Hanson On China, Russian and U.S. Triangle. Another Rant. Americans Turned Off By PC'ism.

+++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++
Hanson on Russia, China and U.S Triangle. (See 1 below.)
+++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++
Another Rant. (See 2 below.)
+++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++
Ben Shapiro discusses American attitudes about PC'ism. (See 3 below.)
+++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++

Dick

+++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++
1) The Russia, China and U.S Triangle

By Victor Davis Hanson

Nearly a half-century ago, President Richard Nixon's secretary of state, Henry Kissinger, established a successful U.S. strategy for dealing with America's two most dangerous rivals. He sought closer ties to both the Soviet Union, with its more than 7,000 nuclear weapons, and Communist China, with the world's largest population.

Kissinger's approach was sometimes called "triangulation." But distilled down to its essence, the phrase meant ensuring that China and Russia were not friendlier to each other than each was to the United States.

Given that the Soviet Union was much stronger than China at the time, Kissinger especially courted Beijing.

The idea was similar to British and French policy in the mid-1930s of discouraging Adolf Hitler's Third Reich from becoming the partner of Josef Stalin's equally powerful and dangerous Soviet Union. Unfortunately, that effort failed, and Nazi-Soviet cooperation led to their joint invasion of Poland in 1939 and the outbreak of World War II.

We forgot Kissinger's wisdom during the Obama administration's coddling of China and the schizophrenic Russian "reset."

The reset was initially a disastrous appeasement of Russian conventional and cyber aggressions. Its failure soon led to an about-face demonization of Russian President Vladimir Putin as an anti-democratic authoritarian -- as if he had been, or would ever be, anything other than a tyrant.

Russia systematically reabsorbed Crimea, leveraged Eastern Europe, caused turmoil in Ukraine, terrified Western Europe, returned to the Middle East after a 40-year hiatus, and hacked into U.S. electoral and political institutions.

From 2009 to 2017, U.S. leadership rationalized that China would soon not just be an Asian and Pacific superpower, but eventually would eclipse America itself -- as if its eventual supremacy was destiny rather than being due to U.S. indifference.

What followed was systematic and unchecked Chinese commercial and intellectual-property cheating. Beijing stole U.S. technology, ran up huge trade surpluses and warped the entire world trading system. Such one-sided Chinese mercantilism was excused as "free trade."

China's military aggression in the South China Sea was also winked at by Washington. So the Chinese built artificial bases in the Spratly Islands to bully their neighbors and to manipulate Pacific trade routes.

The Obama administration again offered little push back. As a result, Chinese President Xi Jinping openly bragged that by 2025, China would dominate the global high-tech industry, 10 years later would dominate the Pacific, and by mid-century would run the world.

For years, Putin and Xi have shared a contempt for the U.S. They have sought to use Syria, Iran and North Korea to check U.S. influence while waging cyberwar against U.S. companies and institutions.

America may be the strongest economic and military power in the world, but it had violated every one of Kissinger's principles. Russia and China both agreed that the willpower of the U.S. was weak, and despite their own existential differences, they found it mutually profitable to collude in reducing American stature.

Our allies noticed. From Scandinavia to the Middle East to Asia, they assumed that America either could not or would not regain its global prestige.

The Trump administration has sought to reverse that descent.

For all the specious charges of Russian "collusion," Trump has boxed in Putin with economic sanctions and military aid to Ukraine. He has beefed up defense spending, demanded greater NATO readiness and accelerated U.S. oil production -- but doing so while also reaching out rhetorically to Putin.

Being friendly with a big stick is far wiser than being obnoxious with a twig.

Now, the U.S is slapping China with tariffs to force it to reduce its nearly $400 billion trade surplus with the U.S., while also sending U.S. warships deeper into the South China Sea to let our allies know that China will no longer bully them.

Trump sought to negotiate directly with North Korea on denuclearization, and to forge new defense partnerships with Australia and Japan. He is also cutting bilateral trade deals with South Korea, Mexico and Canada that will exclude China.

China is worried. Trump's domestic opponents may write him off as a crude buffoon, but Beijing fears that he is a crafty Machiavelli or Sun Tzu, already downsizing Chinese power.

China's stock market is way down. Its economy is slowing and its currency declining. Average Chinese citizens wonder why, in tough times, their leaders are lavishing foreign aid on African countries and other Asian nations while China is mired in a trade war with the U.S.

Because Russia is far weaker than China, the U.S. should be reaching out to Moscow to find common interests in checking Chinese power. Russia could be useful in occasionally siding with an emerging common resistance to China that includes Australia, India, Japan, the Philippines, South Korea and Taiwan.

Russia certainly has no interest in seeing in its neighborhood a nuclear Iran or an unhinged nuclear North Korea -- or having disputes with a Chinese colossus along its 2,600-mile shared border.

