Click here to read about and see it for yourself (scroll down and you can click on the video and watch it).

What is the NFL doing with an interest in China? Give me an “M”-”A”-”R”-”K”-”E”-”T”!!! What’s that spell? MARKET! MARKET! MARKET!! — New fans to replace the old ones in the US that don’t give a rip anymore about pro football and the girlie men players and owners with big egos that go with it!

In Parts I and II of my Spanish versus Mandarin posts we had some great discussions and debate (click here and here). This is also a good follow up to Steve Feng’s recent post and kind offer to lead getting some of you together to learn some Mandarin.

I can’t seem to let a sleeping dog lie:

Per this Wall Street Journal article, “Mexico’s Case Study: Looking to China, and Away From It,” Treasury Secretary Henry Paulson was asked by a Mexican MBA student at Tsinghua University (an elite school in China) while Paulson was recently visiting Beijing, “How will countries like Mexico, who are still emerging markets, compete with this monster that is China?” Paulson replied to the effect of, “See China’s growth as an opportunity.”

I.e., look for ways to do business and partner with these folks and no more whining about how China is kicking your butts.

Per this article, and as I alluded to in Parts One and Two of this discussion thread, think of the professional opportunities here for those students armed with a Cal Poly MBA who speak English (as you all do), Spanish (some do) and Mandarin (??). In my view, with some more hard work, continued networking, talent (see/refer to my earlier post on skills needed for successful expats in China) and yes, a little luck along the way, the world could be your oyster if you spoke or took some time off to learn to speak all three languages reasonably well.

Ah, if only I were in my 20s again …

Uuuhh, I think it’s a lot.  Wikipedia said it’s more than $2.37. 

As a follow up to Professor Ramezani’s session with us, read this recent Wall Street Journal article [subscription may be required], “China May Get More Daring With Its $1.07 Trillion Stash.”

Per this article, China is looking at new ways of managing its investments in the US that he spoke about – fewer purchases of U.S. Treasury bonds and more buying of riskier investments such as corporate bonds, stocks, real estate and/or commodities.

What does this mean for the U.S.? Per Professor Ramezani’s talk, is this a good or bad development for the US? And what business opportunities might this shift in Chinese investing present for YOU?

And for an article on “the man” in China who gets to decide how to spend this money, click on this Wall Street Journal article (”Beijing Taps Top Official To Invest Its Cash Stash“).  Note that he does not have a PhD in finance or economics; a masters degree.  This was suprising to me given much of Asia’s fixation with perception, formality and high levels of education (e.g., PhD from a Tier 1 Western Univesity preferred for top positions; others need not apply, etc.).   Then again, both Chairman Mao and Deng Xiaoping were peasants and did not come from the bourgeoise.

Submitted By: Derrick Fischer

I ran into this video on the Three Gorges Dam, from a link on Google Earth. Some of you may have seen this already if you watched the Discovery Atlas episode done on China. Anyway, it summarizes a few of the pros and cons of building the largest dam in the world. This dam is going to tame the devastating effects of the Yangtze River during a flood, and provide China with a clean source of energy to cover 10% of their annual electricity demands. However, according to the video and these two articles found here and here, this great feat of Chinese engineering comes at a great cost. Over one million people were forced off their land with minimal reimbursement. 1,200 towns and villages with centuries of history will be buried beneath the water. This is just another example that China is not afraid to do whatever it takes to pull their country into the 21st century.

This project is a major step forward in terms of providing China with a clean renewable source of energy. However, do the benefits outweigh the costs?

Is this another project designed to benefit the rich (those who can afford and receive the electricity) at the cost of the poor (those who are removed from their homes and left with a stagnant polluted lake)?

Is this how China should be dealing with their power crisis, or should they be spending their money on finding ways to use less electricity (i.e. more efficient buildings), or a mixture of both? Your thoughts?