Comments by "Alan Friesen" (@alanfriesen9837) on "Bloomberg Television" channel.

Mr. Ross, most of that U.S. market is still going to be there, it's just going to have more friction. China's probably going to be reluctant to devalue because while it compensates for some of the tariff barriers export-wise it would bump up the cost of living in China and it could give them problems politically with Europe and other export markets with whom they currently have some common ground vis-a-vis the Americans.
3
Don't drag the thinking half of the country into your throwback proclamation. I sure as hell don't want a bunch of masked vandals coming here and making it difficult to work and interact with the Chinese in the future.
2
That's the power of an executive order. Besides, gay couples aren't a health risk to the employees and patrons of that business.
2
The Chinese position was hostile and petulant?
2
The Chinese had a huge role in the defeat of Japan, second (maybe) to the U.S. role only.
1
@yourhuckleberry6757 What the hell are you talking about?
1
As an American I think anyone who's not fleeing from justice should be welcomed here. That would include the vast majority of people coming from Mexico and some of the people coming from Hong Kong. I'm sorry that many of my countrymen have no sense of compassion or hospitality for those trying to escape grinding poverty.
1
@barriocubalindo If I was the author of my country's immigration policies that is exactly what I would do. I'm not entirely on board with your assertion that we've caused all the world's misery but I certainly think we should do whatever we can to alleviate it and I certainly think that we should welcome anyone who wants to come participate in our society, and where possible, ensure safe passage. I have great confidence that America is fundamentally strong enough both economically and culturally to benefit from that kind of infusion and I think it would give us a much better claim to the greatness that we like to describe ourselves with.
1
@coldwarrior888 As an agnostic moderate with socialist leanings I welcome and honor conservative Christians who embrace compassion. I wish there were more of you. I also believe, as you suggested, that we have a responsibility to make sure our house is in order and that the general welfare of those living under our flag per se have to be taken care of as a first priority. I say this because I'm an American, a proud one, and I believe that our country is blessed with natural, capital, and human resources to such a degree that no one in our country should be unable to find comfort, purpose and security so long as they are willing to make an honest effort to contribute and participate in our society. This is sometimes referred to as The American Dream. And while that dream has appeared to fade in recent decades, I don't think it's because we no longer have the necessary resources to make it real. We have the ability to house everyone. We have the ability to feed everyone. We even have the ability to entertain everyone. What's assaulting the dream are a lack of vision, a lack of will, and a cruel and non-compassionate distribution system. I know it looks like I'm getting off subject but my point is that we could take care of our own 320 million people if we really wanted to and we worked together to make it happen. We could also absorb far more than double the 1.2 million immigrants that we are taking in annually and still maintain our values (at least the good values) and advance our overall prosperity. Of all the hurdles we have towards progress, immigration is among the least significant, and that's assuming that it's a hurdle at all. Like all investments, there is some up-front cost. But with immigrants there's a huge payoff down the line. In contrast, the costs of rejecting immigrants, denying them timely refuge and opportunity based on their place of birth, are never recovered and often compounded. On top of that, it's evil, despicable in its cruelty, and it should be a huge weight on our collective conscience. It certainly is for anyone who truly is a person of compassion.
1
That's one seriously expensive band-aid.
1
J M, the United States has dominated the world since 1989. That level of dominance is beginning to fray but the U.S. will still be a powerful player, one of two-to-four depending on how Europe and Russia move forward, for the next century.
1
I don't remember suggesting that "the US has [ever] been like Stalin, Tojo, Hitler, Brezhnev or Xi…". There's more than one way to dominate. The United States has dominated the world mostly with economic and cultural power, first through production dominance during the post-war decades and later with consumption dominance. You can control a lot when you're every countries primary customer. I don't think that is necessarily a bad thing. There have been issues but on the whole I think the U.S. has been a pretty responsible actor in that role. But now this role is going to be shared with China, maybe Europe, and though much less likely, possibly Russia over the course of the next century.
1
I think you're misjudging the situation. I think this is the perfect time for Xi to build up the parts of the world that the United States has largely ignored. Trump's global bellicosity is creating a leadership vacuum that may not last too much beyond his administration. There's a certain amount of risk to playing your hand too soon but you can loose out by being overly cautious as well. I think China's government if it's proven anything over the decades has shown competence in the face of challenge and I suspect they'll do fine. I also have a lot of confidence in the United States as a global player for the foreseeable future and I think the Chinese understand that better than a lot of Americans do.
1