China #2

Northern Shoveler-- I think it is fair to say that neither of us are suggesting their system is without serious problems-- or making the claim that ours is either.

As well, I felt the need to point out that the challenges their country faces are not just different form ours but in most measurable respects more difficult. Canadian values and political realities are based on privileges many other countries do not share.

The company I keep includes as many Chinese as others. There is no question that there are criticisms, suggestions and heartache about some things that happen there that I am party to and share even. However, these ought to come from an appreciation of a Chinese context rather than solely a Canadian one and Canadians who want to help can do things to reduce their exploitation of Chinese workers -- along with that of any other workers.

I know this may be an idealist concept but I have long thought that we should have public consideration of the labour components for products -- much like an ingredients label on food. We should not punish whole countries but we can require those purchasing things for our market to require certain standards in those products when it comes to labour.

I am sure it would not come as a shock to many here that I would like to see a requirement that anything that comes from a factory of more than a certain number of people should be unionized-- If all products sold here had to be from union shops where workers were paid a certain amount then we could at the same time treat all source countries equitably and contribute to global progress. It would also be about focusing on our market rather than interfering in others.

I know some will say that unionization can mean different things in different places and that is where local law also must apply. In fairness we cannot insist that our labour laws be imposed on others but a minimum wage for products sold here is not unreasonable -- just as requiring that there not be high quantities of lead in children's toys. If we take out the exploitation in our market that is what addresses our responsibility. Then we can let other countries develop their systems without the interference of our exploitation and that alone is greater than any other influence we could hope for or presume to have the right to exert.

Except not all unions are equal. Look at Saskatchewan's Bill 80. 

Make it mandatory and put the power in the hands of the government and it seems to me it is no longer in the hands of the workers where it belongs. 

I have no problem with choosing to buy only from union labour, but beyond that I think all we can do make the system as free as possible for workers to organize unions if they want to. And there is still plenty of work to be done on that front to undo the attacks and restrictions on that freedom.

I did read that, actually. I don't think it is always that easy to keep that choice free, whatever intentions we might have.

(edit)

And as I said, there is still plenty of work to be done to allow for a truly free choice in the first place.

You need a secret ballot certainly and independent unions naturally--

But if you want the lives of citizens to improve you do this through addressing workers directly-- the only way to do this is through unionization. There is no other way of achieving these results that has ever worked.

George Victor wrote:

And back in China, the party leadership spend sleepless nights formulating appeals to the leaders of the resource-rich nations coming under their protection to keep workers' rights in mind.

The CPC are taking advantage of the massive corruption and economic meltdown in the west by scooping up world resources. Apparently we'll have to democratize our own corrupt states here before we can do anything to stop Beijing consensus from replacing the Washington version.

Actually, the Chinese are fascinated by what other countries do and they do like to study the actions of other countries. The words, not so much. those are unwelcome. Everyone, plays the word game, mostly for domestic consumption. We are not swayed by advice from China anymore than they are by the same from us. But when we or they do something that clearly works the other notices.

Anyone who thinks that people here are concerned about the reception of any appeal we make over there I think is rather naive-- those are politically calculated for here. The only time either country is concerned about an appeal or advice is when their own citizen's are involved. When we have an issue with a Chinese national -- either they have done something wrong or are in trouble or are hurt-- we will listen to them more. And in reverse, they will to us.

The main reason so many Canadians are better off than people in most other countries is because of the wealth in this country not because our government is superior.

When people get that they can see that if you want to help people in other countries you have to tone down the exploitation. You want to do that? You can start with Canadian mining companies and lobby the government for regulation of their behavior abroad. You can look to our procurement practices and lobby for regulation to stop the competition for who can find the cheapest most exploitative contract that would be based on illegal treatment of workers here. We can also consider the waste in energy, the environment here. There is a lot we can do to help the world. Thankfully it mostly can be done from here. And if you are one of those interested in our influence and you want to reach countries like China remember they will watch what we do even if they do not consider what we say. And we pretty much do the same as well-- we also are more interested in what people do than say. It would not take all that much to achieve a greater understanding. I have had many political discussions with Chinese people-- one thing I can tell you from those-- they are not impressed by hypocrisy. Many I have spoken to are very critical of their government but don't take kindly to BS and double standards.Of course there are many Chinese I know who absolutely detest thinking about or discussing politics-- even more than Canadians.

Others may have a different experience but there is mine -- interesting representative or not.

The motivations for coming here is a whole interesting topic.

I know some who came because family members did, others who believed our propaganda about how much better it was here and how well immigrants were treated (some of those have returned now). The most common has been people who came as a visitor, made connections here, or studied and got job offers here and then immigrated. Of course now it is not like that anymore since immigration is a long wait with mostly refusals.

