Forum Replies Created
-
AuthorPosts
-
Myriad
ParticipantThe 99 Ranch in Gardena?
Participanthttp://fortune.com/2016/03/28/millennials-leaving-cities/
I’m interested in seeing what happens in cities as millennials age and before Gen Z population peaks.
ParticipantI’m not sure it’s new news that INTC 10nm isn’t so great. The question for 2H19 – 1H20 is how well is the ramp to 7nm.
For INTC, the question isn’t really about market share loss, it’s how much loss the analysts expect vs what happens in reality.ParticipantAt under $40, it would be worth holding on to INTC through 2020.
It’ll be at <9 P/E, if you take a safety factor of 10%, it's still under 10.
And you'll be getting a 3% dividend.
Seems rather safe to park money there compared to other companies.AMD is sitting at 30+ forward P/E.
ParticipantProbably a good time to sell AMD. The valuation is ridiculous at the moment. INTC is starting to look cheap again – maybe when it gets to $40
Participant[quote=FlyerInHi]We should try to look at China objectively because we were so wrong over the last 30 years.
Big picture wise, America is poorer today because we were wrong about China, Iran, Iraq, Russia, Afghanistan, Pakistan, Central Asia, Turkey, North Korea, Africa, even Latin America and South East Asia.[/quote]That’s right. The entire policy of engagement with China turned out to be completely flawed. By allowing China to benefit from the global economic system while not enforcing certain rules, the US allowed the CCP autocratic system to have legitimacy with it’s own people.
Now we get to see the the world de-globalize and head into another 50 years of cold war. Sucks for the next generation of Americans and Chinese young people who likely will see a world worse off and lower standard of living compared to the previous generations.Participant[quote=The-Shoveler]They buy RE (not just condo’s) because keeping RMB (yuan) in the bank is a value losing game.
They are experiencing inflation like it is the late 70’s (usa).[/quote]
There’s seems to be data that backs up that claim.
http://si.wsj.net/public/resources/images/B3-ED349_Dshot_NS_20190531020018.pngParticipant[quote]I read the book. But as Parag Khanna and Martin Jacques said, we make the mistake of looking at China through our own history.
There won’t be a war unless we start it. China will not start a war they can’t win since their military cannot project to the other side of the world. In a war, China will seek to prolong it to wear American patience with sending troops to the other side of the world. The Chinese are fortifying their own territory the way a feudal lord may fortify a castle to repel invaders. The logistics to invade China are daunting.
China is building a new ecosystem built on financial and commercial engineering. They are building business relationships while we are stuck with a colonial mentality. [/quote]
The irony is that China is following the West’s 1800’s mercantilism – a 21st century version colonialism.
No one is going to invade China – too much work for too little gain. But China’s islands are extremely vulnerable as is their oil supply lines through the Straits of Malacca. Agree looking at China with Western history isn’t as useful, but at the same time neither side really understands each other. In fact the cultural difference makes compromise harder and increases the chances of conflict.
But I doubt US vs China will come to direct military conflict. More like the Cold War in Africa (US vs USSR influence) and war by proxy. Also new areas like a cyber Cold War and weaponizing space.
Leaders in either country don’t seem interested in de-escalation. We seem to be heading towards a world that will be more segregated geo-politically and technologically. Internet and web services are certainly already headed that way.[quote]I am looking at condos in Bangkok and can’t even compete because Chinese investors are buying in all the new developments. They have relationships with Chinese-Thais so they are able to buy the best units. (Foreigners can only own 49% of the units in any development).[/quote]
Probably because rich Chinese try to take money out of China as quickly as possible as insurance vs their own government. The money certainly isn’t legally taken out per official CCP rules.Participant[quote=temeculaguy]Ignore the stuff in this Forbes article about “middle income” and “median IRA,” I’m guessing if you are on this site your 401k balance will not likely be 50k at retirement.
https://www.forbes.com/sites/howardgleckman/2019/05/24/the-trump-administration-is-looking-at-tax-breaks-and-other-ways-to-boost-private-long-term-care-insurance/#22266ecd404f
The govt should encourage LTC plans with tax incentives as without them, these people will be on the governemnt’s dime. [/quote]I do wonder what will happen in the 2030’s when Medicare runs out of money (or more correctly, the spending on Medicare relative to GDP doubles). Unless spending per person drastically goes down, at some point the US will have to ration care. There won’t be enough money for the govt to put people in nursing homes/hospice, and probably not enough workers either (maybe robots instead).
Participanthttps://www.bbc.com/news/technology-48363772
“These are used in the Chinese company’s 5G base stations and computer servers in addition to its smartphones.”
Affects 5G too. Though with all the premature hype maybe it won’t impact the real use of 5G that much.Losing access to ARM is a major problem. Though if they steal copies and use the technology anyways, maybe they only lose a year or two of development.
ParticipantThere are many benefits and flaws with each system.
Maybe our leaders will be smart enough to resolve this without a new version of the Cold War.
Past history isn’t so optimistic – though China’s rise isn’t guaranteed, especially on a GDP/per capital level. 12 out of 16 historical scenarios resulted in war.ParticipantIt’s hard to find the details on the China organ harvesting from independent 3rd party sources – mainly because research into these stories, the government makes it difficult to find out.
But if China starts exporting food that in the shape of green squares called soylent, I would be highly suspicious…Participant[quote=FlyerInHi]We believe the free markets work best so let’s see which ones work better. And let’s apply global rules consistently regardless of whether the target is China, Germany or the USA. That’s what WTO is for. [/quote]
It’s unlikely we’ll ever really have “free trade” or no subsidies in the world – building an economic order that doesn’t take into account of the geopolitical issues seems like something destined to failure. That’s where the WTO and other UN organizations are at now. Basically impotent and have unenforceable edicts.[quote=FlyerInHi]
But Trump wants the Chinese State to buy American farmers’ commodities. Such a ridiculous argument in its face. What if the US Federal government agreed to buy Italian olive oil? [/quote]
Huh? the main issue in the trade war is not about how many goods the Chinese govt buys from the US. The issue is a major disagreement in how to align the different Chinese and US economic models along with all the other technology issues. I would suspect the reason the Chinese government has to get involved with purchases at all is that the they are way more involved with decisions at SOE and other large private companies.Participant[quote=FlyerInHi]
Tariffs are consumption tax on Americans. Tariffs also restrict choices and consumer wellbeing. [/quote]
Generally tariffs are ineffective and economically negative. At least that what’s economists will tell you. Except that in an Economic Cold War, they make perfect sense against a single/group of country(ies) that you want to create higher costs for their products.[quote=FlyerInHi]
…I believe that sourcing away from China will not be easy.True, Chinese manufacturers are moving production to Vietnam, Ethiopia, etc… but if we source from those countries, will help China in the end because those countries will use our USD to buy Huawei phones.[/quote]
Give enough time and money, the supply chain will move out of China. What’s the definition of not easy? I have a hard time believing that by year 3 profit-greedy companies will not have found a way to alter the supply chain.Your argument about other countries buying Huawei phones doesn’t quite jibe. Higher tariffs will force production out of China (which is happening already in some sectors due to labor costs). Any production and jobs that are moved out of China is a net negative to their GDP. Either way it’s lost GDP output regardless of whether another country bought a consumer good from China. How much lost output is a matter of debate.
The question at this point is whether we will step back from the brink of an Economic Cold War or whether the world will divide into 2 different economic and technology spheres.
Or maybe as part of a deal, Trump will outsource the housing of refugees to China where they already have a few million in camps. They do build stuff quick over there.
-
AuthorPosts
