Communist Economic Warfare strategy. Old but as JFCOM states history can predict future.

Sector 5, impluribum utus, nos, de kotus. I can't deal with it it is so unfair I will start speaking the language of heaven.
meditation music
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=sSaf3XcckIw

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=EO5cEta01Dw

This report is old regarding Soviet Union strategies, based on the political agenda of the marxist folks. This is all cited from freedom of information acts regarding the Cold War. I will now apply it to neo-mercantalist and as the whole SOE as one country still can apply to those SOE's left to hold massive similar detrements to the world of free enterprises and free trade. Almost there, we are so close.

"I It is frequently agreed, in assessing the political aspect of the power and policy, that the ultimate end of Communist policy is world domination and the destruction of non-Communist society. In order to achieve this objective the Communists resort to both direct and indirect aggression." "The Communist are engaged in direct and indirect aggression in the sense of calculated, unprovoked attack in the economic as well as the other fields."

The Communist have tried "to convince the Free World that trade and "total politics" are entirely separate matters, and they would like to convince the West that [Communist} economic policies and aims are completely traditional and in the line with those of the West, even though serious basic military and political conflicts are raging. Although they try to propagate this divisibility of policy, the Communists act and formulate their own policy on the contrary assumption that economic, military and psychological policies are merly aspects of the unified total policy geared to consistent total objective."

"Communist principles are at variance with those governing Free World trade policies and constitute, in effect, a type of economic warfare which places the West at a serious disadvantage unless recognized as such and effectively countered" Maybe that is why we are at the very last position for economic regarding trading accounts.

The Communist and its creation of satellites, Like Iran, Venezuela & North Korea " are planned, or centrally controlled economies and aggressive totalitarian states" Much like we see with China not allowing its neighbors of much smaller proportions to keep its local vicinity lands even though China already holds the worlds vasts resources in its own country.

By the means of permanently imposed austerity, the government commands sizable surplus product for direct pursuit  of its policies at home and abroad. This is significant because the resources thus at the direct command of the government constitute a considerably greater share of the national product than those available to governments of the consumption economies of the Free Worlds." Much like still today were we see China holding a 40-50% high SOE hold on its domestic market.

"This surplus product is allocated for development of the industrial war potential of the Communist areas and financing the [economic blitzkrieg]  of indirect aggression or, as in the case of Korea, [Iran and Venezuela] direct aggression abroad."

"The trade policies of the Communist are completely state determined policies with dual objectives of (a) developing as rapidly as feasible the economic independence of the Communist and its satellites economies from non satellite economies [much like we see China's resource quotas and tariffs with specific use of economic warfare against those who wish to dissent to them, or for specific resources being sold to certain satellite countries] (b) disrupting and obstructing Free World efforts toward economic recovery, development, and economic and military defense." Much like what we are seeing now with China's wishes to control militarily under Chinese control the Asianic ocean areas that are currently needed for Free World trade to stay international to trade freely with those countries. Or much like we see with Chinese resource acquisitions so that it can keep up a higher technological advancement than its Free World competitors.

Economic warfare paraphrased:
 A country that trades  to create economic Independence while trying to create financial dependence on another without allowing it to be able to create its own dependence or balance out the financial dues, which can weaken a market or even a country as a whole, through price manipulation, market sharing, protectionism and financial pressures must be considered to be engaged in economic warfare. Personal mixed in with others.

Acceptance of China's currency manipulation and possible economic warfare does not mean the full scale efforts of economic warfare through embargoes or tariffs, however, it is "an essential and significant setup in its defense.'

Acting isolated individually in relative isolation from each other, has created the Free world to become prey to Chinese coordinated economic maneuvers.
Again just paraphrasing what I am reading and then inputting my thoughts into the scope of the idea.
The defense "is to recognize that the Free World needs two specifically different foreign economic[ policies promoting free enterprises, freer trade and minimum restrictions to new foreign developing markets].

However to the communist market place "An entire different policy is required. relationships vis-a-vis the Communist must be developed as an effective counter to a clearly defined policy of economic warfare and not merely on the basis of ad hoc exceptions to and mitigation's of the Free World Policy."
This is something that has caused us greet pain as we have forgotten about this document and the research behind neo-mercantlist countries in which the Communist were and still are as they wish for high foreign currency reserves and trade surplus, much like they did before they cloaked their centralized economic strategies. This centralized strategy can still be seen by heavy reliance on espionage.

