Yes. If China stopped selling the stuff entirely then alternative supplies could be arranged, though not to say the changeover period wouldn't be inflationary.

Yes. If China stopped selling the stuff entirely then alternative supplies could be arranged, though not to say the changeover period wouldn't be inflationary. This situation reminds me of something I read a few years ago - an interview with noted (?) right-wing polemicist P. J. O'Rourke, at the time apparentlny on the merry-go-round promoting his then-new book: http://rightwingnews.com/interviews/the-p-j-orourke-interview/ http://rightwingnews.com/interviews/the-p-j-orourke-intervie... Part of the bit that stuck in my mind: [...] the exports, that’s real stuff, and you’re giving it away in favor of gold. He [Adam Smith] said imports are the good thing. Imports are when you’re getting something you like. You’re getting French wine. You’re getting American tobacco. You’re getting furs from Russia, getting whatever they were getting back in those days. He said exports are the way you pay for those imports. So imports are Christmas morning. Exports are January’s Visa bill. (Search for that quote. His whole answer to that particular question is quite interesting.) I think of this every time I read anything about acres of toxic sludge and skies full of clouds of carcinogens. I don't quite share O'Rourke's apparent glee at how fools will sweat blood to extract raw materials, actual honest-to-god assets, and then swap them for mere money, money whose ultimate value is entirely under somebody else's control... but I do wonder what the hell they are thinking, and what sort of a deal they think they are getting. Because from my perspective, it looks like they're getting shafted.