American appeasement, trade concessions and extraordinary Chinese wealth did not make China a better global citizen. Perhaps stronger U.S. pushback, supported by an array of Asian allies and a conniving Russia, might.

Victor Davis Hanson is a classicist and historian at the Hoover Institution, Stanford University. His latest book is The Savior Generals from BloomsburyBooks. You can reach him by e-mailing author@victorhanson.com.

+++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++
2)Everyone needs to take a chill pill over the stock market. Ignore all the opinions from the so called experts.  They all like to sound off when the press calls. Stand fast, this too will pass. It is October and stocks usually tank in October then recover. GDP will probably be up 4.2% for Q3, earnings will be terrific again, and at 3.1%, or 3.2%, the ten year is still near historical low levels. It is not likely the ten year will move above 3.25% for a while on any sustained basis, and it may float down a bit to 3.1% in the short run.  3.2% on the ten year is still way below its normal level of 5%-6%. With the new core inflation data, the ten year yield is heading lower now. Oil is coming back down substantially. The US is doing great right now. There are issues in much of the rest of the world, as many economies slow down, the IMF warns of further slowdowns, but they are often wrong, and as China slows, which does impact emerging markets, there will be a slowdown but not a crash. There will be very modest signs of inflation in the US as the producer price index was up 2.4%, and as labor costs, and logistics costs rise. However, we are far from bad inflation, and as China slows, commodities prices drop, and oil will drop further, thereby reducing some of the inflation pressure we might otherwise have seen. Amazon and Walmart still have a notable good impact on inflation as they hold down prices even with tariffs. It is a very different economic metrics today than in the past, so Fed, and other economic models that are not taking that into account are missing a key factor change to drivers of inflation. Core CPI in September was only up 2.2% yoy. The core personal consumption expenditure index used by the Fed was up only 2.0%.Rising labor costs cut two ways.  It means wages are rising, so consumers have more to spend, especially with tax cuts, and we are going into holiday buying season. So there may be some minor inflation, but it is still low, and wages are still rising faster. Almost all Christmas goods are already landed in the US, so tariffs will have no effect on Christmas sales. Much of spring buying is already in place, so the China product tariffs will not have a major impact for months. With the rest of the world coming to terms with the US on trade, it is only Chinese goods that get impacted, and there are many sources in other emerging markets in Southeast Asia that can supply product with no tariffs.  Chines companies were already moving production to other places, so that will simply accelerate. Housing in the US is slowing, and in some markets, prices and rents are dropping a little, New York being a major example.  That is probably good, as home prices have been on a tear for several years, and rent is part of CPI. It is time for a little reset before prices get way out of line like in 2006. These over reactions in the stock market happen periodically, and these days they are often caused mainly by algorithm driven trading, and fear by weak, or young, short term traders who panic. Keep in mind, many young traders, and analysts under 35, have never seen a normal market for treasuries and stocks, or for home prices. And most traders and analysts are under 35. The dollar will remain high, which also helps keep inflation lower. The Yuan drops further making inflation in China more of an issue. If the yuan drops further it will also partly offset the tariff. The US economy is doing very well right now, and will continue to do so into 2019. Earnings season starts next week and should help stocks recoup

China continues to have real economic problems. The private alternative PMI index in China is the worst in 7 years. 300 midsized private companies report this is the worst they have had it, and it is getting worse.  China will be under intense pressure to make a deal with Trump as new tariffs kick in and as more countries like Pakistan realize taking Chinese money for Belt and Road is dangerous. Pakistan is now needing an IMF bailout as a result, and other countries are watching that. That US just passed a new large spending bill that created a new program to compete with the Chinese, but on much better terms. Harper, the former Canadian Prime Minister said the new AMCA dal is good for the US and that Trump is doing the right thing nobody else ever did by going after China. He agreed China has gotten away with all sorts of cheating on WTO, and it is long past time for them to be stopped. Harper is no Trump supporter, so his comments are important as they are objective from a guy who really knows what is going on.

It now appears the EU and UK are close to a Brexit deal. It is still an open question if whatever is agreed can get thru Parliament, but if there is a deal that is good for the world and stock markets. It will help calm things, whereas, hard Brexit would cause some short term level of market disruption.

The Saudis and other countries have already begun to make up for lost Iranian and Venezuelan oil. Iran will be the real loser. Oil markets have already shifter and are supplying China and India, two of the biggest buyers of Iran oil. There will not be a major oil spike now due to Iran. Good for inflation and better for forcing Iran to cave and maybe speed up the coming revolution there. Things in Iran are going to really ramp up next year as the economy struggles, water and power are continuing to be problems and street protests increase.