Here is were I differ from this paper who thinks we should weaken the Communist Market. I do not think that. Ithink we should strengthen it by forcing them to have freerer domestic policies for their market places and free enterprises. This will then create a higher quality of life for them and it will allow more growth potential for competing countries who need the labor intensive production to keep their people out of trouble and producing a good days wage. This then will not be the course of Soviet Style war as we did do a good job, little to good. However, Mr. I's strategy will be to further increase China's inner domestic quality of life while forcing the US to compete against the Communist vis-a-vis so that both China and the US will compete for developing countries and of course Russia will be there tag teaming us with China like Usually. However, Bruce lee is the master and two countries can't take down the master of freedom and liberty. I think my new path will create domestic quality of life for China and the US, plus Russia. As the current strategy of dealing with the Communist is costing Americans their quality of life and foreign countries security as we engage China to much and leave out other countries that need the labor intensive production. As China now can start to look inwards for domestic services and consumption. And if it is truly wishing to be free will raise its consumption and drop the neo-mercantlist political and economic policies to follow a higher path of freedom and liberty. I just hope my I was wrong and that there is not a 30 year plan to turn the world communist through a neo-mercantalist economic wafare strategy.
  However it is important to realize that both Countries are still communist. This idea of the cold war is over and Communism is gone is wrong. Both Countries run high neo-mercantalist strategies much like the cold war. Just now our brain is looking at a red hearing of Muslim's instead of homeward bound economics and quality of life. We must see our competitor at eye to eye or we all crash and no one flies.

It must be noc borne 2.1.o that the nature of Communist Economics is still that economic information of many kinds including SOE hotel ownership and food manufacturing is regarded as a state secret. The Communist policy of publishing accurate and real time data is still far behind and totalitarian towards freedom of speech and proper freedom of economic reports. They however, have done strides though still work needs to be done.

Communist foreign trade is still a huge bloc of monopoly. As ships are SOE's good number of manufacturing plants and ports, along with financers and other parts of the market are still monopolized to the State centralized economic planning divisions.

Government monopolies and market sharing along with Cartel and anti-trust violations are still protected in their constitution and legalities. Even though they have created laws to start to try and deal with that. Slow the process may be.

"In economics in general, and particularly with reference to national economies, the significance of monopoly power in the relatively free market has long been recognized. A particular large buyer (monopsony) [much like we see in China's SOE resources which act as separate entities but are owned and controlled by a centralized board] or seller has inherent in its very position the ability to influence prices and take other aciton of a discriminatory nature for its own benefit, which are not open in a freer competitive market. It is stated that the existence of the power, even without conscious will to exploit it, is sufficient  to yield some monopolistic fruit." However, being governed by the Communist party at its helm still today. It is assured certainly a will to exploit it whenever advantage will be gained for the Communist objective will be taken.

"The existence of the Communists monopolies and monopsonies power present very real problems to the exporters and importers of the Free World. The Communist are able to buy and sell on better terms than if their trade was conducted by a member of a merchants acting independent of one another."

"Thus with the combination of monopoly and totalitarian power [of one dictatorial Democratic party running its centralized economic policies and owning the monopolies], the free world foreign trader is faced with a situation antipathetic to the principles governing his other exchange is a competitive market of private traders. they are placed at a considerable disadvantage."

China wishes to think that their economy is some sort of hybrid or miracle. However, monopoly and monopsony power as owned by the government has long been seen as the reason for international instability. So much so that the two biggest countries in the world went head to head over it until one of them crashed and tapped out. This is no different from what we have seen in the international market place today. However, were Senator McCarthy by giving his life maybe somewhat eradicable in his investigation was able to rid America of economic communist spies. However, today we see a weak lack of stance against uncompetitive trade, stemming from the state department and the commerce department. Two places were Senator McCarthy was able to track and get actual confessions of known communist spies before we won the cold war. However, today, there has not been one internal spy found in the economic departments. Why i dnot know, nor why is it that we play so lightly and weakly towards the very tactics we new would cause harm to international market places today. I can only account for this cognitive creation as planted spies in economic departments and heads of intelligence communities. At the point when I was able to trace stock dumping, foreign speculation in real estate, SOE actions of economics, during specific points in the American business cycle and no American economic intelligence agency was even able to figure out the neo-mercantlist had something to do with it. Right away I released the hounds. I had no choice. This is ridiculous. I can read for days on Cold war economic warfare defenses against neo-mercantlist strategies. Yet, our defenses today seem to be down. For good reason i do believe in free trade and open markets. However, again vis-a-vis the Communist parties of China and Russia. as both countries were involved in killing millions of Americans and a huge economic warfare battle over fair competitive international economics.
   The reality is again that the idea of infiltration by infiltration has come at a high cost to the US and free markets. So much so that the Communist are now able to easily inter politics and economics with their government single party dominance tools and actors.