For parents and grandparents it is something over ten years now-- The people arriving now applied more than 7 years ago but those currently in the system know that each step is moving slower so previous history is no indication. The progress for those who applied in 2007 towards the first stage has been moving one day forward in a month for some time now. That means if you are one year away you would expect to come to the top of the pile in 30 years. We are pretty much not taking anyone now since the delay for grandparents is beyond reasonable life expectancy. Canada won't say no because hopeful people pay $2,000 each in fees. It is far too profitable to take their money and throw the applications in storage than to admit the answer is really no. As well by taking the applications the government then has the reason to refuse them from coming as visitors. Once a family member applies they pay the money, can never visit and will never get to immigrate. For Canada I heard that over 100,000 people still apply each year. That would come to $200,000,000 revenue a year to the government if the figures are true. To bad it is such a lie. Our family has relations in China that nobody can see because the kids are in summer school like arrangements and the grandparents are not allowed to visit.

Most Canadians like it this way because of the massive amount of anti-immigrant propaganda that has been spread around the last few years.

China Explores a Frontier 2 Miles Deep

Quote:

The men, who descended more than two miles in a craft the size of a small truck, also signaled Beijing's intention to take the lead in exploring remote and inaccessible parts of the ocean floor, which are rich in oil, minerals and other resources that the Chinese would like to mine. And many of those resources happen to lie in areas where China has clashed repeatedly with its neighbors over territorial claims...The global seabed is littered with what experts say is trillions of dollars' worth of mineral nodules as well as many objects of intelligence value: undersea cables carrying diplomatic communications, lost nuclear arms, sunken submarines and hundreds of warheads left over from missile tests. While a single small craft cannot reel in all these treasures, it does put China in an excellent position to go after them.

And back to a two-year struggle (which included the late Joey and the late Sean, and which I gave up on.) Please read the un-moderated farce, with attempts to maintain the topic of this thread,including the fate of workers in a voracious China. It is understood, a "given", that the U.S.empire is "bad", and does not need underlinging in thhis thread, as are all those corporations who exploit workers abroad, just as Naomi Klein brought to western attention more than a decade ago.

The following bit from AP, which I first raised last year in an appeal to promote RIM's Blackberry hereabouts, rather than iPhone, and which was given prominence last year by a young Chinese activist who appeared on Al Jazeera, suggests there's been little progress:

"Apple Inc. has disclosed a list of its suppliers for the iPhone, iPad and other popular gadgets for the first time amid growing criticism over labour and environmental practices, especially in China.

"The list for years has beenstrictly and vervently protected. Even a glimpse of an Apple iPhone or its components before a public release became a source of iontrigue and controversy. Investors have played a guessing game about which contractors would become Apple's next supplier, or who was on the outs.

"Apple disclosed its list of its suppliers responsible for 97 per cent of its procurement expenditures worldwide. Some examples are Intel Corp., Broadcom Corp., Amphenol Corp. and Sanyo Electric Co...The 2012 'Supploier Responsibility Progress Report' released Friday documents 229 audits throughout its supply chain last year by Apple Inc. That's up 80 per cent from 127 audits in 2010.

"The audits found labour, health and environmental violations, including instances of underage labour and discrimination based on pregnancy. Apple also outlined its response to each of the violations that were uncovered, which included ending its relationship with repeat offenders and requiring companies to come up with measures to prevent them from occurring again.

"The report was issued a day after distraught workers who make Microsoft's Xbox video game consoles at Foxconn Technology Group climbed to the top of a six-storey dormitory and threatened to jump to their deaths. No one did, but the incident highlights growing labour unrest in China. Foxconn is a unit of Taiwan's Hon Hai Precision Industry Co. that makes iPads and iPhones for Apple.

"There was a rash of suicides at the massive Foxconn plant in 2010 in the city of Shenzhen. About 300,000 people work at the plant and industrial park.Plant managers installed nets to prevent more people from committing suicide by jumping from the roof.

"In its report, Appled found...just 38 per cent of the suppliers observed Apple's working-hours policies, and 69 per cent followed its code for wages and benefits..."

Why China makes our electronic products (it's not just cheaper labor)

Quote:

It's not just that workers are cheaper abroad, according to an important article in The New York Times Saturday. Most of the components of cellphones, computers, and other electronic products are now manufactured in China (and European and other East-Asia countries), so assembling the device half-a-world away would create huge logistical challenges, the article points out.

China now has a far larger supply of qualified engineers than the U.S. And China's factories are far bigger and can react faster than those in the U.S. "Made in the USA." is no longer a viable option for most electronics products. So, many companies have closed major facilities in the United States to reopen in China, and middle-class jobs are disappearing as the nation has stopped training enough people in the mid-level skills that factories need.

