Total Posts:16|Showing Posts:1-16
Jump to topic:

The Red Dawn

FREEDO
Posts: 21,057
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
4/15/2010 8:05:49 PM
Posted: 6 years ago
I was just looking at the Wikipedia page on globalization and saw this:

"With the influence of globalization and with the help of The United States' own economy, the People's Republic of China has experienced some tremendous growth within the past decade. If China continues to grow at the rate projected by the trends, then it is very likely that in the next twenty years, there will be a major reallocation of power among the world leaders. China will have enough wealth, industry, and technology to rival the United States for the position of leading world power."

What do you think?
GRAND POOBAH OF DDO

fnord
Tamikajones
Posts: 371
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
4/15/2010 8:09:27 PM
Posted: 6 years ago
At 4/15/2010 8:05:49 PM, FREEDO wrote:
What do you think?

Extremely unlikely.

bout 70% of china are poor farmers, uneducated in rural areas, 20% new emerging middle class who do factory work for cheap, 10% upper class who are the business owners.

The gap is huge. Furthermore when their standard of living increases to match ours, workers will then demand a similar wage that the USf factory worker is receiving meaning that the better workers between the two countries will be hired. Our educational structure is far superior.
: At 4/21/2010 5:49:24 PM, banker wrote:
: Mirza at least no one is misunderstanding santa...!!
:
:Hitler had sexual issues just like muhammud..!!
Volkov
Posts: 9,765
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
4/15/2010 8:14:26 PM
Posted: 6 years ago
At 4/15/2010 8:05:49 PM, FREEDO wrote:
What do you think?

It's expected? However, it says China will contend for leading power; it doesn't mean they'll become the leading power, and even if they do, they will never become an overwhelming, sole-superpower, power, like the United States managed.

Globalization has the funny consequence of not only making Western interests powerful, but also extending the chance of power to other countries, since globalization essentially spreads out influence and opportunity to countries and regions where it never existed before.

However, if it levels the playing field that way, then it also levels the playing field the other way. The rise of China will only go so far, because their rise is dependent upon sustained globalization, which takes every power centre's continued interest. China can't power too far ahead because its always tied down to the US. We're probably entering a world where there are essentially no superpowers, only great powers, because there is no way that another country can really rise without making the other rise along with them!
Volkov
Posts: 9,765
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
4/15/2010 8:16:25 PM
Posted: 6 years ago
At 4/15/2010 8:09:27 PM, Tamikajones wrote:
bout 70% of china are poor farmers, uneducated in rural areas,

Only 46% of China is rural. Wanna change that figure?
FREEDO
Posts: 21,057
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
4/15/2010 8:31:57 PM
Posted: 6 years ago
I'd argue that they already are the world power since they have to ability to destroy America at any time simply by refusing to loan us anymore debt. But the reason why they do keep lending us more is because it's mainly our economy that's propping up theirs. If what this article says is true than once China reaches that point they will no longer need us; America would be helpless.
GRAND POOBAH OF DDO

fnord
Volkov
Posts: 9,765
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
4/15/2010 8:42:27 PM
Posted: 6 years ago
At 4/15/2010 8:31:57 PM, FREEDO wrote:
I'd argue that they already are the world power since they have to ability to destroy America at any time simply by refusing to loan us anymore debt. But the reason why they do keep lending us more is because it's mainly our economy that's propping up theirs. If what this article says is true than once China reaches that point they will no longer need us; America would be helpless.

That's not going to happen though - globalization would prevent it. China is too big to simply cut off their main markets and resources, and they're too disorganized and lacking in proper infrastructure and programs to ever break out of the dependency cycle, at least not for a very, very long time. A level playing field means that China is almost stuck in its position, whenever it reaches its real zenith, though some thing its already come and gone. Same with the US.

The only way China breaks out is if they really ramp up their education and infrastructure programs. They're making strides to do that, but I doubt its enough. Why would they change it anyways? This is making them winners.
Kleptin
Posts: 5,095
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
4/15/2010 8:45:48 PM
Posted: 6 years ago
At 4/15/2010 8:31:57 PM, FREEDO wrote:
If what this article says is true than once China reaches that point they will no :longer need us; America would be helpless.

Debt doesn't exist in a global economy. It's kind of just a formality. There will also be no time in our lifetime in which China is not dependent on the US.

As of right now, education in the US is trailing behind education in nearly every other developed country, China included. China's education system churns out better engineers and scientists. The US is primarily a service-based economy so the core skills in math and science pale, truly, truly pale in comparison to those of India and China.

The problem is that Asian education systems don't have very much room for originality and out-of-the-box thinking. You get less innovation.

However, once industrialization hits agriculture, everything will change. The rural populations will shrink, resources will peak, families scrambling to cities will then lead to huge changes in education and whatnot. At this point, there will be a rapid clamor for solutions to new problems, which will call for education reform as China moves into a service-based economy that requires more western-style education.

