HDTenEightyP/NetNews huggingface dataset:
From: JDW5139@TAMXRD.TAMU.EDU
Subject:      RE: Homework
Reply-To: JDW5139@TAMXRD.TAMU.EDU
Organization: Indiana University
Date: Sun, 8 Nov 1992 21:04:32 GMT
Comments: To: CHINA-NT@UGA.CC.UGA.EDU

>From:         "IAAYROS@MVS.oac.ucla.edu" <IAAYROS@MVS.OAC.UCLA.EDU>
>Subject:      Let's do some homework before next CMFN appeares in US congress

>Questions like these need to be explored or contemplated for the next
>possible CMFN lobby.  I wonder if IFCSS can ask advices from some
>professional institutes such as the law firm that offerd excellent help
>to CSS on the S1216 lobby.

It is more important to ask ourselves---the CSS and all Chinese people---on
what to do to best represent the basis of IFCSS.

_________________________________

>From:         "(Ming Cheng)" <cheng@CS.BUFFALO.EDU>
>Subject:      "HOME" work

>As a democracy Org.( not a savor)  of Chinese, IFCSS has to do what the most
>of Chinese want ( not what other people what).
.......
>So it is not very hard  for CND or IFCSS to conduct some poll about MFN  in
>China to see what the most of Chinese want.
>I trust CND and IFCSS no matter what kind of conclusion they will  get and how
>they will get it so long as they get it from Home but not from some "advisors".

Very good points. However, as some other netter has pointed out, it may not be
entirely safe for the people in China to be polled. Why not do a few things in
our present capacity. For example, IFCSS can form a study group to argue over
all espects of the MFN issue, survey the best sources and statistics, and then
recommend possible strategies. Meanwhile CND can conduct polls among the CND
readers by e-mail, the non-CND readers, the business community, and others by
phone or mail, asking what they think the people in China think. Hopefully the
overall results will reflect something closer to the Chinese people's common
interests. These are only some of the homework that can be done. The most im-
portant thing is to do them now while there is not a lobby emergency yet and
everybody is still cool. This way large amount of objective opinions might be
collected and less shouting and stabbing in the back will be involved.
From: jwh3@po.CWRU.Edu (Junwei W. Hou)
Newsgroups: talk.politics.china
Subject: Ozone Man's Beauty (Re: China's MFN)
Date: 12 Nov 1992 02:09:41 GMT
Organization: Case Western Reserve University, Cleveland, OH (USA)
Reply-To: jwh3@po.CWRU.Edu (Junwei W. Hou)
NNTP-Posting-Host: slc12.ins.cwru.edu


(Nov. 11, 1992) Ozone Man's Beauty (Re: China's MFN)
*********************************

     Finally, he is there, holding the banner of change,
envisioned, partly, by his Milwaukee speech.

     Standing next to him, the "Ozone Man" -- a rather weird title
crowned by the President, intended to be a "kinder and gentler"
attack.

     But I can hardly find a reason to dislike the guy wearing the
"ozone hat".  I guess it's because I'm a Clinton fan.  And more, I
kind of like that title too, let alone the fact it was a courtesy
of the Republicans.

     An Ozone Man, on the earth, looking up to the blue sky,
wondering the hole over North Pole, thinks both the future and the
present.  Perhaps he would be blamed by those unemployed for
reminding people that a tougher environmental standard should be
set, burdening those employers who might otherwise hire more
unemployed.  Or perhaps he would be praised for his stand for a
value, a value of being part of the harmony of the earth family;
call it a new kind of "family value", if you may.

     It surely will be a hard choice facing an Ozone Man.  A
principle, and a reality, mirror the future and the present.  I bet
it'll take a man of vision to tackle this dilemma of the modern
days.

     An Ozone Man, as I rather perceive, is the one daring to hold
on an uncompromisable value of his pursuit, yet industriously
taking on helping the deserved and the innocents achieve a better
life, for they are the core of a family and his hope of the
harmony. 
 
