To kick off this thread I'll use an NPR article that documents at least some of the direct investment from China into foreign countries in their grab for domination in agriculture, energy, technology, finance and industry.
Quote:Explore China's Global Reach
China has been steadily increasing its foreign investments outside of bonds in recent years. Between 2005 and 2010, it made more than $224 billion in overseas investments and also entered into engineering and construction contracts of more than $94 billion, according to data compiled by The Heritage Foundation, a conservative think tank in Washington, D.C. The group tracks China's foreign nonbond investments and contracts worth more than $100 million. Before 2005, China had relatively few overseas investments outside of bonds, says Heritage's Derek Scissors. But China's investments are still dwarfed by the United States, he says. (Explore NPR's full series China: Beyond Borders.)
[attachment=4013]
http://www.npr.org/2011/06/10/136930746/...obal-reach
Note: The onsite version is an interactive graphic while posted below is a simple screenie. Sortable tabular data is also available at the source.
Data is sourced from the following Report using
2009 data:
China Global Investment Tracker: 2011
Published on January 10, 2011 by Derek Scissors, Ph.D.
http://www.heritage.org/research/reports...acker-2011
[
attachment=4015]
Raw Spreadsheet Data:
[
attachment=4014]
Some surprising and not so surprising datasets from an unlikely source in this compilation but I suppose there is a bit of free reign to reveal what is self evident. I'm trying to figure whether they are trying to frame it but my instincts are chirping it as a fear mechanism sprinkled with predictive programming.
It'd be
super groovy if I could get some help on following up the data compilation as there are always lies damn lies in statistics.
One thing
is clear; China is a conduit for wealth transfer and the primary national hub for the global corporate takeover.
So many threads I could link up as related for now just
title search for China and Chinese and you'll find plenty o' resources and articles.
Can't ignore India, Germany, Britain, The US of A and Russia as national shells for wealth in this game. This is like watching a game of RISK unfold at the climax or a game of
MONOPOLY when the old shoe is about to clean up the board. It's more about the so called "elite's" siphoning of power via any and all means; not nations they are merely the properties for revenue generation and control.
I'll follow up later with some military, technology and cultural takeover links and reference threads, torrent releases and more exciting information on the ploy for global dominance, which really is the only conspiracy we should concern ourselves with No matter how much fun it is hearing about how one political player (Weiner), banking figure (Strauss-Kahn) or another icon (Horowitz) did something sexually to or with another is.
Quote:China invests $1 billion in New York City
Echoes of when Japan snagged a majority ownership of Rockefeller Center.
Emily LodishAugust 11, 2011 13:36
Chinese companies and entrepreneurs have quietly invested $1 billion in New York City over the last year.
In the process, they have snagged parts of major city icons, like the Empire State Building and the Tappan Zee bridge.
From the New York Times:
Investors from China are snapping up luxury apartments and planning to spend hundreds of millions of dollars on commercial and residential projects like Atlantic Yards in Brooklyn. Chinese companies have signed major leases at the Empire State Building and at 1 World Trade Center, which is the centerpiece of the rebuilding at ground zero.
In the late '80s, a similar phenomenon that occurred involving Japan that caused quite a stir.
Sony Corporation bought Columbia Pictures in 1989, and the same year, Mitsubishi paid $846 million for 51 percent of the Rockefeller Group, owner of Rockefeller Center.
How were they received? This NY Times headline from Nov. 3, 1989, hints at the anxiety and xenophobia that transpired: "Japan Buys the Center of New York."
People were worried about foreigners having such a strong stake in major cultural symbols, and they weren't shy about saying as much.
But this time, with the U.S. economy in the tubes, most Americans are singing a different tune.
Most welcome the Chinese investment as a welcome boost.
After all, China has been investing all over the globe (Brazil, Africa, Europe, even the Caribbean). It only follows it would eventually settle on New York.
http://www.globalpost.com/dispatches/glo...e-building
More on Chinese Investments in Brazil and the BRICS alliance.
