Post Scripts

by Jack Lee

The GOP has engaged the Dems in a reasoned dialog about minimum wage for a long time and they’ve been losing.   The republicans correctly cite how inflation almost immediately consumes any adjustment in that minimum wage. They’ve righly pointed out how minimum wage was only designed for entry level, unskilled jobs.  They note how it was not intended for anyone to support a family on. And they often cite, if two $5 an hour workers are granted a $10 an hour minimum wage you wind up with one $10 an hour worker.  These are all accurate statements, so why are they losing? 

Now this is where it gets interesting…

The democrats don’t argue the economic facts because, one, they aren’t supportable and two, they don’t need too! Instead they take the debate into a category that resonates with the low information voters. They lambast the conservatives with sloganism: Republicans don’t want you to earn more money! Republicans are against the poor trying to better themselves! They don’t want to share the wealth, they want to hoard it! They’ve got theirs, but they don’t want you to get yours!  And if they can work in racism too, they will.   

These are all specious arguments. Liberals are simply playing to the emotions of the low information voter while completely sidestepping the conservative argument. The republicans find themselves once again being duped into thinking this is a genuine intellectual debate, dealing with economic facts, it isn’t, this is a setup for rhetoric.

(In the burger flipping business the profit margin is about 4% and that means there isn’t a lot of slack for raising wages without raising retail prices – see my opening line?)

This is why I say the liberal party line has the ring of truth, but it is completely fallacious. It’s only purpose is to provoke class warfare.   It’s a clever tactic that republicans never seem to answer effectively. Instead, the GOP allows their opposition to get away with labeling them as mean spirited and stingy. And for all their efforts to explain honest answers about minimum wage, it’s totally lost on the low information voters who only tune in hate speech.

Anyone stupid enough to believe Obama dollars are providing for their free cell phones and free food are never going to understand the dynamics of supply and demand in a capitalist economy.   And this is what democrats rely on and so did P.T. Barnum. Barnum said, “You will never go broke underestimating the intelligence of the American public.”   We will can’t win this debate until the dems get their face shoved into failure and quite possibly drag the nation into bankruptcy.   When that happens, lets just hope it will not be too late to repair the damage.   