"The monopoly of foreign trade in the countries of people's democracy is firstly, a means for the maximum promotion and stimulating of the development of the socialist productive forces of these countries, secondly, an instrument for the defense of their planned economy from the penetration and corrupt influence of imperialist capitalist [articles words presented to speak from marxist eye's], and thirdly, a means for the strengthening of planned economic ties with all countries of the socialist camp. The monopoly of foreign trade in each one of the countries of people's democracy is a means for the planned coordination of its economy with the economy of all countries of the socialist camp, coordination which is aimed at mutual assistance in the economic development of these countries"

" In economics in general, and particularly with reference to national economies, the significance of monopoly power in the relatively free market has long been recognized. A particular large buyer (monopsony) or seller has inherent in its very position the ability to influence prices and take other action of a discriminatory nature for its own benefit, which are not open in a freer market. It is stated that "the existence of the power, even without conscious will to exploit it, is sufficient to yield monopolistic fruit" I think I wrote that one. But here it is just the ability to have monopoly power or monopsony style acquisitions allows the influence of mass ability to purchase at such high quantity to create a vacuum suck in that industrial market place. For example, we have seen this for many years through the industry of the mortgage industry with fannie mae and freedie mac acting as duopolies who can easily hold monopoly power if they were not restrained. They inherently drive prices and market shares by their basic movements because of such vast sizes. This SOE style duopoly is very similar to the cognitive process of which Senator Sherman created when he presented anti-trust laws to capitalist industries, as their vast growth ws controlling the market place in their favor. Much like i believe but am not sure, the last mortgage crisis we had I would believe that fannie mae and freddie mac and other SOE's or duopolies would have gained significant increase percentages as compared to their private free Enterprise competitors. That would be a great study. However, my hypothesis stands on basic natural freedom of economics as a stream system. which is on this blog specifically laid out.

"However, in countries run by communist heads of state it can be assured that there is certainly a "will to exploit it", whenever advantage will be gained for the Communist objective."
This can be seen as the Communist party has spread and gained power in more free markets we see a rise in more neo-mercantalist strategies much like the communist parties views towards the catch 22 of free trade. As they wish for free trade yet their protect and compete so unfairly that they always or most certainly hold high reserves so when their consumers crash due to inability to create productive value through the neo-mercantalist economic model shows, they they can easily step in and purchase their competitors without any need for competition to their monospony style acquisitions of free markets.

"The existence of the Communist SOE's of monopoly and monopsony (especially resource monopsonies as we have seen that this paper rings true) power presents very real problems to teh exportes and importers of the Free World. There is no question that Communist neo-mercantalist economic models can and do buy and sell on better terms than if their trade was conducted by a member of merchants acting independently of one another." or free enterprises who are regulated by the government and forced to act independently of each other specifically because of the reasons of neo-mercantalist SOE style advantage.

"1 at any given time the Communist political party knows its position in relation to the rest of the world and each foreign country separately, thus greatly simplifying the formulation of policy. This has been particularly important in the past two decades, when foreign currencies have not been freely interchangeable [more or less countries wish to try and force neo-mercantalism by not having market force currency of supply and production along with inner consumption] rising complex problems of currency control and clearing in foreign trade."

"2 Its monopoly of foreign trade permits the Communist to insulate its domestic price system form prices prevailing in world markets. the prices at which the Communist buys or sells goods abroad need not, and frequently do not, have any close relationship to the prices." This is probable less true today. However, if my readings of recapitalization are correct, it still applies. As the Communist recapitalize their business as they do not follow market forces which would cause them to rise and fall under normal market prices. In which they then can maintain a lower sell point and a high buy point in which the government just lends them more money at eats it as their growth rate is a major part of their liquidation capital equation. As they figure as long as they are growing they can afford to recapitalize and just pay it off later. However, this then causes the rest of the world to have to follow suit. This is shown as countries with free trade in which depend on the neo-mercantalist production have high service equations into their GDP. However, the service bell curves rise and crash with the employment supply and demand of the service industries. Which is shown in multiplier effects of the saving and loans, .com and the mortage service bell curves. As the employment of those service industries went up so did the rest of the economies employment. Then as the service industries peaked out at supply and demand of employment, the service industries competitors had to start competing for an ever smaller market shares. This then meant they had to cut costs and employment to gain new market shares and keep their business open. Which again I would hypothesis that as after the peak employment of the service industries they started cutting back to gain more clients and be more competitive. This leaning out then caused the rest of the economy to start to lean out. As the employment levels of those service industries then leaned out so did the rest of the economy. This then shows that the free markets do not have an equal share of foreign currency reserve and production capabilities of international market shares to be less reliant on the service industry for the multiplier effect. This is mainly do the uncompetitive nature of neo-mercantalist which hold the international production value and pad their own economies from allowing fair entrance and sharing of market share sails. As such, neo-mercantalist forces free markets to rely on the service curve. Then which forces then to rise and crash with the service bell curve employment multiplier demand and supply. As such this then allows the neo-mercantalist to purchase more shares by buying free enterprises key strategic industries and prying easily into industries otherwise they would be thought unfair to enter, on the theory that they will be creating jobs. Even though their model just takes their domestic neo-mercanlsit model and then forces it upon other free enterprise and free trade models in the guise of free trade do to strategic centralized economic planning of major strategic SOE's and cartel activities.

