They Know the Answer to This

There is a growing recognition around the world of the economic dangers posed by the People’s Republic of China’s export dominance, achieved as it has been through its domestic overproduction and overseas sales at below-cost prices of that overproduction, with the losses to the PRC’s businesses made good by PRC government subsidies.

A Group of 20 statement implicitly criticizing Beijing for its overreliance on exports for growth marks a new stage in international pressure. The statement, issued Tuesday at the G-20 meeting of finance ministers and central-bank chiefs in Asheville, NC, was a striking example of agreement in an otherwise-fractious affair that featured disputes over Russia and President Trump’s policy toward Canada.
Countries across Europe and Asia worry domestic industries in areas such as autos, electronics, and heavy machinery won’t survive China’s push to export its way out of domestic economic troubles.

The US Treasury issued a statement summarizing the matter, although Treasury Secretary Scott Bessent shied away from mentioning the PRC by name.

It said “countries with excessive and persistent external surpluses” should end policies that “result in an overreliance on exports for growth” and cause harmful spillovers around the globe.
Those countries should “eliminate nonmarket policies” and “remove distortions that constrain domestic consumption….”

Of course all of the G-20 players know full well that the PRC won’t do anything of the sort. Those exports are too important an economic weapon for the PRC to lay them down.

Last year, China responded to American tariffs by restricting the export of rare earths to every country, pummeling global manufacturers. Beijing also cut off certain mineral exports to Japan after a spat over Taiwan.

These world “leaders” know this weaponization. They just need to stop importing from the PRC, whether by serious tariffs, or complete refusal to buy PRC products. The doing would correct the economic damage, and from that, greatly reduce the political risk to their national sovereignty (a risk those “leaders” still don’t seem to see). The doing in the longer run also would more than pay for the disruption of shifting their supply chains. They just lack the courage to do it, satisfying themselves, instead, with yapping about it from the safety of their porches, and so they’re failing their people.

Closet Socialist

And sub rosa racist, in addition to his religious bigotry. That’s Progressive-Democratic Party candidate for US Senator from Texas, James Talarico. As recently as 2020, Talarico made his racism and socialist bent crystalline. He

described capitalism as an “oppressive system” that’s associated with white supremacy and climate change.

Capitalism is oppressive, and the primary alternative to that is the Progressive-Democratic Party—and Talarico—and Party’s recent enthusiastic embrace of the socialism of the Democratic Socialists of America. That overt embrace post-dates Talarico’s remarks, but he’s done nothing since to indicate he disagrees with his Party on that.

And: tying capitalism, which gets its strength and its legitimacy from the simple fact that it’s the only economic system that, on the one hand encourages voluntary participation in exchanges, and on the other hand, makes those participants—all of them—better off after the exchange than they were before the exchange, to the blatantly unequal—falsely so, immorally so—relationship among a supposedly oppressor race and supposedly intrinsically inferior races is nothing other than the manufacture of a race beef where none exists. And that is disgustingly racist.

Fatuous

The Supreme Court has ruled that the White House’s East Wing conversion into a ballroom and an uprated secure facility can proceed. The majority (a 5-4 decision) said, in part, that the single individual the plaintiffs had trotted out, a woman whose aesthetic sense was being offended because she heavily favored the original architecture of the White House over the new architecture created by the East Wing conversion, was insufficient to stop the conversion.

Chief Justice John Roberts, writing in dissent, disagreed with that. He wrote, regarding this aspect of the matter, that

one of the group’s [National Trust for Historic Preservation, the main plaintiff] members is “deeply committed” to the preservation of historic American buildings.
“The White House is an iconic American building whose symbolism and history are wrapped up in its architecture,” he wrote.
Preservationists can be “aesthetically injured” in a way that gives them standing to sue, just as environmentalists can have standing to sue over the destruction of wildlife, Roberts wrote….

Aesthetics—personal taste—can be a source of material injury? Really?

I have questions, then.

Personal taste can be used to stop projects? What about the personal tastes of those who favor the project? What about the personal tastes of those whose aesthetic sense leads them to not care about the progress? On what basis does Roberts determine the minority should reign over the majority?

Roberts’ position is so fatuous it’s hard to believe he gave any thought at all to the matter.

An Illegal Strike

Teachers strikes are explicitly illegal in Washington, but so far that State’s law men and women, at both the State and city level, have lacked the integrity to enforce their law. Thus, Seattle’s children are in danger of being deprived, yet again, of their access to education: the teachers of Seattle’s teachers union voted 91% in favor of striking and are set to walk off their jobs before the current school year starts.

There are two responsible answers to this move, if the union follows through, and both of them should be carried out. One is to fire for cause every teacher who goes on this illegal strike. The other is to decertify the teachers union for carrying out the illegal strike.

There are no other legitimate alternatives. The fact that the State’s and city’s managers have kowtowed to teachers unions in past illegal strikes presents no excuse for letting the union and those of its members get away with its illegal action this time. All acquiescing would do would be to demonstrate, once again, the intrinsic dishonesty of those in the State’s and city’s government.

Update: It appears the school district and the teachers union have reached an agreement. Apparently, the union is getting 9% in guaranteed salary increases, plus added school staff, but no added teachers on anything else to improve the children’s academic performance.

Illegal Aliens and CDLs

The Federal government is finally cracking down on illegal aliens with commercial driver licenses and the schools that “train” them. The latter cavalierly ignore the grave danger to life and property—to say nothing of the businesses’ cargo that those illegal aliens are hauling around.

It’s good that the Federal government is finally moving seriously to reduce the number of illegal alien CDL holders and the risks to us Americans and our businesses that those illegals represent.

It’s not enough, though. Government isn’t the only player here, nor should it be the primary. Businesses that engage shipping companies to move their goods from port, factory, farm, retailer to stores, factories, assemblers, and end users have their own part to play in this. They should require those shipping companies, as a condition of doing business with them, to certify that they have no illegal alien CDLs on their payroll.

The Left and many of their Progressive-Democratic Party politicians like to talk about noblesse oblige in the context of rationalizing their drumbeat of imposing punishing taxes on the Evil Rich. A broader and far more legitimate onus is characterized by patriotisme oblige. It’s time for businessmen who are Americans to act like it, and to act on it.