BRICS Summit: Far East Bloc versus America: 'Great Game' for Global Order via Banking and Currency?
http://concen.org/forum/showthread.php?tid=3740
China investment in Alberta Oil:
Chinese Investment in Canadian Resources Survey (45 Pages)
http://www.asiapacific.ca/sites/default/...l_2011.pdf
Buying up the Alberta Oil Sands
http://concen.org/forum/showthread.php?t...#pid177518
http://www.reuters.com/article/2010/04/1...9720100412
I think they already own Vancouver.
Through article on the economic policy and some geopolitics to boot.
Quote:The China Deception
by moneychanges on August 26, 2011
The current trend in the world of finance and politics is toward consolidation of power into the hands of a few large financial intuitions like Goldman Sachs. Over 40 US states have turned over control of unemployment payments to the largest private banks (PDF) such as Bank of America, JP Morgan Chase, and Citibank. Recipients of benefits are often forced to have a bank account and a debit card at these banks in order to receive their benefits.
The state of Kentucky handed over control of all their revenues and financial transactions to these same banks which caused the global financial crisis. Handing over large accounts of public money are among the many gifts and support measures provided by US government entities to prop up and rescue too big to fail banks.
So how do these mega bank show their gratitude to the American People for throwing them a lifeline during the financial crises that began in 2008? A little known fact is that last year Citigroup, JP Morgan, and many other large international banks were engaged in promoting China’s renminbi currency to be accepted in place of the dollar in world commerce. The financial times of London ran an article on August 26, 2010 entitled “Banks back switch to renminbi for trade” which states:
“A number of the world’s biggest banks have launched international roadshows promoting the use of the renminbi to corporate customers instead of the dollar for trade deals with China. HSBC, which recently moved its chief executive from London to Hong Kong, and Standard Chartered are offering discounted transaction fees and other financial incentives to companies that choose to settle trade in the Chinese currency.”
“We’re now capable of doing renminbi settlement in many parts of the world,” said Chris Lewis, HSBC’s head of trade for greater China. “All the other major international banks are frantically trying to do the same thing.”
“HSBC and StanChart are among a slew of global banks – including Citigroup and JP Morgan – holding roadshows across Asia, Europe and the US to promote the renminbi to companies.”
These moves toward internationalizing the Chinese renminbi to replace the dollar would require approval from global corporate giants. Ironically the American icon McDonald’s became the first foreign company in the world to sell corporate bonds in renminbi.
CHINA IS TOP POLICY ISSUE FOR UNITED STATES
Considered unimportant to many, the pivotal political event for global politics this year was the Jan 2011 State visit to the U.S. by Chinese President Hu. US negotiations with China primarily concern the dollar’s competition with China’s currency, the fate of the dollar, and what will be the future world reserve currency. Leading into the January 2011 State Visit, the New York Times ran an article which discussed President Obama’s earlier 2009 Asia tour and its overall failure.
“In Seoul, instead of getting hammered on its currency, China managed to persuade Europe to join it in rejecting core elements of Mr. Obama’s strategy of stimulating growth before focusing on deficit reduction. In addition, several major nations accused the Federal Reserve of deliberately devaluing the dollar in an effort to put the costs of America’s competitive troubles on trading partners, rather than taking politically tough measures to rein in spending at home. The result was that Mr. Obama appeared on the world stage as a leader of a country losing ground to a rising China. Administration officials are determined that this will not happen during the visit to Washington this week.”
This ‘determination’ alluded to by Obama administration officials would evidence itself both in the Arab revolts and the harsh criticism of China during the Chinese President’s visit to Washington. The criticism came through top officials such as Secretary of State Hillary Clinton and Treasury Secretary Timothy Geithner. It is quite unusual diplomacy to openly criticize the policies of a head of state while they are concurrently a guest in your country. What was further unusual was the extent to which US Officials, corporate leaders, and political elites simultaneously attempted to make a powerful and friendly impression on the Chinese President. This seemingly contradictory policy was made mention of in a New York Times article.
