The Instigator
Fisherking
Pro (for)
Winning
27 Points
The Contender
kcougar52
Con (against)
Losing
10 Points

China is a threat to the United States economically.

Do you like this debate?NoYes+0
Add this debate to Google Add this debate to Delicious Add this debate to FaceBook Add this debate to Digg  
Vote Here
Pro Tied Con
Who did you agree with before the debate?
Who did you agree with after the debate?
Who had better conduct?
Who had better spelling and grammar?
Who made more convincing arguments?
Who used the most reliable sources?
Reasons for your voting decision
1,000 Characters Remaining
The voting period for this debate does not end.
Voting Style: Open Point System: 7 Point
Started: 1/20/2008 Category: Politics
Updated: 9 years ago Status: Voting Period
Viewed: 1,821 times Debate No: 2010
Debate Rounds (3)
Comments (3)
Votes (11)

 

Fisherking

Pro

The economy of the People's Republic of China is the second largest in the world after the US with a GDP of $10.21 trillion (2006) when measured on a purchasing power parity (PPP) basis.[citation needed] It is the fourth largest in the world after the US, Japan and Germany, with a nominal GDP of US$2.68 trillion (2006) when measured in exchange-rate terms. China has been the fastest growing major nation for the past quarter of a century with an average annual GDP growth rate above 10%. China's per capita income has grown at an average annual rate of more than 8% over the last three decades drastically reducing poverty, but this rapid growth has been accompanied by rising income inequalities. The country's per capita income is classified as low by world standards, at about $2,000 (nominal, 107th of 179 countries/economies), and $7,800 (PPP, 82nd of 179 countries/economies) in 2006, according to the IMF.

Despite China's size, the abundance of its resources, and having about 20 percent of the world's population living within its borders, its role in the world economy traditionally has been relatively small. Since the late 1970s, however, the Chinese government has reformed the economy from a Soviet-type centrally planned economy that was largely closed to international trade to a more market-oriented economy that has a rapidly growing private sector and is a major player in the global economy. Since being introduced, these reforms have helped lift millions of its citizens out of poverty, bringing the poverty rate down from 53% in 1981 to 8% in 2001. This economic system has been called "Socialism with Chinese characteristics" and can be considered as a type of mixed economy. Only about a third of the economy is now directly state-controlled. As of 2005, 70% of China's GDP was in the private sector. The smaller public sector was dominated by about 200 large state enterprises
concentrated mostly in utilities, heavy industries, and energy resources.

Since the late 1970s and early 1980s, the economic reforms initially began with the shift of farming work to a system of household responsibility to start the phase out of collectivized agriculture, and later expanded to include the gradual liberalization of prices; fiscal decentralization; increased autonomy for state enterprises that increased the authority of local government officials and plant managers in industry thereby permitting a wide variety of private enterprise in services and light manufacturing; the foundation of a diversified banking system; the development of stock markets; the rapid growth of the non-state sector, and the opening of the economy to increased foreign trade and foreign investment. China has generally implemented reforms in a gradualist fashion, including the sale of equity in China's largest state banks to foreign investors and refinements in foreign exchange and bond markets in mid-2000s. As its role in world trade has steadily grown, its importance to the international economy has also increased apace. China's foreign trade has grown faster than its GDP for the past 25 years. The government's decision to permit China to be used by multinational corporations as an export platform has made the country a major competitor to
other Asian export-led economies, such as South Korea, Singapore, and Malaysia.

China has emphasized raising personal income and consumption and introducing new management systems to help increase productivity. The government has also focused on foreign trade as a major vehicle for economic growth. The restructuring of the economy and resulting efficiency gains have contributed to a more than tenfold increase in GDP since 1978. Some economists believe that Chinese economic growth has been in fact understated during much of the 1990s and early 2000s, failing to fully factor in the growth driven by the private sector.

Nevertheless, key bottlenecks continue to constrain growth. Available energy is insufficient to run at fully-installed industrial capacity, the transport system is inadequate to move sufficient quantities of such critical items as coal, and the communications system cannot yet fully meet the needs of an economy of China's size and complexity.
kcougar52

Con

This is a pretty interesting topic. I must admit, this is my first online debate, so I hope that I do well. I will have three points to back up
the fact that the United States is not in fact, currently threatened by China in terms of the economy.