In less than a hundred years, China will bypass the US economically.
: At 5/2/2010 2:43:54 PM, innomen wrote:
It isn't about finding a theory, philosophy or doctrine and thinking it's the answer, but a practical application of one's experiences that is the answer.

: At 10/28/2010 2:40:07 PM, jharry wrote: I have already been given the greatest Gift that anyone could ever hope for [Life], I would consider myself selfish if I expected anything more.
FREEDO
Posts: 21,057
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
4/15/2010 8:47:37 PM
Posted: 6 years ago
Wow, I just had an idea. Please critique this for me.

China needs us, right?

That's why they keep loaning us debt, cause it actually pays of for them.

But we don't like having this huge debt, right?

What if..we held China ransom; if they don't forgive our debt than we will stop or almost stop trading with them.

That may be really hard to swallow but..come on..there is no other solution to the debt.
GRAND POOBAH OF DDO

fnord
Volkov
Posts: 9,765
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
4/15/2010 8:50:59 PM
Posted: 6 years ago
At 4/15/2010 8:47:37 PM, FREEDO wrote:
That may be really hard to swallow but..come on..there is no other solution to the debt.

It's an idea, but one that is essentially zero-sum. No side will agree to it.
FREEDO
Posts: 21,057
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
4/15/2010 8:51:26 PM
Posted: 6 years ago
At 4/15/2010 8:48:25 PM, Nags wrote:
... AND the dollar collapses.

You forgot that part.

There isn't going to be any painless solution to the debt. But the deeper we dig this the worse the consequences are gonna be.
GRAND POOBAH OF DDO

fnord
Reasoning
Posts: 4,456
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
4/15/2010 8:52:38 PM
Posted: 6 years ago
At 4/15/2010 8:47:37 PM, FREEDO wrote:
What if..we held China ransom; if they don't forgive our debt than we will stop or almost stop trading with them.

Stop conflating yourself with the state. The state is your enemy. Do not give in to stateholm syndrome.
"What we really ought to ask the liberal, before we even begin addressing his agenda, is this: In what kind of society would he be a conservative?" - Joseph Sobran
Tamikajones
Posts: 371
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
4/15/2010 8:54:13 PM
Posted: 6 years ago
At 4/15/2010 8:31:57 PM, FREEDO wrote:
I'd argue that they already are the world power since they have to ability to destroy America at any time simply by refusing to loan us anymore debt. But the reason why they do keep lending us more is because it's mainly our economy that's propping up theirs. If what this article says is true than once China reaches that point they will no longer need us; America would be helpless.

LOL

Look at Debt as a % of GDP.
: At 4/21/2010 5:49:24 PM, banker wrote:
: Mirza at least no one is misunderstanding santa...!!
:
:Hitler had sexual issues just like muhammud..!!
Tamikajones
Posts: 371
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
4/15/2010 8:55:11 PM
Posted: 6 years ago
At 4/15/2010 8:16:25 PM, Volkov wrote:
At 4/15/2010 8:09:27 PM, Tamikajones wrote:
bout 70% of china are poor farmers, uneducated in rural areas,

Only 46% of China is rural. Wanna change that figure?

wikipedia says 55%. All figures are estimations The best thing to say is that a large majority of Chinese are poor and living in rural areas.
: At 4/21/2010 5:49:24 PM, banker wrote:
: Mirza at least no one is misunderstanding santa...!!
:
:Hitler had sexual issues just like muhammud..!!
FREEDO
Posts: 21,057
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
4/15/2010 8:56:08 PM
Posted: 6 years ago
At 4/15/2010 8:52:38 PM, Reasoning wrote:
At 4/15/2010 8:47:37 PM, FREEDO wrote:
What if..we held China ransom; if they don't forgive our debt than we will stop or almost stop trading with them.

Stop conflating yourself with the state. The state is your enemy. Do not give in to stateholm syndrome.

Propping up China is the Statist position here.
GRAND POOBAH OF DDO

fnord
Volkov
Posts: 9,765
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
4/15/2010 9:03:09 PM
Posted: 6 years ago
At 4/15/2010 8:55:11 PM, Tamikajones wrote:
wikipedia says 55%. All figures are estimations The best thing to say is that a large majority of Chinese are poor and living in rural areas.

You're right, I swapped my numbers - though its 54% apparently. Though it was 61% only a few years ago. That's a pretty fast rate of change.

At the end of 2008, China's total population was 1.33 billion, with 723 million (54%) and 607 million (46%) residing in the rural and urban areas respectively (not including Hongkong, Macau, Taiwan).[1] The rural population fraction was 64% in 2001 and 74% in 1990. The annual population growth rate was estimated at 0.59% (2006 estimate).

http://en.wikipedia.org...