Why Trump proposed buying Greenland
- Thread starter NightHawkeye
- Start date
The piper will be paid. China wants either economic or military advantage.
China is not a benign investor. Like the mafia, China does not easily forgive.
I hope that works out well for all concerned.
Upvote
0
China apparently holds a little over a trillion in US debt.
US Debt to China, How Much It Is, Reasons Why, and What If China Sells
Why China Owns So Much U.S. Debt
China makes sure the yuan is always low relative to the U.S. dollar. Why? Part of its economic strategy is to keep its export prices competitive. It does this by holding the yuan at a fixed rate compared to a "currency basket" of which the majority is the dollar. When the dollar falls in value, the Chinese government uses dollars it has on hand to buy Treasuries. It receives these dollars from Chinese companies that receive them as payments for their exports. China's Treasury purchases increase demand for the dollar and thus its value.
China's position as America's largest banker gives it some political leverage. Now and then, China threatens to sell part of its debt holdings. It knows that if it does, U.S. interest rates would rise, slowing U.S economic growth. China often calls for a new global currency to replace the dollar, which is used in most international transactions. China does this whenever the United States allows the value of the dollar to drop. That makes the debt China holds less valuable.
China makes sure the yuan is always low relative to the U.S. dollar. Why? Part of its economic strategy is to keep its export prices competitive. It does this by holding the yuan at a fixed rate compared to a "currency basket" of which the majority is the dollar. When the dollar falls in value, the Chinese government uses dollars it has on hand to buy Treasuries. It receives these dollars from Chinese companies that receive them as payments for their exports. China's Treasury purchases increase demand for the dollar and thus its value.
China's position as America's largest banker gives it some political leverage. Now and then, China threatens to sell part of its debt holdings. It knows that if it does, U.S. interest rates would rise, slowing U.S economic growth. China often calls for a new global currency to replace the dollar, which is used in most international transactions. China does this whenever the United States allows the value of the dollar to drop. That makes the debt China holds less valuable.
Last edited:
Upvote
0
Sure it matters.
Many countries, including the US and China, will try to influence the decisions of Greenlanders. Yes, they can choose to continue to be very poor, but that is clearly unnecessary, even under a very environmental friendly set of projects.
Many countries, including the US and China, will try to influence the decisions of Greenlanders. Yes, they can choose to continue to be very poor, but that is clearly unnecessary, even under a very environmental friendly set of projects.
Has anyone asked the native Greenlandic people what they would want? Do they not matter?
Upvote
0
No, no, no.
Countries and their companies should be free to propose projects to the people. If the Danish government continues to reject projects (and keeps them poor), perhaps they will change their minds.
There is much more involved than purchase. China and Russia are surely interested in development projects.
Countries and their companies should be free to propose projects to the people. If the Danish government continues to reject projects (and keeps them poor), perhaps they will change their minds.
There is much more involved than purchase. China and Russia are surely interested in development projects.
Upvote
0
Should the US make efforts to invest and take a greater interest in the future of Greenland? THAT is the question.
The US is signicantly behind in competing for Arctic rights. Greenland is another place where many countries are competing.
Global warming is opening investment opportunities in the Arctic and Greenland. The US can cede the field to China and Russia, or not. And, yes, of course, we should do much more with regard to reducing the amount of global warming.
The US is signicantly behind in competing for Arctic rights. Greenland is another place where many countries are competing.
Global warming is opening investment opportunities in the Arctic and Greenland. The US can cede the field to China and Russia, or not. And, yes, of course, we should do much more with regard to reducing the amount of global warming.
Upvote
0
Kentonio
Well-Known Member
There is zero chance of Greenland changing their mind. Why would they want to give up those natural resources to the US when they can just develop them themselves anyway once they get full independence? It makes no sense. Do you not think they noticed how the US treated Puerto Rico recently?
Upvote
0
This site stays free and accessible to all because of donations from people like you.
Consider making a one-time or monthly donation. We appreciate your support!
- Dan Doughty and Team Christian Forums
You have stated a false option. The current situation under Danish ownership is poverty. There is no need for this. There is also little likelihood of Denmark developing the resources to the benefit of Greenland's residents.
If the resources were now being developed for their benefit, the people would be very rich indeed.
