Online
Pašreiz BMWPower skatās 124 viesi un 15 reģistrēti lietotāji.
|
Tēma: Notikumi pasaulē, EU/ASV,NATO u.tml.
| Autors | Ziņojums |
|---|
| kkas | | 20. Jun 2024, 22:10 |
#9121
|
|  Kopš: 22. Apr 2008
Ziņojumi: 9335
Braucu ar: Alfu
| It kā, vienīgais, kas varētu krievus apstādināt un nonest putleru, bet pēc sexpertu viedokļa nauda jau bija beigusies pirms diviem gadiem.  Vairs par to nerunā, tikai par tehniku un cik daudz gaļas.
Bet nu cik tie paši sexperti vēl pirms kara runāja, ka esot zelts labi uzkrāts, uz trakajām gāzes cenām labi iekrāja.
Vispār hvz kā tās sankcijas strādā,plika tiršana. Tur tik daudz kas sancionēts, bet industrija viņiem kā strādā tā strādā. Tanku rūpnīcā priekš rus TV sižeta aizklāj CNC mašīnām logo un rukā tālāk. Korporācijām pajāt noziegumi pret cilvēci. Publiski sasola ka nu tik aiziešot no rus un ai ai, praktiski bizness turpinās caur n starpniekiem. |  Offline | | |
| Samsasi | | 20. Jun 2024, 22:21 |
#9122
|
|  Kopš: 01. Nov 2014
Ziņojumi: 4583
Braucu ar:
| nu kautkas jau strādā... | | Offline | | |
| mrCage | | 20. Jun 2024, 22:35 |
#9123
|
| Kopš: 03. Apr 2021
Ziņojumi: 1977
Braucu ar:
| Bezjēdzīgi spriest par Rietumu uzvaras iespējām ,ja Rietumi Putinu uzvarēt nevēlas un negrasās.
Viss ,ko grib Rietumi ,ir dabūt putinu pie sarunu galda.
Lai Rietumi atkal kopā ar Krieviju varētu spiest pogu ''peregruzka'' un sajūsmināti stāstīt ,ka ir sācies jauns posms rietumu un krievijas attiecību vēsturē un kā nu mēs visi tagad sadarbosimies ,jo esam par demokrātiju . | | Offline | | |
| Samsasi | | 20. Jun 2024, 22:39 |
#9124
|
| Kopš: 01. Nov 2014
Ziņojumi: 4583
Braucu ar:
| tas brīdis agri vai vēlu pienākks | | Offline | | |
| Mixzzz | | 21. Jun 2024, 19:34 |
#9125
|
|  Kopš: 09. May 2013
No: Rīga
Ziņojumi: 2789
Braucu ar: e34 un e91 kuuc
|
20 Jun 2024, 22:10:02 @kkas rakstīja:
It kā, vienīgais, kas varētu krievus apstādināt un nonest putleru, bet pēc sexpertu viedokļa nauda jau bija beigusies pirms diviem gadiem. Vairs par to nerunā, tikai par tehniku un cik daudz gaļas.
Bet nu cik tie paši sexperti vēl pirms kara runāja, ka esot zelts labi uzkrāts, uz trakajām gāzes cenām labi iekrāja.
Vispār hvz kā tās sankcijas strādā,plika tiršana. Tur tik daudz kas sancionēts, bet industrija viņiem kā strādā tā strādā. Tanku rūpnīcā priekš rus TV sižeta aizklāj CNC mašīnām logo un rukā tālāk. Korporācijām pajāt noziegumi pret cilvēci. Publiski sasola ka nu tik aiziešot no rus un ai ai, praktiski bizness turpinās caur n starpniekiem.
Nu tās krievu rezerves jau lēnu garu pazūd. Kuru mēnesi ātrāk, kuru lēnāk, bet iet mazumā. Pusi jau tomēr rietumi veiksmīgi iesaldēja un gāzes tirdziņš viņiem ir mīnusā. Ukraiņi atkal samērā veiksmīgi viņiem iznīcina naftas pārstrādes rūpniecību, kas veiksmīgi vēl nodzen naftas cenu lejā, jo viņa tāpat kkur ir jāliek un arī patukšo krievu zelta podu, jo tas benzīns un dīzelis atkal kkur ir jāiepērk. Protams ir vēl 100 un 1 nianse, kur viņiem tā nauda šobrīd pazūd. Sankcijas ir un strādā, bet protams ka tas nebūs 1 vai 2 gadu process. Labākajā gadījumā gadi 5 būs, kamēr krieviem sāks reāli palikt sūdīgi, sliktākajā gadījumā vēl vairāk. Šogad baigi spiež gan ķīniešu, gan citas bankas nesadarboties ar krieviem, kas atkal rada galvassāpes importa jomā, jo hvz kā samaksāt par preci. | | Offline | | |
Lafter  | | 24. Jun 2024, 20:43 |
#9126
|
|  Kopš: 23. Sep 2007
Ziņojumi: 28686
Braucu ar: wv
| ‘It’s All Happening Again.’ The Supply Chain Is Under Strain. As Houthi rebels intensify strikes on vessels headed for the Suez Canal, global shipping prices are soaring, raising fears of product shortages and delays.
Stephanie Loomis had hoped that the chaos besieging the global supply chain was subsiding. The floating traffic jams off ports. The multiplying costs of moving freight. The resulting shortages of goods. All of this had seemed like an unpleasant memory confined to the Covid-19 pandemic.
No such luck.
As head of ocean freight for the Americas at Rhenus Logistics, a company based in Germany, Ms. Loomis spends her days negotiating with international shipping carriers on behalf of clients moving products and parts around the globe. Over the last few months, she has watched cargo prices soar as a series of disturbances have roiled the seas.
Late last year, Houthi rebels in Yemen began firing on ships entering the Red Sea en route to the Suez Canal, a vital artery for vessels moving between Asia, Europe and the East Coast of the United States. That prompted ships to avoid the waterway, instead moving the long way around Africa, lengthening their journeys by as much as two weeks.