"3 Where an when necessary, the managers of the Communist economy can and do act against the interest of particular groups of their intra producers and consumers in making decisions about foreign transactions" Which is then treated much like war were certain SOE's getting eaten up by certain bigger SOE's so that they can become strategically inclined to create market sharing between the bigger SOE's. For example, it is like COFCO having a major monopoly holding on grain, then also conglomerating with packing SOE's, manufacturing SOE's and hotel SOE's, in which all play a strategic role in the centralized economy of the Communist Politburo. The main thing to remember is that the Communist were supposed to be held to allowing more privatization for entrance into the international free market. However, we have not seen this as such. What we have seen is major SOE's being built in which still wish to hold market shares of their predecessors. However, they just know do it through one centralized SOE instead of separate SOE's. Which inherently make the whole communist neo-mercantalist economic model easier to control and strategies, as the simplification of the protective market strategy is easier to calculate with one centralized SOE in application to other SOE's which now have all the necessary components to act in a micro version of exaclty how the Communist regime acted in a whole previous to them creating packs with the free market for their entrance.
The best part is that they say they hold onto these SOE centralized neo-mercantalist anti-trust violating models because they need them to be competitive in the industries. However, in such industries as cars this is not true. The Communist have free enterprises owned by their own citizens now which can compete and are very possible to be competitive in international market places. However, the Communist cartel SOE's together to the tune of 16 to create an uncompetitive domestic and international market place. This truly in forensics is not for fair competition but for old Communist views of crushing then devouring their competitors market shares in a monopolistic, monopsony style economic model. As a matter of fact their own citizens have tried to bring suit against them for vertical and horizontal cartel actions however, the Communist do not care as they are more worried about their views of politics and centralized economies being used to control international market places to realy uphold their contracts with the free markets. It would be one thing for them to hold on to their SOE's if they actually allowed their private enterprises without government ownership, as SOE's with some stock holding is not free market. However, their free enterprises have shown over and over again that they can be competitive without all the padding that their communist regimes afford them. Yet, still the communist hold onto their politics and economic uncompetitive models.

"4 As the sole buyer and seller of goods and services for the Communist, the government SOE's has a strong bargaining position as against competing buyers and sellers in other countries.

"5 In advancing its economic interests abroad, the Communist government is able to back them with all its political, economic and military might, giving it substantial advantages frequently over individual foreign enterprises or weaker foreign states." We can see this through such high espionage rates that happen when communist SOE's are allowed bases inside of free markets. I believe it has been documented as communist soe's are allowed to set up shops in free enterprises the espionage rate goes up as their cloaking abilities become much easier to do. This then allows the rate of piracy and national stealing to rise substantially under the guise of commercial espionage. When in actuality it is the Communist intelligence agents who are stealing specific trade goods to compete with their competitors who are free enterprises. This has done huge damage to free enterprises who do not have the ability to protect themselves from full force communist military tactics. There has been numbered of loses due to espionage from communist since they were allowed to start setting up SOE bases inside of foreign countries in such detrimental amounts as to be able to shut down massive amounts of possible new jobs and market shares abroad. Which is then used to be sent right back to the place they sent it, cheaper and at mass quantities.

" With regards to the exchange of highly strategic goods with the Free world and probably with regard to financial operations as well communist should be considered as a trading bloc centered in their capital in terms of monopoly and monopsony power it exerts over their SOE's."

For example the resource market used to be primarily largely competitive while today we find a huge portion of sales going heavily through communist political regimes to the rest of the world or were at least the communist have ability or are trying to gain ability to do as such. As they buy from free market owners and then decide who to sell to, while primarily using those resources to keep up higher neo-mercantalist models do to ability of consumption of needs to produce international valuable goods, which bring in foreign currency which then allow it to purchase free enterprises after they crash from the uncompetitive market places.

"A primary communist economic plan is the rapid expansion of industrial facilities and progressive utilization of available resources in an effort to decrease, and eventually to eliminate its dependence on" globalized trade routes in which it has primarily been able to allow other markets to create things and then they create things together. Are slowing being decade as massive SOE's are being built that need no other services except for foreign market shares to keep growing. This again is shown through their high neo-mercantalist model. In which forces out any new competitive countries through their massive infrastructure low currency and their ability to unfairly compete through centralized planned economics were soe's are still considered the champions and free enterprises are left basically to keep up the free market entrance of the SOE's.

"exports are considered primarily as a means of obtaining imports required for internal economic development."

