Now is the time to thank your local politician and business leader. They handed over all of our technology, all of our intellectual property and all of our innovation.... for the sake of short term profit. They put their own personal gain above the long term welfare of our nation.
At the current rate of Chinese growth, their GNP could be 2 to 3 times ours in a few decades. With this growth of economic power will come military power. I imagine in a few decades their military will outstrip ours (and they won't have import their parts from China). This is very reminiscent of the early 20th century rise of Germany.
The days of American unilaterism are ending. Our fearless capitalist leaders have created a communist country with economic might that Soviet Union could only dream of. Don't think for a second that the Chinese will be so obliging to the U.S. in the future. When they become superior (perhaps vastly superior in a few decades) both economically and militarily, it is the United States who will have to defer to them rather than the other way around. Might makes right is a universal law that has never changed throughout human existence.
The Chinese must be laughing their asses off to see America waste trillions of dollars in wars that are patently against America's own self interest.
Well it sure doesn’t take a genius to figure that one out, who’s lending and who’s borrowing. Give Obama another term and we'll all be speaking Chinese.
My comment is largely sidewise of the main thrust of this thread. I take the main thrust to be to condemn our politicians and/or capitalists for the economic growth of China. I'll leave that discussion to others.
I suggest that the economic growth of China is inevitable. I would further suggest that the economic growth of India is inevitable. What drives economic values today is different from what drove economic values say 300 years ago. Before the industrial revolution, agriculture was a principle economic driver. Not any longer. I would argue that a key economic asset today are human beings. This economic asset alone is not enough. If this asset is not developed through education and economic growth enabled by the right economic policies, development does not occur. But provide these other things, add a very large population, stir, and you are going to get explosive economic growth. This has been seen again and again. Both India and China have been frozen in an undeveloped condition until fairly recent times by these things.
So, maybe to get back to the main thrust of the thread, I'm not seeing how it was in the power of our politicians or our capitalists to keep the lid on these economies.
But whatever . . . get used to it. China is definitely going to outstrip the US economy, have no doubt about that. Likewise, India is going to outstrip the US economy. Those who are young would be wise to analyze what this means to their economic future. I'm old enough that I'm just going to ride the wave out until it peters out. I don't know what the ramifications are, but I can provide an example of something worth bearing in mind.
In the past, the US was the most attractive market to sell into. Everyone wanted to sell into our market. What do you suppose will be the biggest market to sell into by about 2050, after an immense middle class has arisen in China and also in India? You got it, the US will be a secondary market.
You can pound your chest all you want to and proclaim the US to be the greatest and all that gungho, rah-rah cheerleader stuff, but it doesn't change the inexorable economic factors that are making these things happen.
Hey hd--maybe you should go ahead and move over there--get a head-start on getting accustomed, getting into the job market, etc. Somehow we'll survive without you. I'm sure "the smartest man on HNI", with an I.Q. rivalling surgeons, can easily make the transition and thrive. Don't forget to send us a postcard.....
__________________
"We can have no '50-50' allegiance in this country. Either a man is an American and nothing else, or he is not an American at all."-- Theodore Roosevelt
A wise man's heart is at his right hand; but a fool's heart at his left. Ecclesiasties 10:2
The last four letters in American..........I Can
The last four letters in Republican........I Can
The last four letters in Democrats.........Rats
My comment is largely sidewise of the main thrust of this thread. I take the main thrust to be to condemn our politicians and/or capitalists for the economic growth of China. I'll leave that discussion to others.
I suggest that the economic growth of China is inevitable. I would further suggest that the economic growth of India is inevitable. What drives economic values today is different from what drove economic values say 300 years ago. Before the industrial revolution, agriculture was a principle economic driver. Not any longer. I would argue that a key economic asset today are human beings. This economic asset alone is not enough. If this asset is not developed through education and economic growth enabled by the right economic policies, development does not occur. But provide these other things, add a very large population, stir, and you are going to get explosive economic growth. This has been seen again and again. Both India and China have been frozen in an undeveloped condition until fairly recent times by these things.