Point 1: What you stated is a lot of interesting information, but I didn't see how you link it with the United States. All I heard was about China's growing economy. Unfortunately, I don't see this as a case, but a bunch of facts about China's current economy. So, I will have to refute the actual topic instead of your case.

Point 2: The point you fail to realize is the fact the China depends heavily on the United States for export. In fact, with all this growth in China, the United States is actually benefiting mutually with China. According to Craig K. Elwell and Marc Labonte,
Specialists in Macroeconomics, Government and Finance Division, and Wayne M. Morrison,Specialist in International Trade and Finance, Foreign Affairs, Defense, and Trade Division the US-China economic relations are growing. This is what they say:

"China's economic rise has led to a substantial growth in U.S.-China economic
relations. Total trade between the two countries has surged from $4.9 billion in 1980
to an estimated $343 billion in 2006. For the United States, China is now its second
largest trading partner, its fourth-largest export market, and its second-largest source
of imports. Inexpensive Chinese imports have increased the purchasing power of
U.S. consumers. Many U.S. companies have extensive manufacturing operations in
China in order to sell their products in the booming Chinese market and to take
advantage of low-cost labor for exported goods. China's purchases of U.S. Treasury
securities have funded federal deficits and helped keep U.S. interest rates relatively
low. Despite the perceived threat from China, the U.S. economy has recently
maintained full employment and robust economic growth. To date, the growth in
Chinese exports appears to have come partly at the expense of Asian competitors."

This shows without a doubt that my opponent is wrong.

If you want to read this article yourself, you can find it at:

http://www.fas.org...

You'll need Acrobat Reader to view it.

Point 3: Finally, please note that, if we want to abide by the topic, we should be topical. This means, since the topic says is, we look at it in the present tense, not what it will be. If you want the actual definition for is, you can find it at:

http://m-w.com...

This is Merriam Webster's official online dictionary. This is every bit as credible as if you pulled a dictionary off of a shelf in a library. It's based off of Merriam-Webster's Collegiate Dictionary, Eleventh Edition. If you want the credentials of Merriam Webster's Online (1), and for the credentials of the Merriam Webter's Web team (2), you can find it at:

1: http://m-w.com...
2: http://m-w.com...

Thank you, and, to my opponent, good luck.
Debate Round No. 1
Fisherking

Pro

First of all, thanks to your kind suggestions about my case. Many people really believe that China is dependent on the US. Your quotes are very interesting, but they are helping me, not you. Your data clearly showed that China has a lot of trading with US, but China does not depend on US because China has trading with countries all over the world. 40% of the world industries belong to China.

On the other hand, US is the one being affected if China stopped trading with US because the people are used to buy "cheap" products from China, even though they are always whining about the safety issues. Once China pulls the businesses away from US, inflation will be most likely to occur and it hurts the stock market as well.

Or we can just look at this from another angle: Both countries are actually benefiting ach other. But in a long run, China is going to take over the first SUPERPOWER position from US because US has no potential to grow while China, is a new born "baby", was founded in less than 60 years. The Communist China also has extremely good relationships with most of the Asian countries, European countries, African countries, etc. On the other hand, US lost allies throughout the recent decades because of wars in other countries.

Just look at the fact that US went into war with Iraq and other countries has made the oil price $100/barral. The average gas prices is around $3 in US, but look at China, the people are buying $ .50 to .75 per gal gas. Chinese government, the Communist party, can control the price, how about capitalist republican US? China has the ability to resist from US, but US cannot. All I am talking about is to show you the realty that US is a highly integrated society; its structure is vulnerable.

Moreover, China has 30% of US National Bond, which are your debts. China has the power to "cash" all the bonds at once, and US will be in danger of bankruptcy. The United States is a country with debt and there is no debt that US is one of the poorest countries in the world. China, on the other hand, has more than 1.3 trillion dollars in the Monetary Reserve. And more and more businesses from all over the world are coming to China and invest, which means China is taking away the businesses from US.

