We are no Longer a Free World Market

Love this doll.

        As we have allowed the Communist Cartels to be used to the levels of abuses. The only choice for other civilized countries to compete and keep themselves economically sovereign would be to also use heavy SOE cartels in their vertical line of resources, shipping, manufacturing, production, distribution and then the financing department. This then meas that the Cold war and all the work that our forefathers & mothers did to fight for a free and competitive international market place to stop Communist acquisition of political and military targets is almost gone. We have allowed this abuse to happen. As shown in today's economy the effects of a Communist Economic Cartels abusive strategy are everywhere. A free market is based on fair markets and the ability for each to compete fairly we are not seeing that in the international market place. If we allow this Communist Cartel abuse to persist it will be basically who ever has the biggest population instead of fair competition.

    Then, the allowance of the Cartel abuse will lead to other cartel abuses as Japan has already started an SOE in their agriculture. I am sure they will finish the set up the rest of the Communist Economic Cartel strategy to be able to compete with China because we are not regulating their Cartel abuses and the Japanese are getting hit the hardest with SOE Cartel economic strategy. Also this will not only lead to other countries proliferating Cartel activities. It will link into the government stealing mass amounts of business, lands and messing up the economic marketplace for military and political strategy avoid of freedom and liberty much like what is going on in the Venezuela, Marxist leadership Revolution. This will be done under a possible guise of the executive emergency orders after the next, service bell curve is run. However, next time instead of the government just bailing out corporations they will probable have to outright own them to compete against the Chinese Communist Cartel strategies as they conglomerate bigger and centralize their economic strategic abilities.

         Further, along the lines of freedom, link into populations. As a country needs a high population to compete in the SOE economic wars governments will naturally lead to a progression of regulations to find a way to fulfill its Communist Economic Cartel Strategies, known or unknown it is a natural progression. Now the winner of the Economic Cartel wars will be the one with the biggest population as they can create the biggest tax pull to keep up their Communist Economic Cartels. So we will find that these proliferation will lead to war as populations rise, food shortages happen and resources dwindle more as the conservative regulations to breed to keep up economically tighten for mass human production, we will lose our population check known as freedom and liberty. What has happened in the Chinese Economic Model of Communist Cartels is unnatural to a free market place of fair and competitive commerce.

     We are no longer a free world market as the Chinese Communist Economic Cartels have gone unchecked and unregulated. If this keeps going it will lead to proliferation of further Cartels and huge abuses just to say afloat for all major countries. This idea of Communist SOE Cartel strategies will not lead to free markets and fair competition policies. Where countries make laws for their individuals and corporations avoid of political or military ownership. So all can compete fairly and the smaller underdeveloped countries can become new vibrant safe and secure societies to trade with and help flourish to freedom avoid of political or foreign government acquisition, for economic sovereignty. After this crash and the loss of the regulators and regulations against Communist Economic Cartels.  This world is losing the World's title as a Free Market for Trade and Commerce which could lead us back into what we have progressed from. That is not a good thing, Dulce. The conglomerating energy is leaving a rift in the world that will dry up fair markets and the ability for underdeveloped countries to become a safe and secure place, as smaller countries will not be able to compete with the massive SOE Cartels and the SOE cartel owners will only trade with those that they have a strategic need to trade with. Instead of a fair market competition where all can compete without SOE cartel abuses.
 
Rider I
Dulce: Check the tracers of possible future algorithms of this economic strategy that is being allowed via the Communist SOE cartels and how the energy current is way unbalanced. I read things that I see can be a serious threat to peaceful research and proper universal progression of all.

(Sona) (feis taistil) of (Lúnasa); (go maire tú an lá!).

My Service Industry Bell Curve theory explains what is happening and predicts the next crash. All rights reserved to the RI R&A. No stealing, without proper ciation. I want to see my pysdo name like my forefathers before me published and properly, please. You may use the Service Bell, along as cited properly. Again (R)

 Simply demand and supply graph explains the service bell curve theory.


The horizontal line is demand for services
The vertical line is the Allies employment rates: based on the ripple effect of 1 good job creating 2-3 other jobs. I still have to solidify the ripple effect for you, however, it should be a blatant study as anybody knows you shut down the manufacturing plants you get a Detroit effect of no good jobs then the other jobs go too.

    Then the graph shows as demand is awakened, through lenient service jobs laws i.e. loans for specific, need of employment with proper laws etc, or even a force, then the demand for the service will go up as more employees look for and persuade clients to purchase the services. Then after the the demand starts to pick up you will see employment rise as the better client seekers will be able to teach others how to do the same thing through law, persuasion etc. Then it will peak, where the service industry country has reached it's full capacity for that service. Then the demand for the service will start to go down, as clients only wish to at this point seek cheaper services as they already are provided for. Then employers will start to lay off employees to bring prices down. This will keep happening all the way the service bell curve. Until, at the point of normalization for that industry and the bell has rang.

    We have seen this cycle run twice so far with the .com and then the mortgage. The effects are disastrous for the government, and economy. As legalisation is based on the ripple effect of the service bell curve. Along with investments of humans pensions, retirements and government funds. However, once the Bell is rang and it is normalized there is a huge fall out of all those who now do not have a job losing all of their investments as they need them to live, and they can't pay all of their loans because they do not have the jobs after the bell has rang. Then we go right back into exactly what the Communist want us to be.


     We borrowed money from them after the .com, mortgage and we will more or less have to do the same thing after the service bell is rang. This allows the Communist to further their military, political and SOE acquisitions as they are able to purchase and go on spending sprees when the bell has been rung. This leaves the US, Canada, and the EU at a huge detriment to allow the Communist to use their SOE's who own 40% of the Chinese industrial marketplace to keep our labor and production jobs that we need to stabilize or economies.

   As you see the correlation  between , com crash and the mortgage crash and the unemployment levels are obviously similarly.  A service industry goes up so does employment. Once that service industry has gained all the workers and the clients are serviced, then prices fall and workers are laid off. As the clients have their providers and the acquisition part is gone. Then we go through the loss of wages and movement of money and the ripply effects and we again crash.

    The only way to get past it is to find a root manufacturing ability like Green tech to sell to the world. However, we are letting high technological producing jobs go by the thousands;  80% of our Green Technology stimulus was spent on foreign job creation and importation of parts to allow other countries to further their technology advancement of manufacturing and creation. So really, I would buy property now as it will go up in about 10 years then sell when it peaks. As after the insurance service bell curve starts to bend downwards prices of houses and commodities will again start to fall as more and more people lose their jobs as the loss of one job that cannot be replaced it creates the ripple effect overtime to the loss of three jobs correlated with one.

  The Bell curve goes up and goes down, service industries run their cycle no matter what. It is the root manufacturing of technology that stabilizes a country. This allows a country to help other countries through underdeveloped construction by selling products, equipment and machinery needed to help them produce a civil society. That is why the Communist Cartels wish to have a strong hold on technology lines, resources, and shipping lanes. Because, they they can control whole governments and countries by just one little twist of a basic economic infrastructure. If the control the whole market place with proper strategic placemen of SOE cartels, then they can keep a government under a certain well strategies economic theory. If I can do it, I bet you a room full of communist economists helping prepare SOE state secret strategies can do it.

Facts of backing
The US and other free society markets have lost their manufacturing sectors to the Communist SOE padded markets. Countries based on my service bell curve theory that crash the world because of reliance on a cheaters market of SOE Cartel strategic economics.
Countries based on my Service Bell Curve theory:

Canada 76% of GDP is based on Services: 
 EU 70%  of GDP is based on Services
US 70%   of GDP is based on Services
UK 74%  of GDP is based on Services

The SOE Cartels currently have an economic strategy to take a hold of each of the US's allies to slowly erode the power and influence of each country over the Communist Blocs.


    Just ask I can help you defend against it. I just need enough money to live on to do it. For some reason I just see this clearly as day, or through an owl's eyes at night.




     So more or less if the Cartel activities persist and a balance of proper manufacturing and service does not return; we will see the Communist countries becoming more and more powerful after each SOE Cartel strategized crash; politically and militarily. You say it is hard to find the nexus, I say is because you are looking to closely. The strategy is played over years and decades not seasons or quarters.
  Again trust me if this economic defense strategist can create an economic strategy so can the Communist.


  Rider i
Anyone could not have done this or they would have done it already, so do not under mind my genius theory and defense against the Cartels strategy. The genius of it all is that it really is that simple when you put it together and the defense is the enlightenment process. As minds light up, they will have no choice but to defend against it and I will create a ripple effect of enlightenment much like my predecessors during the dark economic middle ages.

This cite once up and running smoothly will also have education institutions for future leaders of the Free Markets to attend and be recruited from.

http://www.ege.fr/

http://translate.google.com/#

Still cite still needs a lot of work. I am underfund and over worked just like I like it, all the chips against me but I am on it. And I think I am going to try and win a blog post award with this thing someday. That is right, if there is not an award program they will create one for me. HEHE.

Rider I

Done

Why it is necessary for China to raise its currency to proper levels.