     That's the beauty of an Ozone Man I admire dearly. 


                              Junwei
     
Newsgroups: talk.politics.china
From: lauf@next01epsl.wam.umd.edu (Jiasi Li)
Subject: Get a Life Yeh
Organization: Workstations at Maryland, University of Maryland, College Park
Distribution: usa
Date: Thu, 5 Nov 1992 16:59:04 GMT

Hey Shannon; no offense but I just wanted to know "do you have a life?"   
Why don't you just quit it and go back to what ever you were doing.  Oops,  
did I hit a nerve.  Are you not employed, beacause of those people, how do  
say it "Blood carders"?  Nobody is on your side.  Do you realize this, or  
are you just stupid enough to think that you are really getting the point  
through.  By the way what were your points?  Does it really matter?  Why  
do you care so much, is there any deep hidden hatred that you are not  
telling?
    Great analogy man, what did you get on your SATs.  Is me or is the  
literacy movement has not caught up to you yet.
Newsgroups: talk.politics.china
From: chen@haydn.ee.uec.ac.jp (Chen Jie)
Subject: Re: "HOME" work
Organization: University of Electro-Communications, Chofu, Tokyo, JAPAN
Date: Mon, 9 Nov 1992 08:14:18 GMT

Good idea, IFCSS has no right to ask USA to give China UMFN or CMFN
if IFCSS refuse to do the "HOME" work.
Xref: sparky talk.politics.china:2598 soc.culture.china:30014 soc.culture.hongkong:14090
From: mte152s@vaxc.cc.monash.edu.au
Newsgroups: talk.politics.china,soc.culture.china,soc.culture.hongkong
Subject: DATA: rail mileage of the nations
Date: 9 Nov 92 17:05:58 +1100
Organization: Computer Centre, Monash University, Australia

Rail mileage of the nations in the world
Source: AsiaWeek, October 30, 1992
================================================================================
Trains are a national development strategy: Japan, India and the Soviet Union
embraced them, the Philippines and the U.S. did. Modest growth was the rule
during the 1980s, with big gains in China, Egypt an Nigeria.
================================================================================
1984 Rank	1991 Rank	Country		Rail-Passenger KM (000s)
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
1		1		Soviet Union	414000
2		2		Japan		361795
4		3		China		303700
3		4		India		263400
5		5		Germany		64585
6		6		France		63588
7		7		Poland		50376
8		8		Italy		44328
14		9		Egypt		34876
10		10		Romania		33506
9		11		Britain		33316
11		12		South Korea	25104
16		13		United States	20837
15		14		Pakistan	20724
13		15		Czechoslovakia	19335
17		16		Spain		15480
19		17		Brazil		15264
12		18		South Africa	15196
21		19		Argentina	13253
18		20		Hungary		11879
20		21		Yugoslavia	11585
22		22		Thailand	10936
24		23		Switzerland	10884
23		24		Netherland	10162
27		25		Austria		8464
25		26		Taiwan		8145
================================================================================
Newsgroups: talk.politics.china
From: "(Xiaowen Li)" <lix@CRSA.BU.EDU>
Subject:      Re: Let's do some homework before next CMFN appeares in US
              congress
Reply-To: "(Xiaowen Li)" <lix@CRSA.BU.EDU>
Organization: Indiana University
Date: Sun, 8 Nov 1992 14:35:38 GMT
Comments: To: CHINA-NT@uga.cc.uga.edu

Basically I agree on the subject line.

Kevin gave a very good example of mis-calculating others bottom line.
Khroschoff thought USA would not take the risk of a nuclear war and would
swallow his missle base in Cuba, this resulted in his face-losing and
finally out-from-power. This should have been the least dissactrous
result humanbeing can obtain from such a miscalculation.

Other examples include Hitler's miscalculation about British' response
for his invasion to Poland (well, he did right in early cases). McArthur's
miscaluclation on China's response to his too-far march.

