Entries from September 2009 ↓

I am always surprised by the excitement that the Nobel Prize for “Literature” generates in some people considering how unrelated to literature it is (and has always been).

The List of winners reads not as a Who’s who of 20th century literature, but rather as a Who’s He?. As far as I know, this is not true of any of the other Nobel Prizes (even the by-nature highly political Peace Prize is awarded to people who an informed audience has at least heard of). Also, as far as I know, no other Nobel Prize has ever been awarded to the members of the Jury who was deciding the Nobel Prize.

I am always surprised by the excitement that the Nobel Prize for "Literature" generates in some people considering how unrelated to literature it is (and has always been). The List of winners reads not as a Who's who of 20th century literature, but rather as a Who's He?. As far as I know, this is ...

The US government is dependent on the Chinese central bank for credit. Without the support of China, interest rates on US Treasury would be much higher than they are now. Also, the Chinese government, if it were to start dumping its bonds on the markets, could make it as difficult as it wanted for the US government to continue borrowing. Put it another way, the Chinese government has veto power over most US government spending (unless Congress were to clean up its act, of course, but that would take things like health care reform out of the picture for the next few years).

Until recently, it was always argued that the Chinese central bank would never abuse its position vis a vis the US because a US fiscal crisis would become a US economic crisis and that would hurt China through its export dependency. Mutual Assured Economic Destruction.

It turns out that China has, to a larger extent than previously appreciated, decoupled from the US. It’s not so export-dependent. A crisis can be pretty nasty in the US while China chugs along. So, MAED is not true. China could probably punish the US much more than it hurts itself.

I guess that people in Washington and Beijing have already started taking this into account in China-US relationships, but I haven’t seen it mentioned in public too often.

The US government is dependent on the Chinese central bank for credit. Without the support of China, interest rates on US Treasury would be much higher than they are now. Also, the Chinese government, if it were to start dumping its bonds on the markets, could make it as difficult as it wanted for ...

Apropos this discussion, I have long noticed that, in Europe, in general, the conservative opinions of Jane Jacobs won against the urban planners like Moses.

In spite of Le Corbusier raving about tearing down central Paris to builld “more rational” buildings, he never did. The only European capital touched by the spirit of urban planning to the same degree was East Berlin, which tore down all the ancient buildings and churches (partially just to show off—some of the German planners were aware of the historical value of the buildings, but there were political orders to demolish churches).

Apropos this discussion, I have long noticed that, in Europe, in general, the conservative opinions of Jane Jacobs won against the urban planners like Moses. In spite of Le Corbusier raving about tearing down central Paris to builld "more rational" buildings, he never did. The only European capital touched by the spirit of urban planning ...