“David Rothkopf, a national security expert who worked in the administration of President Bill Clinton, said: “There’s been this well-orchestrated and clearly well thought-out campaign, over the past two weeks, involving the secretary of state, Treasury, defense and commerce making strong statements regarding currency, the trade imbalance, human rights and China’s military stance.” He added, “So you’re welcoming the leader of the most important rival power in the world into the capital, and the way you pave his entrance into the city is laid with these four big thorny issues”
During the State Visit on Wednesday Jan 19th the Chinese President attended a meeting where he was surrounded by a large show of American corporate might. Such was actually an indication that the US was trying to mask its weakness and really needed something important from China. The list of executives in attendance was unprecedented and included all of the following:
* Steve Ballmer of Microsoft
* Lloyd Blankfein of Goldman Sachs
* Jeff Immelt of General Electric
* Paul Otellini of Intel
* Ellen Kullman of Du Pont
* David Rubenstiein of Carlyle Group
* Aris Candris of Westinghouse Electric Corp.
* John Chen the former Sybase Inc. chief executive
* Muhtar Kent of Coca-Cola Co.
* Greg Page of Cargill Inc
* John Thornton of HSBC Holdings
* Andrew Liveris of Dow Chemical Co.
In spite of all the diplomatic shock and awe, the United States did not achieve what seemed to be its primary objective which was to have China eliminate protections on its banking sector and currency. Richard Adams of the UK Gaurdian presented a time-line of events and quotes from the State visit and press conference with the Chinese and American heads of state. The quotes of President Obama are a good indication of what the US was requesting from China in private discussions:
“The currency issue is a part of the problem, the RMB [renminbi] is undervalued,” says Obama, more bluntly. “President Hu has indicated that he is in favor of moving towards a market-based system,” …” but it’s not happening fast enough. Anyway, it will be a win-win for both countries once the renminbi floats”…
“We want to sell you all kinds of stuff. We want to sell you planes, we want to sell you cars, we want to sell you software,”
HENRY KISSINGER ON CHINA
Henry Kissinger continues to be an important figure on US policy toward China and has been for the last 4 decades. He was in attendance for the State Dinner with the Chinese President, and was reported to have also had a private meeting with the Chinese President. He has been influential on policy and in numerous appointments of the Obama administration. Dr. Kissinger released a book in 2011 entitled “On China” His writings and statement provide a great insight into what may be guiding present decisions on US military and foreign policy.
On Oct 12, 2009 Kissinger posted an article advocating that Obama has no real option but to support the Af-Pakistan surge which General Stanley McChrystal lobbied for. Obama ended up agreeing with this position. Carefully reading between the lines of one of Dr Kissinger’s articles we find clues as to why US has made such a large commitment and sacrifice in Afghanistan. He wrote:
“The special aspect of Afghanistan is that it has powerful neighbors or near neighbors—Pakistan, India, China, Russia, Iran”
In January 2009 just 8 days before Obama was inaugurated Henry Kissigner laid out his thoughts on the importance of China to the United States entitled “A Chance for a New World Order”
“As the new U.S. administration prepares to take office amidst grave financial and international crises, it may seem counterintuitive to argue that the very unsettled nature of the international system generates a unique opportunity for creative diplomacy…”
“The Atlantic partnership will need to work towards a common design if it is to survive….This is why the U.S. relationship with China is so central…What kind of global economic order arises will depend importantly on how China and America deal with each other over the next few years.”
IT’S ALL ABOUT MONEY AND BANKING
In the context of Dr. Kissinger’s assement, the promotion of the Chinese renminbi currency by JP Morgan, Citigroup, HSBC, and other western banks cited earlier makes perfect sense. The actions of these banks appears to be a preliminary good will gesture to China in hopes they will agree to share control of the renminbi with the ‘Atlantic partnership’ else share control over a new world reserve currency.
As Dr. Kissinger indicates, a deal with China on financial issues is required by interests in the United States. This seems to explain why U.S. political leaders have been tolerating the large trade imbalance with China and helping facilitate the transfer of American technology and manufacturing jobs to China.
