The Shanghai Composite Index closed [Wednesday] 1.2% higher, having earlier fallen as much as 5%. The turnaround came after a number of companies disclosed that state-backed companies were among their top shareholders….
Still want to “invest” in the PRC?
Permanent link to this post
(73 words, estimated 18 secs reading time)
As economic managers, Chinese leaders have been in a league of their own for the past quarter century.
They’re the product of a bureaucratic system that, at its best, weeds out underperformers, rewards achievement and prizes experience. By the time they reach the very top, most leaders have run provinces the size of whole countries. Their image of competence has been reassuring at home—and acknowledged abroad—at times of crisis. And they’ve delivered success: China’s economy grew faster, and for longer, than any in history.
That’s how Andrew Browne opened his recent piece in The Wall Street Journal. Then he added,
Richard Fernandez, in his Belmont Club piece, cited Ross Douthat of the New York Times:
Ross Douthat, writing in ruefully writes “I simply do not believe that the Obama Justice Department is going to indict the former secretary of state and Democratic front-runner for mishandling classified information, even if the offenses involved would have sunk a lesser figure’s career or landed her in jail.” The observation is almost tantamount to arguing that the rule of law no longer exists; that the political class can literally do whatever it wants. What is worse, he argues the electorate has accepted it, a point he makes in the succeeding paragraph.
Republican Presidential candidate Donald Trump wants to deport all illegal aliens and sharply restrict legal immigration. I’ll leave the foolishness of the first for another post; I’m more interested in the restriction on legal immigration Trump is proposing here.
He also calls for “a pause” in all immigration, for an unspecified period.
That was buried in the WSJ op-ed at the link. I’ve not seen anything even remotely definitive on Trump’s plans for Social Security, so I have to ask: how does he plan to fund that program?
Except to Steve Chapman, writing in Real Clear Politics.
It’s a mystery why, after allegedly tricking us into giving them everything they wanted, the Iranians would be so eager to evade these easy terms.
Iran’s leadership wants nuclear weapons, and they’ll do what they need to do to get them: talk interminably about a “deal” that purports to restrict their access, for a time, and then disregard the terms of the deal in order to continue their development and building efforts apace. This just isn’t that hard to understand.
Russian Foreign Minister Sergei Lavrov blamed the Ukrainian government Monday for an uptick in violence in eastern Ukraine, saying Kiev’s forces were apparently preparing for a fresh offensive, as Ukraine blamed Russia-backed separatists for the escalation.
Never mind that, were it true that Ukraine is readying an offensive, it would only be true because the Ukrainian government has a right—a duty—to drive the Russian troops from Ukrainian soil and to bring the “separatists” to justice.
Here’s Democratic Presidential candidate Hillary Clinton’s view of “politics:”
I won’t pretend that this [homemade email server/classified email scandal] is anything other than what it is—the same old partisan games we’ve seen so many times before.
It’s not about Benghazi. And you know what? It’s not about emails or servers, either. It’s about politics. I will do my part to provide transparency to Americans[.]
Because it’s only politics that a Clinton, or any other politician, should be held to account for her misbehaviors regarding using homemade email servers to conduct State Department official business.
This one is by Patrick O’Connor in Wall Street Journal Washington Wire piece.
Senator and Presidential candidate (R, FL) spoke to the Foreign Policy Initiative in New York City last Friday, and he decried President Barack Obama’s nuclear weapons “deal” with Iran and Obama’s decision to resume ties with Cuba and reopen an embassy there.
Mr Rubio outlined those positions in a Friday speech in New York hosted by the Foreign Policy Initiative, further casting himself as the candidate most eager to reignite tensions with two longtime adversaries.