Test needed for actual civilized countries, use the fact that the WTO will not allow China to fall under a developing country for limitations, plus all their amenities and military defense abilities. Then link into the fact that if one country is secure they have a duty to help without economic procurement, to allow them to compete in the international marketplace. Explain why inherently as we are seeing as Chinese currency value goes up they find more consumption of their individuals and higher quality of life and the lower end jobs that helped them be civilized are starting to leave china so they can worry about service jobs for their new found quality of life. Welcome to the mall stage.

Rider I it ends to the explained why ti is important for China not to stop the flow of globalization and impede its natural course with its selfishness of low currency and monetary attacks.

Is arresting Individual Researchers for books on SOE cartel like activities, cartel like activities?

   I would say, it has a very similar affect to freedom of information and clarity for international commerce. As the Communist Party will not actually completely clarify its actual use of their SOE's and how their intertwine so that the public can see how their strategies affect their local markets and the ability of the Chinese people to compete in international commerce. As the SOE's do bully their way into markets domestic and foreign markets using their police and military to arrest anyone who tries to do open public research on them. I would say at the point in time any researcher trying to do research on companies that are supposedly public companies like State Owned Enterprises and their actually impact on areas around China are being arrested. That is a problem. If the Communist party will not let researchers non affiliated with governments come in for their books and reports on SOE  strategic allegiances between each other. Than I think a NATIONAL COMMITTEE ON FREE MARKETS SHALL CONVENE ON THEM AND DO THE RESEARCH. As obviously they do not follow their constitution and think that their economic cartel like strategies are more important than free markets for domestic and foreign economic stability. As I think that placing free humans in jail for doing research on companies that are supposed to be completely clear  is a violation of WTO policy and Chinese Constitutionality, PLUS HOSTILE CARTEL LIKE ACTIVITIES.

    Further, it has also come to my attention that the Communist Party has also bribed and been caught for economic political sabotage before and currently uses their military and intelligence community to sabotage politicians to allow SOE's to acquire economic infrastructures so they can further their cartel like activities. As such is the actually catching of spies during the Clinton Admin which then there was no proper defenses against the Communist Cartels strategies to purchase a port via an arm of their cartel like activities. Which means that the Communist government took away the ability of a free market avoid of government interest to own the port and intact monetary value and spread it through out the world without a political agenda at the helm as port business's owned by individuals or corporations avoid of government interest usually do.

   However, the use of Port acquisition will be explained in my theory on how it plays a huge part in the cartel activities of the Communist's party political and monetary impositions of the international commercial marketplace. Of course then again that is if they do not put a bullet in my head first as I believe my individual ability to do research avoid of government interest has lead me to the very theory that will help balance the international economy.

  I do not wish for any hatred, I purely wish for a better economic climate regarding fair business and abusive governments use of their State Owned Enterprises strategies. I beg humble apologize for my outburst of being upset. However, at every turn of my research where I should find a board, committee or other wise to deal with the problems I find, I see they have been infiltrated and disbanded, are so inapt do deal with it that it is hard for them to take on the new study, or are inactive when the worlds biggest cartel like activities have happened. I further find that it breaks my heart to see so many not having the Spirit of freedom to stand up and tell them yes, we have may been part of the problem in the crash. However, if you look at the actually roots of this crash you will find the erosion is because of an outdated and imperial tested and disproved theory that is being held onto and abused by one single huge political party in this world, and their cartel like activities within their party across borders and oceans. As such this goes to all my brothers and sisters just wanting to know the truth and having to sit in jail with no actual government interest or help. To the' when it is my turn to lead, unless killed or economically dismantled by the single party, I will be an advocate for 1st Amendment rights of researchers who do research on things of economics and I see not how economic research is a state secret when the SOE's are supposed to be public entities. As I know in the free societies of the world any so called public entity that is not owned by governments but a group of individual like minded people has to completely disclose all financial statements to their public. However, for some reason the Communist think they can call their SOE's companies of public and not clarify or even attack researchers from public investment firms who wish to invest in their cloaked activity of acting like a free society public entity.

   These my friends are activities of a Cartel that has caused major problems and needs major reforms. As such, with the understanding I place myself on the Cartels hit list for speaking out against their Cartel like strategies however, wishing no harm, This is what I am saying to you loud and clear. The Chinese Communist Single Party is now inconsideration by an individual human being with no ties to any government except taxes etc. and the sending of emails when I think it is important, for CARTEL LIKE ACTIVITIES WHICH CAUSED THE FEAR OF COMMUNIST AND CARTEL ANTI-TRUST ANTI-COMPETITIVE STRATEGIES TO CRUSH THE WORLD'S ECONOMIES.
That is harsh and a little extreme and needs to be edited. I will have to come back and slim it down, and take our the upset speech and replace in gentle speech later. I will start my editing of this page to meet gentleman like conduct today. I am sorry, I write how I feel then later go over it and take it down a couple notches.

Rider I

quoted from:
http://www.businessweek.com/news/2010-07-06/china-jails-u-s-citizen-to-8-years-on-state-secrets.html

"China Jails U.S. Citizen to 8 Years on State Secrets
July 06, 2010, 6:06 AM EDT


More From Business week
July 6 (Bloomberg) -- A U.S. geologist was sentenced to eight years in prison by a Chinese court after being convicted of violating the state secrets law by selling a database on the country’s oil industry.

The U.S. said it was “dismayed” by the sentence given to Xue Feng and remains concerned about his rights to due process under Chinese law. Xue was also fined 200,000 yuan ($29,550) yesterday by a Beijing court at a hearing that was attended by U.S. Ambassador to China Jon Huntsman, Richard Buangan, a spokesman for the U.S. Embassy said.
The case highlights China’s use of the law to protect economic information, three months after the jailing of four Rio Tinto Group executives strained relations with Australia. Groups including the U.S.-China Business Council have criticized China’s definition of state secrets as too broad and say lack of transparency is hurting the confidence of foreign investors.
“These cases definitely make international companies worried,” said Nicolas Groffman, a Beijing-based partner at Australian law firm Mallesons Stephen Jaques.
China rejected criticism over the sentencing and said the process was fair
“Will they say China’s legal system is open and transparent if we release him without any charges?” Qin Gang, a spokesman at the foreign ministry, asked at a press conference today. “I can guarantee that during the trial, all the defendant’s legal rights were guaranteed.
Legal Changes
China in April passed legal changes aimed at making people, companies and organizations more responsible for protecting state secrets, according to amendments approved by legislators at the time.
State secrets include information that may damage the nation in fields ranging from defense and diplomacy to “national, economic and development projects” and technology. The government also has the power to label anything else a state secret, according to the amendments passed in April.
Three Chinese nationals were sentenced with Xue yesterday. Li Yongbo, a manager at Beijing Licheng Zhongyou Oil Technology Development Co., was sentenced to eight years and fined 200,000 yuan, AP reported, citing Xue’s lawyer Tong Wei. Chen Mengjin and Li Dongxu, who worked at a research institute affiliated with PetroChina Co., were each given 2 1/2 year sentences and fined 50,000 yuan, according to AP.


Rio Tinto Charges
Former Rio Tinto executive Hu, an Australian citizen, was detained in July 2009 with three colleagues. They were initially accused of stealing state secrets, with the accusations later reduced to bribery and infringing commercial secrets.
“These kinds of cases have been linked to international politics as a weapon of retaliation in the Chinese government’s arsenal,” Hank Wang, a Beijing-based lawyer at Garvey Schubert Barer and co-chairman of the legal committee at the American Chamber of Commerce in the People’s Republic of China, said in an e-mail. “As the U.S. and China have reopened talks on human rights issues, this should be included in the agenda.”

China “missed an opportunity” to be transparent and give companies more confidence when the government decided to hold Hu’s and his colleagues’ hearings in secret, then Australian Prime Minister Kevin Rudd said in March.

‘Irresponsible Remarks’

Qin had rejected Rudd’s criticism at the time and said Australia should respect the result of the process and “stop such irresponsible remarks.”

The database that Xue arranged to sell contained detailed information on the state of the Chinese oil industry, AP reported. China’s three biggest oil companies are all state- owned.

China, the world’s fastest-growing major economy, has been dipping into $2.4 trillion of foreign currency reserves to buy stakes in oil and natural-gas fields and has spent at least $21 billion on overseas resources in the past year. China Petrochemical Corp. bought a stake in a Canadian oil sands project for $4.65 billion in April.

Since his detention, Xue has appeared three times in court before yesterday’s hearing, AP reported. The court also repeatedly postponed sentencing, according to the report.

--With assistance from Debra Mao and Yidi Zhao. Editors: Joe Schneider, Douglas Wong

To contact the editor responsible for this story: Douglas Wong at dwong19@bloomberg.net"


Update on laws Quoted from:
http://www.chinalawblog.com/2010/07/on_the_state_of_china_state_secrets.html

On The State Of China State Secrets.