Let's do some homework, while not imagining ourselves as great as JFK, only
assuming ourselves something between JFK and McArthur. Great fun:-)
Newsgroups: talk.politics.china
From: wshi@ponder.csci.unt.edu (Weiping Shi)
Subject: Re: MFN under Clinton's administration
Organization: University of North Texas
Date: Tue, 10 Nov 1992 23:17:01 GMT

In <1992Nov10.174608.21517@usl.edu> kxd5425@usl.edu (Du Kaisheng) writes:

>Sorry I don't understand. I think I am still living in a much uneducated world
>in which food and shelters are more important than an empty slogan.

To make it clear,
if Mr. A lets you have free speach and voting right,
but no food or shelters, then Mr. A respects your human right.
If Mr. B lets you to have food and shelter but no free speech
and voting rights, Mr. B violates your human right.

A proof that human right does not include food and shelters,
look at the conditions in the CMFN.
Food and shelters are what CCP is referring to as
"surviving rights".

Which one do you want is your choice.

Organization: Carnegie Mellon, Pittsburgh, PA
Newsgroups: talk.politics.china,soc.culture.china
Date: Thu,  5 Nov 1992 18:28:09 -0500 
From: Rikiya Asano <ra01+@andrew.cmu.edu>
Subject: Re: Chinese, Are You Jealous?

Mr. Xiao,

             Are you crazy? Who are the "slaves" that you are referring
to? Are you calling my friends "slaves"? Shame on you, if this is true.
You sound like a redneck up there in Indiana. Come back down to earth!
From: xiaofei@acsu.buffalo.edu (XiaoFei Wang)
Newsgroups: talk.politics.china
Subject: Re: the congratulation letter to Clinton
Date: 6 Nov 92 20:48:31 GMT
Organization: UB

/* jwh3@po.CWRU.Edu (Junwei W. Hou) wrote */:
* 
*      It's so astonishingly true that a near-insane ego, an "ex-"
* title, plus liar-style "competence" could make a "hero" in not-
* quite-so-few CSS's minds where the greatness of this nation seems
* shy away from the shameless words and deeds of the "hero". 
*  
*                                    Junwei

I am not a law student so I have great difficulty in understand complex
sentences. I would appreciate it if some genius could translate the
sentence so that I could also understand. 

:wq
.
-- 
xiaofei@acsu.buffalo.edu | Subscribe Chinese Poem Exchange and Discussion List 
mail LISTSERV@UBVM.BITNET with "SUB CHPOEM-L 1st LastName" in the MESSAGE BODY
InterNet Address: UBVM.CC.BUFFALO.EDU | Posting in UUENCODED GB and BIG5
Newsgroups: talk.politics.china
From: mlibucha@magnus.acs.ohio-state.edu (Mark A Libucha)
Subject: Re: MFN under Clinton's administration
Organization: The Ohio State University
Date: Thu, 5 Nov 1992 23:31:09 GMT

In article <Bx9C7K.IBp@usenet.ucs.indiana.edu> YAO@AE.AGECON.WISC.EDU writes:
>Even [if Clinton] really believes personally
>that the human right situation in China is very bad and deserves
>punishments, he wouldn't do so after he goes into the White House.
>The reson is simple, he has to evaluate the gain that the United
>States can get from such  punishments. What the States can gain from
>such a punishment?  Nothing.

Agreed. But what you're overlooking is what *Clinton* has to lose. He's
made it very clear that he will be tougher on China, and I believe he
will act on that. However, not until he is provoked.

For instance, if another Shen Tong were to go off to China and get
arrested, Clinton would make an issue out of it. Bush probably put some 
pressure on the CCP behind the scenes to release Shen Tong, but Clinton 
will do it overtly.

I also believe that Clinton will demand some human rights concessions
(perhaps empty ones) next time MFN comes up. He'll be sure to see China
gets MFN status, but he'll make the CCP admit it has a poor human rights
record (which is a whole lot more than Bush did).