Then, a severe drought in Central America dropped water levels in the Panama Canal, forcing authorities to limit the number of ships passing through that crucial conduit for international trade.In recent weeks, dockworkers have threatened to strike on the East and Gulf coasts of the United States, while longshore workers at German ports have halted shifts in pursuit of better pay. Rail workers in Canada are poised to walk off the job, imperiling cargo moving across North America, and threatening backups at major ports like Vancouver.
The intensifying upheaval in shipping is prompting carriers to lift rates while raising the specter of waterborne gridlock that could again threaten retailers with product shortages during the make-or-break holiday shopping season. The disruption could also exacerbate inflation, a source of economic anxiety animating the American presidential election.
If the supply chain disturbances of the pandemic proved anything, it was this: Trouble in any one place tends to ripple out widely.
A container full of chemicals that arrives late to its destination spells delayed production for factories waiting for those ingredients. Ships jammed at ports wreak havoc on the flow of goods, clogging warehouses and putting pressure on the trucking and rail industries.“I’m lovingly calling the market now ‘Covid junior,’ because in a lot of ways we’re right back to where we were during the pandemic,” said Ms. Loomis. “It’s all happening again.”Since October, the cost of moving a 40-foot shipping container from China to Europe has increased to about $7,000, from an average of roughly $1,200, according to data compiled by Xeneta, a cargo analytics company based in Norway. That is well below the $15,000 peak reached in late 2021, when supply chain disruptions were at their worst, but it is about five times the prices that prevailed for the years leading up to the pandemic.
Rates to ship goods across the Pacific have multiplied by a similar magnitude. It now costs over $6,700 to transport a 40-foot container from Shanghai to Los Angeles, and nearly $8,000 for Shanghai to New York. As recently as December, those costs were near $2,000.“We haven’t seen the peak yet,” said Peter Sand, Xeneta’s chief analyst.
Importers relying on shipping bemoan the return of another source of distress they suffered during the pandemic: carriers frequently canceling confirmed bookings, while demanding special handling charges and premium service fees as the requirement for getting containers on vessels.
“Everything is a fight to get containers,” said David Reich, whose Chicago company, MSRF, assembles gift baskets for Walmart and other giant chains. “It’s frustrating.”
Alarmed by the growing threats to sea transportation, Mr. Reich is accelerating plans to amass goods for the holiday season. He is pressing his suppliers in China to make his packaging for food items faster, anticipating delays in shipping.
Mr. Reich has contracts with two ocean carriers to move four containers per week from China to Chicago at prices below $5,000. Yet he was recently informed that the carriers were imposing escalating “peak season surcharges” that would add as much as $2,400 per container, he said.And even at those prices, the carriers often say they have no space on their vessels, he complained. He fears he will have to resort to booking on the so-called spot market, where prices fluctuate, with rates now reaching $8,000.
In an emailed statement, the World Shipping Council, an industry trade association, said “spot rates reflect demand and supply in a competitive, global market, and the large majority of container traffic moves under rates negotiated through long-term contracts.”
Experts challenge that assertion, noting that container shipping is characterized by a dearth of competition on major routes, allowing carriers to raise prices substantially when the system is strained.
Three primary alliances of carriers control 95 percent of the container traffic between Asia and Europe and more than 90 percent between Asia and the East Coast of the United States, according to the International Transport Forum, an intergovernmental organization in Paris with 69 member countries including China and the United States.During the worst disruptions of the pandemic, when extreme delays and product shortages prompted retailers to pay carriers as much as $28,000 to move single containers across the Pacific, the industry logged record profits.
New Balance, the athletic shoe brand, is cushioned in part by its reliance on factories in the United States as well as its contracts with carriers that lock in prices. Still, in some instances, the company has been forced to pay spot market rates that have risen sharply, “similar to the peak years of the pandemic — more than 40 percent month over month,” Dave Wheeler, the chief operating officer, said in an email.
Carriers have been canceling some scheduled sailings, reducing capacity, Mr. Wheeler added. “We do see a storm brewing in 2024 for reliability and pricing risks.”
The most immediate cause of the recent increase in shipping prices is the targeting of vessels by the Houthis, who are acting in support of Palestinians under assault by Israeli forces.That threat appears to be escalating, as the Iranian-backed Houthi rebels increase the frequency of their attacks, supplementing missile strikes with sea drones — essentially waterborne boats loaded with explosives and commanded by remote control.
In recent weeks, such assaults have sunk two vessels, including a Greek-owned ship carrying coal.
With container traffic through the Suez Canal dropping to one-tenth of its usual flow, most ships moving between Asia and Europe now circumnavigate Africa, which entails burning more fuel.
At the same time, carriers have concentrated their fleets on the most lucrative routes, those connecting destinations like Shanghai and the Dutch port of Rotterdam, Europe’s busiest. That has forced cargo bound for other places to stop for loading and reloading at major hubs known as transshipment ports.
The largest such ports including Singapore and the Sri Lankan capital of Colombo are now overwhelmed with incoming vessels. Ships must wait at anchor for as long as a week before pulling up to the docks.
Given the disruptions and additional costs, some increase in shipping rates is unavoidable. But those dependent on the industry argue that the carriers are increasing prices beyond the recovery of their own additional costs.
“The carriers learned a very valuable lesson during the pandemic,” Ms. Loomis said. “They will manipulate capacity, and they will jack up freight rates.”
The greatest concern is that floating jams could become a self-fulfilling prophecy. As importers absorb the reality of increased shipping prices and port congestion, they are ordering early. That could result in a surge of incoming cargo at major ports like Los Angeles, Newark, and Savannah, Ga., exceeding the capacity of trucking, railroads and warehouses.The prospect of a rail strike in Canada is prompting cargo bound for Vancouver to divert to Southern California, the scene of the worst traffic jams during the pandemic disruptions.
In Tennessee, F9 Brands, an importer of cabinets and flooring products, has been increasing its orders in the face of longer delivery times, said Jason Delves, the company’s chief executive.
The company brings cabinets from factories in Vietnam, Thailand and Malaysia to the port of Savannah, and then to its warehouses in Tennessee via rail and truck. Typically, that journey takes six weeks. “Now, you’re bumping it up to over eight weeks,” Mr. Delves said.