Finally, you want to talk to me about grammar and tenses. Great! You were right about the meaning of "is," but you need to be aware of another word, threat. "Threat" means an expression of intention to inflict evil, injury, or damage; this word bares an implication of going to be happened, which also means the actual damage of US economy has not happened yet. Therefore, no matter the topic is about present or future, China is a threat to the US economically.

By the way, if you wan to see the credentials of Merriam Webster's Online (1), and for the credentials of the Merriam Webster's Web team (2), you can find it at:

1: http://m-w.com......
2: http://m-w.com......

I am sure you are very familiar with these two websites, right?
Good Luck!
kcougar52

Con

The way I see it, there are 2 main arguments. One is of course, whether or not China will be willing to hurt their own economy by "cashing in" on bonds or ceasing trade with the US, and the other is what a threat is.

Point 1: To see if China will act upon their growing economy to hurt the United States, we must look at what would happen if trade ceased. I agree that the US would be hurt as well, but I am arguing China will not take the risk of hurting not only relations with the US, but also their own economy. I did a little digging, and I found what the damage to China's exports would be if they dropped the United States. I found this from China Daily, China's only English-language newspaper. They say;
"According to US statistics, China's export to the United States was $243.5 billion last year, accounting for 32 per cent of China's $762 billion total exports and 14.6 percent of US total imports. This demonstrates the fact that China and the United States are big markets to each other. In 1994, the US Department of Commerce listed China as the head of its top 10 newly emerging markets, which has been proven over the past 10 years."

To see this article, go to this site:

http://www.chinadaily.com.cn...

Now, please note that 32% of China's exports go to the US. They may be able to get some of that back from other nations, but 32% is pushing very far. This proves that China has major incentive to keep trading with the United States. This leads to my next point.

Point 2: According to the definition you provided, for a someone or something to be a threat, it must have intention. According to US Trade Representatives, the market between China and the US is booming. Coming from both ways. Demand for American goods is high in China and China has become a major trade partner with the US. And do I even need to talk about imports to the US? Does it sound like China would have intentions to hurt the US? I think not. Check the info at this site.

http:// www. ustr .gov/Document_Library/Fact_Sheets/2004/America's_Trade_with_China.html (This URL has an apostrophe in it, so it doesn't show up with Debate.org's help. There is a space between [/ and w]; [r and .] Sorry for the inconvenience.)

For credentials on the USTR, go to this site.

http://www.ustr.gov...

All in all, if you want to win this, you will need to find hard evidence that says that China is a current threat, and that China will act on this. Also, you will need to show how China will not be hurt from stopping trade with the US. Please cite everything so I can be sure you are not just making something up. And please make the sources credible. I know full well how easy it is to set up a website that says whatever you want it to. And please be assured, I will do everything I can to do the same. (That is, when it comes to information.)
Debate Round No. 2
Fisherking

Pro

Before I start the third round, I need to say that I am expecting a debate, not an info collection contest. "All in all, if you want to win this, you will need to find hard evidence that says that China is a current threat, and that China will act on this. Also, you will need to show how China will not be hurt from stopping trade with the US. Please cite everything so I can be sure you are not just making something up." You do not need to tell me what I need to do in order to win this debate and I know what I am doing. And I lived in Hong Kong for 15 years and my family is in China. I believe my information is correct. If you think my information or data provided previously is not accurate or I made something up, please free feel to point out and attack upon it, which is, after all, your responsibility. "And please make the sources credible. I know full well how easy it is to set up a website that says whatever you want it to. And please be assured, I will do everything I can to do the same." I don't even make websites, so you don't need to worry, or maybe that is a practice you will use. A real debate should like an impromptu speaking; I am writing this right after I read your argument and I am not going to do researches upon it. This debate is about cross-examining and rebuttal skills and I hope you understand it.

I understand both of your arguments about "cashing" bonds and definition of "threat," and I think we both agree on some points but not all.

First, your point about China is going to take the risk to "cash" the bonds is a good one, but I disagree with the way you look at it. It doesn't matter if China is going to take the risk to "cash" them; the treat is still in the United States. The United States has to prepare herself for any predictable situations. A threat is a threat. If China is going to take the risk to "cash" the bonds, then that is not a threat but destructions. This also applies on the situation if China is going to pull all the business out of the United States. China may not do that, most likely, and I agree with that. But we need to focus on the word "can." China can "cash" all the bonds; China can pull all the businesses out of US. The fact that China can do all that is a threat to US and US is worried about it too.