Posted by Dan on July 19, 2010
Share LinkChina Economic Review just published an article by CLB co-blogger, Steve Dickinson, entitled, "Chinese Walls."
Steve starts out his article by discussing the inherent tension between China's desire to manage "economic information" while at the same time wanting to move to becoming a "modern market economy." China has responded to this tension by overhauling its state secrecy system:
In recent months the State Council has promulgated an amended State Secrets Law and the state assets regulator has put forward new rules regarding commercial secrets held by state-owned enterprises (SOEs).
The idea is to limit the scope and amount of information classified as secret and improve the systems for preventing disclosure of classified information.
China's new approach to state secrecy focuses on the following three themes:
Restricting the scope and quantity of state secrets. Only information classified in advance as secret by an authorized government agency qualifies as a state secret. And, under the Secrets Law, the number of agencies able to make classification decisions is strictly limited. The old system where virtually any government agency or SOE was authorized to arbitrarily designate information as a state secret has been eliminated.
Both Chinese and foreign observers have criticized the PRC state secrets system because of the overly broad definition of what can be classified as a state secret. This criticism reflects a misunderstanding of how the law works. It is true that the definition is broad, but information is only a state secret once classified as such by a relevant government authority. Thus, while the potential scope of secrets is vast, the actual quantity is limited by the requirements of the classification procedure.
Clearly distinguishing between state and commercial secrets. SOEs are owned and supervised by the government, which begs the question: Do SOE secrets automatically count as state secrets? If so, then an SOE could reasonably be classified as a government agency and not as a private commercial enterprise. This is contrary to the country's economic development policy and would cause enormous difficulties for SOEs in their international business dealings.
In order to prevent any confusion, on this issue the regulations provide clearly that SOE secrets are neither private commercial secrets nor state secrets. The companies themselves do not have the power to classify any information as a state secret. This clear separation between normal commercial secrets and state secrets is consistent with international law on the separation between SOEs and government agencies.
Protecting state secrets from disclosure in the digital world is the critical issue. The State Council estimates that in the past decade, over 70% of disclosure of state secrets has occurred electronically. Much of this disclosure was inadvertent, resulting from failure to adopt normal computer and telecommunications security measures.

The Secrets Law addresses this issue in two ways. First, it imposes an obligation on all agencies and persons with access to state secrets to follow data protection best practices such as use of secure networks. Second, it requires all telecom operators in China to cooperate with the relevant government agencies in monitoring the unauthorized disclosure of state secrets.

Steve then goes on to discuss how many foreign observers have wrongly concluded that telecom operators are now being asked to act as censors regarding state secrets. No operator has the power to define a state secret - this can only be done by the relevant government authority. The only requirement imposed by the new law is that they must cooperate with the government if a disclosure of state secrets has occurred.

Telecoms operators have no right to question the government's classification of something as a state secret so this "may be an issue for foreign investors in Chinese telecoms operations, since they may not agree that certain information should be ruled secret."

I wonder if this law means that those who had previously been sent to jail for doing basic research of SOE's and their impacts or the nature of SOE's that are Cloaked State Owned Enterprise under the warped theory of a public entity when really they are political and military entitites should if it is truly trying to act like a corporation avoid of government ownership be free to have public investigations about it. As such y'all should let got the investigators and news writers y'all have held up behind bars like animals for wanting to know what they should have been told.

Another cite regarding the issue of cartels arresting investigators on the tight laws of clarity that the SOE's uncompetitivly hold onto:


Quoted from:
http://blogs.ft.com/beyond-brics/2010/07/06/chinas-state-secret-laws-cast-a-dark-could-over-shanghais-ambitions/

"China’s state secret laws cast a dark cloud over Shanghai’s ambitions


July 6, 2010 12:00pmby Geoff Dyer
Share

The eight year prison sentence given yesterday to the American geologist Xue Feng for spying has revived the controversy over China’s often vague secrets laws but it is also another blow to Shanghai’s ambitions to become an international financial centre.

Xue, a naturalized US citizen born in China, was convicted of spying and collecting state secrets by a court in Beijing which said that his actions had “endangered our country’s national security”. According to the verdict, he got access to documents about the geology of oil wells in China and a database with information about 30,000 oil and gas wells belonging to PetroChina, which was then sold to his employer, the consultancy IHS.

There are plenty of questions about the case that make it rash to rush to judgement, especially as IHS has had little of substance to say. But two of the conclusions that are being drawn have huge importance for Shanghai and mainland financial markets. The first is the fact that the information he obtained appears to have been classified as a state secret only after the event:

As I understand it, this database was not classified as a state secret until afterwards,” said Joshua Rosenzweig, a senior researcher at Dui Hua. “Under Chinese state secrets laws, we have seen in the past that you can’t always go into a transaction knowing beforehand that what you are doing is wrong, because you can’t always know what is a state secret.

Then, according to a report by the Associated Press (which first revealed Xue’s arrest), geologists say that the sort of information he collected is widely available in most countries and represents no threat to national security, given that the government has complete control over who has access to the resource.

Cases like this cast a dark cloud over Shanghai’s ambitions. To become one of the cities where cross-border finance feels at home, Shanghai needs more than just a big domestic economy at its back - it also needs to be a place where important information can be circulated freely and where the legal framework is clearly understood by all. China’s interest in meeting such conditions has been questioned before, including during the various attempts by Beijing to exert more control over the market for financial information.

The erratic application of catch-all state secrets laws is another major obstacle."



 
Rider I

I guess that is the scary thing about Freedom that you have to trust your people with the freedom of information and that you have to have a good defense team to prevent bad guys from using the liberty of freedom for harm.

I could not imagine, imaginary I think: having to try and pay someone for basic investor information about a firm before merging or buying then being charged with bribing because the deal did not go the way I wanted. Or eve the horrors of doing a basic observation report for an investment firm on a energy firms complete dose and then get arrested for spying. Woa, I think I would not feel free if that happened in America.
I think I might kick some body's butt if that happened in America. Freedom is a liberty that one has to trust their people with, and have the belief that the defense team will catch any bad guys that try and abuse that freedom.

Done

My recommedations for the WTO, editing is needed not complete, yet.

  As it has come to my knowledge that for some reason the the Working Group on the Interaction and Competition Policy is inactive. I would with full force and regard to this research page call to pens and search the such group that has been inactivated. As such an area I wish for a proper analysts after my own individual analysts would be:

  The provision on hardcore cartels:
      possible bid rigging by use of cartels, (for resources), price rigging by use of State Procured Business and their conglomerated use of financial systems, manufacturing, resources and shipping, acting against the very nature of open free trade and the expansion of free trade as inherently if found to be acting as a cartel, the SOE's can act in coherence with each other to out perform any individual or smaller country without proper regulations to slow their Government strategy so as to allow proper international commerce and further expansion of civil liberties for those countries who cannot afford to compete with a massive cartel like structure of the Communist Party and its possible strategic use of SOE's to rig prices in favor of their national political interest to grow their economy without regard for their fellow nations and countries in the world.

      "Guiding Principles


The following sets out ICC’s recommended guiding principles with regard to hard core cartels:

1. Horizontal agreements only. In section 8 of "Discussion Points on Information Sharing in International Cartel Investigations" submitted by BIAC to the OECD Global Forum on Competition on February 15, 2002, BIAC suggested that hard core cartel behaviour means (i) horizontal price fixing agreements, (ii) horizontal bid rigging, and (iii) horizontal market allocation. (A copy of the BIAC Discussion Points is attached.) ICC supports this definition.



Hard core cartels ought to be confined to horizontal agreements between competitors, and should not extend, for example, to an agreement between two or more undertakings each of which operates, for the purposes of the agreement, at a different level of the production or distribution chain."
ICC Hard Core Cartels Discussion Paper Prepared by the ICC Task Force on Competition and Trade
Document n° 225/577

27 June 2002

To distinguish from the limitations set forth in id cited document, No 2
 I would believe that a full scale use of a single political parties State Owned Enterprise cartel like activities of such scale use of resources, shipping, manufacturing, packaging, financial possible investments for and against weaken markets, strategic alignment of trading partners to oust non government agents so that their cartel like interest can be obtained from that partners industry, (China's loan to Venezuela, Venezuela stealing American individual business oil rigs), along with dumping tactics, maneuvers to acquire certain industrial economic strategic business with their use of their SOE cartels and further then halting any help what so ever to further the growth of a stable world economy by simply raising their currency value to a country that can produce more than the eldest advanced country.

It has been shown that further mergers of those big type cartels and their activities are bad for smaller economies as they will not be able to compete with them and they will be left to their mercy, if not properly regulated.

Therefore, the Trade Review Board if so found by the Working Group on the Interaction and Competition Policy should properly review and watch the use of the Single Political Party of China which has in not so many wasy stated the very use of their SOE cartels if for political agenda gain and not for fair trade or even to help other countries with their trade as through my scope, which is not a proper regulatory scope as it should be researched.