Adding to the concern is the reality that no one knows how long the latest disruption will last, or how it will play out.
The Panama Canal restrictions have mostly been lifted as the rainy season replenishes the supply of water. But climate change is increasing the risks of future droughts going forward.
The consequences of the pandemic were difficult enough to grasp, with great miscalculations over the impacts on demand for factory goods. But everyone understood that pandemics end eventually.
The Houthi strikes and the effects on the Suez Canal, on the other hand, involve enormous geopolitical variables that make forecasting difficult.
“It’s a very complex situation, and it appears open-ended,” said Mr. Sand, the Xeneta analyst. “There is no clear solution in sight.”
Peter S. Goodman is a reporter who covers the global economy. He writes about the intersection of economics and geopolitics, with particular emphasis on the consequences for people and their lives and livelihoods. More about Peter S. Goodman
Baigais palags sanāca 
Pardon! 
-----------------
Gribās pļūtīt? Nejūties novērtēts? Neviens nepievērš uzmanību?
Spied zemāk.
Spama topiks
Jā! Man jūk komati. Tas dēļ ilga perioda komunicējot citās valodās.
| | Offline | | |
| Output | | 25. Jun 2024, 23:10 |
#9127
|
|  Kopš: 02. Jan 2017
Ziņojumi: 527
Braucu ar: G20
| Kādi speciālistu vērtējumi? Pozitīvs/negatīvs tēls?
https://www.delfi.lv/46713439/arzemes/120032266/rite-tresdien-tiks-oficiali-pasludinats-par-nakamo-nato-gene
ralsekretaru | | Offline | | |
| kkas | | 26. Jun 2024, 08:24 |
#9128
|
| Kopš: 22. Apr 2008
Ziņojumi: 9335
Braucu ar: Alfu
| RU nogalināja veselu lidmašīnu ar viņa valsts pilsoņiem. RU desas laizītājs viņš nav un nebūs. kas mums ir labi.  ģs lielos vilcienos ir tik runātājs. ko NATO ģenerāļi lemj, to nokomununicē publiski. | | Offline | | |
|
|
| abyss | | 26. Jun 2024, 09:20 |
#9129
|
|  Kopš: 26. Jun 2013
No: Rīga
Ziņojumi: 8252
Braucu ar: e39 523
| Atbalsta ASV. Tas pa lielam ir vienīgais, kam nozīme |  Online | | |
| Rockstar | | 26. Jun 2024, 12:48 |
#9130
|
| Kopš: 11. Dec 2004
No: Rīga
Ziņojumi: 3697
Braucu ar:
| Baltkrievijā represē baltkrievu patriotus, Russiā psihiatriskajās slimnīcās ievieto opozicionārus azāļo un sabojā smadzenes. Izraēla pieķeras savas tautas dzīvesziņas nesējiem. Ortodoksi "savu" zemi grib atgūt miermīlīgā veidā, bez asins izliešanas ar mesijas atnākšanu.
https://www.delfi.lv/46713439/arzemes/120032317/izraelas-tiesa-lemj-ka-ari-ultraortodoksalie-ebreji-beidzot-
jaiesauc-armija | | Offline | | |
| Lafter | | 26. Jun 2024, 19:25 |
#9131
|
| Kopš: 23. Sep 2007
Ziņojumi: 28686
Braucu ar: wv
|
26 Jun 2024, 12:48:18 @Rockstar rakstīja:
Baltkrievijā represē baltkrievu patriotus, Russiā psihiatriskajās slimnīcās ievieto opozicionārus azāļo un sabojā smadzenes. Izraēla pieķeras savas tautas dzīvesziņas nesējiem. Ortodoksi "savu" zemi grib atgūt miermīlīgā veidā, bez asins izliešanas ar mesijas atnākšanu.
https://www.delfi.lv/46713439/arzemes/120032317/izraelas-tiesa-lemj-ka-ari-ultraortodoksalie-ebreji-beidzot-
jaiesauc-armija
Un tieši kur teikts tas, ka viņus sūtīs uz fronti, liks karot vai vispàr laidīs tuvumā ierocim??
Ir šoferi, ir krāvēji, ir remonta darbinieki, rakstvei un vēl citas 10001 profesijas armijā.
-----------------
Gribās pļūtīt? Nejūties novērtēts? Neviens nepievērš uzmanību?
Spied zemāk.
Spama topiks
Jā! Man jūk komati. Tas dēļ ilga perioda komunicējot citās valodās.
| | Offline | | |
| Lafter | | 27. Jun 2024, 18:33 |
#9132
|
| Kopš: 23. Sep 2007
Ziņojumi: 28686
Braucu ar: wv
| Ready for palags??
Trump Eyes Bigger Trade War in Second Term The former president’s past tariffs raised prices for consumers and businesses, economists say. His next plan could tax 10 times as many imports
In March 2018, a day after announcing sweeping tariffs on metals imported from America’s allies and adversaries alike, President Donald J. Trump took to social media to share one of his central economic philosophies: “Trade wars are good, and easy to win.”
As president, Mr. Trump presided over the biggest increase in U.S. tariffs since the Great Depression, hitting China, Canada, the European Union, Mexico, India and other governments with stiff levies. They hit back, imposing tariffs on American soybeans, whiskey, orange juice and motorcycles. U.S. agricultural exports plummeted, prompting Mr. Trump to send $23 billion to farmers to help offset losses.
Now, as he runs for president again, Mr. Trump is promising to ratchet up his trade war to a much greater degree. He has proposed “universal baseline tariffs on most foreign products,” including higher levies on certain countries that devalue their currency. In interviews, he has floated plans for a 10 percent tariff on most imports and a tariff of 60 percent or more on Chinese goods. He has also posited cutting the federal income tax and relying on tariffs for revenue instead.
Mr. Trump, who once proclaimed himself “Tariff Man,” has long argued that tariffs would boost American factories, end the gap between what America imported and what it exported and increase American jobs.His first round of levies hit more than $400 billion worth of imports, including steel, solar panels, washing machines and Chinese goods like smart watches, chemicals, bicycle helmets and motors. His rationale was that import taxes would revive American manufacturing, reduce reliance on foreign goods and allow U.S. companies to better compete against cheap products from China and other countries.