I am sure you have heard the saying, "A risk is also an opportunity." You viewed the relationship between China and the United States is an opportunity that can help the growing economies of both. I agree, but I also see this as a risk, a threat. For example, Cooperation A is working with Cooperation B on some projects. They can benefit from each other. But since their services are in the same area, they are also competitors of one another. Who knows if the next day Cooperation A is going to take over the market and Cooperation B will suffer? Back to your argument, you see China and the United States as business partners; I see them as market enemies. They are just getting advantages from each other, and once they lose interest, there will be a big fight.

About the second arguing point, I can see your point which China has no intention to hurt US. But we need to realize even (if) China does not give out an intention; the United States sees one anyway. We are looking from the United States perspective, not from China. The United States is threatened because of the extremely fast growing rate of Chinese economy and that is incontrovertible. The possibility of being taken over by China as the Number 1 superpower in the world is fairly large and the United States aware of it. How can you see there is no threat? No matter how you persuade me that China will not threaten the United States, the United States acknowledge one out there in China anyway.

All I said before was that China is a "friend" to US but also a threat to US. No matter how many difficulties they have been through, someday they can still betray each other and that is a worry, a threat. Also, the way we view this resolved is very different: I set this resolved is from the view point of the United States, not China's. Therefore, even (if) China has no intention to threaten the United States, the United States worries anyway.
kcougar52

Con

First off, I'm sorry if I offended you in any way. I am a debater at my highschool and so I'm used to having to have good evidence to back up any claims and statistics. But on to the debate.

There's really only one thing that I'm going to attack, and that is this sentence.
"China may not do that, most likely, and I agree with that. But we need to focus on the word "can." China can "cash" all the bonds; China can pull all the businesses out of US. The fact that China can do all that is a threat to US and US is worried about it too."

Really, if you look at it, China "cannot" pull out. If they do this, their economy will be hurt in a very large way. You must give this. I've shown this using "evidence". I can back up my sources with hard facts. If China gives up the US, they are screwed. 1/3 is ALOT. $243.5 billion is ALOT. China will suffer if they do this, therefore they CANNOT pull out, therefore they are NOT a threat. Thank you.
Debate Round No. 3
3 comments have been posted on this debate. Showing 1 through 3 records.
Posted by kcougar52 9 years ago
kcougar52
This was a good debate and you made some pretty good points. As I said, I am a debater in my highschool and pretty good at it in fact. So, I never die, even when you make a good point. Good luck in your future debates as well.
Posted by Fisherking 9 years ago
Fisherking
Thanks for having this debate with me. I am glad that we had a good time.

What I meant on the point "can" was that China "can" pull the businesses out; "can" "cash" the bonds, but they "will" not and "are not going to." I am talking about an ability to destroy both countries, not the possibility , and I am sure you agree that China has such ability, especially when China has more and more fianacial, or economic relationships with US (which is proved by your facts), US benefits from it and also makes herselg in a more difficult position because US is building a greater dependency on China, in which China is building this dependency as well.

I agree with your points if you do not realize, but I am trying to go with the angle of China is a friend and an enemy as well while you are going with just the "friend" angle. That's another reason why I do not need fact or statistics because your facts or statistics are actually building up my points.