The worry is that the communist still wish eliminate economic dependence from the free market place and thus place in their ideas of communist economic ownership of government style owned entities. Much like what we have seen the Communist doing to Iran and Venezuela with their ideas of economic building. In which creates detriments to the free market world as we see more neo-mercantalist countries much like Venezuela. Example Venezuela exports more to free enterprises than it imports at a substantial level. While they are currently being funded to keep creating non dependency of the free marekt place world by China through SOE bank loans to allow Venezuela to become part of the Communist plans to just provide oil and other key strategic resources to them while importing as little as possible. This then becomes a huge problem as another international market place becomes bottled up. As such the world becomes less valuable for free trade as Venezuela seeks to export more than it ever imports. This then creates a super flawed economic model which will leave them at a constant struggle to keep up with the rest of the world in certain industries as supply and demand will not impact their country. Leaving them much like countries of the old soviet bloc very far behind in certain areas. This will also cause them create massive trade debts for countries who import but can't export to Venezuela. As such the Communist still wish to implement their economic models upon developing countries.
  Which unlike what the free markets did for the Communist markets will not open them up for expansion and growth that will benefit everyone for more jobs and more production. As such neo-mercantalist countries will primarily be worried about exports and only necessary imports for the creation of their exports. Which will cause their own citizens quality of life to decrease and become erratic and very unstable, with massive black markets that can cause either huge totalitarian massive slayings in jails from black markets and wishes for political change or if less totalitarian huge pockets of guerrillas that fight for more communism and fight for less as their people will become hugely impacted from economic deprivation as the government of these newly founded communist models will eat up all the excess which could allow their citizens to have more savings for a nicer quality of life and more civil rights, as free flow of money allows the system to have more people to fairly fight for rights and create new ideas and new things to do. As different from neo-mercantalist countries that care only about exports with minimal imports based on needs for exports. Were as free markets are based primarily on citizen quality of life and civil rights. As freedom of economics and freedom of civil rights reigns supreme over export or import. Which is a major reason why the free markets have such a problem dealing with neo-mercantalist. As we think we are doing them a favor and also incurring cheaper products. However, in truth it is just forcing their own economic model upon us as the free markets can barely compete. In which as previously spoke about forces us to create new industries as through the guise of comparative advantage. However, unlike comparative advantages flawed reasoning the free markets can only sustain new growth through service industries which again are super flawed as they do not enter new developing countries to create a foreign currency reserve which can then pad any down turns.
 As such the communist wish to keep this policy going to as their fulfill their constitution which states to create a greater socialist market place until the communist revolution can be compete. That is paraphrased but basically the idea i get from communist politicians. That they tolerate socialism only until they can seek full communism.

The trade plans of SOE's and their centralized economic strategy for their free enterprises ability to gain market shares is considered a state secret.

"The needs of the various industries and stockpiling operations for imported raw materials, finished products, and consumer goods are included in this plan"

"a plan which will include provisions for exports sufficient to obtain foreign exchange or other means to pay for the required imports, payments for international obligations, maintenance of diplomatic offices etc.'

"The general policy governing satellite trade clearly provides that the requirements of the Communist should first be satisfied and then those of the satellites to the greatest extent feasible, regardless of the effect of trade with other areas."
For example Venezuela has recently just started shutting down free trade. In which it has seen huge economic shortages as the government decides were to spend the money unbenounced to market forces or their peoples real wants and needs as per their consumptions and market forces. This then has created massive deficit shortfalls. Even though their neo-mercantalist economic strategies should show it otherwise. This is primarily do to their economists not understand either model of neo-mercantalist nor free enterprise. This then created an inability to pay for their import of necessary required products to create their trade export surplus. The Communist then decided as Venezuela seems to have a huge hate for free enterprise and free markets that they could secure a fuel satellite by giving them a massive loan to become self reliant on the necessary imports for their exports. In which then caused international free enterprises to be stuck with late bills and then completely blocked out of their market place. This shows how the Communist had no care to help Venezuela actually create a good working economy but rather for their own benefit of securing a fuel source and hurting economically the free market countries that were being allowed to import at such a small rate in which it was already squeezed to due to communist influence. As such the Communist were able to create an economic warfare strategy which lead to their behalf, furthering the detriments of Venezuelan quality of life and civil rights and also detriments to free enterprises and free trade. This again is shown on one of my citations for future professional development of theories based on my brain storms here. As Hong Kong has furthered their freedom of economics their quality of life and quality of civil rights has flourished. However, encompassing to Venezuela who has gone the other way regarding freedom as declined into horrible levels due to Communist exploitation of their satellite wants and needs.

" Such a system of foreign trade planning means that all Communist trade is conducted within framework of an established of priority goals of centralized economics, with respect to commodities to be purchased and sold, and with respect to trading partners." This means that actual market force of free enterprises plays last to the single political parties economic political planning of their centralized strategies. This is specifically shown with the Action's of their massive SOE's and their trading partners and which industries in specific that are attacked. After the .com there was the port systems of the free markets and the financial sectors of real estate, as ports were needed for necessary intelligence bases and the real estate sector was the easiest industry for the communist to manipulate and control through creating a bigger peak for a harder crash. This means that housing speculation hit an all time high as SOE financiers used their financial strategies to purchase and push the prices way above any prices we have every seen before at such high prices that not even a normal free market service would have called for. Were a normalized condo was being sold for $170,000 it was pushed upwards up to $500,000 in which specific financiers driving prices actually kept pushing and re-selling until the peak was so high that the reliance on legislatures and the public on the service would have nothing but a determinate societal impact at such highest that even the national security worry of such communist SOE's being placed in our economic infrastructure would have to be overlooked for the value of the minimal jobs they would create.
This could have been seen by the knight I's collection on stock market and real estate pushing and then dumping by Communist SOE's. However, that knight is currently in the tombs preparing for its next, educational plateau. Along with that mother played a nice hello and crashed my hard drive when I went up to DC to present to the elders. So it is a belief as I do not have those citations on my panel of citations for my professional production.
  Along with that the Communist keep a high structural government ownership protection of their domestic market while complaining that foreign markets will not let their SOE's enter the same industries that they claim to be national secret and security industries at home in which is highly protected from foreign free enterprises.
Robes and reefs on my head for the Knight I may it make it out at a higher level of conceptional understanding of the mental cognitive process. I am on your heels though, and still higher on the wall of degrees.