Don't quote me but I think the Free Tibet movement and the notoriously well-informed Radio Free Asia are intimately tied to the American National Clandestine Service/CIA based out of Langley, Virginia. They've been active in various surrounding areas in Central Asia, Nepal, golden drug triangle in SE Asia etc for many years since Chiang Kai-shek and his gangsters were chased to Formosa and Burma by 1949. It's no wonder there has been "unrest." International unrest has tended to manifest as armed insurrections and even acts of terrorism in recent times.

China Investment Deal in Canadian Oil Sands a Sell Out, Says Party Leader

Quote:

China's totalitarian regime will be able to sue Canada over lost profits resulting from stricter environmental controls or other regulatory changes under a foreign investor protection agreement Stephen Harper announced during his current trip to China..."Our rights and sovereignty to exercise over decisions made in Beijing are narrowing down to very few choices on a limited menu," [Elizabeth May] said.

China Sets Up Fund to Bankroll Takeovers

http://www.dw.de/dw/article/0,,15748467,00.html?maca=en-rss-en-bus-2091-rdf

"Boasting $3.2 Trillion in foreign currency reserves, China has created a new fund aimed at financing takeover bids abroad. The fund also seeks to boost China's currency in global financial markets.."

China shows signs of neo-fascism, J. Michael Cole, Taipei Times

Chinese Fascism's Global Consequences, Roland Farris, Truthout

Quote:

...we have already seen the early stages of this global trend. A powerful fascist state of such maturity and size in the world will increasingly come to determine political debate in nominally democratic countries as the economic advantages of such a regime draws more and more financial resources away from less "efficient" political systems. If China continues to be able to use its fascist state apparatus to attract investment at the cost of liberal democratic nations, then the characteristics of these nations will tend toward increasing fascism in an imitative defensive response.

Perhaps you saw in the Globe and Mail Business Report this week: "What China wants"
It reads: "China has revolutionaized the way most other nations produce and shop for goods. It's where the world goes when it's looking for a bargain. But increasingly, China may be looking at the rest of us in a similar manner. Between 2005 and 2011, Chinese firms invested more than $300 billion in global enterprises (about $73 billion last year alone), predominantly oil and gas companies, mines, banks and real estate. "

Australia hold the top spot, with $40.8 billiions in investments there.

I believe I'm beginning to better understand the restiveness in Australia's Labout Party and Rudd's attempt to regain the helm this weekend. :)

- It would also be bad news if valuable resources (other than seafood-which may be contaminated now anyway) are found in the disputed Diaoyu/Senkaku Islands just northeast of Taiwan, along the way to Okinawa. They are claimed by China, Taiwan and Japan - a potential trigger for an intriguing (given the unsettled situation between Taiwan and China) multi-sided conflict that could drag in the US. In a crafty move to strengthen its claims, Japan started giving the islands in the group Japanese names, during a mini-honeymoon period just after the Taiwan election in January, when the party favored by both the PRC and US (the KMT) won re-election.

- China interest in Argentina land irks locals - reportedly to grow genetically modified soy and corn, for animal feed and biofuels.

Like in Australia and around the world, the name of the game China is playing is "buy up resources before others do," an updated variant of "colonialism."

Fidel wrote:

And Beijing is basically telling western capitalists to go fuck themselves.

They're getting more and more refined at this.

Hong Kong's new leader must restore trust

Quote:

Perhaps Leung's most difficult challenge will be paving the way for full suffrage in the next chief executive election in 2017, as promised by Beijing.

The South China Sea is the Future of Conflict  -  by Robert D Kaplan

http://www.foreignpolicy.com/articles/2011/08/15/the_south_china_sea_is_...

"The 21st century's defining battleground is going to be on water.."

US-Philippine Drills 'Obviously a Provocation' (and vid)

http://rt.com/news/us-philippine-drills-china-967/

"Joint US-Philippine military drills have kicked off in the South China Sea, near an island claimed by both the Philippines and China. The controversial exercises are seen by many as a provocation that could lead to a real military conflict..."

Interview with Asia Times' Pepe Escobar

Interesting how China is the one being provocative in training its navy in international waters off its own coastline.  Seems like China is not the only military power making statements.

The difference is the the US routinely trains their navy in other peoples backyards. I am waiting for the Chinese training exercises that pass as close to Hawaii as legally possible and then proceed to "train" off the west coast of the US.  Now that would be provocative.

Quote:

Posted at 05/15/2012 11:05 PM | Updated as of 05/16/2012 12:48 PM

MANILA, Philippines – A US Navy attack submarine has arrived in Subic Bay, Zambales, about 124 nautical miles away from the disputed Scarborough shoal (Panatag Shoal).