Once again, thanks for this debate. Good Luck in future debates!
Posted by vicstorm15 9 years ago
vicstorm15
I would much rather debaters back up their arguments with facts than assumptions because they lived there and had family there. I must vote Con.
11 votes have been placed for this debate. Showing 1 through 10 records.
Vote Placed by kcougar52 8 years ago
kcougar52
Fisherkingkcougar52Tied
Agreed with before the debate:-Vote Checkmark-0 points
Agreed with after the debate:-Vote Checkmark-0 points
Who had better conduct:-Vote Checkmark-1 point
Had better spelling and grammar:-Vote Checkmark-1 point
Made more convincing arguments:-Vote Checkmark-3 points
Used the most reliable sources:-Vote Checkmark-2 points
Total points awarded:07 
Vote Placed by Rousseau 9 years ago
Rousseau
Fisherkingkcougar52Tied
Agreed with before the debate:--Vote Checkmark0 points
Agreed with after the debate:--Vote Checkmark0 points
Who had better conduct:--Vote Checkmark1 point
Had better spelling and grammar:--Vote Checkmark1 point
Made more convincing arguments:Vote Checkmark--3 points
Used the most reliable sources:--Vote Checkmark2 points
Total points awarded:30 
Vote Placed by tombob900 9 years ago
tombob900
Fisherkingkcougar52Tied
Agreed with before the debate:--Vote Checkmark0 points
Agreed with after the debate:--Vote Checkmark0 points
Who had better conduct:--Vote Checkmark1 point
Had better spelling and grammar:--Vote Checkmark1 point
Made more convincing arguments:Vote Checkmark--3 points
Used the most reliable sources:--Vote Checkmark2 points
Total points awarded:30 
Vote Placed by Warrior 9 years ago
Warrior
Fisherkingkcougar52Tied
Agreed with before the debate:--Vote Checkmark0 points
Agreed with after the debate:--Vote Checkmark0 points
Who had better conduct:--Vote Checkmark1 point
Had better spelling and grammar:--Vote Checkmark1 point
Made more convincing arguments:Vote Checkmark--3 points
Used the most reliable sources:--Vote Checkmark2 points
Total points awarded:30 
Vote Placed by Richard89 9 years ago
Richard89
Fisherkingkcougar52Tied
Agreed with before the debate:--Vote Checkmark0 points
Agreed with after the debate:--Vote Checkmark0 points
Who had better conduct:--Vote Checkmark1 point
Had better spelling and grammar:--Vote Checkmark1 point
Made more convincing arguments:Vote Checkmark--3 points
Used the most reliable sources:--Vote Checkmark2 points
Total points awarded:30 
Vote Placed by Sen.SBraun 9 years ago
Sen.SBraun
Fisherkingkcougar52Tied
Agreed with before the debate:--Vote Checkmark0 points
Agreed with after the debate:--Vote Checkmark0 points
Who had better conduct:--Vote Checkmark1 point
Had better spelling and grammar:--Vote Checkmark1 point
Made more convincing arguments:Vote Checkmark--3 points
Used the most reliable sources:--Vote Checkmark2 points
Total points awarded:30 
Vote Placed by phunkyboy123 9 years ago
phunkyboy123
Fisherkingkcougar52Tied
Agreed with before the debate:--Vote Checkmark0 points
Agreed with after the debate:--Vote Checkmark0 points
Who had better conduct:--Vote Checkmark1 point
Had better spelling and grammar:--Vote Checkmark1 point
Made more convincing arguments:Vote Checkmark--3 points
Used the most reliable sources:--Vote Checkmark2 points
Total points awarded:30 
Vote Placed by tjzimmer 9 years ago
tjzimmer
Fisherkingkcougar52Tied
Agreed with before the debate:--Vote Checkmark0 points
Agreed with after the debate:--Vote Checkmark0 points
Who had better conduct:--Vote Checkmark1 point
Had better spelling and grammar:--Vote Checkmark1 point
Made more convincing arguments:Vote Checkmark--3 points
Used the most reliable sources:--Vote Checkmark2 points
Total points awarded:30 
Vote Placed by Fisherking 9 years ago
Fisherking
Fisherkingkcougar52Tied
Agreed with before the debate:--Vote Checkmark0 points
Agreed with after the debate:--Vote Checkmark0 points
Who had better conduct:--Vote Checkmark1 point
Had better spelling and grammar:--Vote Checkmark1 point
Made more convincing arguments:Vote Checkmark--3 points
Used the most reliable sources:--Vote Checkmark2 points
Total points awarded:30 
Vote Placed by vicstorm15 9 years ago
vicstorm15
Fisherkingkcougar52Tied
Agreed with before the debate:--Vote Checkmark0 points
Agreed with after the debate:--Vote Checkmark0 points
Who had better conduct:--Vote Checkmark1 point
Had better spelling and grammar:--Vote Checkmark1 point
Made more convincing arguments:-Vote Checkmark-3 points
Used the most reliable sources:--Vote Checkmark2 points
Total points awarded:03