As there was welcoming in the cartel laws to regulated the huge prices differentials from Swiss vertical cartel like actions linking into offshore resources sites, Switzerland May 1996 PRESS RELEASE

PRESS/TPRB/32 TRADE POLICY REVIEW BODY: REVIEW OF SWITZERLAND

CONCLUDING REMARKS BY THE CHAIRPERSON  30 May 1996 Horrible cited I do apologize.

I would call for if so found that hostile cartel like strategies where used in the Chinese Communist State Owned Enterprises for control of their Mergers and Foreign Acquisitions of their SOE's to slow their uncompetitive nature so as to allow smaller countries, individuals and corporations avoid of government control the ability to compete fairly with the Communist SOE cartel like activities. As such at this time their cartels after their probable use of vertical alignments of uncompetitive nature are on a huge acquisition of uncompetitive nature so as to favored the cartel and to not benefit and even place caps on the growth of smaller countries, developing countries, individuals and corporations avoid of government ownership.,

I believe the detriment of this nature could possibly be more countries only being able to have a service economy and being forced to really heavily on one country for resources and produced materials, like technology, and other basic manufactured necessities.

It is understood that Communist Regime of China does have a very good natural labor pool. However, it is thought that the cartel like actions could be possible a reason and a cause for the last crash as more countries had to be dependant on service economies as their nations, individuals or corporations avoid of national cartel strategic government ownership could not compete with their unfair business campaign, and cloaked conglomeration of smaller SOE's into vast huge government well placed steam rollers of businesses.

I will further my recommendations later I now have to get some sleep. These recommendations come with a notice of need to edit, and that I am in no way a counselor of any type and I do this for fun and am an individual who just worries and sees something I think has grown way to unfair for others.

Rider I, that is why I hide my name as I fear for myself.

I will edit and try and do a better job, these thoughts came to me as I was going to go to sleep. Before, I embarked on this track of research I was having nightmares of people in the world in poverty because of no jobs, and no ability to compete with dumping and over surpluses without proper regulations. The dreams were more or less fathers and mothers crying that they could not afford to provide better for their children. I used to wake up gritting my teeth. Now I can sleep, as I feel I am doing something. I do not have those dreams anymore.

I will edit later.

You see China wishes to be self independent of the world with its SOE use of strategic holdings and conglomerations. Its beliefs are it can make its government, military and communist political stronger if it conglomerates it's SOE's to more power. Then they wish to hold mass resource acquisition so that their SOE's can be well funded and they can under sell the minerals to their national individuals and corporations to keep up the jobs and taxes, so their SOE's can expand, while also using foreign investment money to expand their SOE's.

You see currently the Communist SOE cartel strategy allows for China to be domestically self sufficient while forcing other countries to depend on them. They produce as much as they can for dumping tactics, then the rest allows them to be self sufficient and they only import things on a substantial level that they cannot produce themselves. I believe their SOE strategy is veering very close to the Soviet Unions strategy of causing economic instability so that they can be self Sufficient and selfish without worrying about the worlds economic stability. Further it is the Communist Chinese Central Economic planning and strategic growth of SOEs through that centralizing of and conglomeration of their SOE's that proves to be the biggest problem much like was the fault of the Soviet Union.

http://italy.usembassy.gov/pdf/other/RL31979.pdf
pgs.7-8 on the reasons why the Soviet Union was not allowed into the Free Market society.

It is further relevant by the Communist Chinese massive proliferation of conglomerating SOE and resource acquisition that they seem to wish to stay on the path of centralized domestic self reliance and none cooperation and defiance of free market values and fair competition. As was shown with their last minute raise not even putting in enough money to help any country compete with them for more than a couple years on their plan. Which strategically by then after their Cartel of SOE's gets its strategic foot hold they could raise their prices and then just raise prices on resources and manufacturing items and it would level out to a still unfair playing filed because of their centralized economic strategies.
  Also it is major fear that the Centralized economic strategy of the Communist party will use their Centralized connected and controlled financial investment firms some times even being part of the actual SOE to further create unfair competition in the markets. At the level of Centralized planning and strategic political incite of strategies plus the blatant disregard to fully work with and be humble with the other members of the WTO to help reform the economic world instability. It would be my call to say we need to form and convene on the Chinese Cartel matter, without regard for their military bullying as such if we do not the next crash will be bad and it has been all world leaders can do from having their people go into civil unrest like Greece's poor situation and cause homeland terrorism to go up. As the next crash I predict with the this cycyle of Communist Cartel unregulated strategies will cause a crash that is twice the one we have seen, and governments will have a major time trying to fix it even with inflation and stimulus packages.
I wonder if the same questions we asked Russia would be found very proper to ask China,however, in an even more strategic level as I believe China has taken their Centralized economics to an even higher status than Russia and an even more potential threat. As I know the political fall out from the Cold War and Communist invasion through military forces is still there. I find it funny that when you ask someone if they new if Communist China was in North Korea, or Vietnam killing Americans and Free World Society members citizens they say they do not think so of they do not know. However, you ask about Russia and the Cold War and they know right away. I think that this misrepresentation of the two sides of the Communist Party has been fallen, as the Chinese Communist Party is now the culprit we need to regulate as they have gone unregulated for some time.

China has also started to go back on its reforms of being a more market based country and less of a self sufficient or SOE economic centralized country.

These are rough draft notes I will place them in a precise article later on. Just note taking right now.

http://papers.ssrn.com/sol3/papers.cfm?abstract_id=939435##

I need to read this as this sounds good. point arrow up.
These should also be an interesting read.
http://jiel.oxfordjournals.org/content/vol7/issue4/index.dtl
I disclaim now I am not a lawyer nor counselor and make no qualms to be. I am just reading and writing and expressing my individual rights, as I believe this topic is very important for someone to stand up and say something.

Done Equal competition is fair, unequal competition is unfair.

  It has been long known and understood that the reason why the Chinese and the Communist Party have done so well is because of the individual free markets of the world and the belief in individual ownership being placed into their country. We believed that would happen, and we also thought that it would bring them more civil rights, economic freedoms and a stable military defense for their citizens. As such, I applaud them. As China is now stable and doing very well. However, the Communist party and its political agenda has decided to create unfair competition to create the safest and most padded economy in the world for its national political interest which has crashed the world economy.

 It is normal for political leaders and political parties in power to want a safe and stable country for their citizens. But, when it comes at the cost of the world economies being unstable and crashing because of:
   unfair competition in resource acquisition,
   countries losing millions of manufacturing jobs to their padded market
    countries basic financial deficits being funded by the single party to keep the debt up and the Single parties foreign currency holdings high
     their single party state owned enterprises conglomerating while becoming bigger through strategic national political agendas and strategies
       &
       allowing that single party to become the worlds biggest exporter of technological advances like nuclear machines, and basic luxury technology like computers, mother boards, chips and screens that even our defense department uses at their homes and completely cancels out any comparative advantage theory that any Political Admin every used to uphold the trade deficit with China.
Then it really becomes a problem. The Chinese are freer than they have ever been. They feel the lifestyle of arts, cultures, military defenses and security, & even Cadillac problems are now some of their worst worries like a religious group that is no threat to them or being so wrapped up in economic strategy that properly could be defined as war. So When do we talk to them about their Abuse of their State Owned Enterprises?

    Now!.  It is fair to say after the world, yes the world, asked China to raise its currency to help smaller countries and undeveloped countries to be able to compete in international contracts and resources acquisition. So there would be new markets for all to export and import with. Then, China, or at least one party in China went behind the world leaders that helped China become so economical free, militarily safe, and, China stabbed them in the back. They stated that the world crash was not their fault and took no blame that the world crash happened without even in looking into the policies that they have been holding onto and abusing. Unlike the free world markets which quickly noted they may have problems and started to regulate, fix them appropriately and freely, with humbility, and re-pore corrected(ing) as the free markets always do. They further acted like their SOE economic strategies are ok, and their mass disastrous strategic national economic planning had nothing to do with it. While still seeing and completely understanding that freedom of economics is truly more beneficial for their people's liberties and right to own their own life's. The time is now.

At the point when China tariffs countries when they do not allow their Single Party SOE national interest's to merge, or acquire countries economic infrastructure businesses owned by individuals or corporations avoid of national interest with no national strategic planning or military backing; however, those countries allow in China's individuals or corporations avoid of single party government ownership. I think that is when we should take a look at our newly found bright safe and secure country in the world. As they might be, being a little, to abusive with their old tactics (see 50 years of full bloom communist economic warfare studies and watching, and then apply it to now a days economic market crash). Then, we should explain to them that if you want to be a leader you should not not speak badly on those who helped you. Or, you should not complain and moan about pitching in to help other countries be able to compete. The single parties hesitance to look inwards on their own currency and use of their National Owned Enterprises in the international market really has been selfish and has stopped or even slowed new markets to export and import with. As such this detriment has Stopped and seriously impeded other countries abilities to become economically stable, sovereign, and militarily secure from foreign economic acquisition or terroism. While also slowing the worlds economic rebound because those countries who should be able to compete cannot because of SOE strategies. Leaving smaller markets for all but more markets for the Communist SOE national strategy to conglomerate and merge with crushed free markets, instead of letting them be free and sovereign. This has been done by abusing their SOE strategies to keep out other smaller countries, or underdeveloped countries from resource acquisitions then keeping their currency at a third world rate. While having one of the most secure countries in the world. Further, crushing countries free markets with SOE national strategies so they have to be dependent on Communist resources and products for their feeble service industry, is not what leaders do. Leaders allow people to be free and own their own, produce their own, feel liberty, feel secure and safe from governments, and be their own owners. Freedom of individual markets and competitive international commerce so all countries can have safe countries because of their economic stability, China, is a good thing, what you have done is a bad thing. I think this is when we talk to China and the Single Party dictatorship. About their abuse of their SOE's.