But it seems the needed deal with China was not achieved during the State visit in January 2011. Since the carrot approach with China wasn’t working, it seems the stick approach was implemented. Tunisia, Egypt, Libya, and the other Arab revolts were a timely message to China that the Atlantic partnership will not go away quietly. China’s growing economic and political ties in North Africa and the middle east region were going to be undermined until Chinese elites came to the realization that they must make a deal.
Goldman Sachs played an integral part of the unusual State Visit diplomacy as evidenced by its reversal of position in calling on investors worldwide to pull out of China while the January 2011 State visit was underway. Facebook and Google played a key role in supporting the Arab revolts and the timeline of events is suggestive of a connection between the Chinese State Visit and the Arab revolts. The day the Chinese President left Washinton DC was the very same day Google Executive Wael Ghonim posted the Facebook call for a January 25 protest by Egyptians.
The underlying issue is that the Atlantic partnership is bankrupt and China believes that its currency deserves to be the new unit of trade in the world. The time is upon us where the US dollar can no longer be maintained as the worlds reserve currency. China holds the key to determining if the bankrupt financial institutions of the West will live or die. China is poised to become the new financial center of gravity in the world as the value of the dollar fades. Therefore China is holding the best cards in the game.
There is another factor that makes China vital to the Western powers. The Financial Oligarchical system of rule which dominates the Western world today thrives by occupying every country like China, which is both a military and economic superpower. It is those who control that system that want to gain a foothold in China. That is why we are seeing Arab revolts and a NATO war on Libya. It is for that agenda that the United States will continue to pay the heavy price for occupying Af-Pakistan, bank bailouts, transfer of jobs to China, and the flight of capital and industry out of the United States.
Changing the balance of power is what is needed and the ability to do so is within the power of everyday people. Abuse of power by banks with this China agenda is actually enabled by individuals who unconsciously deposit their money in them. State and local governments put trillions in public money in these same banks in the form of state reserves and pension funds. The solution to the problem is in the hands of individuals all over the world, not just in the United States. The most viable option for world peace and a global economic recovery is for people worldwide to move their money somewhere else. Remove trillions of dollars from the bad banks and instead use it to establish banks which invest responsibly and operate in the public interest. Start locally and start today.
http://www.moneychanges.org/2011/08/the-...deception/
China seems poised to claim the (really) high ground.
Quote:China's huge leap forward into space threatens US ascendancy over heavens
By David Eimer in Beijing
5:44PM GMT 05 Nov 2011
Floating 200 miles above earth is the latest symbol of China's determination to become a true global superpower.
When the Tiangong 1 module docked successfully with the Shenzhou 8 spacecraft in the early hours of Thursday morning, China took a giant step towards its dream of becoming the pre-eminent power in space, a position some experts believe it may claim by 2040.
For the millions of Chinese who stayed up to watch the rendezvous of the two unmanned craft live on television, its success wasn't just a matter of enormous pride that China had become only the third nation after the US and Russia to master orbital docking. It was also a message to the rest of the world of China's ever-growing reach and ambition, as each successive mission in the country's space programme narrows the technological gap with its rivals.
At a time when the US is mired in an economic downturn and both public and financial support for the space agency Nasa is at its lowest ebb ever, China is forging ahead with plans to have its own space station by the end of the decade.
And with the Russians also stating that manned space missions are no longer a priority, it is likely that - within 15 years or so - the next men to set foot on the moon will be Chinese.
Nor is China looking merely at near space. Later this month, it will launch its first Mars probe, carried into space as part of the payload on a Russian rocket.
Just eight years since China put its first astronauts into space, and only three years after its astronauts took their first space walk, the latest accomplishment reveals with startling clarity the speed at which China is mastering the steps needed to become a superpower in space.
"It's a huge technical leap forward," said Wu Ping, spokeswoman for China's manned space programme. Over the next 10 years, China plans to launch around 20 spacecraft to build its own space station. "We will do more two more rendezvous and docking flights next year. After that, we will begin the construction of a space laboratory and space station."
