Did Obama Just Lose The Election?

By
August 22, 2008

It’s lost in the Veep hype for now. Down the stretch that won’t be the case. After he is softened up and a growing number of Americans are given reasons for concern over Obama’s Leftism – there’s this and some pertinent facts on China below.

"Their ports, their train systems, their airports are vastly superior to us now, which means if you are a corporation deciding where to do business you’re starting to think, “Beijing looks like a pretty good option. Why aren’t we doing the same thing?”

Obama is either incredibly naive, terribly misinformed, a communist, just flat out dumb or all of the above to be caught on tape making a statement like that.

I can just imagine the voice over now. It wouldn’t even require half of this:

In all this activity it greatly helps to have a secretive planning bureaucracy and a government that brooks little dissent. In Britain it took as long to conduct a public inquiry into the proposed construction of Heathrow’s Terminal Five as it took to build Beijing’s new airport terminal from scratch.

There was no consultation with the public on the terminal. Nor was there any public debate about the construction of Beijing’s third runway, notwithstanding the noise pollution already suffered by thousands of nearby residents.

Chinese official Xu Li said, Once a plan is made, it is executed. “Democracy”, she says, “sacrifices efficiency.”

For Beijing’s airport expansion, 15 villages were flattened and 10,000 residents resettled. They were barred from unemployment benefits and other welfare privileges though their farmland had been grabbed. Officials threatened them with violence if they refused to leave.

The World Bank says that roads are sometimes built only to convert countryside into revenue-generating urban land. Combined with a lack of adequate public transport, Beijing’s polluted air and congested streets, to which 1,000 cars are added daily, are evidence of the problem.

Chinese official Xu Li said, Once a plan is made, it is executed. “Democracy”, she says, “sacrifices efficiency.”

The government wants to build a new mag Lev train line. Residents along the route are fearful of noise and radiation from the trains.

Complaints still abound about the way things work. Highways—both expressways and other intercity roads—are studded with traffic-slowing toll booths. China reportedly has 70% of the world’s tolled roads and its tolls are the highest in the world (using exchange rates adjusted according to currencies’ purchasing power). To cut costs, lorries routinely overload. This helps to make the roads among the most dangerous in the world (89,000 deaths in 2006 by official reckoning; the actual number may be much higher). And it pushes up the cost of maintaining them. 

Chinese official Xu Li said, Once a plan is made, it is executed. “Democracy”, she says, “sacrifices efficiency.”

In China, many laborers are lucky to make the equivalent of $8,000 a year. And for that they often work 16 hour days, seven days a week.

And Barack Obama wants America to be more like China? You are kidding me, right?

Well, it is change, I guess. But does Barack Obama really represent the kind of change that America wants? Or maybe he and some of his radical friends should simply move to Beijing.

Please consider supporting RiehlWorldView with a small donation
, by shopping at Amazon via our Associate link in the sidebar or by re-distributing our content across the Web with the options below. Thank you.


Comments:
  1. Hyscience says:

    Barack Obama wants America to be more like China?

    As Dan Riehl so appropriately puts it, “You’re kidding me, right?” My God, is this clown Obama really that naive?…

  2. ET says:

    It’s a simple philosophy, really. America is bad. Anywhere else is better than America and the way we operate. It’s the same position espoused by the looney lefties who haunt this blog.
    Obama’s problem is that he holds a fringe position. The more he exposes his distaste for all things American, the more he alienates most of the population. Just like our poor leftard posters here are alienated from mainstream society.
    The election is Obama’s to lose, and he is doing his part. Wait ’till we hear the wailing and gnashing of teeth when McCain wins in November.
    Keep talking Barack. Then go back to Chicago and scam some more shit.

  3. Scrapiron says:

    Evidently he has settled on a plan for his first two ‘ten year terms’ in the white house.

  4. SacTownMan says:

    For the first time in my life I am starting to like this sucky country, Amerika.
    This can’t be good for the kids!