Economists say the tariffs did reduce imports and encouraged U.S. factory production for certain industries, including steel, semiconductors and computer equipment. But that came at a very high cost, one that most likely offset any overall gains. Studies show that the tariffs resulted in higher prices for American consumers and factories that depend on foreign inputs, and reduced U.S. exports for certain goods that were subject to retaliation.
Mr. Trump is now envisioning taxing perhaps 10 times as many imports as he did during his first term, an approach that economists say could trigger a trade war that drives up already high prices and plunges the U.S. into a recession.
David Autor, an economics professor at the Massachusetts Institute of Technology, said the proposals would have “a very large effect on prices almost immediately.”“I don’t think they’ll do it,” Mr. Autor said. “It could easily cause a recession.”
In a recent letter, 16 Nobel Prize-winning economists wrote that they were “deeply concerned” about the risks a second Trump administration posed to the economy, inflation and the rule of law.
“We believe that a second Trump term would have a negative impact on the U.S.’s economic standing in the world and a destabilizing effect on the U.S.’s domestic economy,” they wrote.
Mr. Trump and his supporters have a much more positive view of tariffs, arguing that they serve as leverage with foreign governments, reduce the trade deficit with China and result in the growth of U.S. manufacturing jobs.
“I happen to be a big believer in tariffs because I think tariffs give you two things: They give you economic gain, but they also give you political gain,” Mr. Trump said on a recent podcast.Karoline Leavitt, the Trump campaign national press secretary, said in a statement that “the American people don’t need worthless out-of-touch Nobel Prize winners to tell them which president put more money in their pockets.”
“President Trump built the strongest economy in American history,” she said. “In just three years, Joe Biden’s out-of-control spending created the worst inflation crisis in generations.”
Jamieson L. Greer, a partner in the international trade team at King & Spalding, who was involved with China trade negotiations during the Trump administration, said the view of Trump officials was that tariffs “can help support U.S. manufacturing jobs in particular, especially to the extent that they’re remediating an unfair trade practice.”
China has long engaged in policies that disadvantage American workers, but other countries also have unfair trade and tax policies or misaligned currencies, Mr. Greer said.“If you level out that playing field, it makes it so that Americans don’t have to compete unfairly,” he said.Mr. Trump’s tariffs have domestic supporters among the industries that have benefited from them. And President Biden gave them his own stamp of approval by choosing to keep Mr. Trump’s China tariffs in place while adding some of his own, including on electric cars, steel and semiconductors.
But some of the industries that were hit hardest by Mr. Trump’s trade wars are not looking forward to a sequel. Executives in sectors like retail and spirits worry that another round of tariffs could reignite tensions, raise their costs and again close off critical markets abroad.
Spirit exports to Europe declined by 20 percent after the European Union imposed a 25 percent retaliatory tariff on American whiskey in response to the Trump administration’s tariffs on steel and aluminum. And the China tariffs increased the prices that retailers had to pay for their products, forcing them to either raise prices for their customers or cut into their profits.
“We need a trade policy, not just more tariffs,” said David French, executive vice president of government relations at the National Retail Federation. His group, which represents department stores, e-commerce sites and grocers, ran a television ad campaign opposing the Trump tariffs in 2018. “All they’ve done is add friction to the supply chain and cost consumers $220 billion.”
“Former President Trump looks at trade as some sort of zero-sum game — if you win, I lose and vice versa,” Mr. French said. “That’s really not the way trade works.”The power of tariffs to help or hinder exports is clear in industries that eventually won a reprieve. In 2021, whiskey tariffs were temporarily suspended as part of a deal the Biden administration made with the European Union. American whiskey exports to the bloc rose from $439 million in 2021 to $705 million last year.
Chris Swonger, the chief executive of the Distilled Spirits Council of the United States, said he was hopeful that, if re-elected, Mr. Trump would appreciate that strong exports of American spirits would help achieve his goal of reducing the trade deficit. The lobbying group wants the E.U. tariff suspension, which expires next March, to be extended.
“For President Trump, obviously we appreciate and respect his efforts to reduce the trade deficit,” said Mr. Swonger, who has made his case to Trump campaign officials. “Imposing tariffs on distilled spirits would be counter to reducing the trade deficit.”
Research suggests the tariffs did accomplish their goal of increasing domestic production in the industries they protected, but did so by imposing other costs on the U.S. economy.
One nonpartisan government study found that the tariffs on foreign steel and aluminum increased U.S. production of those metals by $2.2 billion in 2021. But American factories that use steel and aluminum to make other things, like cars, tin cans and appliances, had to pay higher costs for their materials, and that reduced the output of those factories by $3.5 billion in the same year.
Studies suggest the tariffs also had a mixed record when it came to jobs. In a recent paper, Mr. Autor and other economists found that the cumulative effect of Mr. Trump’s trade policies and other countries’ retaliation was slightly negative for American jobs, or at best a wash.
In terms of inflation, studies have estimated that American households faced higher prices as a result of the tariffs — from several hundred dollars to more than $1,000 annually.
But economists say consumers probably did not associate the higher prices they paid with the tariffs, given that inflation was low throughout Mr. Trump’s tenure and the economy was strong.
While the economy remains robust, prices have spiked since 2021, and inflation remains elevated. That could make tariff-induced price increases more obvious and more painful this time around.
A recent analysis by the Peterson Institute of International Economics found that if Mr. Trump did impose a 10 percent tariff on all goods and a 60 percent tariff on China, it would cost a typical household in the middle of the income distribution about $1,700 in increased expenses each year.
Another analysis, by the right-leaning American Action Forum, estimated that a 10 percent tariff could impose additional annual costs of up to $2,350 per American household. Adding a 60 percent tariff on China would add another $1,950 to U.S. household costs.
The burden of those tariffs would fall more heavily on poorer households, because they spend a larger share of their income on everyday products.
That could ultimately backfire on Mr. Trump, given that voter concerns about inflation are top of mind.