The space lab is expected to be operational by 2016 and the space station by 2020, the very year that the International Space Station (ISS) is set to be decommissioned.
"The Chinese have momentum in their programme; they're closing the gap while the US is treading water," said Professor Michael Sheehan, an expert in space politics at Swansea University. "Ten years ago, China didn't have any reconnaissance satellites and it was 25 years behind the US. Now they have ones that are as good as the American satellites. It's been an incredible build-up in the last decade. If things continue as they are, China will be the number one power in space by 2040."
China did not even launch its first satellite until 1970, one year after Neil Armstrong became the first man on the moon. Now, it rivals Russia in launching commercial satellites, sending 20 into orbit last year alone. Jiuquan, China's space city, in northwestern Gansu Province is the Chinese equivalent of Mission Control in Houston and the Cape Canaveral shuttle launch-pad rolled int one.
The launches themselves take place nearby on the edge of the Gobi Desert, part of a huge enterprise whose details - unlike Nasa's operation - are kept strictly secret.
But it is the successful docking of the 33ft Tiangong 1, or "Heavenly Palace" 1, with the 30ft Shenzhou 8 that is set to prompt a massive acceleration in the country's space programme. It means China now has the ability to ferry its taikonauts, the Chinese name for their astronauts, and supplies back and forth from earth to a space station of its own.
At around 60 tons, China's space station will be far smaller than the 400 ton ISS and more like the cramped and basic former Russian Space Station Mir. Yet, having their own semi-permanent outpost in space at a time when no one else does will be sweet revenge for the Chinese, whose participation in the 16-country ISS was vetoed by Washington, as well as offering them the opportunity to further their space science.
"We cannot wait any longer to make our own scientific experiments in space. We have to build our own space station to satisfy the demands of China's development," said Jiao Weixin, a Professor at Peking University's School of Earth and Space Sciences.
Some worry that science is not the only motivation behind China's space programme. "Chinese space efforts are largely managed by the People's Liberation Army and directed by the Central Military Commission," said Scott Pace, the director of the Space Policy Institute at George Washington University and a former senior Nasa official and White House adviser on space.
"Military space activities can be conducted for peaceful purposes, just as the US does, but there should be no mistaking the fact that China's space activities have military purposes."
Shenzhou 8's launch last week has already set alarms bells ringing, because the craft was delivered so precisely to its intended location. If China can send a rocket into space with such accuracy, it means it can destroy any object in near space as well.
China's new strides in its rocket guidance systems comes despite an embargo on US exports of sensitive hi-tech equipment to Beijing. Having relied on re-engineered Russian technology for much of its space programme, the docking system that brought Tiangong 1 and Shenzou 8 together was Chinese-designed.
China is also preparing to launch the latest generation of its Long March rockets, which will be able to carry far heavier payloads into space.
Professor Jiao says that Western suspicions of China's ambitions in space are unfounded. "It is costly and silly to use the space programme for military purposes. Why would we make such a big show and spend so much money if it was only for military use? Our goal is very simple; we want to make scientific discoveries in space. I am sure all mankind will benefit from Chinese achievements in space," he said.
What is clear that China seems able to meet its goals in space far more cheaply than Nasa. Exact figures are hard to come by, but it is estimated Beijing spends around £1.5 billion a year on its space programme, a fraction of Nasa's annual budget of £20 billion.
"I would suspect they are spending more than they admit. That's certainly true with their defence spending. But they are definitely getting value for money," said Professor Sheehan. "The Russians always spent less on their space programme than Nasa and they did OK, even though it wasn't as technologically advanced as Nasa's."
For now, Nasa remains the world leader in space technology. But there seems to be little appetite amongst both the US's leaders and the American public for the bold missions which characterised Nasa's operations in its glory days of the 1960's and 70's.
"The question is whether the United States will proceed with its own long-term programme of space exploration and development, or drift," said Mr Pace.