Mark
Newsgroups: talk.politics.china
From: wshi@ponder.csci.unt.edu (Weiping Shi)
Subject: Re: MFN under Clinton's administration
Organization: University of North Texas
Date: Mon, 9 Nov 1992 23:19:05 GMT

In <1992Nov8.234942.9313@usl.edu> kxd5425@usl.edu (Du Kaisheng) writes:

>If you think that the rights to have elementary education and the right to
>have at least some food to eat, a shelter to live in are not part of human
>right, we do not have any common ground to discuss this problem. Your "
>human right" is too fancy for me to understant.

I bet the other guy is right, that human right does not
include food and shelter.  Haven't you understand that human
right does not equal to "human's basic right"?
Newsgroups: talk.politics.china
From: Ying Tang <Ying.Tang.2@ND.EDU>
Subject:      china-nt: Homeworks
Reply-To: Ying Tang <Ying.Tang.2@ND.EDU>
Organization: Indiana University
Date: Mon, 9 Nov 1992 21:08:28 GMT
Comments: To: china-nt@uga.cc.uga.edu

Dear Netters:
As a matter of fact, we did some homework about MFN. My husband went
back to China Feb. 92, he went to 4 cities: Beijing, Tianjin, Nanjing
and Xi an. He visited five factories several companies and some acadmic
institutions and met different level of people: workers, teachers,
professors etc., asked them about the opinons towards the MFN and what
CSS in US did for MFN.  Only 2% of them said that they didn't care,
other 98% said they didn't want CMFN to be passed, they HATED what some
of CSS did in US.

One worker told my husband that if China lost MFN,
he could only get 55% of the salaries, also did other 3000 people in
his factory. He said human right is a good thing, but if it would affect
people's living, they don't need it, and they don't care. He said "you
guys in America, you don't need worry about the eating, living..., if
you want to stay there, stay, don't bother people here, I gusse you
guys have nothing to do because of eat to much (Chi1 bao3 le cheng1 de).

Democracy means you should do what majoraty wants, there is no doubt
that if we let the people in China (not here) chose either they want
CMFN or MFN, majority will chose MFN because that's the best
interest for them right now. I know it's pity that they don't care
much about the human right like the guys in U.S. do, democracy or
human right is their second need after they satisfy their first
need which is eating, living, and improving their living standard.
This is the reality.

The Chinese in America CANNOT represent the Chinese people.

Ying Tang
Newsgroups: talk.politics.china,soc.culture.china
From: xlli@silver.ucs.indiana.edu (xiao-lin li)
Subject: Re: Patriotism is the Opium of the Mass (was Re: Chinese, Are You Jealous)
Organization: Indiana University
Date: Sun, 8 Nov 1992 16:54:27 GMT

In article <BxDLGH.2wq@ulowell.ulowell.edu> cshi@cs.ulowell.edu (Chunde Shi) writes:
>>Patriotism is the opium of the mass.
>You "D-fighters", you even radicule patriotism. leave my country alone!

Hitler was the most patriotic person in Germany.
Joseph R. McCarthy was the most patriotic person in America.
Shi Chunde is now the most patriotic man in China.

Newsgroups: talk.politics.china
From: Undetermined origin c/o Postmaster <POSTMASTER@UGA.BITNET>
Subject:      Service Message
Reply-To: Undetermined origin c/o Postmaster <POSTMASTER@UGA.BITNET>
Organization: Indiana University
Date: Fri, 6 Nov 1992 00:51:01 GMT
Comments: To: CHINA-NT@uga.cc.uga.edu

Report on your message to: /R=AM/U=YUNFENG/@mrgate.uwyo.edu
Reason: Failed to transfer; communications failure (0)
Arrival-date: Thu, 5 Nov 1992 17:51:01 MST
Newsgroups: talk.politics.china
From: ping@bnlux1.bnl.gov (Shiping Zhang)
Subject: Re: Prostitutes from China 
Organization: Brookhaven National Laboratory, Upton, NY 11973
Distribution: usa
Date: Thu, 5 Nov 1992 01:22:15 GMT