Posted by Jack

“I was a constitutional law professor, which means unlike the current president I actually respect the Constitution.” Barrack Hussein Obama.    Obama took the Presidential Oath, swearing to “.. preserve, protect and defend the Constitution of the United States” but has:
■Used Executive Privilege in regards to Fast & Furious gun running scandal. When Government misconduct is the concern Executive privilege is negated.
■23 Executive Orders on gun control – infringement of the 2nd Amendment
■2 more Executive Orders added on gun control – infringement of the 2nd Amendment
■Executive Order bypassing Congress on immigration – Article 1 Section 1, ALL Legislative power held by Congress; Article II Section 3
■Issued directive instructing ICE to NOT enforce immigration laws in certain cases. Article 1 Section 1, ALL Legislative power held by Congress; “he shall take Care that the Laws be faithfully executed,” Article II Section 3
■NDAA – Section 1021. Due process Rights negated. Violation of 3rd, 4th, 5th, 6th, and 7th Amendments.
■Executive Order 13603 NDRP – Government can seize anything
■Executive Order 13524 – Gives INTERPOL jurisdiction on American soil beyond law enforcement agencies, including the FBI.
■Executive Order 13636 Infrastructure Cybersecurity – Bypassing Congress Article 1 Section 1, ALL Legislative power held by Congress
■Signed into law the establishment of NO Free Speech zones H.R. 347 – noncompliance is a felony. Violation of 1st Amendment.
■Attempt to tax political contributions – 1st Amendment
■DOMA Law – Obama directed DOJ to ignore the Constitution and separation of powers and not enforce the law. ” he shall take Care that the Laws be faithfully executed,” Article II Section 3
■Dodd-Frank – Due process and separation of powers. Consumer Financial Protection Bureau writing and interpreting law. Article. I. Section. 1
■Drone strikes on American Citizens – 5th Amendment Due process Rights negated
■Bypassed Congress and gave EPA power to advance Cap-n-Trade
■Attempt for Graphic tobacco warnings (under appeal) – 1st Amendment
■Four Exec. appointments – Senate was NOT in recess (Court has ruled unconstitutional yet the appointees still remain)
■Appointing agency czars without the “advice and consent of the Senate.” Violation of Article II, Section 2
■Obama took Chairmanship of UN Security Council – Violation of Section 9.
■ACA (Obamacare) mandate – SCOTUS rewrote legislation and made it a tax because there is no Constitutional authority for Congress to force Americans to engage in commerce. SCOTUS has no authority to Legislate or lay taxes. Article I Section 1 & 8.
■Contraceptive, abortifacients mandate violation of First Ammendment
■Healthcare waivers – No president has dispensing powers
■Refuses to acknowledge state’s 10th Amendment rights to nullify Obamacare
■Going after states (AZ lawsuit) for upholding Federal law (immigration) -10th Amendment.
■Chrysler Bailout -TARP – violated creditors rights and bankruptcy law, as well as Takings and Due Process Clauses – 5th Amendment (G.W. Bush also illegally used TARP funds for bailouts)
■The Independent Payment Advisory Board (appointees by the president). Any decisions by IPAB will instantly become law starting in 2014 – Separation of Powers, Article 1 Section 1.
■Congress did not approve Obama’s war in Libya. Article I, Section 8, First illegal war U.S. has engaged in. Impeachable under Article II, Section 4; War Powers Act – Article II Section 3.
■Obama falsely claims UN can usurp Congressional war powers.
■Obama has acted outside the constitutional power given him – this in itself is unconstitutional.
■With the approval of Obama, the NSA and the FBI are tapping directly into the servers of 9 internet companies to gain access to emails, video/audio, photos, documents, etc. This program is code named PRISM. NSA also collecting data on all phone calls in U.S. – Violation of 4th Amendment.
■Plans to sign U.N. Firearms treaty – 2nd Amendment.
■The Senate/Obama immigration bill (approved by both) raises revenue – Section 7. All Bills for raising Revenue shall originate in the House of Representatives
■Obama altered law – (A president has no authority to alter law) Delayed upholding the Employer Mandate Law (ACA) until 2015 – Individual Mandate will be enforced. A President does not have that authority – Article. I. Section. 1. All legislative Powers herein granted shall be vested in a Congress of the United States; The president “shall take care that the laws be faithfully executed” -Article II, Section 3; Equal Protection Clause -14th Amendment.
■Obama altered law – ACA Medicare cuts delayed until 2015. Article. I. Section. 1; Article II, Section 3.
■Obama altered law – Enforcement of eligibility requirements for ACA delayed until 2015. Article. I. Section. 1; Article II, Section 3.
■Obama wavered ACA Income Verification Article. I. Section. 1; Article II, Section 3.
■Obama altered law – Delayed ACA caps on out of pocket expenses until 2015. (when implemented premiums will skyrocket) Article. I. Section. 1; Article II, Section 3.
■Obama ignored judicial order to fulfill legal obligation regarding Yucca Mountain waste. Article II, Section 3
■Waived Federal provision that prevents U.S. From arming terrorist groups – Article I. Section 1; Impeachable under Article III, Section 3.
■Obama shelves part of the ACA Law for Insurers, extending the life of non-qualifying (according to ACA) plans until Jan. 1, 2015. Article. I. Section. 1; Article II, Section 3. Violation of the Take Care Clause, Separation of Powers.

A Constitutional law professor (even their students) should know better. The TRUTH is Obama was not a Constitutional law professor, and clearly he has not respected or protected the Constitution. Obama has broken his oath to preserve, protect, and defend the Constitution of the United States. Article II, Section 1.

Note: Executive Orders by the president were not designed for, nor do they give a president the authority to use as, a means to override or alter legislation or any other Constitutional violation.

Q: Was Barack Obama really a constitutional law professor?

A: His formal title was “senior lecturer,” but the University of Chicago Law School says he “served as a professor” and was “regarded as” a professor.

FULL QUESTION

When I was in law school, I addressed all of my course instructors as “professors,” regardless of their rank or formal position in the school academic hierarchy (tenured professor, assistant professor, adjunct professor, lecturer, etc.). Was Obama exaggerating or factually wrong in referring to himself as a “constitutional law professor” at the University of Chicago Law School even though his official title was lecturer?

FULL ANSWER

Posted by Tina

The President spoke this morning to a gathering of folks at the Center for American Progress, a group the AP referred to as a “nonprofit community center” in their reporting. Obama couldn’t have picked a more liberal friendly group now that the college kids have soured on hope and change.