That lack of enthusiasm is perhaps the reason why China's growing presence above the earth has so far not sparked a space race reminiscent of the battle between the US and the former Soviet Union for supremacy. "I believe the United States is largely indifferent at this point," said Mr Pace.
More likely is the prospect of a regional space race in Asia. India is pushing ahead with plans for its first manned mission in 2016, while Japan has stepped up its programme of probes to asteroids and the moon.
Some believe the US and China should start collaborating instead. On the same day that Tiangong 1 docked with Shenzhou 8, Nasa's chief Charlie Bolden raised the prospect of future cooperation with China when he appeared before a House of Representatives committee in Washington.
Yet, China's lack of transparency over its intentions in space and the US's reluctance to give Beijing access to its technology remain barriers to any meaningful partnership.
More than anything, China's successes in space are helping to bolster the ruling communist party by boosting national pride and unity at a time when a slowing Chinese economy and a rising tide of protests are threatening stability.
Some 12 million people recorded their hopes and dreams for the future and just under 43,000 of them were selected to be stored on a computer chip and carried into space as part of the mission.
"It's a way to demonstrate what the communist party has achieved in the last 60 years," said Professor Sheehan. "It's big statement to the Chinese people that China is a great nation again and that after all the technological advances it made thousands of years ago, it is once more a technologically advanced country."
Ultimately, that may be more important to Beijing than assuming the US's mantle in space.
http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/worldnew...avens.html
Reverse Engineering, A Shift in policy at the US Commerce Department, Economic, resource staking in Africa and military positioning and a growing partnership with Russia and India but most notably multi-national corporate and international bank backing are the most adventurous in fuelling a meteoric rise in the Chinese space program that doesn't show signs of decelerating anytime soon.
But there could be a wild card technology (unrevealed or undeveloped) that could shift the balance.
China is spending their US reserve money on real assets. Gathering up shares, IP and industry as they roll along. They are preparing for a transition in currency markets to an IMF model of par value more directly tied to assets such as land resources and energy. At the same time they are separating from US currency. Chinese interests, not necessarily Chinese nationals want the US dollar to have buying power as long as possible so they can get value out of it in their purchases. Their hedge against it is real assets (foreign and domestic).
As long as they can keep up the value of the US dollar until they spend their reserves. China has $3 Trillion in US reserves. They are spending it hand over fist and still accumulating more so their US investments in assets corporations can be used as a solvent tool.
Their agreements with India and Russia to only trade among themselves in their own national currencies will produce an outflow of USD and further devalue the US currency so we'll see an outflow of US dollars from China, Russia and India while hedging against the USD collapse. Leaving other countries holding worthless paper in this play.
China has already prepared for this in creating their own mercantile (HKMEX) exchange recently.
Collection on the outstanding US debt is another story and may leave American Citizens on the hook in some sort of deal like Greece did in submitting to the IMF or some other International NGO to service it with assets that remain including, land, labour, resources, world political clout to service this illusion of a money system. A default could provoke an aggressive reaction. Either way wealth will be transferred East removing the obstacle of a superpower with a relatively free system and subjecting its citizenry to servitude; but only if this game plays out as it was designed.
References:
China's foreign exchange reserves, 1977-2011
http://www.chinability.com/Reserves.htm
China and Russia Sign 12 Documents in Trade and Economic Unification Deal
http://concen.org/forum/showthread.php?tid=35661
China Global Investment Tracker: 2011
http://www.heritage.org/research/reports...acker-2011
The IMF on Corporate Governance and $75,681,430,091 in Interest + Charges since 1984
http://concen.org/forum/showthread.php?tid=35276
Further Reading:
Colombia & Peru & EU Sign Trade Agreement; Peru and China Sign Military Agreement
http://concen.org/forum/showthread.php?tid=39322
Brazil Doubles Down on China Trade
http://www.huffingtonpost.com/eric-ehrma...51481.html
The Chinese Government Is Buying Up Economic Assets And Huge Tracts Of Land All Over The United States
http://endoftheamericandream.com/archive...ted-states