  5. elixelx says:

    “Their infrastructure is vastly superior to US now…”
    Shouldn’t he have said “superior to OURS now…”? Of course, he should, but didn’t.
    So what he’s saying is Beijing’s subway system is better that Barack Obama! I think that’s comparing apples to Presidential candidates!
    OTOH isn’t this incorrect circumlocution really just a bit of “GUFF”?

  6. AllenS says:

    After 4 years of an Obama presidency, America’s infrastructure won’t look like China, but the south side of Chicago. Take a look at what he accomplished there.

  7. K T Cat says:

    Is it possible that Obama gets away with most of his gaffes because he makes so many of them? Every time he goes off the teleprompter, it results in several new idiocies. Which one to follow? You can’t possibly follow them all. Is it possible that he’s so stupid that he seems smart?

  8. Beijing Expat says:

    Anyone who’s lived in mainland China will tell you that the general standard of infrastructure here is backwards, with a few sops to ultra-modernity. Obama doesn’t know what he’s talking about.

  9. Brett says:

    “Democracy sacrifices efficiency.”
    Big government authoritarians of all stripes confuse efficacy with efficiency.

  10. anonymous says:

    Part of Obama’s campaign platform is to make the trains run on time?

  11. Jack says:

    Well, Barack is right about one thing. China’s energy infrastructure is loads better…they are building one coal fired plant every week. Does the Three Gorges Dam ring a bell with anyone?
    Funny how that sort of infrastructure isn’t what Barack is talking about.

  12. Uni Petrowska says:

    As Michelle tells us, The One “will make you work” and “never let you go back” to your former life.
    It is the year Zero. Confess your education and your faith. And be reborn.
    (Queue the chain gang of the educated and the faithful to the Killing Fields).

  13. Uni Petrowska says:

    What if Nixon had realized that Kruschev was right, in the kitchen debate!
    He could have come home and nationalized the nation’s washing machine companies.
    ‘Their “People’s Washer” is more efficient, has economies of scale. We should be doing the same thing!”
    China is the world’s first “Communist Bubble” that will go bust before our eyes. Setting off the 3rd great cultural revolution, and the first mass murder pogram of the 21st century.

  14. David R. Graham says:

    He is a communist, specifically of the Maoist variety, like his pals Klonsky, Ayres and Dohrn and his mother and “uncle Frank” Marshall Davis. His background is neither African nor American. His names are Arabic and his socialization is Asian. All the signs are there, to include abandonment of siblings and vacuity of word on everything but abortion, theft of privacy and cabal collectivism (all central Maoist doctrine). He never mis-speaks or makes gaffs. He merely enjoys at times playing with his listeners’ attentiveness by dropping indications of what he is actually thinking and planning. He is a jive-ass jack in anti-American. One awaits notice of his lower-self activity — and his spouse’s and staff’s. He is highly experienced and has a long, well-documented and successful record for what he is and what he intends to make of the Constitution, the office of POTUS and the other branches of the Government of the United States. He is no “empty suit.” His nature, history and plans are self-evident. There is no excuse for not reading them.

  15. bap says:

    Mr. Obama’s larger point about the importance of investing in infrastructure is valid, but if he wants to lead America, he’d better learn to BE an American first–to understand & acknowledge what makes America great, communicate those ideals and challenge Americans to live up to them.
    America is not the only country of worth in this world, but if Mr. Obama doesn’t share an understanding of and appreciation for the things that are special about this country, he has no business being president of it.

  16. Fred Beloit says:

    But, Senator, don’t you really mean Dubai? You know, the indoor ski slopes, the island developments shaped like palm trees, the glitz, glamor and bling bling? Oh, you really do mean China? Get bent.
    http://images.google.com/images?ie=UTF-8&oe=UTF-8&rls=com.google:en-US:official_i&gfns=1&sourceid=navclient&q=dubai+photos&um=1&sa=X&oi=image_result_group&resnum=1&ct=title

  17. Fred Beloit says:

    But, Senator, don’t you really mean Dubai? You know, the indoor ski slopes, the island developments shaped like palm trees, the glitz, glamor and bling bling? Oh, you really do mean China? Get bent.
    http://images.google.com/images?ie=UTF-8&oe=UTF-8&rls=com.google:en-US:official_i&gfns=1&sourceid=navclient&q=dubai+photos&um=1&sa=X&oi=image_result_group&resnum=1&ct=title

  18. pst314 says:

    “He is a communist, specifically of the Maoist variety”
    I’ve known a few Maoist types who are active in the Democratic Party.