 When is it time to tell China, not so long ago, I remembered a country with SOE's owning all industries and not being allowed to compete freely because of their SOE's uncompetitive advantage and huge political agenda. I think now it is time to say that we are not happy that China is further conglomerating their SOE's and has reverted back to a national economic political strategic SOE level of disastrous proportions. As they have been used too heavily in single party strategy to crush world economies for their national political agenda of economic growth. Therefore, causing their brothers and sisters of the world to hurt in pain, while China laughs and stabs their helping brothers and sisters in the back. Then they wish not to help until it became an issue of Chinese pride that they would be in the hot seat of the meeting of the free worlds regarding the world economic crash.......... Or, at least they waited till very close to that, and that is what it inherently seemed like. It was very close to the last minute. Lets be real and stop eating ourselves up over our abusive relationship and say, China, do you know what your international SOE's have done? Or do you really think that you can hide National Interest Economic Strategies forever?

We need an intervention and the Rider I is here to intervene. I stand and I say, it is time to have a talk with the single party at least to sit down and speak with them regarding their National Interest Economic Strategy of SOE's and how far do they wish to take them? Are they going to go back to the deal of them actually selling off none basic SOE's like manufacturing, agriculture, resource acquisitions etc. (as I believe it states in some WTO agreements that the Communist Party should slow their aggressive and abusive use of SOE's) or is it the single party's plan to try and convert the world through their expanding of SOE conglomerations to their style economics so we can all be country v country as free market countries have started to do; just so they can compete with Communist SOE strategies, (which is war if it comes down to it, as countries will have to compete with countries for resources and market shares instead of business v. business being regulated by governments as it should be)? Or, should the Communist go back on the path of business v. business, which allows countries to fairly regulate the market place and commerce without political agenda or, old Karl's way over thinking. Which, brought his theory right back into the feudalistic prediction of free markets and individual ownership being crashed. Then, having violent revolutions so that all people can be enslaved to each other and have certain rulers (or popular kings,as in communism no person should have more than the other so leaders inherently will have the most power without power checks). Instead of natural competitive individual ownership and the strongest pen writers, (ref's), creating and regulating the competition between their citizens like a referee should. Stay out of the game. Ref's should not play the game as the  SOE's crash of 2008-2010 shows that when countries get their national political agenda's involved with free market commerce at abusive levels, things go very badly. This is when we need to have another Communist talk with the Chinese.

Rider I

Done Prediction of the path of the Warriors of the Communist Economic Warfare Strategy or Unconventional War.

   I would guess that the Communist SOE holdings will further their conquest in minerals and resources in which they hold the contracts in foreign international markets and others have to buy from them. Instead of an individual business or cooperation avoid of government interest. This mining part of the war will lead to Chinese control of who gets to manufacture and who does not, by easily manipulated selling and or bidding out by the Chinese SOE cartel brothers and sisters.

   Case study prediction. Lest say the Communist gain a further hold in foreign lands and their imperialist arm of the Communist Economic warfare machine gains full, to almost, monopolistic style holdings on certain resources. Then they could easily sell to their allies or those who bow to their bulling military and economic cloaked threats. Which will create what we have seen recently in the IMF. Which have started going agaisnt free markets and Democracy in favor of the Communists. As such, if a society that they do not want, or they see as a threat, or an enemy they could easily have their mass holding of SOE cartelled arms come into bid out the countries individuals, or business avoid of government ownership; would then mean, that the Communist would be able to see what company was getting what resources and if they deemed them a threat. In which means they could easily use their military arm of the Communist party to infiltrate, sabotage or spy to see what the company is up too. Therefore, in the national interest of the Communist party and its Economic warfare strategy,  I believe, they have ascended on mines, minerals and resources to gain pure materials for technological advances while making it harder for their competitors like India, Turkey or Russia to compete with their mass holding of SOE resource companies. As such they move for national interest and not for the fair business or market shares. As they usually only fund back to their cloaked style of SOE stock holders who never own more than the Controlling Communist party. Which is no more than 20% at the majority and 40% at the most while the Communist party keeps 60% of the profits for themselves. With hundreds of SOE's nation wide in mining and other strategic economic infrastructures this cloak works well for them.  It keeps away the anti-trust laws by acting like they do not control the company when they still do. Plus, it allows the Communist go gain more money for their expansion. With at times having their SOE's actually not pay back their investors or they just steal their investors money.


Rider I

Done Isolation is bad. However, proper regulations are good.

 In such a drastic crash as the SOE Crash of 2008-2010. It is important not to let the light of actuality get the better of us. It is important to keep globalization open and a free market for individuals and corporations avoid of national interest. This means that if we start to protect against a countries individuals or corporations avoid of national interest the whole advantage to globalization is gone. (globalization in a vacuumed comparative advantage scope is not good but that is for indi and me to decipher and explain later, here we are on proper regulations of SOE"s in international markets.) As such globalization creates peace between countries as our individuals and corporations avoid of government ownership compete and interact and leaders of state avoid of their interest or partners who are leaders of state and leaders of industry create fair laws for all.

    However, protection against foreign economic military uses such as complete domination of certain resources rich countries, or the use of one state owned conglomeration of financial, market, manufacturing, and shipping is a huge problem and causes unfair advantage for those who wish to enter the market and start competing. This means that the use of SOE's actually stumps the peace that globalization creates. As such, that is because corporations avoid of government ownership and individuals cannot compete and are therefore, let to the mercy of those governments who have the biggest SOE conglomerations. i.e. imaginary Case study. Lets say, someone makes a computer chip that can track crawlers embedded in mother boards or other forms of computer technology that was usually thought to be in the micro processor. Then a certain country steals that technology for their military use and then starts to allow their SOE's to produce that technology. The person who created the technology and had it patented tries to prove that they stole it from them and they had a world patent. However, a certain country as it is considered a now state secret cannot release what in a free market we considered as ip or natural business documents. So then they are allowed to flourish in their own markets and markets where they have substantial control. Then as the creator has spend so much time and money on lawyers and trying to fight for his rights he goes practically broke. So when that country or SOE that is producing the chip comes to knock on that producers countries market space. They easily enter as they have cloaked there way through the market. As such, that same country just happens to have a darn good grasp on the technological resources, minerals and the such for the creation of that certain chip. So as their SOE's and their national interest has deemed the item of national state secret. They can easily make the resources need to produce at the original ip holders home just expensive enough for them to be cheaper and start to gain the mass contracts it needs to beat out the original individual who wanted to go corporate but before he could was beaten out by State Owned Enterprise strategy.

   You see this is why SOE's should not be allowed so much strength in international markets. As when a country controls with their political party the commerce they control for their national interest and not for the fair laws of good business practices, or anti-trust, or even just peaceful resolve. As such, free markets have had to start using more SOE's to try and compete with the Communist who's old regulations where tight but now the SOE's find themselves in a world market commerce because of their use of military and protectionist threats if we actually do regulated their SOE's we find legislatures in free markets afraid to stand up and so no you may not have your advantage with national interest SOE's. However, your individuals or corporations avoid of government ownership or national interest may have the table. As your SOE's have caused a world crash with your national interest of economic military strategies. And they further impeded on peaceful international markets, by wishing to control resources, and use their national interest markets to unfair compete with our individuals and corporations avoid of national interest. Yes, we understand that there should be a minimal amount of SOE use. However, a full scale economic warfare strategy as such used by the Chinese and their hundreds of cloaked SOE's which they try and say they only have 100. However, under those 100 names you will find many different market SOE's and strategic financial SOE's. Therefore, we have the resolve to stand up to you say stop threatening us with your protectionist ideas each time we try and properly regulate your SOE's. We are tired of your ego's, your scare tactics, and we would like peace in international commerce. At least if I stood up to them that is what I would want to say. If they pulled the same old Communist if you protect against our State Owned Enterprises from conquering your countries free business we will not allow your individuals or corporations avoid of government ownership into our markets nor will we allow them our SOE's resource control. As such, if they do say that it needs to be explained to them, SOE's bad individual and corporations avoid of government ownership and national interest good. That was cheeky sorry. Just the way I feel and this is my individual cite and I wish for no harm just proper regulations. So Cheeky I am and no lazy one that does not mean that we should have more communist style resource acquisitions SOE's here at home, because that will create war in the long run. That means the Communist need to stop playing unfair. We allowed them into the market place to see how individual free markets can help them and now they are abusing their privilege with their conglomeration of SOE's. In my cheeky stern belief.