"While deciding what items should be imported into the Communist either from the East or the West, all prospective acquisitions are classified according to an economic priority coefficient"

Again this whole principle is against higher civil rights and economic freedoms. As governments worry about conquering and defending and not their own citizens quality of life as historical economic Communist applications have shown. Which then leak into the international cognitive process as other countries must fear for their own economies and they react in similar fashion. However, in freedom of economics free enterprises are not in any manner meant for government except for the competition that grows creation and allows for natural law of economics to further technology and investment through good hearted competition for compensation from the market forces that demand it so. Not for government purposes of conquering of leadership ego's.

"Just as the trade is conducted according to centrally established priorities with regard to the commodities exchanged, so the matter of trading partners is determined in line with a system of priorities, or preferences as per the Communist political economic centralized planning department."

This system is not just specific in observance of their neo-mercantalist strategies of centralized economic planning but it is inherent in their own statements as quoted from their government cites of specific government centralized planning and wish to create SOE champions which inherently will not be able to compete fairly as they will have the whole government behind them. As one company executive on an airplane once said to an observer sitting next to him to gain his cognitive process of the situation at hand: i am going to the Communist because they can create the product cheaper. We will export our jobs to them to sell it back to us cheaper. However, I worry how my children's future economic stability will be. This shows that even the basic people involved think something is wrong. However, the people in charge are so worried about other things that it has become a national security problem so much so that the Chief executive of the US has began to receive briefings on economic markets of the world to see how their stability will affect the the US's.

"The Communist is consolidated its economy at an every quickening pace [conglomerating SOE's]. The isolation of subject countries form the rest of the world, increasing trade between the countries of communist [intelligence or political strategic interest] and the revisions of the economic plans of those countries to harmonize with Communist interests -- these are links in the chain which is being forged by the leading Communist country to subdue other states" Much like what we see with the US being in last place regarding international account balances. In reality there is a scare that the West has had to give up specific land and soil to the Communist just to keep getting funding by buying western market debt and currency. Hope it stays a fear and not a reality.

The Communist now represent the internationals main trade partners,with high trade deficits being held by the mainstay. This formula has allowed the Communist to use their power gained from the neo-mercantalism strategies to start to acquire and destroy free enterprise at a rate in which free enterprises are more likely now to bend to SOE Communist style ownership of their industries as they can no longer create a quality of life at a value of their production to the reliance on the service industries and the ever needing necessary filling of the comparative advantage gaps with new service industries which peak and crash with the employment multipliers.

As a result of the Communist expansion they have a necessary need for more consumption. However, the communist specifically still scope in their economic policies to neo-mercantalist foreign high trade surplus with massive amounts of specific funding from SOE banks to SOE so called champions. These means that instead of the Communist following a normalized pattern of free enterprise and free trade of market force in which the actual higher loans would go for more intra domestic service style industries as we saw after the free markets allowed the Communist into the market. The Communist have decided to not allow any other countries into the international market to become civilized and productive with their very slow and repressive centralized economic models. That wish to create massive SOE's not so as to compete fairly as they have free enterprises in those industries that could compete fairly on market forces in the international market place. But to create SOE's relied on monopolistic style and monopsony style SOE's that are recapitalized without respect to market forces to keep up the Communist mainstay of international strong producer for the market places. In which then stops other countries from becoming secure and nationally stable much like the free markets allowed the communist to do.

"The view point that free market leaders ignore is that the Communist government takes advantage of its monopoly position, or it dismisses the monopoly & monopsony features by pointing out that there are monopolies operating in free worlds" or by using comparative advantage to try and show we gain more technology increases as the idea of comparative advantage is that one country does it all while others create new things However, the flaw is the new things we create are service industries which create no foreign or little foreign currency reserves so as to allow the free enterprises or free markets to protect themselves once the service bell curves have run their course.

Thus free markets interpretation the presence of political motivators for the Communist is considered very exceptional and no more prevalent than in the trade policies of other nations.

