|
Flikken posted:Has this thread turned into "The Interesting cool poo poo thread Iyaayas01 knows or knows where to research for walls of text of cool poo poo" ? That was the point of this thread from the beginning. It makes me want to research some stuff now.
|
#
¿
Jan 7, 2011 03:13
|
|
|
|
| # ¿ May 22, 2024 14:52 |
|
|
This discussion on the Chinese economy is interesting, and to tie it into the cold war era more the way the Chinese did things is another interesting subject. The Chinese initially copied many aspects of the Soviet economy (because in the early fifties the Soviet model still appeared quite strong). Things such as no private land ownership (important for farming) and state owned heavy industry (which often was thought of as necessary for state defense, funny to me because I often hear right leaning people crying for the protection of domestic production in the name of national defense). Anyways back to China, so while they brought in Soviet economic advisers to help them set things up initially, it did not last long. I think that it has been pointed out numerous times in this thread that the Chinese and Soviets were not the best of friends. The chinese started changing things, either because of national pride or simply because their infrastructure was somehow worse than the soviets and did not lend itself to such a centralized system. For example many farming communities become more decentralized in nature because there was no way to really transport their goods. This lead to some increase in efficiencies (for the communities themselves, not necessarily for the state) but it was not until the government began leasing farm land to households starting in the late seventies that there was a large increase in the efficiency of farming. And by this increase I mean that a lot of labor was freed up, leading to a large surplus of people that could now move out of rural areas and begin transitioning to the urban areas. This something that the soviets never really did, while the chinese government was more open to transition the soviets seemed far more reluctant. I have heard the theory that one reason the soviet union fell is because they ran out grain to feed the people and were going broke buying it from the good ol' USA. USA USA USA USA NUMBER 1 WE GROW CORN LIKE THERE IS NO TOMORROW ehem, sorry back to the CHINESE. The freed up labor needed something to do and at first they did things related to agriculture like build dams and irrigation projects. This lead to another important aspect the formation of Township and Village Enterprises (TVEs). These used the excess labor for light manufacturing. Which brings up another important difference between the soviets and the good chinese. In the soviet union everything manufactured was set by the state, if the state did not control it, it was not made. Whereas the chinese controlled most of the heavy industry but allowed the TVEs to make things that were not under state control. So to make it a little clearer the soviets had a list of everything that could be made, things not on this list were basically only blackmarket items. An example of this would be chewing gum. The soviets thought it was a waste of resources to make chewing gum, so they did not allow it to be made. Foreign made chewing gum was highly prized by school children who did not often chew it but used it for more of currency for trade. This is a contrast to the chinese who did not allow the TVEs to compete with the state owned heavy industries but that still left many opportunities for the TVEs to pursue many items in the consumer goods market. This is still a pretty incomplete story and does not explain everything about the current chinese economy but I still think that it is interesting to contrast russia and china. They may be both communist but they had very different ideas about how to go about things and it seems to have worked a little better for the chinese. Anyways like i learned in school if you don't know the answer to a current macro economic question just plug your and ears and repeat CHINA CHINA CHINA CHINA CHINA CHINA CHINA, you are probably wrong but most people will still believe you. Vork!Vork!Vork! fucked around with this message at 19:49 on Feb 15, 2012 |
|
#
¿
Feb 15, 2012 19:44
|
|
|
Cyrano4747 posted:I can't speak towards the rest of what you say here, but the bolded part is at best only partially correct, and at worst is pretty much straight up wrong. I'm also wondering if you've got any citations for the rest of it, as it runs a bit counter to a lot of what I'm familiar with, but in areas that I don't know enough about to flat out say it's incorrect. anyways i don't post much because I am poor at communication and when I do it is nice to get true feedback. Obviously the internet allows this because of the anonymous nature. I know i have presented pure crap in the past and other students and teachers never said a thing. I still think you post poo poo once in while (probably simply due to the shear volume of words) but your ability to consistently produce large amounts of information on demand is fascinating. You will go far in the academic field
|
|
#
¿
Feb 16, 2012 04:55
|
|
|
The ITAR is somewhat better now post reform of many of the USML categories, but still nothing to gently caress around with if the defense article is enumerated on the USML and truly is ITAR. And it is important to remember that about any specially designed military article even if it is not subject to the jurisdiction of the ITAR is almost certainly controlled under the Commerce Department CCL (EAR). Also the BIS and the DDTC will happily go after ITAR and EAR violations.