  19. RJ says:

    Sheesh. This summer is starting to seem like a milder (hopefully) version of 1936. What’s next? Will Obama be promising us a “New Deal?” (Not that he hasn’t essentially done that already.)

  20. Peg C. says:

    David Brooks wrote basically the same thing, and El Rushbo disemboweled him for it. Some call Brooks a conservative. He isn’t and never was.
    Not a few have called Biden the Senate’s dimmest bulb (Boxer notwithstanding). For months now I’ve been thinking Obama has that honor. The stuff coming from Obama’s mouth soon to be joined with the stuff from Biden’s mouth promises a hilarious fall.
    Is there an unwritten rule that Senators must be fools and idiots?

  21. Sue in Texas says:

    I can’t believe that the DNC is letting this unvetted thug into the Democratic convention. He’s already started to prove what type of POTUS he would be. His FREE TICKETS turned out to be not so free. You had to do volunteer work for his campaign to get a ticket. Then he was selling some tickets for $1000 a piece. If he ever gets to be president, things will really CHANGE.
    You may have to do 100 hours of community service before you can get your drivers licence.
    You may have to donate $1000 to the Democratic Party before you can get married.
    You may have to donate 1 gallon of blood before you can have children.
    You may have to sponsor an illegal alien for 1 year before you can retire.
    I know these sound ridiculous, but with Barack Hussein Obama, you just don’t know what he has planned for us.

  22. MP says:

    I’ve had secure area access to several US airports, and yes, some of them are bad. Denver International, despite the publicized problems, is a well designed and executed airport. I’ve also traveled in China. Beijing and the new Guangzhou airports are nice. The new airport at Guangzhou was not finished when I was there, and appeared to be behind schedule on completion, with no one hurrying to catch it up.
    Some remote airports are horrible. In Xining, Quinghai province, the airport is a tin shed. Your baggage goes by you on the baggage cart as you get off the plane and walk a quarter mile to the terminal. The door to the men’s room doesn’t close completely, so the entire terminal can see men at the urinals. In Kunming, the runway was built by Americans during WWII, and the terminal is a classic mid-60′s design. So much for Chinese infrastructure.
    China appears to lack an equivalent to our interstate system, and the trucks are indeed scary to pass. Beijing is in constant gridlock in some areas. Once you get out of the populated areas, the infrastructure decays quickly. Unlike the US, where we have roughly the same quality of infrastructure everywhere (or at least not the wide variations seen in China.)
    The Hong Kong airport is a work of art, with the modern hotel. But of course, that was built by capitalists before the Chinese takeover. Obama might want to actually see some of the infrastructure before he brags about it, and get out of the made-for-TV Olympic areas.

  23. Dave Winer says:

    So what’s your answer — how will the US compete with China?

  24. Ernie G says:

    Is there an unwritten rule that Senators must be fools and idiots?
    Posted by: Peg C.
    Peg, it’s been known for some time:
    “Reader, suppose that you were an idiot. And suppose that you were a member of Congress. But I repeat myself.”
    -Mark Twain

  25. Steve Skubinna says:

    There’s an undeniable fascination with totalitarianism among the left. The ability to simply do what you know already is correct, without having to suffer debate and obstruction from those too foolish to see your way… it’s a utopian’s wet dream. You know, the “make the trains run on time.” The trains will not only be on schedule, but we’ll all have to ride them because it shall be so mandated. And we’ll all like it, because it’s so much tidier and “more efficient.”
    No room for messy individual opinions, let alone choice, in a utopia. Can’t have noncomformists getting in the way. The only problem is most utopians consider themselves good people and haven’t thought through the implications of their pet programs, to the need for enforcing compliance. After all, the only possible objections can come from those awful conservatives, and it won’t be too hard to just… put them somewhere so they can’t interfere. For the greater good.