In a recent article by Phil Gramm he points out that all the anti-poverty programs have created a dependent class, and has the numbers to prove it. Kanye West says the same. As I pointed out in a Rant a while ago, if you count all of the subsidies that the low income people receive, which the census data on poverty does not, such as food stamps, earned income credit, rent subsidies, free medical care, etc, then the poverty rate is really 3%. There are 87 such “poverty “ programs, plus state and city additional subsidies. Transfer payments constitute 84.2% of the disposable income of the poorest quintile, and 57.8% of the next quintile. None of this data counts the off the books income from illegal activity. Entitlement payments such as these constitute 27.5% of total national disposable income. Let that number digest, and you realize where the budget has to be reduced. You also realize these payment programs have become an industry that fights hard to protect its fiscal fount. The war on poverty was meant to provide a sustainable living standard, and to motivate the poor to go to work and get off the dole.  It has done exactly the opposite, which should come as no surprise to most of you. Dependency does not motivate people to work hard.  In 1965, poor families with working age members had only 5.4% more families with no one working than did middle income families. By 2015 that number had risen to 37.1% with a working age person in the house, but nobody worked. If you think that was due to the recession, in 1975, the number was 24.8%, and it rose from there as entitlements rose. There are no numbers for 2018 yet so we do not know how the booming economy generated by tax cuts and deregulation has impacted this. Put another way, a second quintile family has three times as many families with two people working as the bottom quintile, and the middle class quintile has five times as many families with two workers.  The data are clear- anti poverty programs destroy incentives to work and build self-sufficiency, at a giant cost to the rest of us. This has contributed to the broken families and poor work ethic in some minority communities. Tough love works-give aways do not. So next time the Dems talk about poverty rates, and the poor, and spout the need to help the poor with even more programs, and why we cannot reduce entitlements, or we hurt the poor, keep these numbers in mind. What they are really saying is we need entitlements to keep them dependent on us and voting for us. That is the reality of the War on Poverty.

The left and Dems are working hard to make it more possible for the Republicans to hold the House. The more there are comments from the likes of Hillary, Holder and Obama about encouraging their people to not being civil, and the more there is a push to impeach Kavanaugh, the more Republicans, and now independents are motivated to go vote. Now trade is mostly a win for Trump, and everyone agrees it is time to take on China so trade is a winning talking point. As we get GDP numbers, and as the jobs numbers for October come out just before election day,  the better the economy looks. Someone has convinced Trump to tone it down on twitter, and to act better lately, so his poll numbers are rising well. He is on a roll at this moment. Rational people in the middle are feeling good about their jobs and about their future. That wins elections. Many are rightly afraid of what they see from the left with protests and violence. This election is all about where America goes from here. To campus type mob rule, trying to change the constitution, and pack the court, or sticking with the constitution as now written, and passing laws based on proper procedure, not under threat from screaming mobs as we saw with Kavanaugh. That is the stark choice we now have.

++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++

3)  

This New Study About The Unpopularity Of Political Correctness Will Shock You

By BEN SHAPIRO

On Wednesday, Yascha Mounk, lecturer on government at Harvard University, wrote a fascinating piece for The Atlantic regarding a new study from Stephen Hawkins, Daniel Yudkin, Miriam Juan-Torres and Tim Dixon, titled Hidden Tribes: A Study of America’s Polarized Landscape. There’s a lot of fascinating material in the report, but Mounk picks out the biggest gem: Americans hate political correctness. Or at least nearly all Americans do, the only exceptions being far-Left progressives.

And who are these far-Left progressives? They’re disproportionately white and upper class.

So much for the narrative that PC protects minorities, and sets them in opposition to the racist white majority.

According to Mounk:

Among the general population, a full 80 percent believe that “political correctness is a problem in our country.” Even young people are uncomfortable with it, including 74 percent ages 24 to 29, and 79 percent under age 24. On this particular issue, the woke are in a clear minority across all ages… Whites are ever so slightly less likely than average to believe that political correctness is a problem in the country: 79 percent of them share this sentiment. Instead, it is Asians (82 percent), Hispanics (87percent), and American Indians (88 percent) who are most likely to oppose political correctness.

The poorer you are, the less likely you are to support political correctness. The more highly educated you are, the more you’re likely to support political correctness.

Fully 97 percent of conservatives hate PC; 61 percent of liberals do, too. But only 30 percent of progressives dislike political correctness. And according to Mounk, they’re highly educated, white and rich:

Compared with the rest of the (nationally representative) polling sample, progressive activists are much more likely to be rich, highly educated—and white. They are nearly twice as likely as the average to make more than $100,000 a year. They are nearly three times as likely to have a postgraduate degree. And while 12 percent of the overall sample in the study is African American, only 3 percent of progressive activists are. With the exception of the small tribe of devoted conservatives, progressive activists are the most racially homogeneous group in the country.

 All of which suggests that woke SJWs aren’t the future – they’re the past. Which is good news for the rest of the country
++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++