|
|
#
¿
Apr 23, 2015 03:45
|
|
|
Alaan posted:ITAR is specifically exporting from US. It's not an international treaty or anything. It is a little broader than that too though. There are "deemed exports" which could occur if say a foreign national working in the US were to access ITAR controlled technical data (say engineering prints for certain aspects of the F-35). Without express permission from the DDTC this would be a violation of US export law. Also the ITAR covers things like US persons providing defense services to foreign entities. It also covers temporary imports of defense imports to the US (but not permanent that is the BATF  )there is more too, but eh boring.....until you violate it
|
|
#
¿
Apr 23, 2015 03:54
|
|
|
chitoryu12 posted:So if someone in Russia put up, say, a POSP scope for sale online, it's perfectly fine to buy it and have it mailed over here? What about if I were to sell someone in Russia a Leupold scope? Assuming nothing but private individuals making transactions. for exporting the scope...it depends. It could be ITAR or EAR controlled depending on the specs (the manufacturer would likely know the USML cat. or ECCN for the scope) Regardless no rifle scope is "EAR99" (meaning not really facing many export controls). Technical the rifle scope would require a license or a license exemption (or exception if EAR). One rifle scope? probably not worth the effort to prosecute you. But all rifle scopes are controlled for export.
|
|
#
¿
Apr 23, 2015 04:08
|
|
|
Here rifle scopes controlled under the ITAR: 121.1, Category I, (f) Riflescopes manufactured to military specifications (See category XII(c) for controls on night sighting devices.) all other rifle scopes are controlled under the EAR: Commerce Control List (CCL), Supplement No. 1 to Part 774, 0A987 (ECCN) - Optical sighting devices for firearms both face potential export controls that if you were to export them it would be your responsibility to over come. do not gently caress around with shipping gun parts overseas unless you know what you are doing. It does not matter if this is a private non military sale. ITAR has "higher" jurisdiction than the EAR, so the ITAR is your first check. Notice how the ITAR says manufactured to military specifications, so it is possible for a civilian company making a purely civilian hunting scope for civilians, and have that rifle scope being subject to the ITAR. Vork!Vork!Vork! fucked around with this message at 04:26 on Apr 23, 2015 |
|
#
¿
Apr 23, 2015 04:18
|
|
|
mlmp08 posted:It's likely you'll never get hosed over for shipping commerical, off-the-shelf products overseas. I disagree, most AR-15 parts are subject to the ITAR, the BIS can and will go after you for exporting them. One off shipments? no they probably will not, but why risk it? Example: http://www.strtrade.com/news-publications-export-privileges-denied-Honduras-rifle-parts-052014.html
|
|
#
¿
Apr 23, 2015 04:29
|
|
|
mlmp08 posted:I guess I haven't researched the rate with which they go after people, but my point stands: It's one of those things where you might hear 10 stories of people selling ITAR poo poo without issue, but you never, ever want to be the one unlucky rear end in a top hat that gets wrecked by ITAR. Yeah rates are unknown for prosecution. Gun parts probably get exported all the time with out being caught. If it was just a mistake of somebody not knowing the law and shipping a small amount, customs would probably just seize it.
|
|
#
¿
Apr 23, 2015 04:41
|
|
|
chitoryu12 posted:Is any sale overseas between parties legally an export for these purposes? depends...If you as a US Person are handling the transaction then that could be considered brokering (also subject to the ITAR) and faces regulations
|
|
#
¿
Apr 23, 2015 04:43
|
|
|
|
| # ¿ May 22, 2024 14:52 |
|
|
chitoryu12 posted:For the record, I have nothing for sale. I'm mostly a purchaser of surplus and modern gear, some of which comes from Eastern Europe and Russia. for the record I did not offer any legal advice for complying to US export regulations 
|
|
#
¿
Apr 23, 2015 04:51
|
|