"This is misleading  as it ignores Communist trade policy and cartel actions. Free world trade is characterized of competitive free enterprises operations. IN GENERAL, THE TRADING POLICIES OF FREE WORLD NATIONS ARE DESIGNED PRIMARILY TO SERVE INDIVIDUALS [MARKET FORCES] OR GROUPS OF INDIVIDUALS, AND TO SERVE AN ECONOMY ORIENTED TO CONSUMPTION [CIVIL RIGHTS AND QUALITY OF LIFE] WHICH IS ORIENTED TO THE GENERAL WELFARE OF THE POPULACE.. THE COMMUNIST ECONOMIC POLICY AND THE COMMUNIST MONOPOLY OF FOREIGN TRADE [SURPLUSES AND FOREIGN CURRENCY RESERVES, HELL MARY 10, FOR THIS] ON THE OTHER HAND, EXPLOITS THE ADVANTAGES OF THE FREE WORLD MARKET NOT TO IMPROVE THE WELFARE OF THE POPULACE BUT TO FURTHER ITS WORLD POWER AND AGGRESSIVE AIMS."


"In addition Communist trade policy and practices differ basically from those of Free world nations in that the Communist use of monopoly [Champion SOE's]  confers an advantage on the monopolistic over the competitive trader."

" The communist practices and trad policies differ from free world nations in that the Communist use their SOE power which can be termed non-commerical in nature; that is, it serves the strategic state of motives rather than private profit motives, for implicit in the term commerce is a large and competitive trade market of many individuals being able to own and lead their own labors which include buyers and sellers."

"Strategic considerations are directed towards a relative increase in the nation's strength or towards diminishing the strength of potential enemies." As the free market world has long held monopsony and monopolistic style SOE's as uncompetitive and harmful to free trade and free enterprise. The Communist see any major free world traders a threat to its economic dominance in the world as previewed through neo-mercantalist wishes to be able to conquer other neo-mercantalist economies via scope and first strike control of their growth of economies through financing, and resource controls.

"In turn the economic policy is a fundamental component of a carefully conceived total policy, the objectives of which include the weakening of the Free world economically, psychologically and militarily (mmm if this is false then let them cooperate) and the strengthening of the Communist [so called FTA's however as they hold high SOE's it is not a free trade agreement as the Communist can't understand free trade as they use things that are not considered competitive or even fair in free trade and free enterprise trade, so the FTA is just another show of how much they have weakened the free markets psychologically, militarily as no one stand up to them, and economically as the free markets can't step in and compete with their low goods, and the flawed psychological theory that cheap goods will be better for countries so they should stop protecting their countries from communist economics which have long been understood to control and conquer and not compete fairly].

"It is [and would be if still holding true] and pertinent to not that a number of their leading diplomats [along with espionage heads, mmm MSS] are trained economists." MMMM not whispering in the corners about this, straight to the head.

"To put it in another way, foreign trade for the Communist is a weapon in their total policy of economic, psychological, and military aggression for world domination." In which the free market wishes not for, as they as per political and economic freedoms could not hold such a policy as even the countries we help build morally and through politician and economic policy we could not hold countries to such uncompetitive economic models as it is illegal in our moral structure of economic freedom. Along with that civil warriors can make a substantial fee for attacking such uncompetitive behavior in our society.

"Everything is subordinated to the end goal of the victory of the communism throughout the world, and here stated claims to destroy all non communist governments." This can be shown by blatant hard line strategy to create massive SOE's in which can be cloaked by the free markets of their industries yet can still be used to crush free enterprises strategic free enterprise and free market places that are considered economic security in their domestic policy. However abroad are trusted to economic freedom market forces and the good values of the free market citizens.

"Discrimination towards the West is a corollary to the forced integration of the Communist Economy into the Communists orbits, and takes the form of special preferences granted by the Communists and use of various discrimination trade practices against the west.' conclude thereof. We can see this by the constant hatred coming from satellites towards the US and its foreign policies.

"Given the internal policies of concentration on heavy industry and the development of military war potential, [technological advancement] the consumption demand element [as shown through free enterprise of service industry gain and percentages, along with comparisons of loans out to SOE's compared to free enterprises] which is such an important factor in the Free world trade, is scarcely considered in Communist policies." However, I have seen a small push for more intra domestic policies. Still though not at level as to sustain competitive levees with its other first world countries, so as to allow third and 2nd world countries to start to open up and compete and create new markets to export and import to internationally, safely and securely.

" On the one hand, the West allows all but a number of selected strategic items, to be exported to the Communist and leaves the needs of tis own rearmament and economic development to be met for the most part through the world market, in which the Communist [SOE's] have wide access."

"It must be recognized, at the outset, that the fundamental policy of the US and other friendly nations, of promoting free enterprise and a minimum of restrictions on foreign trade should be applicable only as a foreign economic policy in relation to the free world."

