A Hong Kong newspaper widely read on the mainland ran a front page with a banner saying “The American Dream is Over.”  It went on to report that Washington owes every single Chinese citizen 5,700 Yuan – about 900 U.S. dollars.

Another editorial said Washington’s solution to its debt time bomb was to make the fuse one inch longer.

That kind of commentary has hit a nerve with the Chinese people. After a drop in Shanghai’s stock market, bloggers took to local social media sites. One wrote: “The U.S. suffered a downgrade, why did we become the biggest victim?” Another said: “It was a huge mistake to buy U.S. bonds with Chinese taxpayer money. We must hold those who are involved responsible.”

Here in the U.S. you hear many people worry that the Chinese government might stop buying American T-Bills. I think these fears are vastly overblown.

The economic situation between China and the U.S. is the financial version of mutually assured destruction – that cold war doctrine of nuclear deterrence. If you destroy me, I will destroy you.

Let me explain. I’ll start with the facts. China is indeed America’s biggest foreign lender – it owns about 1.2 trillion dollars of debt – more than Japan, the UK and Brazil.

A little-known fact is that most of America’s debt – 14.3 trillion and counting – is owned by Americans in Social Security trusts, pension funds, and by the Federal Reserve.

But it is the marginal buyer that matters, so China is important. Imagine that China were to sell off those 1.2 trillion dollars of U.S. Treasury bonds. This is a huge hypothetical – but let’s play out the disastrous chain of events that would happen if China began to divest.

It would trigger panic selling of the dollar. That would in turn hurt the U.S. economy, which is China’s number one export market (not a good idea if you are the Beijing government trying to keep workers occupied in factories across China).

China is addicted to a strategy of export-led growth, which requires that it keep its goods cheap. This means keeping its currency undervalued. That’s why it buys dollars.

But could China stop or slow down its new purchases of American debt? Yes, but even here, it has fewer options than people think. As China’s export growth continues, it will keep adding to its foreign reserves of 3.2 trillion dollars. Where can it park that money? Does it want to invest in Japanese debt and make the Yen a reserve currency? Anyone who understands the deep animosity between China and Japan will see that this is unlikely.

Euro-denominated assets are a possibility – but there’s really no such thing as European Treasury bonds. And even then, do you really want to put all your eggs in the euro when the future of the currency looks more shaky than ever before? Can you be confident that it will even be around 15 years from now?

As for British pounds and Swiss francs, you can buy those but just not in the vast quantities that China needs given the cash it generates.

And of course, if China were to stop buying Treasuries, the value of the Yuan would rise, Chinese exports would become more expensive and employment in China would fall.

So at the very moment China’s bloggers and state-run media were blasting the U.S. government for its profligacy, guess what Beijing was doing?

It was buying U.S. Treasuries.

The reality is that China is trapped into a cycle of buying our T-bonds.  No matter what any ratings agency says, no other bond market is as big or as safe.

So ignore all those theories about China doing America a huge favor. The reality is, they have nowhere else to go. We’re probably doing them a favor.

And by the way, in terms of who is paying whom, data from the Congressional Budget Office shows that the U.S. pays out some 74 million dollars to China in interest payments on debt every day. We did the math. That means Washington is paying Beijing 833 dollars every second.

That’s where Bratton comes in. “We should be looking beyond our shores to learn the lessons from others who have faced similar problems,” Cameron told a special session of Parliament, convened to address the riots, on Thursday. “That is why I will be discussing how we can go further in getting to grips with gangs with people like Bill Bratton.” (See photos of London’s riots.)

During his tenure heading three major American police departments — Boston from 1993 to ’94, New York City from 1994 to ’96, and Los Angeles from 2002 to ’09 — Bratton , 63, drastically reduced crime rates and won particular praise for his handling of gangs. It is in this area that he will try to help the British government in the coming months. “All these thugs and knuckleheads running wild in London this week, you can’t excuse away that behavior. I’m a progressive, but on crime I’m very tough,” Bratton tells TIME. His record speaks for itself.

In New York City, working under Mayor Rudy Giuliani, Bratton introduced a zero-tolerance policy called broken windows. Police began cracking down on public drunks, potheads, aggressive panhandlers, graffiti scribblers and even “squeegee pests,” the guys who offered to clean commuters’ windshields at traffic stops, and cyclists who rode on the sidewalk. If a person was unable to provide photo identification, they were hauled to the police station, searched, fingerprinted and possibly detained. The system was credited with lowering rates for major crimes such as murder and rape. “The secret of it is blending of big things and little things,” Bratton says. “You don’t want people to fear the police — you want the criminal element to fear and respect the police. Criminals have to fear that if they commit a crime that they will get caught.”

In New York City and Los Angeles, Bratton drastically increased the size of the police forces, instituting a “boots of the ground” approach. In Britain, which is suffering from one of the worst debt crises in its history, such a strategy is impossible. Cameron is intent on slashing the force by 20%, or 16,000 police personnel, over the next four years. Bratton has worked with less. In New York City he had 36,720 officers, or 1 for every 218 residents; in Los Angeles he had only 9,320 officers, or 1 for every 429 residents. London currently has 32,500 officers, or 1 for every 241 residents. (See the highs and lows of Scotland Yard.)