As he waited in line to attend Mr. Trump’s rally on Saturday in Philadelphia, Paul Rozick, an electrical warehouse manager from Bensalem, Pa., said high grocery and gas prices had outpaced his pay raises.
“Inflation is going up like 20 percent, but our paychecks go up like 2 percent,” Mr. Rozick said. “I’ve got less money in the bank because I’m spending more money when I walk out the door.”
Ana Swanson covers trade and international economics for The Times and is based in Washington. She has been a journalist for more than a decade. More about Ana Swanson
Alan Rappeport is an economic policy reporter, based in Washington. He covers the Treasury Department and writes about taxes, trade and fiscal matters. More about Alan Rappeport
-----------------
Gribās pļūtīt? Nejūties novērtēts? Neviens nepievērš uzmanību?
Spied zemāk.
Spama topiks
Jā! Man jūk komati. Tas dēļ ilga perioda komunicējot citās valodās.
| | Offline | | |
| Lafter | | 28. Jun 2024, 02:18 |
#9133
|
| Kopš: 23. Sep 2007
Ziņojumi: 28686
Braucu ar: wv
| San Diego Zoo to Receive 2 Giant Pandas From China The pandas, Yun Chuan and Xin Bao, will be the first to enter the United States in 21 years, the San Diego Zoo said.
The San Diego Zoo will soon be home to two giant pandas from China, the first to enter the United States in more than two decades, zoo officials said on Wednesday.
The pandas, Yun Chuan and Xin Bao, were bid farewell at a ceremony on Wednesday at the China Conservation & Research Center for Giant Pandas in Sichuan Province. Afterward, they were to be flown to the United States, the San Diego Zoo said in a statement.
Paul Baribault, the president and chief executive of the San Diego Zoo Wildlife Alliance, said in the statement that a partnership between his organization and the China Wildlife Conservation Association had been “instrumental in advancing giant panda conservation.”
“We look forward to continuing our work together to ensure the survival and thriving of this iconic species,” Mr. Baribault said.
Panda-swapping has been a longstanding sign of diplomacy between the U.S. and China, with zoos across the country taking in some while sending back others over the years.
Panda diplomacy by the People’s Republic of China began in the 1950s when the newly established communist regime under Chairman Mao Zedong started giving pandas to its socialist allies to strengthen ideological ties and foster diplomatic goodwill.
Ping Ping and Qi Qi, China’s first panda “ambassadors”, arrived in the Soviet Union in 1957 to celebrate the 40th anniversary of the October Revolution, when the Bolshevik party seized power in Russia.
A pivotal moment then came in 1972. Following US President Richard Nixon’s historic visit to Beijing, two pandas, Ling-Ling and Hsing-Hsing were gifted to the United States. This gesture symbolised a strategic shift in China’s foreign policy towards engaging with Western nations and easing Cold War tensions.
Later that year, Japan also received two pandas, Kang Kang and Lan Lan, after normalising diplomatic relations with China.
By 1984, under Deng Xiaoping’s leadership, panda diplomacy transitioned from outright gifts to long-term loans, embodying China’s market-orientated economic reforms.
The lease model saw pandas being loaned for significant fees, typically between US$500,000 to $1 million per year (A$755,000–$1.5 million), with the proceeds directed towards conservation efforts in China. These agreements also typically trigger joint research projects on panda conservation, fostering scientific collaboration alongside diplomatic relations.
Adelaide’s Wang Wang and Fu Ni, the only giant pandas currently in the Southern Hemisphere, came to Australia under such a deal in 2009.
Under current Chinese leader Xi Jinping, panda diplomacy has been regularly used to symbolise China’s willingness to strengthen bilateral relations with other nations.
For instance, Malaysia received two pandas in 2014 to mark the 40th anniversary of its diplomatic ties with China. Likewise, two pandas were sent to Indonesia in 2017 as part of the 60th anniversary of the countries’ relations.
The loan of two pandas to Germany in 2017 coincided with Xi’s visit to Berlin. He and then-German Chancellor Angela Merkel also attended the official opening ceremony of the Panda Garden at Zoo Berlin.
Even the recent tensions between the US and China haven’t derailed panda diplomacy. Last year, the US returned three pandas – Tian Tian, Mei Xiang, and their American-born son Xiao Qi Ji (which means “Little Miracle” in Mandarin) – from the Smithsonian Zoo in Washington to China. But Xi said two new giant pandas would take their place later this year, calling them “envoys of friendship between the Chinese and American peoples.”
-----------------
Gribās pļūtīt? Nejūties novērtēts? Neviens nepievērš uzmanību?
Spied zemāk.
Spama topiks
Jā! Man jūk komati. Tas dēļ ilga perioda komunicējot citās valodās.
| | Offline | | |
| Lafter | | 28. Jun 2024, 09:39 |
#9134
|
| Kopš: 23. Sep 2007
Ziņojumi: 28686
Braucu ar: wv
|
Baigais kipišs USA medijos. Ir vēl viens palaga, par ,,diršanas,, analīzi no abiem mezolîta laikmeta pārstāvjiem.
A Fumbling Performance, and a Panicking Party President Biden’s shaky, halting debate performance has Democrats talking about replacing him on the ticket
President Biden hoped to build fresh momentum for his re-election bid by agreeing to debate nearly two months before he is to be formally nominated. Instead, his halting and disjointed performance on Thursday night prompted a wave of panic among Democrats and reopened discussion of whether he should be the nominee at all.
Over the course of 90 minutes, a raspy-voiced Mr. Biden struggled to deliver his lines and counter a sharp though deeply dishonest former President Donald J. Trump, raising doubts about the incumbent president’s ability to wage a vigorous and competitive campaign four months before the election. Rather than dispel concerns about his age, Mr. Biden, 81, made it the central issue.
Democrats who have defended the president for months against his doubters — including members of his own administration — traded frenzied phone calls and text messages within minutes of the start of the debate as it became clear that Mr. Biden was not at his sharpest. Practically in despair, some took to social media to express shock, while others privately discussed among themselves whether it was too late to persuade the president to step aside in favor of a younger candidate.
