Slope initially began as a blog, so this is where most of the website’s content resides. Here we have tens of thousands of posts dating back over a decade. These are listed in reverse chronological order. Click on any category icon below to see posts tagged with that particular subject, or click on a word in the category cloud on the right side of the screen for more specific choices.
I was on the long plane ride home from Cambridge to my beloved Palo Alto (cities that are identical in many respects, the temperature notwithstanding) and I saw the ES explode higher. (green tint, below). This was on the heels of a day that already had an EKG-style zaniness from the Fed Minutes. As I sit here now, both of these have faded away (red arrow).
Hi, Tim: You recently posted an email, “A Response to China Deal” and the article is so misleading and paints such a false narrative that I have to wonder if it’s a Communist Party cyber-ops fake news attempt to obfuscate the truth. If you could post my rebuttal, I would appreciate it.
Let me start with this introductory pre-amble. The single largest problem with business in China is not the negotiations, not the contracts, nor the law. Very simply, what matters in the end is if the terms of the agreement are Verifiable and Enforceable. It doesn’t matter what you agree to, what you sign, or what the law is in China. What matters is if the deal you have made is Verifiable and Enforceable. If you can’t get this, all you got are seashells.
From Tim: If this keeps up, I won’t have to write any posts at all – – I can just reprint emails from Slopers! Anyway, a gentleman wrote me in response to last night’s China Deal post, and he has granted me permission to share his email here (which I’ve slightly edited for clarity and brevity).
Tim: I read your post titled “The China Deal” and am forced to disagree with a number of key contentions in the article. I realize you didn’t write the article and I’m not sure to what degree you agree with all the assertions, I thought I’d offer a slightly different opinion on a few (definitely not all) of the points.
Preface from Tim: as with the prior post from Binkius, this was not originally submitted as a post. Instead, it was a personal email to me. But, as before, Binkius has kindly granted me permission to reprint it here as a post. I frankly find his insights more insightful than anything else I’ve read about the US/China trade dealings, and I’m grateful to him for his continued unique perspective.
The infamous Roman emperor Caligula rashly decided that he could invade Britain. When the Roman legions stood on the shores of the English channel the Roman generals realized that the mad emperor could not put together a coherent logistical/economic plan to get the troops across. Eventually, Caligula lost interest in his folly and told his troops to collect seashells to bring back to Rome for a triumphal procession of his great military prowess.
Before I begin, I wanted to mention (again) a very handy feature in the comments section which I introduced years ago: the Ignore button. I get emails from time to time from folks who have no interest in the political chit-chat on the site, or they find certain individuals to be tedious, vexing, or annoying.
This is NOT a hard problem to solve. Just click on the Ignore button (it looks like a “stop!” hand) and, voila, your troubles are over. That person is no longer part of your life.