Full independence is a really tough road for a country with 55,000 residents. They would need to have allies (China, Canada, Russia and the US are the most obvious) and major investment partners.
I think that a population if 55K running an independent country would be overwhelmed by competing interests from other countries, companies and countries.
========
Maybe independence is the best option. Maybe being owned by a different country than Denmark is a better option. My guess is that people would be best served by Greenland being sold to Canada, with a 50 year transition contract.
To be clear, the US and Canada would benefit from the use of this critical military area, as well as from developing resources. There is no one reason to believe that the 55K will be better off under continue Danish rule.
===
As an aside, if you want a US example, Guam and the Mariana islands are better example than Puerto Rico. However, here the natural resources make it possible for the residents (and their children) to be made very rich.
If the resources were now being developed for their benefit, the people would be very rich indeed.
Full independence is a really tough road for a country with 55,000 residents. They would need to have allies (China, Canada, Russia and the US are the most obvious) and major investment partners.
I think that a population if 55K running an independent country would be overwhelmed by competing interests from other countries, companies and countries.
========
Maybe independence is the best option. Maybe being owned by a different country than Denmark is a better option. My guess is that people would be best served by Greenland being sold to Canada, with a 50 year transition contract.
To be clear, the US and Canada would benefit from the use of this critical military area, as well as from developing resources. There is no one reason to believe that the 55K will be better off under continue Danish rule.
===
As an aside, if you want a US example, Guam and the Mariana islands are better example than Puerto Rico. However, here the natural resources make it possible for the residents (and their children) to be made very rich.
Upvote
0
... and on that subject ... in today's news:
Japan Surpasses China as Top Foreign Holder of U.S. Debt
Upvote
0
Kentonio
Well-Known Member
Stop pretending the people of Greenland are some poverty stricken peasants, they aren’t. And neither are the Danes some vile colonial rulers. Denmark hasn’t been pushing mineral exploitation of Greenland because some of us actually care about the environment and don’t want to turn every pristine natural area into a strip mine. As a Democrat I thought you might actually understand that, but instead you seem to just be pushing Trump talking points yet again.
The US will NEVER own Greenland thankfully. The Greenlanders have zero interest in becoming a US colony.
Upvote
0
Reuters is now reporting a little more of the recent history ... apparently the Obama administration cut off contracts to Greenland companies.
In spotlight after Trump offer, Greenland sees chance for an economic win
In spotlight after Trump offer, Greenland sees chance for an economic win
Greenland had long wanted more in return for the base’s use. But discontent worsened in 2014 when the U.S. military canceled a contract with Greenland Contractors, a partly state-owned firm that had serviced the base for more than four decades.
And in 2017, the Department of Defense picked a U.S. company instead of Greenland’s Royal Arctic Line to ship goods to the base, causing further resentment among politicians and locals.
“It is only natural that we should make the most of the U.S. presence in Greenland, as we accommodate the defense cooperation on our land,” Greenland’s minister for foreign affairs Ane Lone Bagger told Reuters in an interview this week.
...
“To the greatest extent possible, it must be Greenlandic companies as well as Greenlandic workers who service the base. It is only natural that we get our fair share,” she said.
Curiously, it seems to be all about the money.And in 2017, the Department of Defense picked a U.S. company instead of Greenland’s Royal Arctic Line to ship goods to the base, causing further resentment among politicians and locals.
“It is only natural that we should make the most of the U.S. presence in Greenland, as we accommodate the defense cooperation on our land,” Greenland’s minister for foreign affairs Ane Lone Bagger told Reuters in an interview this week.
...
“To the greatest extent possible, it must be Greenlandic companies as well as Greenlandic workers who service the base. It is only natural that we get our fair share,” she said.
Upvote
0
This site stays free and accessible to all because of donations from people like you.
Consider making a one-time or monthly donation. We appreciate your support!
- Dan Doughty and Team Christian Forums
All or nothing, that is the answer????
Have the Greenlanders been polled to see whether they would like to have incomes more than $40K a year?
Your position seems to be that ALL mineral exploration is wrong. As a Democrat and an environmentalist, I strongly disagree.
Have the Greenlanders been polled to see whether they would like to have incomes more than $40K a year?
Your position seems to be that ALL mineral exploration is wrong. As a Democrat and an environmentalist, I strongly disagree.
Upvote
0
Similar threads
