a slippery way of not taking a principled stand.....and in effect, standing for nothing....brave talk here at home but effectively doing nothing on the world stage.

Once again standing up for Canada, here's what Harper had to say about China's remark about taking 5 years to visit China:

However, the prime minister did not let the comments slip by without a response. He pointed out that it had also been five years since the Chinese leadership had stepped foot in Canada

Link: http://ca.news.yahoo.com/s/capress/091203/national/harper_china

Edited December 3, 2009 by Keepitsimple

[Oleg Bach]

Why would the money boy conservatives want to truely teach China about human rights? That's just plain silly - Our domestic human rights offenders have been destroying human beings for years. Look at the poor and homeless - the policy of attrition though so-called socially benevolent societies is a sham - The policy towards human rights is spawned by big buisness and not by government. Those at the top of the food chain are cruel barbarians - How do you think they got there, by being civlized and kind? The guys that run China are cut from the same cloth as our cut throaters...but China might be better at the game of human betrayal on mass. We might just be amateurs at the game of crushing human rights. I see human rights stomped on all the time in Canada and America...we just do it so nicely and it seems like it is the milk of human kindeness when it's actually poison.

[Shady]

Forget the trade imbalance, you said it yourself this is a thoroughly corrupt, brutal, backwards regime run by powerful thugs. Canada simply shouldn't be trading with any countries, including China, that don't respect human rights or the environment. I'd also extend this to countries who's arms exports find their way into the world's conflict regions and their thoroughly corrupt, brutal, backward regimes.

So, do you then support a Canadian trade embargo on Cuba?

[Shady]

Why would the money boy conservatives want to truely teach China about human rights? That's just plain silly - Our domestic human rights offenders have been destroying human beings for years. Look at the poor and homeless - the policy of attrition though so-called socially benevolent societies is a sham - The policy towards human rights is spawned by big buisness and not by government. Those at the top of the food chain are cruel barbarians - How do you think they got there, by being civlized and kind? The guys that run China are cut from the same cloth as our cut throaters...but China might be better at the game of human betrayal on mass. We might just be amateurs at the game of crushing human rights. I see human rights stomped on all the time in Canada and America...we just do it so nicely and it seems like it is the milk of human kindeness when it's actually poison.

As usual, complete nonsense.

[Oleg Bach]

As usual, complete nonsense.

It's non-sense if you have great and lucrative investments in actions that oppress human beings - or you are willing to srew people into the ground so YOU - can live in comfortable entitlement - YES that makes sense - but if you have nothing like I do and no vested interests at all - then I am full of complete non-sense from your perspective that is askew morally. That makes sense to me - no one benefits from trade that destroys domestic production - except a very few and maybe YOU can lick up what you imagine to be the trickle down effect...I have a dog that thinks in the same terms if I cut myself.

[Shady]

It's non-sense if you have great and lucrative investments in actions that oppress human beings - or you are willing to srew people into the ground so YOU - can live in comfortable entitlement - YES that makes sense - but if you have nothing like I do and no vested interests at all - then I am full of complete non-sense from your perspective that is askew morally. That makes sense to me - no one benefits from trade that destroys domestic production - except a very few and maybe YOU can lick up what you imagine to be the trickle down effect...I have a dog that thinks in the same terms if I cut myself.

Just more complete nonsense. Post after post. Grand generalizations, out-of-this-world hyperbole, wrapped up in an overly dramatic Shakespearian soliloquy.

[madmax]

If we want to addres the trade imbalance we should work to cut Chinese imports. That shouldn't be too difficult. There's ample evidence to support the need to stop all Chinese imports for careful safety examinations, for example, before letting them through. Perhaps a special tax on these imports to cover the cost of such careful examination might be imposed, too.

While I share your concerns, I would rather see the Prime Minister engaged with the Chinese to voice them, rather then ignore one of the largest countries in the world for 5 years.

Dialogue and diplomacy first.

Regardless, better late then never.