Done Karl Marx's theorized himself right back into Feudalism.

   The natural check of individual ownership, plays out as the leaders of industry and their own labors and work can check the leaders of state and their political agenda. Of course there needs to be regulations to keep them separate as much as possible. However, you see with a government separated from commerce except for regulation as stated in the US constitution. It allows for natural competition between individuals and corporations avoid of government ownership. This then breads a healthy market in which can be stabilized through proper regulations.

   However, Karl theorized himself right back into feudalism. He stated that some basic root theories of the individual rights of ownership will collapse because the poor will up rise and destroy those who own. This might have been true in his time. However, now we have some of the best regulations on industry we have ever seen and they keep progressing. Then he states that the class system should be abolished in this violent revolution. He states this will allow the working class to own all of each of every bodies things. However, in truth there will still be a leader, then the leaders favorite or the next leader in charge, and then there will be different levels of workers. So if the commune owns everything, instead of competition and fair governmental laws regulating who gets what and how much each should get. It has played out since the ancient times of Feudalistic Communism, that the ones who find themselves ruling in a Communist type are those closest to the political system. Meaning that if you live in a Communist society and you do not own up to the ideas of beliefs of the Communist it is very unlikely you will get far.

   That sounds like Feudalism to me. Where the whole commune owns everything and each gets the same share or close to the same share as the other. The reason why is that instead of having the leaders of industry being able to check the leaders of state and vice verse, it will be just the leaders of state and the political party who have the power. As if you want to be in a position of State owned enterprise industry and wealth you will have to be in good with the popular Communist leaders. This is much like what happened during the times of the Feudalistic style rulers. Those who had more political clout had more.

   However, in a Lockean theory. It is based on competition and how much each deserves is based on how much they create or output allowing them to own their own if they are the smartest, brightest or can social appease. This then allows society to progress at a faster rate and gain more humanity for the earth. As competition is what breads creativity not, communist contentious order. In Lockean theory yes it is a socialist theory, or a middle ground theory. In which there is a pro viso. That if read in a proper light shows that those at the very lowest level of competition or age or health should be taken care of. However, at any other point it should be the natural order of freedom and liberty for each person to own their own, compete, to bear their own, and to try and make their way on their own. As such each individual is allowed to live the American dream. As our forefathers and mothers came from a land where Communist religion was forced and they wanted more freedoms, or where Communist ideals of the King ruling the land and all the land belonging to everyone under the kings rule and authority was not liked. So folks moved to this land to be their own kings and queens and to be their own. To create their own little place where they felt safe away from Feudal Communism  or slavery to the whole. This is America, we have are the bright shining star of individual liberties.

   At last though of the last 30 years we have grown tired and allowed our defenses down against the very thing this country has fought so hard against its whole entire existence. The ideal that there should be leaders who gain more and the rest should all work to receive the same. We are not the same, I make no draws that I am unique and you are unique. You are better at one thing and I am the best economic warfare analysts alive at least in my mind. That is what I do. So that is what we do. You do not own my labors and I do not own yours. If tomorrow I decided to stop reading and writing with focus on Communist Economics. Then the world would be dimmer from it. However, that is my choice not yours. My day job is my choice and it is not yours to own. My body is mine and it is not yours to own. The land I protect and feed and nurture and live on is mine and not yours. The wife I take is mine and not yours. My children are mine and not yours. Our of good heart and good faith if we help each other that is great and brings us happiness and peace. However, being forced to enslavement of the commune because of state leaders not being able to regulate an industry properly is not right, nor is it freedom to take someones business away from them because our government cannot protect or properly regulate, so as to give it to the whole. That is not right, and shan't happen. Our leaders of state and industry have long lead the way in the world. This is because they have some of the toughest constitutions to fall under. It is not easy to write and weave under an individual liberty of light. It takes proper time and management to make sure each industry is regulated. The stealing of ones citizens property or business to give to the commune or the poor because the government cannot protect its economy, is not right and shan't happen. Of course with exceptions of necessity and domain as confined to certain individual instances has been upheld. However, strictly regulated and very very taught against.

    Therefore, the Constitution was created in the light of Feudalistic Communism and as such had the Bill of Rights written for individual rights so that the people of this land shall not fall back under Feudalistic Communist style economics, leadership, checks and balances or the such. So our leaders need to spend more time behind the pin writing for freedom and not for government stealing.

     I plan to write a full dose on Communist theory is actually a circular reasoning and leads back feudalistic style liberties instead of progression forward for humanity and liberties.

Done Pay Go is very important.

   The idea that state or federal legislatures are allowed to make legislation based on cloud economics needs to be regulated. Our Chief and Commander Obama did a good job when he started the pay go regulations. We need to make sure that these ideas are placed in State Legislators by our state Legislatures. Of course the Fed's should not force it because of State Sovereignty issues. However, it is a needed regulation. It becomes ridiculous when I see politicians asking for more money and another politician standing up and having to explain that the State is broke, maybe you do not understand. If this state has no jobs, then we have no taxes and as a matter of fact the jobless are eating up more of our taxes through state welfare programs instead of placing more in. It is understandable to take our deficit for such things as the defense of this country or even to feed this country. However, what is more important is the realization of psychological warfare.

   If you know anything about military style propaganda you know then that the reality is to win without blood shed. To get the other side to bow, or to beg for help, or to even allow it to peacefully take it over. This is what is happening. If we do not use Pay Go in our legislation it will become worse as the government has to raise more taxes on business and mom's and pops and others cannot afford to even start up business even with all the start up benefits. As after a year or two they just go under once the back end of the start benefits go away.

   This none use of PAY GO and the reality of having to Raise Taxes like some of the Old Clinton Administration believe in. Leads right to exactly what the Communist Economic Warfare Manifesto explained they would do. That is to get the US to completely submit and allow the Communist Government to purchase their citizens business and economic infrastructure like oil, banking, agriculture, finance etc. This is because only the Communist with their strategy of monopsony resource control and monopsonic style government ideological perspective would be able to compete in a world that they crashed.

  As such if our legislatures keep up their massive spending to look good so that they can be voted in again, then we will have no choice but to raise taxes on those business still left. This will make it harder to enter and stay in the market if we have to compete against Communist SOE's that are allowed in our economic infrastructure like COSCO buying one of our only Middle California Naval shipyards.
    So go PAY GO. You pay for what you write Legs, or you do not get it unless death and destruction are tied to it.
   My Chief and Commander had to influx our economic system with the financial stimulus. If he did not we would not even be able to protect our business from Communist acquisitions because we would have been so hard up that we would have been down and out and they would have looked like help. However, they are the wolf in sheep's closing.

  So said so is, Go PAY GO or go home. Vote no if they cannot fund it with real money not cloud economics.

I hold.

Done They theory of comparative advantage is flawed. So Scotty, this Ameican Mutt has to resolve the flaw.

Picture, an American of different cultural blood and inherent multi cultural mindset, sitting inside of his study with books all around, a dark wood, a small lamp lit, a pistol and a knife, along with a glass of whiskey and a smoking pipe, listening to Prince. You see the theory goes we should export jobs so that we can concentrate on high tech jobs. However, what is flawed is those with the highest manufacturing get the best resource contracts for further research and have the highest tax base because they inherently have more jobs for the middle class. This means that foreign governments can obviously gain advantage over the country that is allowing the unfair advantage to continue. Therefore, if they go unchecked they can become a huge threat to economic stability and world peace, World Crash, small belligerent countries feeling they are untouchable and threatening peaceful nations with proof of their attacks.

 As such once a country obtains such a high resolve as to be able to need a set test, then there should be proper laws to allow another country to also catch up. How ladies and gents? Well, we need to start using algae tech to filter out our manufacturing plants output of carbon dioxide as the hair dryer theory (place a bowl of ice in a bathroom and then turn on a bunch of hair dryers and the ice will melt, link to ozone any kid can see that) shows we are seriously hurting our environment. This will stop the inherent killing of our earth. As such the next country that wants to be civilized and have civil amenities like running water, electricity, proper military defense from foreign or domestic terrorism, etc, should be used to properly protect the earth.

Because as my other calculation besides this blog posts economic calculations will show the number of trees compared to cars, humans, manufacturing plants, waste output, and natural carbon dioxide will cause this planets air to be toxic in a very short time. Along with our natural resources like oil, wood, water, and rocks and minerals, that should be mined from outer space and shipped in via individual or corporations avoid of government interest so we can find Eden again. But that is on my other blog from a different server and you have to have had the invitation to read that to see it. That is a little to much light for some to see.