  26. Mikey says:

    These remarks might have hurt Obama if his compliant cheerleaders and worshipers in the MSM gave them the airing they deserve.
    However, they will bury these remarks just as they bury all his horrendous gaffes. It’s hard to report the news from your knees.
    He deserves the Dan Quayle treatment, but they’ll never allow it.

  27. ROA says:

    Does his enthusiasm for China’s infrastructure include the over 300 coal fired power plants they have recently constructed, or the nuclear plants they are planning on constructing in the near future?

  28. newscaper says:

    Hell,
    He deserves the ‘Dan Quayle’ treatment more than *Quayle* did!

  29. iconoclast says:

    It sounds like Obama and Biden will at least get our trains running on time.

  30. NahnCee says:

    China recently suffered an earthquake. Lots of buildings flattened in that quake, lots of dead Chinese, including lots and lots of dead Chinese children.
    I haven’t seen any published reports on whether the buildings went down because of substandard materials, poor construction methods, bribes and corruption among officials and builders, or all of the above.
    But LA recently also suffered a 5.7 earthquake with absolutely no damage and no deaths. It’s laughable to put China up as something to aspire towards when you compare those two events.

  31. Fred Beloit says:

    By Winer: “So what’s your answer — how will the US compete with China?”
    Dave, I think we should keep our child labor laws the way they are, don’t you? How about elections by union members instead of appointments by government officials to union positions? Let’s keep freedom of the press, shall we? How about tightening up eminent domain and the takings clause so government can’t take your land and give it to a large corporation or government agency without first proving public use and compensating you fairly? Do I have to go on?

  32. libertybelle says:

    Aside from the communist crush that Obama has.. he asks why we are not doing this, after he begins by mentioning that the Olympics have helped to bring this new spectacular infrastructure to China…hello? He answered his own question. The Olympics. That was their incentive. Duh.

  33. John says:

    Someone call the Potemkin village that is missing its idiot. We’ve found him, and he’s about to be nominated as the Democratic candidate for president.

  34. bl says:

    What does Barry think about the air quality of Beijing? They had to essentially close down manufacturing and traffic to have the air quality they currently enjoy. What about enviromentalists in China? How much influence do they impart upon the government? I’m tired of hearing from the complainers in this country(USA) about how horrible life is here, having never lived anywhere else. How pathetic to listen to people complain about their civil rights being abused by the Patriot Act. I’ve never heard of anyone except suspicious people having their civil liberties compromised.
    I love Mikey’s comment above how the news reporting media(MSM) are going to be shocked when they finally get up off their knees, to see the Obamessiah has lost the election, as a result of them being unwilling to fully investigate and properly vet a qualified candidate. Give me a Colin Powell, Condi Rice, Justice Clarence Thomas, and I’ll vote for them, but Barry ?

  35. P. Ami says:

    Where did he get the idea that China’s infrastructure us better then ours? Maybe the airport in Beijing and Shanghai rival ours but from experience I can tell you the airports in Guangzhou. Guilin, Shenzhen, Hangzhou, Chengdu (before the earthquake), Nanjing and Qingdao are no where near as modern, amnemitous, secure or efficent as the US airports in cities analagous to those I listed. The trains generally run on time but they too are State controled and even in major cities don’t rival one finds in Chicago, NYC or other cities that where major players when trains were a primary mode of transportation. Finally, maybe Obama should try and see the roads leadind to factories around Tianjin, Huangzhou, Shenzhen, Qingdao, or any other industrial center and if he can keep his waffles down after the pothole dodging and bobbing then good for him. He’ll have pulled off a feat impossible to spin into it’s opposite.