It’s hard to imagine a thought more audacious than, “The basic bargain at the heart of our economy has frayed,” after four years of policies specifically implemented to create “a new beginning” for the American people. The President said it nonetheless. Judge for yourselves…video of the speech is posted at Yahoo.com.

A rebuttal given by Senator Jeff Sessions today was more interesting and unfortunately for the American people, right on the money:

It is shocking for the President to give a speech about income disparity and falling wages while pushing an immigration plan that will hammer American workers and widen the disparity. The Congressional Budget Office confirms the White House-backed plan would reduce wages, reduce per capita GNP, and increase unemployment. The President says people are worried that “the system is rigged,” and yet it is the President who has teamed up with a small cadre of CEOs to double the flow of immigrant workers when these exact same companies are laying off American workers in droves.

Wages for American workers are lower today than they were more than a decade ago, and take-home pay has fallen each year since the President came into office. A recent study demonstrated that all net job growth since 2000 has gone to immigrant workers while the number of U.S.-born Americans working has declined by 1.3 million.

The President’s policies also threaten college students who are about to enter a difficult economy. His plan would more than double the number of temporary foreign workers for wealthy tech companies. As Professor Ron Hira, a leading expert on H-1B visas, has noted, the visas are being used for “facilitating offshoring and providing employers with cheap, temporary labor—while reducing job opportunities for American high-tech workers in the process.”

Harvard professor Dr. George Borjas found that high levels of immigration between 1980 and 2000 caused the wages of lower-skilled American workers to drop nearly 8 percent. He also found current immigration levels have resulted in a $402 billion annual wage loss for workers but a $437 billion increase in profits for business owners.

It is time to have an open and honest conversation about our shrinking middle class and the consequences of our immigration policies on American workers and their wages. Unfortunately, that is not what we got from the President today.

The truth is that the policy formula favored by President Obama—more regulation, hostility to American energy, anti-growth taxation, surging debt, bigger government, more federal interference, government-run healthcare, and mindless immigration policies—are the cause, not the cure, for growing middle class distress.

Sessions source: John Hinderakker, Powerline.

Posted by Tina

Speaker Boehner stood on the floor of the House this morning to highlight 150 bills passed in the House of Representatives that have been blocked even from consideration by Harry Reid in the Senate. His comments are in defense of recent accusations by Democrats and media that the 113th Congress is “the least productive in history”. House bills include legislation that would reform job training programs, boost protection from cyberattacks, and help schools recruit and keep good teachers. Two Republican Senators have attempted to influence Reid to no effect:

Boehner added that the GOP is now trying to work out differences with Democrats on the budget and the farm bill, but indicated little progress so far.

“Chairman [Paul] Ryan and Chairman [Frank] Lucas have made serious, good-faith efforts to Senate Democrats,” he said. “When will they learn to say ‘yes’ to common ground? When will they start listening to the American people?”

I don’t mind that Republicans are criticized as long as people understand what’s actually going on in Washington DC under the overly ambitious Obama administration and the radical leftist leadership of Harry Reid…as long as we all understand who is playing the obstructionist roll.

By the way, CNN reports today that Reid’s staff will be exempted from Obamacare because he can’t afford to pay them enough to afford the high premium that would give them an equivalent plan on the Obama exchange.

Posted by Jack

See anyone familiar? They might be your ancestors. The oldest known human DNA found yet reveals human evolution was even more confusing than before thought, researchers say. The genetic material came from the bone of a hominin living in what is now the Sima de los Huesos in Northern Spain.

By Charles Q. Choi, LiveScience

The oldest known human DNA found yet reveals human evolution was even more confusing than thought, researchers say.

The DNA, which dates back some 400,000 years, may belong to an unknown human ancestor, say scientists. These new findings could shed light on a mysterious extinct branch of humanity known as Denisovans, who were close relatives of Neanderthals, scientists added.

Although modern humans are the only surviving human lineage, others once strode the Earth. These included Neanderthals, the closest extinct relatives of modern humans, and the relatively newfound Denisovans, who are thought to have lived in a vast expanse from Siberia to Southeast Asia. Research shows that the Denisovans shared a common origin with Neanderthals but were genetically distinct, with both apparently descending from a common ancestral group that had diverged earlier from the forerunners of modern humans. [See Images of Excavation & Mysterious ‘New Hominid’]

Genetic analysis suggests the ancestors of modern humans interbred with both these extinct lineages. Neanderthal DNA makes up 1 to 4 percent of modern Eurasian genomes, and Denisovan DNA makes up 4 to 6 percent of modern New Guinean and Bougainville Islander genomes in the Melanesian islands.