"At the heart of this economic offensive must lie a coordination of free market economic policies, just as the development of international agreement." Further, there must be an understanding that the proliferation of SOE's in the international market place will thus lead to such in the domestic market place. In which will crush free markets and free trade and will leave the international community and domestic communities with much the same effects that we saw in the Soviet Union and satellite countries. Along with the similar effects we know see in such satellites as Venezuela, as compared to Free market scholars such as Hong Kong.
The Communist currently hold a fair rate of growth. However, this is only based on free world market weakened assets of military strength as per the war on terror with small help form Communist, to the weakened economic polices of the free market through neo-mercantalism. Which for the free market to survive will either lead to two roads. 1. is they become communist and start creating massive SOE's as we have seen many free markets do in food, manufacturing and other areas, again why I say we did not win the cold war, or 2. we realize why the free markets are so reliant on a service bell curve and loss of currency reserves and how to solve it much like our forefathers and mothers stood up to the communist and neo-mercantalist before us. However, if we go down the road of SOE proliferation it will lead basically to warfare economies instead of competitive economies regulated by the government to keep free enterprises online, which has been proven allows for more civil and economic freedoms. However, as of recently we have seen a massive decline in free market saving abilities as the Communist neo-mercantalist economies grow stronger and crash and devour free market places. This then is showing the road back to feudalism of single party rulers and away from the future in which free enterprises are able to compete in a well regulated international market place run by market forces without the ability of governments o create or inact economic warfare for their own governmental benefits without cause of individual or groups of individuals market forces wishes. As governments do not know everything and should not dictate what economics individuals should have to buy or sell. As market forces is truly the freest form of socialism, with as poverty shares for the sick, elderly and poor to be taken care of. Allowing the most growth and welfare when the market places is well regulated. However, the Pentagon's and heaven's gates have allowed the Communist to crash and devour to as such, so as to, be devoured in return by devouring to many times now.

The Communist have the ability to bring their economy into their proposed contractual obligations of free markets and fair competition. However, it is not our job to force them to do so. What is our job is when they decide that they should stop moving towards a free economy and move back into massive SOE's and neo-mercantalist wishes that we refresh the guard and become stronger allied with free market enterprises. Along with moving back into a full competitive strategy to push for political and strategic build up of underdeveloped countries so as to receive foreign currency reserves so as to defend against the neo-mercantalist economic warfare strategy of crash and devour strategies. Thus, inclined it will be as we compete again and become less reliant on a single political party that wishes not to uphold its obligations as it has competitive free enterprises, again we will have to show them why in the first place they wanted to be part of the free market enterprises. As such at this time they have began a huge ego rush and their populace seems to have forgotten their historical past. Along with their economists, trying to hold honor and ego's over free market and free enterprises principles which to create communist style entities to regurgitate the Communist wishes to dominate and crush the world economic models so as to place themselves in the lead through unfair SOE, cartel and anti-trust violation methods of uncompetitive behavior.
As such proud we are that the Communist have gained so much security and civil rights through moving towards free trade and free enterprise. However, at the point they wish to stop at an advantageous point and call it a miracle, or a hybrid economy when it is just a level of transition, the free markets must take a serious look at the reasons why the cold war was implemented and basic competitive nature of why freedom of economics is better than communist style neo-mercantalist economies. Globalization may not work fast, nor may it be perfect. However, along in communist societies as they have allowed more free Enterprise and are moving towards an free trade economic model they nor anyone else can deny the benefits of globalization through free enterprise or free trade.
  It creates deep fear in my heart and person, to think that the Communist are not the highest proliferated free trade agreements when they are truly not a free market economy. As they still hold vast emince unfair uncompetitive advantages to those underdeveloped countries that the Communist again, wish to gain foreign currency reserves and debt holdings so as to take the world leadership in economics without care for their actives of unfair competition to their economies. Much like what we have seen via Free market scholars and activities in Hong Kong and then Communist model economics in Venezuela. Which are not either extreme in development as they have both had the same ability as per trade and economic availabilities. However, one took the economic freedom route and one took the communist economic model route. Actions as the Communist seeking and funding old style communist strategies to the countries they are helping develop instead of hold strong the contracts and obligations to the free markets they signed so as to gain acceptance shows mens rea of their turning back on their contracts and wishing for economic dominance over economic competitive free trade and free enterprise models. It would make no sense for a free market entity to fund a communist style economy as they would be able to easily see it will fail and cause a collapse as we have seen Venezuela go through as they centralize their economies and bring them under economists control which are not the forces of the market place.

"And Shepherds we shall be

For thee, my Lord, for thee.
Power hath descended forth from Thy hand
Our feet may swiftly carry out Thy commands.
So we shall flow a river forth to Thee
And teeming with souls shall it ever be.
In Nomeni Patri Et Fili Spiritus Sancti."

Rider i
 Feel my spirit, see my soul. I am not here to conquer or to destroy. I am here to create equality and raise welfare for all via fair competitive globalization of economics. While creating a path to a new Eden before the last minute and all culture and past technological advancements and the ability to re-create them are lost.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=4-XfthjK-bk
I am proud of all those who have given their life for freedom. I am proud to be an American and believe in my heart and soul in freedom of economics and the faith in every individual to compete fairly with a fair government to regulate us as we go on our way. I feel no shame, I am proud, I hold my colors on my shoulders and I hold the world and the eagle on my hand, with the world in my eye.
I am Mr. I.
Bocephus
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=vPuQ8_kD-gE
.