  36. jhinoakland says:

    Back to high school English — the “reading skills” part — for all of you. Obama didn’t state that *he* believed Beijing to have the superior system; he was pointing out that the U.S. is losing jobs because corporations believe it, and want to do business in countries with efficient infrastructures.
    Nowhere on this site or any other of the right-wing sites that are jumping all over this sentence is it placed in context. Elsewhere in the speech, Obama noted, ““We need a policy to create jobs here in America…. to invest in people and our infrastructure right here in the U.S.A.”
    He went on: “At a time when Iraq has a $79 billion surplus — they have parked it in banks in New York City — it doesn’t make too much sense for us to be still spending U.S. taxpayer dollars, $10 billion monthly, rebuilding Baghdad. We should use some of that money to rebuild Virginia, building roads and laying broadband lines and putting people back to work.”
    You can agree or disagree with his point, which was that if the U.S. wants to hang onto jobs it should be investing the kind of money on infrastructure that China has done in preparation for the Olympics. But taking one sentence out of context, and twisting it through a syntactical wringer is absurd… and stupid.

  37. bill says:

    As is often the case, it is easier to take the superficial reading of a candidate’s words. If a candidate acknowledges that another country has a better port or pension system or doesn’t seem to get caught up in senseless wars, his or her pundit opponents automatically suggest that he can’t see the cost of that “betterness” or worse yet, that she/he is a secret communist/socialist/citizen of france or whatever. Indeed, why can’t we do it? Why can’t we have democracy and a good, functioning port system? Why can’t we question the value of the Patriot Act and still be enthusiastic about our country? Why can’t we acknowledge what another country does right *and* what we do better than them. What are we so afraid of, after all?

  38. OneDayAtATime says:

    I thought that the Kelo decision already made it possible for the US to have the same sort of infrastructure decisions that China has made. The path has been cleared. Aren’t we just waiting for the Obamamessia to actually make it happen?

  39. Bod says:

    Nice diversionary tactic there, jhinoakland. The point has been made that the problem with the quotation is that their infrstructure is demonstrably NOT superior to the US, except in a few, exceptional areas (hence the references to Potemkin Villages). Building a nation out the size of the US with an infrastructure equal to that of the US is not going to happen in the short-term, and certainly not in the next 4 or 8 years.
    IF Obama’s assertions were correct, one might see substantial non-Chinese industrial development in China, and that’s very very rare. Why? Low to nonexistant rule of law, pitiful adherence to generally aceeptable levels of intellectual property rights, and yes, overall poor infrastructure.
    Furthermore, the reason why jobs will be (and are being) lost to the Chinese right now is exactly the reason why those jobs left the US. You can buy cheaper labor elsewhere. Why is labor becoming more expensive in China? Because they cannot continue to run their nation like a flyblown compost heap. They want to join the 20th Century (they haven’t a hope of joining the 21st, not on a national scale) and to do so, they have to become more like the West, and spend money like the West – and not just in isolated oases like Shanghai, and leaving the hinterlands undeveloped.
    And so, to return to your comment, the *context* is that you can put lipstick on a pig, but it’s still a pig, and Western businesses know what China is good for; Cheap labor in an environment where the overheads are low. And when the costs are not so low, the calculus will encourage them to look elsewhere. Of course some business have, and will develop plant and factories, but they won’t be doing it because China is some paradise that closer fits Obama’s conception of how a nation should be run.

  40. John says:

    Interesting, reading someone’s words, and taking them at face value is now considered “taking them out of context”. Evaluating the merit of the judgment of the person based on was they said is now an “attack”. Pointing out that China has accomplished this feat through the lack of environmental protection, lack of work place safety laws, minimum wage and overtime laws, government controlled unions, and a government confiscation program that makes kelo look tame, is not understand the nuance.
    Bill, lets have the democratic discussion, I’ll start with the statement that your right, we can have all the things that China has, we just have to give up all the things we currently have. China never even bothered with a patriot act, and routinely places their dissidents in prisons or worse (perhaps we should have a discussion about why our judicial system is not as efficient as the Chinese?) We could discuss the several senseless wars the china has been involved with (Tibet, Vietnam, Korea, etc.)
    I would like you to consider that maybe those who oppose your view may not be afraid to acknowledge and discuss another country, but may instead be dismayed by your complete lack of knowledge on the subject. Much like BO.