“Biden is about to face a crescendo of calls to step aside,” said a veteran Democratic strategist who has staunchly backed Mr. Biden publicly. “Joe had a deep well of affection among Democrats. It has run dry.”
“Parties exist to win,” this Democrat continued. “The man on the stage with Trump cannot win. The fear of Trump stifled criticism of Biden. Now that same fear is going to fuel calls for him to step down.”
A group of House Democrats said they were watching the debate together, and one, who spoke on the condition of anonymity, acknowledged that it was a “disaster” for Mr. Biden. The person said the group was discussing the need for a new presidential nominee.
Mark Buell, a prominent donor for Mr. Biden and the Democratic Party, said after the debate that the president had to strongly consider whether he is the best person to be the nominee. “Do we have time to put somebody else in there?” Mr. Buell said.
He added that he was not yet calling for Mr. Biden to withdraw but that “Democratic leadership has a responsibility to go to the White House and clearly show what America’s thinking, because democracy is at stake here and we’re all nervous.”
Mr. Biden’s goal in accepting a general election debate earlier than ever held in presidential history was to recalibrate the contest as a choice between himself and a felon who tried to overturn an election and would in his view destroy American democracy if given the power of the presidency again. Mr. Biden left the CNN studio in Atlanta instead facing a referendum on himself and his capacity that will reverberate for days if not longer.
Mr. Trump, 78, appeared to coast through the debate with little trouble, rattling off one falsehood after another without being effectively challenged. He appeared confident while avoiding the excessively overbearing demeanor that had damaged him during his first debate with Mr. Biden in 2020, seemingly content to let his opponent stew in his own difficulties.
While Mr. Trump at times rambled and offered statements that were convoluted, hard to follow and flatly untrue, he did so with energy and volume that covered up his misstatements, managing to stay on offense even on issues of vulnerability for him like the Jan. 6, 2021, attack and abortion.
Mr. Biden appeared on defense much of the time and either did not use lines teed up for him by his campaign’s predebate advertising or mumbled them in passing in such a way that they barely registered.Speaking with reporters afterward, Mr. Biden indicated that he had been battling a cold. “I have a sore throat,” he said. But he expressed satisfaction with his showing. “I think we did well.” Asked about Democrats’ concerns about his showing and calls for him to consider leaving the race, he said: “No. It’s hard to debate a liar.”
Mr. Biden’s advisers have long dismissed any speculation about him dropping out, rejecting it as unjustified nervousness even as he has trailed Mr. Trump in battleground states needed for victory this fall. Biden aides and allies have repeatedly challenged the polls and pointed out that predictions of Democratic defeats in recent elections have been overblown. One reason they cited for an early debate was to make clear to the public that these are the two choices, and no one else will be nominated.
“Folks, the facts are if Joe Biden was going to step aside, he would have done so a long time ago,” said Symone Sanders, a former aide to Vice President Kamala Harris. “That’s not my opinion, that’s literally the facts. So no, he won’t be stepping aside tomorrow morning. He’s the nominee, and a number of Dems I suspect will be out defending him over the next few days.”
The campaign quickly dispatched Ms. Harris to defend the president on CNN after the debate, although even she acknowledged that “it was a slow start, that’s obvious to everyone.” Mr. Biden had shown he could handle the job because of his many accomplishments for Americans, she said, and “the Joe Biden I work with every day is someone who has performed in a way that has been about bringing people into the Oval Office.”
Gov. Gavin Newsom of California, one of those mentioned as a possible replacement for Mr. Biden other than Ms. Harris, brushed off talk about switching candidates. “I would never turn my back on President Biden’s record,” he told reporters, serving as an official surrogate for the campaign in the spin room after the debate. “I would never turn my back on President Biden, and I don’t know a Democrat in my party who would do so, especially after tonight.”
But that did not stop the speculation. “Guys, the Dems should nominate someone else — before it’s too late,” Andrew Yang, who ran against Mr. Biden for the Democratic nomination in 2020, wrote on social media before the debate had ended, adding a hashtag #swapJoeout.
Former Senator Claire McCaskill, Democrat of Missouri, called it “a crisis,” saying that her phone was “blowing up” with senators, operatives, donors and other distraught Democrats doing “more than hand-wringing” about what happens next.
“Joe Biden had one thing he had to do tonight, and he didn’t do it,” she said on MSNBC. “He had one thing he had to accomplish, and that was reassure America that he was up to the job at his age, and he failed at that tonight.”That judgment extended beyond the political class. Mr. Biden’s perceived odds of winning the nomination plummeted within hours on PredictIt.org, a betting site that takes wagers on political events. His chances of being the party’s candidate fell to 60 cents, down 26 cents, meaning that bettors essentially thought there was only a 60 percent chance of him being nominated even though he swept the primaries, has no internal opponent and controls the party apparatus.
No incumbent president has dropped out of the race so late in the campaign cycle, and there was little consensus about what would happen if he were to. On Thursday night, Democrats were imagining scenarios in which party elders like Senator Chuck Schumer of New York, former Speaker Nancy Pelosi of California and Representative James E. Clyburn of South Carolina were to intervene with Mr. Biden.
There was no indication that any of them would agree to do so. Other Democrats said they feared it was too late, noting that Mr. Biden is a proud, stubborn man who has long insisted he is the best equipped to defeat Mr. Trump and would not listen to anyone other than perhaps his wife, Jill Biden, who has strongly supported another run. Democrats have long fretted that there is no obvious successor, uncertain that Ms. Harris, Mr. Newsom or any other party figure could rise to the challenge.
Incumbent presidents often stumble in their first debate of a general-election season, either because they are rusty or overconfident, but in many cases make up for it with stronger subsequent performances. Mr. Biden’s troubles particularly brought to mind Ronald Reagan’s first debate in 1984, when he appeared old and out of it; he salvaged his campaign at his next debate with a well-timed joke about not exploiting his opponent’s youth and inexperience.
The problem for Mr. Biden is no other debate is scheduled until Sept. 10, meaning he has no obvious opportunity to recover for months. And as the veteran Democratic strategist said, this was not like Mr. Obama losing to Mitt Romney in 2012, which was a tactical setback. “This is existential,” the strategist said.