In article <1992Nov2.223929.8313@msdhsv.ingr.com> Dayie writes:
>A comparison can be drawn between prostitutes and "blood carders":
>
>	Prostitutes sell their bodies and souls for the "quick and easy" money,
>"blood carders" sell their motherland for the "quick and easy" "blood cards".
>
>	Prostitutes should get normal, harder and lower paid jobs to make decent
>living because there is something more important than money , "blood carders" 
>should go through the normal immigration procedures to get their green cards
>because dignity is more important than green card itself. You have to carry 
>honesty and dignity with you.
>	Stop lying and China bashing!
>--
>Dayie

  What about those Diaoye's who sneak into prostitutes' bedrooms in night
  and condemn prostitutes in day?  Some even complained that prostitutes
  are not virgins and accused prostitutes of cheating.  Probably they should
  give the prostitutes a moral lesson while in their bedrooms.

-ping

Newsgroups: talk.politics.china
From: wshi@ponder.csci.unt.edu (Weiping Shi)
Subject: Re: MFN, Clinton and IFCSS
Organization: University of North Texas
Date: Mon, 9 Nov 1992 16:50:56 GMT

 Yuan> Again, it should be pointed out that China will not lose MFN.  Only
 Yuan> the products from state-owned companies will lose the tariff benefit.
 Yuan> This may not be a bad thing because it will force the encourage the
 Yuan> state-owned companies to be converted to private owned.

Sounds like a good thing for China.   Better lobby
to have China lose MFN so state-owned companies all go bankrupt.
Yeah!  Let's collect the tarrif money from these
state-owned companies to help US military industry.
Let's tariff prisoner products from China so we can feed
each US prisoner at the rate of $3000 per month.
What if someday China meets all the conditions?
Well, it is good for China and US according to Yuan,
so never give MFN to China.

Newsgroups: talk.politics.china
From: phsj@marlin.jcu.edu.au (Su Jianfeng)
Subject: Test 
Organization: James Cook University
Date: Fri, 13 Nov 92 09:22:18 GMT

Test !
From: CHINA@UTKVX.BITNET
Subject:      MFN & US Interest
Reply-To: CHINA@UTKVX.BITNET
Organization: Indiana University
Date: Tue, 10 Nov 1992 21:59:22 GMT
Comments: To: china-nt@uga.bitnet

>From:  UTKVX::IN%"stacc0@QUANTUM.FIU.EDU"  "(Ye)" 10-NOV-1992 14:12
>Subj:  RE: homework...
>
>So far you guys only discussed half of the homework. The other half, what
>I call 'adopted home work' has not been touched upon. We shall also look
>at the pluses and minuses of MFN status for China from our adopted home's
>point of view. Even for those who consider US as a temperary home, it's
>still a common practice to help do the dishes etc. As to those brats who
>only want a home but not homework...

I like to remind netters about the importance of the question raised here,
because the impact of China's MFN to US is the sole fundamental force driving
the turn-out of MFN Bill. Also, I appreciate the author's concern. Since the
trade between US and China is such a big deal, it can't be justified if it is
not fair to either side.

However, the answer to above question, i.e., the public impression that
the Chinese trade surplus harms US economy significantly, is far from being
accurate. It is inaccurately projected by the ignorance of the following
single fact:

    The Chinese provided goods are those what you find in Walmart
    and Big Lots, which US ceased manufacturing long before it had
    a sizable import from China.

What is the difference ? one may ask. It is still a 15 billion deficit.

The difference is US won by losing. If the above description about Chinese
made goods is right, then the increase of China's trade surplus with US must
be because US switched its source of those goods from those nations which it
originally bought from to China. Since any buying switch in trade must be
in the direction of spending less, the appearence of US trade deficit with
China must be associated with a larger decrease of trade deficit (or increase
of surplus) with those nations which China substituted as goods provider.