 So lets play fair and allow another country to have the chance to become civil like President Nixon did for China. Shall we, ladies and gents progress into a green earth so our grandchildren can enjoy the same bright sun shiny days and cold cuddly winters as we have? I think we should and basic theory, proper legislation, and international cooperation; can do. We just need proper individual economic progression regulation to do it, as individual ownership causes less wars. We can do it, I know we can we just have to move and groove properly. So regulate and do not steal from your people, individual ownership is the highest form of international peace, with the proper laws. Legislatures need to stop thinking lazy and start properly constructing and weaving so as to create a place for our children to dream of owning their individual industrial shops and be able to give their grandchildren what we should give them. Maybe that is just the Native American India coming out of my blood, or maybe it is just peace and natural competition.  Either way, we can find what we need in this solar system. We just need to properly regulated countries from using their full forces of government, military tax base, to do this. This will allow for proper regulations as the Governments will not be interested in their SOE commerce as much as they will be interested in civil laws like proper exploration of space, and green technology. I believe when we have SOE's it creates an imperialistic economic domination business plan that stunts properly needed green tech and civilian liberties, and causes economic crashes, and wars. This means we have to think more about our internal countries and rebuilding them after the crash than we do about helping foreign countries with poverty. Lets work together to create a world with proper regulations and non government interest business. I think we can do it. As Karl Marx's theorized himself right back into feudalism, I theorize the human species into outer space and exploration while being able to keep the earth intact till that day it becomes a super nova. Properly.
Rider i

Done High Unemployment can cause civil unrest.

  At a certain point of unemployment percentage there is a higher output of criminal activity. This can lead to full force of civil aggression or acting out against those that are trying to help. This is not a good thing. Therefore, we need to work really hard on getting our unemployment levels back down around 5%. We can do this with proper regulations of Foreign State Owned Enterprises in international commerce.
   However, that does not mean that unemployed people should be rolling around buying 20 inch rims and paying 60 dollars a week to drive around and get 11 mpg in their cars, nor should they not be able to look for jobs in a industry that can pay them basic living wages.
   And President Sir, if I had my way we would do like New Deal and put all those who are on unemployment to work for the country for 20 hours a week to earn their pay and then let them look for jobs the other 20. I know if I was on unemployment I would want to work for my pay. Plus this will fix any deficit that people are on unemployment and try to stay on it as they will not want to be pushing  abroom, painting, or handing out food to the homeless. Of course, this is a bipartisan issue, as we already take care of our poor or ill. So America wins, we get people to help take care of our country and we know that those on unemployment do not want to stay on unemployment because they will have to do minium labor to earn their wages.
  Sir, Chief and Commander
     Rider I earning my keep.

Done Economic Science Nobel Peace Prize.

Well lets pay gratitude to those in the past, and then lets progress:
To all those who have come before me, I say good thank you.

Ragnar Anton Kittil Frisch Norway "for having developed and applied dynamic models for the analysis of economic processes"[4]
Jan Tinbergen Netherlands

1970 Paul Samuelson United States "for the scientific work through which he has developed static and dynamic economic theory and actively contributed to raising the level of analysis in economic science"[11]
1971 Simon Kuznets United States "for his empirically founded interpretation of economic growth which has led to new and deepened insight into the economic and social structure and process of development"[12]

1972 John Hicks United Kingdom "for their pioneering contributions to general economic equilibrium theory and welfare theory."[13]
Kenneth Arrow United States

1973 Wassily Leontief United States "for the development of the input-output method and for its application to important economic problems"[14]

1974 Gunnar Myrdal Sweden "for their pioneering work in the theory of money and economic fluctuations and for their penetrating analysis of the interdependence of economic, social and institutional phenomena."[15]
Friedrich Hayek United Kingdom/Austria

1975 Leonid Kantorovich Soviet Union "for their contributions to the theory of optimum allocation of resources"[16]
Tjalling Koopmans United States

1976 Milton Friedman United States "for his achievements in the fields of consumption analysis, monetary history and theory and for his demonstration of the complexity of stabilisation policy"[17]

1977 Bertil Ohlin Sweden "for their path breaking contribution to the theory of international trade and international capital movements"[18]
James Meade United Kingdom

1978 Herbert Simon United States "for his pioneering research into the decision-making process within economic organizations"[19]

1979 Theodore Schultz United States "for their pioneering research into economic development research with particular consideration of the problems of developing countries."[20]
Arthur Lewis Saint Lucia

1980 Lawrence Klein United States "for the creation of econometric models and the application to the analysis of economic fluctuations and economic policies"[21]

1981 James Tobin United States "for his analysis of financial markets and their relations to expenditure decisions, employment, production and prices"[22]

1982 George Stigler United States "for his seminal studies of industrial structures, functioning of markets and causes and effects of public regulation"[23]

1983 Gérard Debreu United States "for having incorporated new analytical methods into economic theory and for his rigorous reformulation of the theory of general equilibrium"[24]

1984 Richard Stone United Kingdom "for having made fundamental contributions to the development of systems of national accounts and hence greatly improved the basis for empirical economic analysis"[25]

1985 Franco Modigliani Italy "for his pioneering analyses of saving and of financial markets"[26]

1986 James M. Buchanan United States "for his development of the contractual and constitutional bases for the theory of economic and political decision-making"[27]

1987 Robert Solow United States "for his contributions to the theory of economic growth"[28]

1988 Maurice Allais France "for his pioneering contributions to the theory of markets and efficient utilization of resources"[29]

1989 Trygve Haavelmo Norway "for his clarification of the probability theory foundations of econometrics and his analyses of simultaneous economic structures"[30]

1990 Harry Markowitz United States "for their pioneering work in the theory of financial economics"[31]
Merton Miller United States
William Forsyth Sharpe United States

1991 Ronald Coase United Kingdom "for his discovery and clarification of the significance of transaction costs and property rights for the institutional structure and functioning of the economy"[32]

1992 Gary Becker United States "for having extended the domain of microeconomic analysis to a wide range of human behaviour and interaction, including non-market behaviour"[33]

1993 Robert Fogel United States "for having renewed research in economic history by applying economic theory and quantitative methods in order to explain economic and institutional change"[34]
Douglass North United States

1994 John Harsanyi United States "for their pioneering analysis of equilibria in the theory of non-cooperative games."[35]
John Forbes Nash United States
Reinhard Selten Germany

1995 Robert Lucas, Jr. United States "for having developed and applied the hypothesis of rational expectations, and thereby having transformed macroeconomic analysis and deepened our understanding of economic policy"[36]

1996 James Mirrlees United Kingdom "for their fundamental contributions to the economic theory of incentives under asymmetric information"[37]
William Vickrey United States

1997 Robert C. Merton United States "for a new method to determine the value of derivatives."[38]
Myron Scholes United States

1998 Amartya Sen India "for his contributions to welfare economics"[39]

1999 Robert Mundell Canada "for his analysis of monetary and fiscal
policy under different exchange rate regimes and his analysis of optimum currency areas"[40]

2000 James Heckman United States "for his development of theory and methods for analyzing selective samples"[41]
Daniel McFadden United States "for his development of theory and methods for analyzing discrete choice"[41]

2001 George Akerlof United States "for their analyses of markets with asymmetric information"[42]
Michael Spence United States
Joseph E. Stiglitz United States

2002 Daniel Kahneman Israel
United States "for having integrated insights from psychological research into economic science, especially concerning human judgment and decision-making under uncertainty"[43]
Vernon L. Smith United States "for having established laboratory experiments as a tool in empirical economic analysis, especially in the study of alternative market mechanisms"[43]

2003 Robert F. Engle United States "for methods of analyzing economic time series with time-varying volatility (ARCH)"[44]
Clive Granger United Kingdom "for methods of analyzing economic time series with common trends (cointegration)"[44]

2004 Finn E. Kydland Norway "for their contributions to dynamic macroeconomics: the time consistency of economic policy and the driving forces behind business cycles."[45]
Edward C. Prescott United States

2005 Robert Aumann Israel
United States "for having enhanced our understanding of conflict and cooperation through game-theory analysis."[46]
Thomas Schelling United States

2006 Edmund Phelps United States "for his analysis of intertemporal tradeoffs in macroeconomic policy"[47]

2007 Leonid Hurwicz United States "for having laid the foundations of mechanism design theory"[48]
Eric Maskin United States
Roger Myerson United States

2008 Paul Krugman United States "for his analysis of trade patterns and location of economic activity"[49]

2009 Elinor Ostrom United States "for her analysis of economic governance, especially the commons"[50]
Oliver Williamson United States "for his analysis of economic governance, especially the boundaries of the firm"[50]

However, for all those that come after me just know Indivismus Maximus is going to be a contender, my child is rough, but can create world peace. We will just have to soften some of the edges. Time to progress not relapse back into Marxism. So good luck and may the best peace worker win. In the future I apologize now to my wife and grandchildren for being so one sided with Indi. Not so much my grandchildren as Indi can be taught while having fun at parks, zoo's, amusement parks, dancing or researching in Grandpa's garden and sitting on Grandpa's porch having a lemonade. To my future family I love you and I hope I do not annoy my grandchildren, I'll make it fun though and interesting.


Love you bubba's. Pap's been working on this for a long time.

Done Helping a country back on its feet without State Owned Enterprises.

