主题:del -- MRandson
here's the point. Obama is asking China to do something for the US that only the most naive in China would do. Now if the Americans accept `rebalancing' as necessary, then any ligitimate measure to eliminate the cause of this great imbalance should be discussed and considered.
The question is of course, what kind of measure is ligitimate and what's not. Given that all human are created equal and freedom is the single most important value, I should argue that the rebalancing of sino-US population is not only ligitmate but also the right path to follow. A great and responsible country like the United States must not violate the born human right of anyone seeking a better life under the excuse of border control, which in itself is expensive, ineffective and unnecessary...
We all know free market is good and one generally shouldn't fear competition on a level ground. Once 300 million Chinese immigrants are in the states, a new level ground will be created in both countries. America will have enough hardworking workers to promote manufactoring in the US. China on the other hand, will have more incentive to attract workers with better living standards, hence consume more.
I can go on with the benefits of population rebalancing. But I guess you've already seen the point. Of course neither Obama or the Congress will buy this. But why should China and the rest of the world buy their argument? Which is equally very thin on operatability and popularity. It's not about actually addressing the imbalance, but simply a way of fighting a propaganda war.
- 相关回复 上下关系8
🙂two years ago 5 parishg 字678 2010-11-20 07:04:50
🙂Next time... 1 发了胖的罗密欧 字161 2010-11-20 07:13:44
🙂then you only get the 1 parishg 字341 2010-11-20 09:13:19
🙂You're right, but
🙂I see your point 7 parishg 字2258 2010-11-20 11:52:57
🙂物价接轨的速度蛮快啊。 readerg 字0 2010-11-20 04:33:26
🙂嗯,给点操作建议啊…… 贪玩的风筝 字64 2010-11-19 11:29:53
🙂我对其他人的回复,对你是否有些价值呢? MRandson 字0 2010-11-19 18:53:25