It is now known that US has dramatically reduced its net trade deficit
in the past four years. I guess its increasing cheap buy from China should
be a major factor.

Conclusion:

  (1) Under the circumstance that Made-in-China is a substitute of
      Made-in-Singpore or Malaysia, and is less costly, import from
      China is benificial to USA for reducing the net trade deficit.

  (2) A Cut-off of MFN is a factor forcing US buyers back to the nations
      China has replaced in the past few years. Since goods in all these
      countries are more expensive than in China, US will be subject to
      a larger net trade deficit as a result.

Jing Zhang
Univ. of Tennessee

P. S. This note should not be taken as an attempt about the whole issue of MFN.
      Although I am indeed for U-MFN given the current CMFN Bill, I do believe
      that a complete discussion should involve more than just trade analysis.
Newsgroups: talk.politics.china
From: & Wang <joe@ASTRO.AS.UTEXAS.EDU>
Subject:      Re: MFN, Clinton, and IFCSS
Reply-To: & Wang <joe@ASTRO.AS.UTEXAS.EDU>
Organization: Indiana University
Date: Tue, 10 Nov 1992 21:11:04 GMT

It should be pointed out that the bill passed LAST YEAR exempted
private enterprises.  The one passed the year before did not.  It's
not certain whether the one passed this year, will or will not, and
that's what lobbying is for.

Neither would probably exempt cooperative enterprises which are owned
by the provincial and local governments, but which are in essence
privately managed.
Newsgroups: talk.politics.china
From: wjin@nmsu.edu (Wang Jin)
Subject: Re: What CMFN can accomplish? (Re: MFN under Clinton Administration)
Organization: Computing Research Lab
	<1992Nov10.013333.1778@netcom.com>
Date: Wed, 11 Nov 1992 03:38:35 GMT

> From: kemnitz@netcom.com (Greg Kemnitz)
> Date: Tue, 10 Nov 1992 01:33:33 GMT

> The Chinese government is the one who has to be "pragmatic" here.  Clinton
> has committed to CMFN on the campaign trail, and the liberal wing of his
> party will hold him to it.  Additionally, the protectionist forces will jump

I think Deng Xiaoping is probably the most pragmatic guy you can ever
expect from a 'communist' country. However, the main theme of CMFN is
about human rights. Now we are talking impossiblity. If you undersatnd
CCP more you know what i am saying. These guys are so obsessed with
the idea of stability they are willing to pay any price for it. 6.4
should have made this too obvious.

> As Joe Wang points out, the "pragmatism" here is to make sure the "C" in CMFN
> is something which can be achieved by the PRC government.  UMFN is, IMHO, a
> dead issue.

Let's see some other possible conditions. trade surplus, weapon
proliferation might be possible. But it will be less humiliating to CG
if they are achieved through trade talk. Not long ago, CG did make some
concession in the sino-us trade talk.

I hope UMFN is not a dead issue. I have read some optimistic articles
on some different newspapers. I doubt that CMFN is mostly like to be a
politic game played by Democrats against Geoge Bush, and they probably
will not put their darling president elected into such an lose-lose
situation again. 

To be honest, i'm not that confident in UMFN under Clinton. I can only
hope he would realise the potential damage it will cause to the US
side, and do what he promised to do: 'put America first'. 

-wj
From: exuwng@exu.ericsson.se (Wade (Wei) Wang,xt-do,x7886)
Newsgroups: talk.politics.china
Subject: talk.politics.china
Keywords: TEST
Date: 12 Nov 92 16:05:44 GMT
Reply-To: exuwng@exu.ericsson.se
Organization: Ericsson Network Systems
X-Disclaimer: This article was posted by a user at Ericsson.
              Any opinions expressed are strictly those of the
              user and not necessarily those of Ericsson.


 Wish some goodies, no dirties here.