So, maybe to get back to the main thrust of the thread, I'm not seeing how it was in the power of our politicians or our capitalists to keep the lid on these economies.
But whatever . . . get used to it. China is definitely going to outstrip the US economy, have no doubt about that. Likewise, India is going to outstrip the US economy. Those who are young would be wise to analyze what this means to their economic future. I'm old enough that I'm just going to ride the wave out until it peters out. I don't know what the ramifications are, but I can provide an example of something worth bearing in mind.
In the past, the US was the most attractive market to sell into. Everyone wanted to sell into our market. What do you suppose will be the biggest market to sell into by about 2050, after an immense middle class has arisen in China and also in India? You got it, the US will be a secondary market.
You can pound your chest all you want to and proclaim the US to be the greatest and all that gungho, rah-rah cheerleader stuff, but it doesn't change the inexorable economic factors that are making these things happen.
The economies of both will become larger than that of the U.S. That is inevitable, because they have several times more workers and several times more consumers. The size of any other economy doesn't really trouble me. However, should their per capita figures begin to rival or exceed ours, then it is cause for concern. Their demand plus their individual buying power will have negative consequences for the dollar, making us all relatively worse off.
If we continue on our current path, we won't have to worry about any of this. Our government's fiscal policies and ever-increasing indebtedness will end up causing us all financial ruin.
__________________
You may beat the rap, but you won't beat the ride!
Now is the time to thank your local politician and business leader. They handed over all of our technology, all of our intellectual property and all of our innovation.... for the sake of short term profit. They put their own personal gain above the long term welfare of our nation.
At the current rate of Chinese growth, their GNP could be 2 to 3 times ours in a few decades. With this growth of economic power will come military power. I imagine in a few decades their military will outstrip ours (and they won't have import their parts from China). This is very reminiscent of the early 20th century rise of Germany.
The days of American unilaterism are ending. Our fearless capitalist leaders have created a communist country with economic might that Soviet Union could only dream of. Don't think for a second that the Chinese will be so obliging to the U.S. in the future. When they become superior (perhaps vastly superior in a few decades) both economically and militarily, it is the United States who will have to defer to them rather than the other way around. Might makes right is a universal law that has never changed throughout human existence.
The Chinese must be laughing their asses off to see America waste trillions of dollars in wars that are patently against America's own self interest.
Um, . . . aren't the Chinese communist?
__________________
You may beat the rap, but you won't beat the ride!
My comment is largely sidewise of the main thrust of this thread. I take the main thrust to be to condemn our politicians and/or capitalists for the economic growth of China. I'll leave that discussion to others.
I suggest that the economic growth of China is inevitable. I would further suggest that the economic growth of India is inevitable. What drives economic values today is different from what drove economic values say 300 years ago. Before the industrial revolution, agriculture was a principle economic driver. Not any longer. I would argue that a key economic asset today are human beings. This economic asset alone is not enough. If this asset is not developed through education and economic growth enabled by the right economic policies, development does not occur. But provide these other things, add a very large population, stir, and you are going to get explosive economic growth. This has been seen again and again. Both India and China have been frozen in an undeveloped condition until fairly recent times by these things.
So, maybe to get back to the main thrust of the thread, I'm not seeing how it was in the power of our politicians or our capitalists to keep the lid on these economies.
But whatever . . . get used to it. China is definitely going to outstrip the US economy, have no doubt about that. Likewise, India is going to outstrip the US economy. Those who are young would be wise to analyze what this means to their economic future. I'm old enough that I'm just going to ride the wave out until it peters out. I don't know what the ramifications are, but I can provide an example of something worth bearing in mind.
In the past, the US was the most attractive market to sell into. Everyone wanted to sell into our market. What do you suppose will be the biggest market to sell into by about 2050, after an immense middle class has arisen in China and also in India? You got it, the US will be a secondary market.
