Some people have been warning about this for years, but now its getting to reach critical mass.

The race to outsource American industry is having catastrophic effects on U.S. security.

The U.S. is by treaty, obligated to defend Taiwan against aggression from China.


Boeing's China Strategy Is Threatened by U.S.-Beijing Tensions - DailyFinance

Strained U.S.-Beijing Ties Could Cripple Boeing's China Strategy

And Boeing is purchasing hundreds of millions worth of parts from China for its new aircraft, the 787 Dreamliner. Moreover, over a third of Boeing's total aircraft parts come from China.

Is this sabre-rattling?

It's becoming more and more apparent that China's economic leverage over the U.S. grows every year and that the Chinese sabre is growing with it. China continues to pursue a manufacturing policy that promotes national independence from foreign sources to avoid the very problem that is growing in the U.S. - foreign dependence.

The newst airforce tanker design submitted from Boeing is based upon the 787.

China's former defense minister stated that a war between the U.S. and China was "inevitable".

People, wake up. THIS IS NO JOKE.

Steve

Naaahhh.
I'm sure exporting our industries overseas, eliminating our manufacturing base, including labor and going into massive debt financed by our enemies couldn't be a bad thing.
After all, they (the gov't and corporations) keep telling us how good it will be.
I'm sure they must be telling the truth.............

The 787 is being built worldwide, most major countries are making at least some part of it.. Aus is making the flaps for it..

While I agree that there is pain on the horizon, I'll offer a little fact check: The 7A7 Tanker is being offered on both the 767 and 777 platforms. There is no published 787 variant plan that I am aware of.

The rhetoric coming fromChina in the last few weeks is disquieting. They are beginning to openly scorn the US and its leadership.

A lot of the rhetoric is the result of Obama's decision to meet the Dalai Lama later this month. China is very much against that.

Point Obama.

- Leigh

This is the part that makes me sick to my stomach. They literally took a century's worth of process development, put it on a nice silver platter, and then handed it over to their largest future competitor, and the only legitimate threat to our nation.

For what? To save a few bucks? The short sighted stupidity just boggles my mind.

No, because China is Boeing's largest international market, and the only one that's growing at any noticeable rate. They are there for the money, most of which is still exports.

If they don't have local content, they don't have a market. If they don't have a market, they don't have a business any more.

It's nice to hear a bit of reason on here occasionally.

Yes and also remember that Boeing's largest competitor is Airbus which is supported by the EU . Boeing's got to do everything it can to compete.Bill

And Airbus are cheerfully out sourcing to China too

Boris

"Why cant we outsource our management to Japan?.... they'd we have to pay 10% of what we do now on management"

This comes back to short sightedness. Jeopardizing the future for profits and market share today.

China Has a Competitor to Boeing and Airbus

Airbus has or is about to open a complete assembly line for their A320 aircraft in China. If Boeing failed to globalise component supply they would indeed lose sales. Industrial offsets are common in the military market too.

None of the foregoing should be at all comforting. It is one thing to share the wealth (knowledge and sales) with compliant allies but quite another to do so with a competitor. China has a "China first" policy. The rest of the world operates on a mutually beneficial (at least in theory) system of counter trade.
China recently made a new "local innovation" policy which excludes foreign companies from trading unless they surrender technical expertise.

(I guess this is their way of making piracy legal)

So what? Boeing are supported by the American national and local Government.

That argument sounds ridiculous even to people who don't much care either way. Boeing makes some military products. America buys them, as do other countries. To call that "support" in this context is to pervert the meaning of the term.

Airbus gets interest free "loans", it gets grants, and it too gets fat military contracts from many European (and other) countries.

One of these two commercial realities is illegal under WTO rules. Guess which?

Please, it only sounds ridiculous if you don't understand what is going on. It's well documented about the 'research' grants and preferential treatment that Boeing gets from the American Government, plus the hand-outs from the State government isn't peanuts. BOTH are illegal under WTO rules, but you only shout about Airbus. One thing I love reading in American aviation magazines is the almost insane and childish letters written by those Americans who believe that America invented everything, and that Americans win because America is the best, and America loses because they were cheated. It's as if only the writer knows the facts. "Oh, someone tripped over their laces on an Airbus; that's because Airbus can't design aircraft!" "I had a bad meal on an aircraft. The food supplier supplies Airbus so Airbus are at fault!" My 4 year old nephew talks more sense than these people.
I surprised you don't take your ball back!

Time for tea!

PS Why don't you read some facts first? Yeah, this stuff was alllll made up by the bad guys!

Endgame Profile of Boeing

Boeing deal unmasks true state of business climate

CorpWatch*:*Boeing Scandal Part of Deeper Problems at Pentagon

1. Well documented by whom?
2. I'm not shouting about Airbus at all
3. I'm not an American
4. I'm not even sure what you are on about with your vitriol.
5. I don't have a ball in this game

6. As far as reading facts goes: I've been in aviation longer than most people have been in long pants. I am also able to read facts and opinion, and consider sources and weigh other possibilities. I very much like most Airbus products by the way.

Anyway, sorry you got your kilt in a knot. Too much haggis?

For the spectators:http://www.nytimes.com/2009/09/05/bu...bal/05wto.html

A NYT article reporting on the WTO finding of illegal subsidies against Airbus and A380 funding. The article correctly points out that there is another, counter, case against Boeing covering some of mrcrazy's points.

washingtonpost.com

The link is to an article in the Washington Post speaking to exactly the concerns voiced in the start of this thread.

1/ The New York Times, actually http://www.nytimes.com/2005/02/04/bu.../04boeing.html
2/ You're repeating accusations against Airbus whilst implying Boeing are snow white.
3/ I never said you were American. As a matter of fact one of my friends is currently eating his way through as many pie floaters in your city as he can. (I want one, NOW!)
4/ I'm saying that magazines and forums are being ruined by people repeating over and over the same accusations, (and sometimes outright lies) which is the equivaalent of saying 'yah, boo, sucks!'
5/ It's a British expression.

The kilt is a chick-magnet! Have you tried chicken olives? (chicken with a filling of haggis) Or, haggis truffles? Great!

Feeding time at the zoo! Bye!

Well, I shouldn't have left the impression that I believe Boeing to be without sin. But I do take issue with the differing assumptions about how business should be conducted. To be fair, the WTO has found against Airbus. The ruling on the Boeing case is due in June. The European Union is hoping for offsetting findings-opinions vary with accent on the likelihood of that.

I think the pie floater is an Adelaide specialty. It's not as good as proper mushy peas.

Aviation magazines and forums: Your happiness will improve if you avoid them. The endless Boeing v. Airbus debate is mindless tripe.

"got your kilt in a knot"

One of the few times we can appreciate substantial........'shrinkage'