Pit of Bones

To discover more about human origins, researchers investigated a human thighbone unearthed in the Sima de los Huesos, or “Pit of Bones,” an underground cave in the Atapuerca Mountains in northern Spain. The bone is apparently 400,000 years old.

“This is the oldest human genetic material that has been sequenced so far,” said study lead author Matthias Meyer, a molecular biologist at the Max Planck Institute for Evolutionary Anthropology in Leipzig, Germany. “This is really a breakthrough — we’d never have thought it possible two years ago that we could study the genetics of human fossils of this age.” Until now, the previous oldest human DNA known came from a 100,000-year-old Neanderthal from a cave in Belgium.

The Sima de los Huesos is about 100 feet (30 meters) below the surface at the bottom of a 42-foot (13-meter) vertical shaft. Archaeologists suggest the bones may have been washed down it by rain or floods, or that the bones were even intentionally buried there.

..View gallery

The thighbone of the 400,000-year-old hominid from Sima de los Huesos, Spain.

This Pit of Bones has yielded fossils of at least 28 individuals, the world’s largest collection of human fossils dating from the Middle Pleistocene, about 125,000 to 780,000 years ago.

“This is a very interesting time range,” Meyer told LiveScience. “We think the ancestors of modern humans and Neanderthals diverged maybe some 500,000 years ago.” The oldest fossils of modern humans found yet date back to about 200,000 years ago.

Denisovan relative?

The researchers reconstructed a nearly complete genome of this fossil’s mitochondria — the powerhouses of the cell, which possess their own DNA and get passed down from the mother. The fossils unearthed at the site resembled Neanderthals, so researchers expected this mitochondrial DNA to be Neanderthal.

Surprisingly, the mitochondrial DNA reveals this fossil shared a common ancestor not with Neanderthals, but with Denisovans, splitting from them about 700,000 years ago. This is odd, since research currently suggests the Denisovans lived in eastern Asia, not in western Europe, where this fossil was uncovered. The only known Denisovan fossils so far are a finger bone and a molar found in Siberia. [Denisovan Gallery: Tracing the Genetics of Human Ancestors]

“This opens up completely new possibilities in our understanding of the evolution of modern humans, Neanderthals and Denisovans,” Meyer said.

The researchers suggest a number of possible explanations for these findings. First, this specimen may have been closely related to the ancestors of Denisovans. However, this seems unlikely, since the presence of Denisovans in western Europe would suggest an extensive overlap of territory with Neanderthal ancestors, raising the question of how both groups could diverge genetically while overlapping in range. Moreover, the one known Denisovan tooth is significantly different from teeth seen at the Pit of Bones.

Second, the Sima de los Huesos humans may be related to the ancestors of both Neanderthals and Denisovans. The researchers consider this plausible given the fossil’s age, but they would then have to explain how two very different mitochondrial DNA lineages stemmed from one group, one leading to Denisovans, the other to Neanderthals.

Third, the humans found at the Sima de los Huesos may be a lineage distinct from both Neanderthals and Denisovans that later perhaps contributed mitochondrial DNA to Denisovans. However, this suggests this group was somehow both distinct from Neanderthals but also independently evolved several Neanderthal-like skeletal features.

Fourth, the investigators suggest a currently unknown human lineage brought Denisovan-like mitochondrial DNA into the Pit of Bones region, and possibly also to the Denisovans in Asia.

“The story of human evolution is not as simple as we would have liked to think,” Meyer said. “This result is a big question mark. In some sense, we know less about the origins of Neanderthals and Denisovans than we knew before.”

The scientists now hope to learn more about these fossils by retrieving DNA from their cell nuclei, not their mitochondria. However, this will be a huge challenge — the researchers needed almost 2 grams of bone to analyze mitochondrial DNA, which outnumbers nuclear DNA by several hundred times within the cell.

The scientists detailed their findings in the Dec. 5 issue of the journal Nature.