  41. Obama: China “vastly superior” than U.S. of A.

    I heard this first on Limbaugh’s show yesterday and was stunned by it. Did he really mean what he said here? NRO sheds some light Barack’s way:… let’s look at Obama’s examples of Chinese excellence… Their ports…Reuters, July 11: Severe

  42. jhinoakland says:

    Back to high school English — the “reading skills” part — for all of you. Obama didn’t state that *he* believed Beijing to have the superior system; he was pointing out that the U.S. is losing jobs because corporations believe it, and want to do business in countries with efficient infrastructures.
    Nowhere on this site or any other of the right-wing sites that are jumping all over this sentence is it placed in context. Elsewhere in the speech, Obama noted, ““We need a policy to create jobs here in America…. to invest in people and our infrastructure right here in the U.S.A.”
    He went on: “At a time when Iraq has a $79 billion surplus — they have parked it in banks in New York City — it doesn’t make too much sense for us to be still spending U.S. taxpayer dollars, $10 billion monthly, rebuilding Baghdad. We should use some of that money to rebuild Virginia, building roads and laying broadband lines and putting people back to work.”
    You can agree or disagree with his point, which was that if the U.S. wants to hang onto jobs it should be investing the kind of money on infrastructure that China has done in preparation for the Olympics. But taking one sentence out of context, and twisting it through a syntactical wringer is absurd… and stupid.

  43. jhinoakland says:

    Bod writes: “reading someone’s words, and taking them at face value is now considered ‘taking them out of context’.”
    He also writes: “Western businesses know what China is good for…. we can have all the things that China has!”
    See? I can do it too! Isn’t this fun?

  44. Bod says:

    jhinoakland
    Did I write that? Maybe you need to recheck who typed and said what. I said nothing of the sort.
    What Obama actually said and what he meant are obviously open to broad interpretation (not least of all by you). My comment was meant to indicate that *whatever* he was thinking, it’s utterly and demonstrably wrong.
    Incidentally, I also did not state that we can have all the things that China has, nor should we want them.
    All you’re really doing is beclowning yourself.

  45. WAL says:

    “In China, many laborers are lucky to make the equivalent of $8,000 a year.”
    -
    Actually $8,000 a year would be remarkably good.
    For all the talk of them overtaking us, the average income in China (using GDP per capita as a proxy) is currently $2,500 and even if you adjust it for purchasing power parity it’s just a little over $5,000.

  46. WAL says:

    “Obama didn’t state that *he* believed Beijing to have the superior system; he was pointing out that the U.S. is losing jobs because corporations believe it, and want to do business in countries with efficient infrastructures.”
    -
    If Obama doesn’t believe that and believes it’s a case of corporations being wrong, he’s free to argue that they’re wrong.
    If he says “why aren’t we doing the same thing?”, it’s fairly obvious he’s arguing something else.

  47. Fred Beloit says:

    ginblossom wrote: “Obama noted, ‘We need a policy to create jobs here in America…’”
    He’s wrong about that, ginblossom. (1)The private sector is quite capable of providing jobs here in America, and the jobs would be even better if the teachers unions would allow the schools to be improved (not a Dem priority). (2) The jobless rate is historically still low.
    ginblossom also say: “Obama didn’t state that *he* believed Beijing to have the superior system; he was pointing out that the U.S. is losing jobs because corporations believe it…”
    So you, ginblossom, say that Obama says that those dumb corporations have no idea what is going on? Obama says we have the best infrastucture but the idiot CEOs think China has a better infrastructure. This statement is absurd on its face. Obama said no such thing. Here is what he said, ginblossom: “Their ports, their train systems, their airports are vastly superior to us now,…” You are the one who needs a reading lesson, ginblossom.