There is a way to help countries get out of debt and to intrinsically create an economic industrial revolution, and technological revolution, without using major State Owned Enterprises that have national interest tied to them.
As such, the study needs to be refreshed, and I, plan on writing blog's as I go on how to properly help crashed,crashing, or underdeveloped countries bloom and secure their countries without the use of Foreign SOE's to do so. This will allow those countries to stay economically sovereign, and to grow stronger and have more individual economic freedoms and economic civil liberties for their people. As such, this study will be part of the new economic theory I am creating called Indivisimus Maximus. Which is, in one chapter, the study of the economic defenses of a country without using protectionism from individuals or corporations avoid of government owned national interests. Therefore, the best solution for any country is to enhance their economic civil liberties for individuals and corporations avoid of SOE national interests. As the detriments of allowing foreign state owned enterprises into national economies has been seen by the latest crash. As such there is over 30 years of lost data explaining why America the UN and the WTO have all feared Communist Economics. This data also needs to be refreshed, read and applied to the crash as of today. The reason as such is the Chinese Communist party holds strong they had nothing to do with the crash and it was everyone except them and predominately the free world societies fault. However, our Free Societal historical economic research and analysts of Communist Economics could easily prove the root cause of the last crash. As truly SOE's used in international commerce do attend to their national interest to allow their single Party (the Communist party) to dominate economies.

Signed
Rider I

Truly we need apply historical research data to the new communist economic warfare strategy.

Done Globalization is a good thing when not abused.

The use of privatized companies in international commerce allows for fair competition. However, when whole countries use their businesses that have access to full force of military, strategists, taxes, and the basic padding from governments. It becomes unfair to other countries individuals or corporations to compete with them. As such, globalization allows for individuals or like minded individuals(.) around the world to gain the opportunity to own their own businesses or work for a business that works for them (not their military, nor government political agenda). Example, if an individual wishes to compete in international commerce they could find a way to compete with a proper business plan. This then allows the government to set up rules for fair competition between local business and foreign business avoid of the governments SOE's interest in commerce. Plus, the laws could help out with fair rules to compete with exports and imports.

However, if a country owned business is inside of a country and it needs more market share it will consume its own local market and turn to international markets, as natural law economic progression of business plays out. This will cause a detriment, as the people who regulate, create, or deal with monetary policy will feel a patriotic duty, or that an easy way to make money is to help their governments by helping the SOE's to do better, or, to even give them contracts that the SOE's may have inadvertently caused to be the only bidder of, or the most competitive bidder of. This is also true in nature, as called survival of the fittest. If the biggest animal in the pack brings in the most food the others will surround it to protect it from any other competition . As such, this creates another detriment for individuals as they get muscled out of market shares and the government SOE's take dips into new markets, needing, and consuming more market shares, conglomerating as they go. This will make it much harder for individuals to live their dream of being their own boss, and owning their own labors (Lockean Progression), as it will be very difficult to compete against a government.

So why is this bad? The SOE's keep going, they stay strong and there are jobs. Well, lets take the macro approach to SOE use in international commerce. (case example) The Venezuela State owned energy industry did not pay an American company, ~100 million that it owed. However, this American business was avoid of government ownership. So they just took it as a contract gone bad. What if the USA was a Communist country also, and the contract was done by a US SOE to Venezuela SOE? This could be cause for war or some kind of later detrimental affect. As many wars in the past have been of money and business territory. However, as the US is not Communist, Venezuela did not have any problem getting away with not paying them and being late for some time on their payments (I believe the US government did protect their citizens business though). So we have no war and American contractors will just be wary of doing business with them.

Lets take another case example. Lets say the whole world uses SOE's to acquire resources for their businesses. Each country on its own, has to provide for its local people. This means it would be country against country, and not business versus business. This also could lead to war or economic imperialism as there would be no one to stop countries from getting into fights over their SOE's. You say that would never happen, we would just use another country to arbitrate. Doubtful that that would help, because if government SOE's had complete control there would always be an angle and some sort of conflict of interest for a certain SOE to SOE business transaction or economic imperialist motive. Kind of like the old Soviet Union's bloc style trading. Where it traded with certain Bloc members that its economic imperialism felt would be more beneficial to the bloc than others. They were avoid of natural law economic competitive progression. So it left countries with huge corruption of the leading class. Which left the mass leaderships to feel the flush and the individual worker to feel tired and abused. Apply this to Country SOE v Country SOE and it could leave whole countries in shambles much like what happens when whole government's get involved with physical weapons. However, this is instead with economic weapons (SOE's). AS one country becomes stronger and stronger until it is a national threat to its fellow commercial traders.

However, lets look at another case. You say we can find equilibrium with SOE use. That is hard, humans are competitive in nature, and humans work in the SOE's. This would inherently over time cause an influx of SOE's to crush local markets then turn to international markets. Plus, link in the idea of country v. country instead of business v. business too. The mere fact that SOE's would exist using the natural law progression of economics through SOE national interest causes government members to circle around them to make money, to dominate markets, to vest, and to further their own national interests. This would then be considered economic warfare, much like the conclusions I have come too as SOE v individual or corporation avoid of government ownership is war (definitionaly: the pushing of one side for national economics by use of state owned enterprise to build military and defensive technology, and to further be able to use force to acquire political clout, or currency stocks and the huge imbalance that causes world economic instability) and business v business is natural law progression of competition.

Therefore, the use of SOE's to pad ones economy, then to enter anothers market, and finally allow certain specific national interest to enter the crushed market to obtain through use of SOE's, national interest of resources acquisition, debt ratios, strategic military political clout, and national interest etc. is: illegal, anti-trustworthy, bad business practices, and a showing of bad faith after they were allowed into the international market to try and help their country. SOE's should not be allowed to be in foreign markets as they can easily use their size and strength to pry open markets and allow more SOE's in that will inherently focus on national interests. The fact that no individual or corporation can compete with an SOE that is not held back by strategic slow eroding strategies should be cause enough for serious concern of huge SOE conglomerating businesses competing in international commerce.

You say, no it should not, because we can watch and control the use of Foreign SOE's in industries and market places. Then I say, look to the world crash and certain blatant red flags flying so high that any high school economic student, if pointed out to them, could understand the logic. The SOE's economic dominance and inherent natural need to feed its owners, has caused a world crash so that its national interests can grow, and obtain more market shares as it has, and is doing. SOE's unregulated and uncontrolled as through natural law economic progression are for national interests and not fair business competition. They will dominate with full force of national interest cloaking their steps as much as allowed.

Therefore, stopping full SOE international commerce is not feasible in real time. Though, (,) we could at least slow the progression by placing proper strictly scrutinized regulations on them. These laws should be properly written to hold back governments from being able to use their SOE's to unfairly compete, cause monopolistic, or monopsonistic style national economic interest, which unchecked cause world economic collapses. So that it may acquire more political clout, business contracts, and conglomerate their SOE's bigger, while the crushed markets can barely struggle to survive, rebuild without being forced to allow them to be purchased by or invested heavily in their markets by a foreign SOE.

Where SOE's have become strategically the strongest businesses in the world with full governmental force behind them. These laws need to be properly placed so as to slow the economic dominance of those countries which still use heavy SOE's. The use of SOE's used to be a very big regulation area in international trade. So much so that those countries using them as much as China is using them were not allowed into Free World Trade Societies. This is true and there are historical documents pertaining to the fear and predictions of the use of SOE's unchecked and unregulated in international trade. The reason for this is because of exactly what you have seen happen hear over the last two crashes, the .com service crash and the mortgage service crashes. As such I have dubbed this crash the SOE crash of 2008-2010. Furthermore, I am very irate with China for trying to blame the US and other countries for this crash when its very own use of heavy SOE's in international commerce made the fear of Communist Economics come true. Now they are gaining resources, contracts and their SOE's are growing faster than ever. Which, as a government entity allows them to have full incite to national military and political acquisitions.

As such individuals or individual corporations avoid of government ownership are a good thing in international commerce. They breed competition and creation, avoid of national interest. This causes less wars in the world and even furthers peace processes as countries try and work together to get their individuals or corporations to interact with each other. When State Owned Enterprises are used to the mass quantity of being in the very structure of economic foundations of the international industrial trade arena, they are used to cause economic warfare through a strategic dominant national interest policy, and are trying to intertwine themselves into other countries economic foundations. There are laws that should be created to infuse the world with economic stability and peace. SOE's as such used by the Old Soviet Union or Communist bloc and the new Chinese Communist SOE strategy are a threat to international peace and economic stability.

Rider I

P.S. selling stocks of an SOE that reports to a national interest is a cloak of national interest.

P.S.S., I am also upset that the Chinese government keeps trying to call countries use of being careful of letting Chinese use their SOE's to invest in economic infrastructures as protectionism, tariffs, or any such thing as that. There is no barriers from individuals, or corporations avoid of government ownership or cloaked government ownership, that should be stopped in world trade. It is pure sovereignty and defense from economic imperialism. However, blatant SOE's should be strictly scrutinized, as the trace is complete and economic warfare by way of SOE is a dominant trait in the World Crash.