Posted by Tina

A story this morning from Mediaite mirrors the mood of many people in our nation as we come to the end of 2012:

President Barack Obama has always had a broad base of support among America’s youngest voters. In 2012, 60 percent of voters aged 18-29 took to the polls to reelect the president. According to a Harvard University’s Institute of Politics poll released on Wednesday, however, many young voters are regretting the votes they cast just over one year ago.

11 percent more young adults, aged 18-29, disapprove of the president’s performance in office than they did last year. Only 41 percent of millennials expressed approval with Obama’s job performance. Of the 55 percent of young voters who admitted to casting their ballot for Obama in 2012, just 46 percent said they would do the same again.

52 percent of younger millennials, aged 18-24, told Harvard pollsters that they would support a recalling of the president from the Oval Office. 47 percent of all young voters said they would support such a measure. Fortunately for the president, no provision to recall the President of the United States exists in the Constitution.

Another complaint from this group was expressed this morning by a young conservative who suggested that the President’s policy of pressuring the young to take out student loans reminded him of the tactics of some lenders before the housing crash…those “predatory lenders” that pressured people into taking out bad loans to buy a home. His opinion struck me as having a ring of truth to it. As the government took over the student loan market I noticed that advertisement encouraging people to attend college and offering college loans was suddenly everywhere, in magazines, on television and on the web. I even began receiving unsolicited calls at home and at work offering loans. (Same with housing loans, business loans).

Time Business & Money reported in October that student loan’s were “becoming a drain on the economy” in October:

The housing recovery remains on track. But high levels of student debt threaten to hang over the residential real estate market for many years, acting as a drag on both household formation and higher prices.

At the height of the housing boom, the U.S. was producing 1.4 million additional households every year. That figure plunged to 500,000 in the Great Recession. The number of new households is expanding again but remains stuck at 700,000—half the peak level. One big reason is underemployed new college graduates struggling with student debt and unable to contribute to the economy.

“Three-fourths of the fall in household formation can be directly correlated to student debt,” Rohit Chopra, student loan ombudsman at the Consumer Financial Protection Bureau, said at a conference last week. His comments were reported on Mainstreet.com.

Debt seems to be the drug that this administration, and government in general, pushes.
The President’s approval number dipped just below 40% in polling of the general public recently with 53% disapproval. It’s likely that young millennials, who voted for Obama in great numbers in both elections, have turned away from the hope and change President.

by Rally Sally

Back in the early 1990s, Stan Statham, then the North State’s assemblyman, avidly promoted a plan to split California in two. Lately he’s revived his old cause just as some North State conservatives have embraced the idea of breaking our rural northern areas from the rest of urban California.

He’ll even tag-team with State of Jefferson boosters. He told Tehama County leaders at a meeting last month, for instance, that Assembly researchers studied his idea in 1992 and found that an independent Northern California would be financially viable. Money, of course, is one of the critical questions the independence-minded have struggled to answer, so this seemingly objective report would lend weight to their claims that the North State could go it alone.
Statham was kind enough to supply a copy of the 1992 report — “Two New Californias: An Equal Division.” And his memory serves him well. The financial analysis really did find that breaking up the state would leave two parts that could easily be self-sufficient.

Unfortunately for Jefferson proponents, the dividing line was well into what everyone up our way thinks of as “Southern California” — along the nearly straight-line northern boundary of San Luis Obispo, Kern and San Bernardino counties. Broken there, the report found, the Southern California megalopolis and Northern California could each go it alone well enough (though the report noted many potential complications).

But does anyone who yearns for a State of Jefferson yearn for a state whose population center is … the San Francisco Bay Area? Of course not. Those conservatives’ desire is to shed California’s liberal over-reach. But in Statham’s theoretically viable split, the politics of Northern California would be, if anything, distilled into an ever higher-proof liberalism. Seriously. Many of the still-conservative corners of the state are in the south. Orange County, anyone?

And, sorry, rural California still couldn’t pay the bills on its own — and never could have. Then, as now, residents of the prosperous Bay Area counties paid far more in state taxes. Some Jefferson boosters argue that if we could bring logging and other resource industries back, our economy would thrive again. Even in the late 1980s figures parsed by the Assembly report showed the rural counties of the North State had higher unemployment and lower incomes. That was before the northern spotted owl was listed as a threatened species, the national forests were strictly protected, and the timber industry was disastrously upended.

That transition was wrenching and, especially for the most isolated mill towns, left lasting damage on communities. But the numbers show we weren’t well off, compared with the rest of the state, even then.