Authorities said the USS North Carolina is docked at Subic Freeport for "routine ship replenishment," amid a standoff between Philippine and Chinese ships near the area.

Philippine Navy spokesman Lieutenant Colonel Omar Tonsay clarified that the US submarine’s arrival last Sunday “has nothing to do with that matter.”

Tonsay said the USS North Carolina is due to leave Subic on Saturday.

According to the website of US Pacific Command (US PACOM), the 350-feet long USS North Carolina is the fourth submarine in the Virginia class and is the US Navy's "newest class of submarine and the first ship designed for the post Cold-War environment."

"She is designed to operate with stealth, agility and endurance in the world's littoral regions, as well as the deep oceans. During this maiden deployment, her crew provided the value of the ship and their training by completing a wide variety of missions assigned by their operational commander," PACOM said.

"North Carolina is one of the stealthiest, most technologically advanced submarines in the world. She brings to the region the capability to conduct the full spectrum of potential submarine missions including anti-submarine warfare, anti-surface ship warfare, strike, naval special warfare involving special operations forces, intelligence, surveillance, and reconnaissance, and mine warfare," it added.

The solution is simple.  NATO needs to stop its arms race.  China spends far less per capita on arms than any of the NATO countries including Canada. I think the US is around 43% of the world's total spending while the Chinese are around 8% or 9%.  In 2010 China's per capita spending was $68 while the USA spent $2,327 per person.

China's State Media Spinners wrote:

China's military spending is not a threat to neighboring countries. In fact, there are three reasons for the rise in China's military spending:

First, technological progress inevitably leads to periods when there is a rapid growth in a country's military spending. Advances in military technology bring about intensive upgrading of weaponry, which increases the cost of weaponry and directly leads to a rise in military spending. China is currently updating its second and third generation weapons. However, its level of weaponry still lags behind the most advanced international levels by two or three decades.

Second, China has to increase its military input to enhance its national defense strength and safeguard its interests. This too necessitates a rise in military spending. China's national defense task is extremely complicated and arduous compared with other major military states in the world.

Aside from maintaining its border defenses and air defenses, China also has to strengthen its coastal defenses and protect China's maritime rights and interests. Moreover, it has to meet the new challenges of protecting its national interests in space and cyberspace, all of which require increased input and a higher level of professionalism. In addition, increased military expenditures are needed to combat various separatist forces.

Third, China adheres to the principle of peaceful coexistence, friendly communication and collaborative development with other countries in the region. But the US' Asia-Pacific strategy is to "squeeze" China by fueling disputes between China and some of its neighbors. This has made the disputes more complicated and acute, and forced China to increase its military spending to safeguard its interests.

China's military expenditure is based on its own strategic evaluations and decisions. Moreover, it is compatible with its economic growth. It accounts for only a small proportion of its GDP and fiscal expenditure and its per capita military expenditure is comparatively low, which means it has room to grow without adding to the national economic burden.

From 1989 to 2011, China's military expenditure accounted for less than 1.3 percent of China's GDP on average. In 2010, its military expenditure per capita was only $68, well below the $2,327 of the US, $970 of the UK and $336 of Japan.

http://www.chinadaily.com.cn/cndy/2012-05/16/content_15302643.htm

Yup that is just you Bec. 

I was responding to ilha's comment; "Chinese navy increasingly provocative, training and gathering intelligence ahead of anticipated completion of PLA navy's new aircraft carriers around 2015-2020."

I personally think it is all provocative and I wish the war mongers who control the military security complexes did not control the main Western economies.  But if the US and its NATO allies are going to be in the face of every other sovereign nation on the planet it is hardly surprising that they are increasing their spending on military equipment.  We live in an age where the arms industry is America's only real business the rest of the economy has been sold or hollowed out.  If this corporate militarism is not fascism then what should it be called.

Quote:

The total arms sales (including sales of military services) of the SIPRI Top 100 maintained their upward trend in 2010, although at 1 per cent in real terms, the increase was much slower than in 2009. Over the period since 2002, the increase has been 60 per cent in real terms.

Arms-producing and military services companies from North America and Western Europe once again dominated the list (which however does not include China-based companies). Sales by the 44 US-based companies accounted for over 60 per cent of all arms sales by the Top 100 arms-producing companies in 2010.  The 30 companies based in Western Europe accounted for a further 29 per cent. 

The global arms industry continues to be highly concentrated, with the top 10 arms-producing companies accounting for 56 per cent, or $230 billion, of total Top 100 arms sales.

http://www.sipri.org/media/pressreleases/27-feb-2012-Business-as-usual-f...

Where is China’s heir apparent Xi Jinping?

http://www.washingtonpost.com/opinions/where-is-chinas-xi-jinping/2012/09/11/4fb48d1e-fc34-11e1-b153-218509a954e1_story.html