  48. M. Zelenz says:

    Of course he picked Biden. He wants a flack just as Bush wanted his Cheney. Also, being the Chi-Town boy, he is comfortable with the authoritarian style of the Daleys: Meigs Field, Children’s Museum, O’Hare expansion/Bensenville, Cook County/Stroger tragedy. Obama is no different then ANY Chicago pol, giving his due to his roots.

  49. Brian G. says:

    I am quite sure that Obama is jealous that the COmmies don’t actually have to win an election before doing as they please. O
    No way he wins. None. Has theie ever been a guy this liberal been elected? Jimmy Carter wasn’t known to country as the leftist wacko that he is now, When he was elected, he ran as a COnservative Southern Democrat.

  50. jhinoakland says:

    Bod: What you’re trying to say is that I took your words out of context. Which I did.
    How does it feel?

  51. MP says:

    Companies know what the infrastructure is like in China. They go there for cheap labor and less regulation. Give China a few years and they will be as expensive as Japan or Europe. Then the companies will go to Africa, if it is stable.
    Jobs going oversees has little to do with infrastructure beyond the basics required to get the product to a ship. It has everything to do with the cost of doing business. No matter how you read what Obama is saying, he doesn’t understand this.
    By the way, the Guangzhou airport is new. The old one in town was crowded, noisy, and really bad. The new one is spacious, quiet, and about an hours drive away from any of the old business district.

  52. Bod says:

    Jhinoakland
    Actually, what I’m trying to say is that you MAY have taken someone else’s words out of context. Misunderstanding what someone says, and attributing a quotation to party A when it was actually party B who said it are very different. Of course, such subtlties may be beyond you.
    You clearly have no further input of a substantive nature.

  53. Bod says:

    A very relevant point, MP. The fact is that I work for a firm that is trying to run a real estate funds in China, and it’s tough to turn a nickel.
    The real ‘bargains’ of 2 or 3 years ago were bargains because the ‘smart money’ spent all their time chattering about how the urban centers would be economic dynamoes. Just ain’t happening. City dwellings, no problem. As soon as you move outside to what we might want to call exurbs, nothing. Why? Because the infrstructure isn’t there, and let’s face it, the infrastructure required to support commuters isn’t particularly hard to do, nor is it frightfully expensive.
    It’s just like all the hype about the Asian Tigers of the 90′s. Pablum.

  54. Jim says:

    It’s possible that a nation run by capitalists for profit will be very successful. The British trade companies acted like governments and were quite profitable. Communism and socialism failed because their economic system stinks. But a nation that uses free market capitalism to maximize GDP? We shouldn’t be too quick to dismiss this model as doomed to fail—not that we should emulate it, only that we should be prepared to compete with it, instead of running and hiding (using protectionism) like Obama wants.
    Potemkin villages maybe, but mostly it is because a lot of their infrastructure is less than 20 years old, and of that, much has been built in the past 10 years. It is difficult to find a dead zone in mobile phone coverage, the highways are pretty good (where they have them, travel out west and there are still dirt highways), and the new airports and subways are clean and efficient.
    I think a more accurate comparison would be to say that the Chinese government does what it takes to make business successful. Americans do not want to see their individual rights sacrificed for national GDP, but on the other hand, we have one whole party dedicated to bashing Big Oil, Big Pharma, etc. China wants bigger oil, bigger pharma, and they will do what it takes to get it. I don’t think Obama means that, so I don’t know what he means.

  55. Roger Godby says:

    I’m in Japan. There are occasional stories about how Japanese corporations who moved their low-tech plants to China (keeping the high-tech (and better-paying ones here)), except now those China factories are starting to move to Vietnam and elsewhere. As coastal China grows, labor becomes more expensive (as, I expect, does the paperwork and bribery).
    Although the following DeutscheWelle article begins about Steiff, it includes a figure that 1 in 5 German companies in China are planning to relocate, some back to Germany:
    http://www.dw-world.de/dw/article/0,2144,3462948,00.html
    China is overrated. Like Japan, it has no children but lots of old and aging people; it probably has even less money to pay pensions and medical care promised. That means tax increases, which means less becoming less competitive in some areas. I wish the best for China and the Chinese, but their future isn’t as shiny as many would have us believe. The (Muslim) Uighurs are unhappy, Tibetans are unhappy, occasional rural villages revolt against local Party cadres, pollution gone wild, a growing AIDS problem. Yikes.
    Obama’s an ignorant “progressive” elitist snob, an “ugly American,” if you will.