Financially viable to split California? Maybe, but not in the way the latter-day Jeffersonians imagine.

Posted by Tina

The President always signals his true intentions. He has said that he will get his way by going around Congress in every way he possibly can (Legal or not…we notice). One method he uses is to grant unrestrained powers to the heads of agencies like the EPA. New EPA regulations have the power to effectively disarm the citizenry. You can keep your guns…good luck getting ammo!

Alan West is sounding the warning and the Washington Times reports:

Come 2014, all ammunition sold to civilian gun-owners in America will have to be imported, a result of President Obama’s crackdown on sulfur dioxide and lead emissions and accompanying harsh Environmental Protection Agency regulations, said former Florida congressman, Lt. Col. Allen West.
And for defenders of the Second Amendment, that means higher ammo prices are likely on the way — a situation Mr. Allen writes on his blog, AllenBWest.com, is akin to a federal power-grab on guns, albeit through the backdoor.

The situation stemmed from the shutdown of The Doe Run Lead Smelter in Missouri, a business that’s been around since 1892 but due to close at the end of this month. Mr. West said it’s due to new air standards placed on the company that would have cost $100 million to achieve. The significance is that Doe Run was the last lead smelting plant in the country — leaving America no choice but to turn to overseas operations to produce lead bullets.

“[This] will surely increase the price and possibly come under government control,” Mr. West warned, Breitbart.com reported. “It seems this is fully in concert with the U.S. Military and Homeland Defense recent purchase of large quantities of ammunition.

Radical, damaging regulation coming out of the EPA will result in many downside realities for Americans. Expensive, hard to get ammo is one such result. The loss of another business and the jobs it supplies is another. We can be assured that these draconian regulations will affect other businesses as well…meaning fewer jobs, higher prices, a shrinking tax base, and a lot of shared misery.

Central control means less power and less wealth and buying power for every American. that is the shared misery reality of leftist government.

by Jack

Looks like retailers didn’t make the kind of money they were hoping for, even though the volume was up. Consumers are tending to be more value buyers to make their declining incomes go farther. Black Friday, considered the start to the US holiday shopping season, saw its first drop in sales since 2009, according to a National Retail Federation survey conducted by Prosper Insights & Analytics over the holiday weekend.

On the local front it appears that ticketing bums for City Code violation is working and it’s caused a drop in their numbers. However, the transient population is still disproportionately high for a community of this size.

The presence of armed security guards patrolling the downtown has been enthusiastically received by shoppers and store owners alike. These folks don’t care where the protection is coming from, so long as it’s there. The local businesses had to hire their own police. This has caused the Chico Police Administration look indifferent to the needs of the community, Chief Trostle better start tuning in or he may not be around much longer. From my personal observations I can tell you that the occasional drive-by of a police patrol car for 2-3 seconds doesn’t get it. People want to see police out of those cars and on the street or walking through the mall. They want a police presence, because this community is sick of the stabbings, thefts, robberies and harassment by transients and punks that have claimed ownership of our streets and parks.

On the global front, there’s more saber rattling coming from China. The word is China is feeling threatened because of the US war in Iraq. No comment was heard about the Afghanistan war. The end result of this concern is, China’s devoting more of it’s revenue to building state-of-the art military hardware. This comes at the risk of damaging their fragile gains in basic human rights. Another bi-product of their fear is the newly created air defense zone north of Taiwan. The Chinese have claimed the right to control air traffic in this area, despite it being far outside their territorial limits as established by international law. The air defense zone encompasses the Senakus islands that are held by Japan, needless to say the Japanese are not happy. President Obama’s response to China has been tepid. He instructed U.S. civilian flights to comply with the Chinese demand to request permission before entering their security zone. Chinese officials believe that it’s almost inevitable they will have a military conflict with the U.S. in the coming years. The Chinese of course blame the US for this climate of hostility, citing the recent war in Iraq where they claim the U.S. had no legitimate reason for invading this sovereign nation. On the other hand, China has been waging all out economic war on the U.S. for decades and quite successfully, mostly because own companies that have moved jobs and hardware to China. The Chinese have been extremely aggressive with cyber-attacks and cyber-spying on both U.S. civilian and military targets.

A recent poll showed that more than one quarter of Americans currently perceive China as the world’s dominant economic power, a reflection of the changing global order. (Source CNBC)