[Oleg Bach]

Then I bow out gracefully my good man..."This above all to thine own self be true. Thou can'st then be false to any other man"........China is fine as long as we send our good people to deal with their good people - and not send our bastards to cut tacit deals witht their bastards....there - was that focused enough for you?

[eyeball]

So, do you then support a Canadian trade embargo on Cuba?

On the basis I described? Absolutely.

[Oleg Bach]

On the basis I described? Absolutely.

That's foolish. Just because the Americans got into a battle with the Spanish Navy back in the late 1800s - then later the Cuban commies tossed out the American gamblers, drunks and sex addicts screwing 12 year old Cuban girls..THEN the Amerixcan weasils put an embargo on the Island - that's like saying if I can not have sex with your child I am cutting off your families food supply - No wonder Ernest Hemmingway off himself - out of sheer guilt and remorse.

[Shady]

On the basis I described?

Well Cuba certainly falls under that category. So no more trade with Cuba? Does that include vacations too?

[madmax]

Generally I agree, but China deals behind enormously high trade walls itself. It lies, cheats and steals corporate and commercial secrets, then reproduces counterfeits in its own factories and ships them under false labels. It sends goods produced in slave labour camps contrary to treaties. It ships goods with the labels of other countries in order to get around rules and regulations. Even if one ignores their human rights abuses, their abuses of trade rules, regulations and laws are legendary. They will by raw materials from us but that's about it. Well, we can ship raw materials to almost anyone. And the damage to our own industrial base from their predatory pricing, not to mention their often damaged, dangerous and carcinogenic goods is considerably greater than any benefit we derive from shipping them rocks and wood.

Don't hold back, you're on a roll

To follow up on your slave labour comments.

45,000 workers are killed on the job every 3 months. That is 180,000 workers die so that we can have cheap consumer goods. Life is cheaper then the goods we purchase. Who knows how many limbs are lost and injuries sustained?

[madmax]

Well Cuba certainly falls under that category. So no more trade with Cuba? Does that include vacations too?

This thread is about China. Both are communist countries. In China the Military belongs to the Communist Party, not the country. Remember that.

China is a country that can supplant us as the US biggest trading partner and the see saw continues. Likely they will remain on top.

Thanks for ignoring the elephant in the room, and being fixated on that spec of dirt in the far corner.

Edited December 3, 2009 by madmax

[madmax]

Then I bow out gracefully my good man..."This above all to thine own self be true. Thou can'st then be false to any other man"........China is fine as long as we send our good people to deal with their good people - and not send our bastards to cut tacit deals witht their bastards....there - was that focused enough for you?

Focused or Poetic? LOL.

[Shady]

This thread is about China. Both are communist countries. In China the Military belongs to the Communist Party, not the country. Remember that.

China is a country that can supplant us as the US biggest trading partner and the see saw continues. Likely they will remain on top.

Thanks for ignoring the elephant in the room, and being fixated on that spec of dirt in the far corner.

So we don't hold all human-rights abusing countries to the same standard? So we stop trading with China, and Cuba, and basically all of the Middle East, probably Russia, and much of Central and South America, and also most of Africa.

So we lower our standard of living, and general health and welfare, while these human-rights abusing countries continue to be ruled by human rights abusers. Great strategy! *thumbs up*

[capricorn]

What gets me are comments about how important saving face is in Chinese culture. Ignatieff referred to it today in his reaction to the Harper visit.

“He lost face today,” Mr. Ignatieff said. “And in that culture losing face is very important and I do think it’s cost Canada economic opportunity today.”

http://www.theglobeandmail.com/blogs/bureau-blog/harper-reaping-what-he-has-sown/article1386729/

To me the meaning of losing face is when someone hurts your feelings by directing a comment at you that you don't like. OK, the Chinese don't like to have their feelings hurt especially in public. So what. The truth hurts. In Harper's case, I doubt his feelings were hurt or he lost face as a result of being told that 5 years is too long for a Canadian PM to visit China. I think Harper is thick skinned enough not to feel his prestige has been hurt by that comment. Conversely, it is the Chinese authorities who are fearful of losing prestige in the eyes of their own people and in the world if their faults and shortcomings are exposed.