So, rather than resetting the campaign in Mr. Biden’s favor, as it had anticipated, the president’s team ended the evening knowing that the task of the next few days if not weeks would be to stem the damage and rally the party behind their beleaguered leader.
Zolan Kanno-Youngs, Katie Rogers and Annie Karni contributed reporting.
Peter Baker is the chief White House correspondent for The Times. He has covered the last five presidents and sometimes writes analytical pieces that place presidents and their administrations in a larger context and historical framework. More about Peter Bake.
-----------------
Gribās pļūtīt? Nejūties novērtēts? Neviens nepievērš uzmanību?
Spied zemāk.
Spama topiks
Jā! Man jūk komati. Tas dēļ ilga perioda komunicējot citās valodās.
| | Offline | | |
| Lafter | | 28. Jun 2024, 09:40 |
#9135
|
| Kopš: 23. Sep 2007
Ziņojumi: 28686
Braucu ar: wv
|
Baigais kipišs USA medijos. Ir vēl viens palaga, par ,,diršanas,, analīzi no abiem mezolîta laikmeta pārstāvjiem.
A Fumbling Performance, and a Panicking Party President Biden’s shaky, halting debate performance has Democrats talking about replacing him on the ticket
President Biden hoped to build fresh momentum for his re-election bid by agreeing to debate nearly two months before he is to be formally nominated. Instead, his halting and disjointed performance on Thursday night prompted a wave of panic among Democrats and reopened discussion of whether he should be the nominee at all.
Over the course of 90 minutes, a raspy-voiced Mr. Biden struggled to deliver his lines and counter a sharp though deeply dishonest former President Donald J. Trump, raising doubts about the incumbent president’s ability to wage a vigorous and competitive campaign four months before the election. Rather than dispel concerns about his age, Mr. Biden, 81, made it the central issue.
Democrats who have defended the president for months against his doubters — including members of his own administration — traded frenzied phone calls and text messages within minutes of the start of the debate as it became clear that Mr. Biden was not at his sharpest. Practically in despair, some took to social media to express shock, while others privately discussed among themselves whether it was too late to persuade the president to step aside in favor of a younger candidate.
“Biden is about to face a crescendo of calls to step aside,” said a veteran Democratic strategist who has staunchly backed Mr. Biden publicly. “Joe had a deep well of affection among Democrats. It has run dry.”
“Parties exist to win,” this Democrat continued. “The man on the stage with Trump cannot win. The fear of Trump stifled criticism of Biden. Now that same fear is going to fuel calls for him to step down.”
A group of House Democrats said they were watching the debate together, and one, who spoke on the condition of anonymity, acknowledged that it was a “disaster” for Mr. Biden. The person said the group was discussing the need for a new presidential nominee.
Mark Buell, a prominent donor for Mr. Biden and the Democratic Party, said after the debate that the president had to strongly consider whether he is the best person to be the nominee. “Do we have time to put somebody else in there?” Mr. Buell said.
He added that he was not yet calling for Mr. Biden to withdraw but that “Democratic leadership has a responsibility to go to the White House and clearly show what America’s thinking, because democracy is at stake here and we’re all nervous.”
Mr. Biden’s goal in accepting a general election debate earlier than ever held in presidential history was to recalibrate the contest as a choice between himself and a felon who tried to overturn an election and would in his view destroy American democracy if given the power of the presidency again. Mr. Biden left the CNN studio in Atlanta instead facing a referendum on himself and his capacity that will reverberate for days if not longer.
Mr. Trump, 78, appeared to coast through the debate with little trouble, rattling off one falsehood after another without being effectively challenged. He appeared confident while avoiding the excessively overbearing demeanor that had damaged him during his first debate with Mr. Biden in 2020, seemingly content to let his opponent stew in his own difficulties.
While Mr. Trump at times rambled and offered statements that were convoluted, hard to follow and flatly untrue, he did so with energy and volume that covered up his misstatements, managing to stay on offense even on issues of vulnerability for him like the Jan. 6, 2021, attack and abortion.
Mr. Biden appeared on defense much of the time and either did not use lines teed up for him by his campaign’s predebate advertising or mumbled them in passing in such a way that they barely registered.Speaking with reporters afterward, Mr. Biden indicated that he had been battling a cold. “I have a sore throat,” he said. But he expressed satisfaction with his showing. “I think we did well.” Asked about Democrats’ concerns about his showing and calls for him to consider leaving the race, he said: “No. It’s hard to debate a liar.”
Mr. Biden’s advisers have long dismissed any speculation about him dropping out, rejecting it as unjustified nervousness even as he has trailed Mr. Trump in battleground states needed for victory this fall. Biden aides and allies have repeatedly challenged the polls and pointed out that predictions of Democratic defeats in recent elections have been overblown. One reason they cited for an early debate was to make clear to the public that these are the two choices, and no one else will be nominated.
“Folks, the facts are if Joe Biden was going to step aside, he would have done so a long time ago,” said Symone Sanders, a former aide to Vice President Kamala Harris. “That’s not my opinion, that’s literally the facts. So no, he won’t be stepping aside tomorrow morning. He’s the nominee, and a number of Dems I suspect will be out defending him over the next few days.”
The campaign quickly dispatched Ms. Harris to defend the president on CNN after the debate, although even she acknowledged that “it was a slow start, that’s obvious to everyone.” Mr. Biden had shown he could handle the job because of his many accomplishments for Americans, she said, and “the Joe Biden I work with every day is someone who has performed in a way that has been about bringing people into the Oval Office.”
Gov. Gavin Newsom of California, one of those mentioned as a possible replacement for Mr. Biden other than Ms. Harris, brushed off talk about switching candidates. “I would never turn my back on President Biden’s record,” he told reporters, serving as an official surrogate for the campaign in the spin room after the debate. “I would never turn my back on President Biden, and I don’t know a Democrat in my party who would do so, especially after tonight.”
But that did not stop the speculation. “Guys, the Dems should nominate someone else — before it’s too late,” Andrew Yang, who ran against Mr. Biden for the Democratic nomination in 2020, wrote on social media before the debate had ended, adding a hashtag #swapJoeout.