Bratton was also known for cracking down on riots. He employed rubber bullets, tear gas and water cannons — tactics that British police were hesitant to use during the London riots. Not everyone is eager to see such harsh policing come to Britain. “Although [Bratton] has a glittering record across in the States, it’s a different style of policing,” London Metropolitan Police Federation chairman John Tully told the BBC. “The gang culture’s different.” British gun laws are very strict, and police in London rarely need to carry anything more than batons. “It’s up to the British people how much force they want their police to use,” Bratton says. “They’ve always celebrated the lack of firearms — and that’s a contract, a trust between the British police and their people.” And despite his severe tactics, trust has always been important to Bratton.

In the U.S. cities he policed, Bratton paired his zero-tolerance policies with intense outreach to the community. “I cannot count the number of church basements, synagogues, mosques and storefronts that I spoke in, that my captains spoke in,” Bratton says. He cultivated relationships with civil rights groups and listened to them when they complained that the force was too racially homogeneous. Twenty years ago, the Los Angeles Police Department (LAPD) was 61% white. Today, mostly due to Bratton’s policies, it’s 36% white, better reflecting Los Angeles’ diversity. Though Scotland Yard made an effort to diversify the ranks of the British police in the wake of the 1985 riots, that endeavor fell short. In June, Scotland Yard admitted that racism is still pervasive as part of an agreement ending a 16-month boycott by the Black Police Association.

When Bratton was a young sergeant in Boston tasked with managing community relations, he says he was struck by how the police at outreach meetings all talked about response time and statistics, while citizens were more concerned about the prostitute on the corner, the broken window at the municipal building or the number of homeless haunting their stoops. “They wanted you to do something about the things they saw every day — their quality of life,” Bratton recalls. “You have to present a face of both confidence and caring. That the public comes to know the chief of police, in my case, as someone they trust, somebody they have confidence in not just day-to-day but when there is a crisis. And to do that, you can’t just do it in on TV or newspapers, you’ve got to get out there and press the flesh.” (See the upscale looters involved in the London riots.)

If that sounds an awful lot like a politics, Bratton says it’s meant to. “To be a successful chief of police in America, you have to have those attributes,” he says. “You cannot function in exclusion. Lack of transparency, it doesn’t work. You are doomed to failure in America if you’re not willing to open up the tent to everybody.”

On the phone, Bratton talks wistfully of his law-enforcement days. He clearly misses it. Since leaving the LAPD in 2009 he has been chairman of Kroll, a global private-security firm, and he would have jumped at the chance to head up London’s Metropolitan Police Department after the last commissioner, Sir Paul Stephenson, resigned last month in the wake of the News Corps. hacking scandal. But Home Secretary Theresa May said Britain’s top cop should be British, and so it won’t be Bratton sitting in Tottenham church basements or pressing the flesh at Hackney town-hall meetings. Instead, he’ll be an unpaid adviser to Cameron for an undetermined length of time. The Metropolitan Police Department doesn’t have a new commissioner yet — the application period ends on Wednesday — but whoever it will be can learn a thing or two from Bratton if London is to sort out its gang problem by next summer.

WordPress is becoming more and more usable as a Content Management System, so naturally the question comes up.

But they don’t want to abandon the idea of a blog either. Blogs can be an integral part of a business website, and it makes sense that businesses and individuals would want the site and the blog managed from the same WordPress installation.

The First Option

The idea is simple … create a category called “blog” and place every single post you create in this category by making it the default category. Make all other categories “children” of the blog category.

This is actually a pretty decent option for users with a fair amount of WordPress experience. It allows you to accomplish the desired effect, and also lets you create other top-level categories for other purposes than categorizing posts (for instance, using top level categories for things like setting feature posts, press releases, or like me … theme releases).

solving every kind of income tax problem for my clients.
Some areas of my expertise include: tax help with
federal income tax debts, money owed, non filed tax
returns for previous years, amended tax returns, tax
lien, tax preparation, tax deduction, tax planning,
tax question, tax advice, tax service, federal income
tax returns problems, and related matters.

2. I Work “Together” With The IRS

as opposed to “against” each other. I don’t cheat the
IRS to save you money (which may have been how your
last accountant cost you your current tax problems,
which you may not even be aware that you
have). Accordingly, I don’t let the IRS cheat YOU.

3. I’m Not A Tax Service Franchise

I don’t pawn you off to half experienced tax people. I
handle each case personally and I’m always available
for you to talk to. Why? Because it takes years of
personal experience with tax issues to see the countless
angles in any given tax problem scenario. I do not know
nor have I heard of anyone else as qualified as myself
to do that, therefore I haven’t taken on any help, which
means I will be personally analyzing your tax situation.

4. My Competition

My competition is not qualified, you hear these big firms
on tv and on the radio all day long asking you if you
have a tax problem, but they never seem to solve it for
you. I often have to fix their mistakes as well as begin
the work over because they never solved the original tax
problem you were having. After solving my client’s tax
problem, I then often help my clients get their money
back that they paid my competition for their incompetent
work. And please don’t get fooled by “former IRS
employees”, they are not qualified from working
on the inside.