  56. Spartan112 says:

    Taking quotes and using them out of context is SOP for the GOP.

  57. James says:

    Hey – let’s raise the minimum wage to $10+ / hour. That will make companies rush to move jobs back from China.

  58. Philippe says:

    I am a European but I have lived in US a long time and know it rather well .
    I must say that most people interested with politics are looking on the upcoming US Campaign with a mixture of horror , hope and unbelief .
    Is it REALLY possible that a country with 300 000 000 people who has to pick up only 2 candidates for one of the most important functions in the world – the president – came up with a dogmatic lowbrow Hussein Obama and a McCain decades beyond his freshness limit ?
    Did those 300 000 000 really think that this appaling duo was the best choice for their country and their future ?
    That in itself shows that there must be something horribly wrong in the process .
    But I digress .
    There has been an interesting article in an important european journal written by a political analyst explaining why it was in the interest of most countries (US excepted) that Obama becomes US president .
    Basically what he was showing was that Obama was an ignorant with no clue about economy and most importantly geopolitics .
    Quotes like the one about the “superiority of the chinese infrastructure” clearly support the thesis that Obama is indeed an ignorant with no clue about most things that matter .
    And that is good news for all countries who have interest to have much less competition from US on the world’s markets (or in the world’s geopolitics for that matter) .
    If Obama is elected , he will cause such a mess in the US by tinkering with things he doesn’t understand that it will take decades to restore the US competitiveness again .
    And in the meantime all other countries (Japan , Russia , China , Europe) will be able to improve theirs what is good news for them .

  59. PA says:

    China invests in concrete while we invest in stacks of impact studies.

  60. James says:

    I don’t think he meant we should be more like China and become communist. I think he meant we have a lot to learn from the Chinese, but we can do many of those things our own way while respecting human freedoms. Why is it unpatriotic to be a realist and see that others are making progress, we don’t have a monopoly on human progress, but we can compete and show the world that we can achieve great heights while maintaining respect for human dignity. China might be taking shortcuts and compromising on good values to achieve those ends, but in the long run we can show ourselves and the world that we can do it better the right way. But in the process, why do we need to fool ourselves and pretend that if its not American progress, it doesn’t exist. And God forbid we observe and admit that some things might be superior to us, so what? Why do we get so jealous? Our arrogance will destroy our otherwise noble values.

  61. Gina says:

    Obama’s lip stick / pig remark … and, Biden’s unsavory children with special needs remarks show us what a couple of creeps these two candidates are. In lieu of Sarah Palin’s comment about hockey moms, pit bulls and lip stick, Obama’s lip stick/ pig remark was extremely demeaning. Even though I am not an Obama supporter, at least I thought he had some degree of class and sophistication. He can try to cover his tracks by saying that the lip stick remark was not directed towards Governor Palin, but anyone with half a brain knows that’s exactly what he meant. I think Obama knows his campaign is in real trouble, and that’s why he’s stooping to such desperate, insulting and distasteful attacks. Obama is definitely not Presidential material.

  62. Gina says:

    Obama’s lip stick / pig remark … and, Biden’s unsavory children with special needs remarks show us what a couple of creeps these two candidates are. In lieu of Sarah Palin’s comment about hockey moms, pit bulls and lip stick, Obama’s lip stick/ pig remark was extremely demeaning. Even though I am not an Obama supporter, at least I thought he had some degree of class and sophistication. He can try to cover his tracks by saying that the lip stick remark was not directed towards Governor Palin, but anyone with half a brain knows that’s exactly what he meant. I think Obama knows his campaign is in real trouble, and that’s why he’s stooping to such desperate, insulting and distasteful attacks. Obama is definitely not Presidential material.