Former Senator Claire McCaskill, Democrat of Missouri, called it “a crisis,” saying that her phone was “blowing up” with senators, operatives, donors and other distraught Democrats doing “more than hand-wringing” about what happens next.
“Joe Biden had one thing he had to do tonight, and he didn’t do it,” she said on MSNBC. “He had one thing he had to accomplish, and that was reassure America that he was up to the job at his age, and he failed at that tonight.”That judgment extended beyond the political class. Mr. Biden’s perceived odds of winning the nomination plummeted within hours on PredictIt.org, a betting site that takes wagers on political events. His chances of being the party’s candidate fell to 60 cents, down 26 cents, meaning that bettors essentially thought there was only a 60 percent chance of him being nominated even though he swept the primaries, has no internal opponent and controls the party apparatus.
No incumbent president has dropped out of the race so late in the campaign cycle, and there was little consensus about what would happen if he were to. On Thursday night, Democrats were imagining scenarios in which party elders like Senator Chuck Schumer of New York, former Speaker Nancy Pelosi of California and Representative James E. Clyburn of South Carolina were to intervene with Mr. Biden.
There was no indication that any of them would agree to do so. Other Democrats said they feared it was too late, noting that Mr. Biden is a proud, stubborn man who has long insisted he is the best equipped to defeat Mr. Trump and would not listen to anyone other than perhaps his wife, Jill Biden, who has strongly supported another run. Democrats have long fretted that there is no obvious successor, uncertain that Ms. Harris, Mr. Newsom or any other party figure could rise to the challenge.
Incumbent presidents often stumble in their first debate of a general-election season, either because they are rusty or overconfident, but in many cases make up for it with stronger subsequent performances. Mr. Biden’s troubles particularly brought to mind Ronald Reagan’s first debate in 1984, when he appeared old and out of it; he salvaged his campaign at his next debate with a well-timed joke about not exploiting his opponent’s youth and inexperience.
The problem for Mr. Biden is no other debate is scheduled until Sept. 10, meaning he has no obvious opportunity to recover for months. And as the veteran Democratic strategist said, this was not like Mr. Obama losing to Mitt Romney in 2012, which was a tactical setback. “This is existential,” the strategist said.
So, rather than resetting the campaign in Mr. Biden’s favor, as it had anticipated, the president’s team ended the evening knowing that the task of the next few days if not weeks would be to stem the damage and rally the party behind their beleaguered leader.
Zolan Kanno-Youngs, Katie Rogers and Annie Karni contributed reporting.
Peter Baker is the chief White House correspondent for The Times. He has covered the last five presidents and sometimes writes analytical pieces that place presidents and their administrations in a larger context and historical framework. More about Peter Bake.
-----------------
Gribās pļūtīt? Nejūties novērtēts? Neviens nepievērš uzmanību?
Spied zemāk.
Spama topiks
Jā! Man jūk komati. Tas dēļ ilga perioda komunicējot citās valodās.
| | Offline | | |
| bum_bumz | | 28. Jun 2024, 11:51 |
#9136
|
| Kopš: 05. Jan 2006
Ziņojumi: 6756
Braucu ar: E34
| 2 veci pandas 
demokrātiem beigušās pasaciņas, jāsūta Briškens palīgā, tam vēl lejamais nav beidzies | | Offline | | |
|
|
| Rockstar | | 28. Jun 2024, 23:06 |
#9137
|
| Kopš: 11. Dec 2004
No: Rīga
Ziņojumi: 3697
Braucu ar:
| http://nra.lv/pasaule/461439-par-jauno-nato-generalsekretaru-iecelts-niderlandes-premjer
s-rite.htm
Šī ir ļoti slikta ziņa Baltijai... | | Offline | | |
| Samsasi | | 28. Jun 2024, 23:13 |
#9138
|
| Kopš: 01. Nov 2014
Ziņojumi: 4583
Braucu ar:
|
28 Jun 2024, 23:06:06 @Rockstar rakstīja:
http://nra.lv/pasaule/461439-par-jauno-nato-generalsekretaru-iecelts-niderlandes-premjer
s-rite.htm
Šī ir ļoti slikta ziņa Baltijai...
Arī pret Rites kandidatūru iebildumus iepriekš izteica Turcija un Ungārija. << šīs norāda uz pretējo. | | Offline | | |
| Rockstar | | 28. Jun 2024, 23:36 |
#9139
|
| Kopš: 11. Dec 2004
No: Rīga
Ziņojumi: 3697
Braucu ar:
|
28 Jun 2024, 23:13:50 @Samsasi rakstīja:
28 Jun 2024, 23:06:06 @Rockstar rakstīja:
http://nra.lv/pasaule/461439-par-jauno-nato-generalsekretaru-iecelts-niderlandes-premjer
s-rite.htm
Šī ir ļoti slikta ziņa Baltijai...
Arī pret Rites kandidatūru iebildumus iepriekš izteica Turcija un Ungārija. << šīs norāda uz pretējo.
Te nav runa par to ka viņš nav prokrievisks vai kā citādi. Rute ir Nīderlandes Krišjānis Knariņš... dirsā būs 
Varētu vēl Laimdotu Straujumu iecelt par ģenerālsekretāru. [ Šo ziņu laboja Rockstar, 28 Jun 2024, 23:37:28 ] | | Offline | | |
| Locis | | 28. Jun 2024, 23:40 |
#9140
|
|  Kopš: 14. Aug 2008
No: Dobele
Ziņojumi: 11229
Braucu ar: X5 , Jeep, Tuareg, L200, Jumper,Master ,Transit, Stralis x2, Volvo FL, Atego, Deu
| Cik es sapratu ,tad Kariņš bija vainīgs pie Covid pandēmijas ,tāpēc visiem tāds naids ?  | | Offline | | |
|
Moderatori: 968-jk, AV, BigArchi, BlackMagicWoman, Czars, GirtzB, Lafter, PERFS, RVR, SteelRat, VLD, kolhozs, linda, mrc, noisex, smudo
|