You can pound your chest all you want to and proclaim the US to be the greatest and all that gungho, rah-rah cheerleader stuff, but it doesn't change the inexorable economic factors that are making these things happen.
Bingo. I will also add that China is embracing capitalism while we are going in the complete oposite direction. Under Obama's plan, we now have the highest rate of people living off the backs of another. The newspaper likes to color it what is really not. People reyling on government. It's non providers sucking the life out of the providers.
__________________
John Adams “The moment the idea is admitted into society that property is not as sacred as the laws of God, and that there is not a force of law and public justice to protect it, anarchy and tyranny commence.”
Ronald Reagan: 'Everybody that is for abortion has already been born'
"I never said I was worth it. I only said I wouldn't do it for less " William F. Buckley Jr.
THE IMPLICATIONS of this analysis for the future of American national security policy are clear. The most dangerous scenario the United States might face in the early twenty-first century is one in which China becomes a potential hegemon in Northeast Asia. Of course, China’s prospects of doing so depend largely on whether its economy continues modernizing at a rapid pace. If that happens, and China becomes not only a leading producer of cutting-edge technologies but also the world’s wealthiest great power, it would almost certainly use its wealth to build a mighty military machine. For sound strategic reasons, moreover, it would surely pursue regional hegemony, just as the United States did in the western hemisphere during the nineteenth century. So if Chinese relative power grows substantially, one should expect it to attempt to dominate ***an and South Korea, as well as other regional actors, by building military forces that are so powerful that those other states would not dare challenge it. One should also expect it to develop its own version of the Monroe Doctrine, directed at the United States; just as the United States has made it clear to distant great powers that they are not allowed to meddle in the western hemisphere, China will make it clear that American interference in Asia is unacceptable.
What makes a future Chinese threat so worrisome is that it might be far more powerful and dangerous than any of the potential hegemons that the United States confronted during the twentieth century. Neither Wilhelmine Germany, nor imperial ***an, nor Nazi Germany, nor the Soviet Union had nearly as much latent power as the United States did during their confrontations. But if China were to become a giant Hong Kong, it would eventually have several times as much latent power as the United States, allowing it to gain a decisive military advantage in Northeast Asia. In that situation, it is hard to see how the United States could prevent China from becoming a peer competitor, or even from eventually becoming a more formidable superpower.
This analysis suggests that the United States has a profound interest in seeing Chinese economic growth slow considerably in the years ahead. For much of the last decade, however, the United States has pursued a strategy intended to have the opposite effect. The United States has been committed to engaging China rather than containing it. Constructive engagement is predicated on the liberal belief that if China could be made both democratic and prosperous, it would become a status quo power and not engage in security competition with the United States. As a result, U.S. policy has sought to integrate China into the world economy and facilitate its rapid economic development, so that it becomes wealthy and content with its position in the international system.
This approach is misguided, however, because a wealthy China would not be a status quo power; it would be an aggressive one determined to achieve regional hegemony--not because a rich China would have wicked motives, but because the best way for any state to maximize its prospects for survival is to dominate its region of the world. Although it is certainly in China’s interest to be the hegemon in Northeast Asia, it is clearly not in the interest of the United States to have that happen.
At the same time that it is building up rather than placing obstacles in the way of its greatest potential rival, the United States is also exposing itself to trouble rather than taking sensible precautions in advance of future conflict.
This guy forecast the exact scenario which is playing out now except at a rate higher than even he foresaw. Remember that every country in history that became the number 1 economic power eventually became the number 1 military power. Also remember that every country that was the number 1 military power USED that military power.
I think it is highly doubtful if any American troops will be in Asia 10 years from now. China won't allow it. What is scary when you read the article is that the author postulates that war becomes much more likely with rising Chinese power. When the Chinese get enough power, there literally will be nobody to stop them if they decide to take Korea and ***an.
IMF: China GNP to surpass the United States GNP in 5 years
Don't forget to send us a postcard.....
