How many years before China is No. 1?
POSTED BY: TraineeAlternate
UPDATED: Saturday, September 5, 2026 17:48
VIEWED: 15174
PAGE 1 of 2
Just asking a few opinions: How many years before China's economy, military, technology, and culture becomes powerful enough to trump that of the United States? What happens after this; more importantly, can it be stopped?
Chinese culture is very prevalent in Firefly, almost as much as Western-American culture. Even shipping crates bear as many US flags as Chinese stars. This is obviously a prediction of US-Chinese cooperation or conflict as almost-equals sometime in the future.
"That's why I never kiss them on the mouth."
"When do I get to get sexed up?!"
"This is my most favorite-est gun..."
NOTIFY: Y | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | PERMALINK | TOP | HOME
Well at least for the next ten years we will have assured military dominance beyond the Taiwan strait due to the fact they lack any creditable power projection capability in their navy i.e. they have no Carriers and only a few guided missile Destroyers. Also we have so much pre-positioned equipment in the area we can counter any move they could make. We have (what use to be called) SOSUS ocean floor sensors to monitor any ship/sub movements, Carriers based in Japan, Attack Subs in Japan & Guam, and airbases all across the Pacific Ocean. One Los Angeles class attack sub could probably defeat the entire PLAN (People’s Liberation Army-Navy) Nuclear sub force (5 Han SSNs and 1 Xia SSBN) and that’s no joke! An LA has torpedoes with over twice the range (nearly 30 miles vs. 10) and sensors with ranges the Chinese can’t possibly dream of (possibly over hundreds of miles vs. around 30 on a very good day). Their Air Force really can’t stay as massive as it is now. Currently they still fly versions of the MiG-21 (a jet from the 1960’s) and the cost of having to produce spare parts for such an obsolete jet while building modern ones is high and their ineffectiveness in combat makes it stupid.
As for Chinese technology there really isn’t such a thing it’s all begged, bought or stolen from Russia, France and the US. That’s the problem with communism; innovation vanishes and your always playing catch up.
EV Nova Firefly mod Message Board:
http://s4.invisionfree.com/GunRunner/index.php?act=idx
NOTIFY: Y | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | PERMALINK | TOP | HOME
Quote:
Originally posted by GunRunner:
As for Chinese technology there really isn’t such a thing it’s all begged, bought or stolen from Russia, France and the US. That’s the problem with communism; innovation vanishes and your always playing catch up.
At one time, only slightly more than a lifetime ago, the same was being said about the Japanese - that they had no innovation and that they had begged, borrowed, or stolen everything they had from the US and the British. By the time it was too late they had beaten the Russians and were well on their way towards becoming an imperialist power; traits they carried beyond WW2 and into becoming the technological juggernaut they are today.
Also, the rate at which we are wrecking our educational system and outsourcing most of our innovation doesn't bode well for us in the future, either. There is also a growing nationalist movement going on in China, as anyone who follows Chinese news certainly knows, which is more cooperative with the government than it is with the progressive movement.
I used to think that once the old guard communists passed away, democracy would take root in China (and China would fragment) and they would be no threat to the US on the world stage. I find it harder and harder to keep that belief as the years pass.
Just 7%'s 2c.
------------------------------------------
He looked bigger when I couldn't see him.
Anyone wanting to continue a discussion off board is welcome to email me - check bio for details.
NOTIFY: Y | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | PERMALINK | TOP | HOME
With all the bonds China is holding, they already own the US.
Nearly everything I know I learned by the grace of others.
NOTIFY: N | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | PERMALINK | TOP | HOME
How many years before China is No. 1?
TRAINEEALTERNATE
What? You mean they're not?
Made in Japan used to mean something Chrisisall
NOTIFY: Y | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | PERMALINK | TOP | HOME
HA HA HA HA HA HA HA HA HA HA HA HA HA HA HA Ha Ha Ha Ha Ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha (snort) hee hee hee hee hee hee .... (titter)
Nearly everything I know I learned by the grace of others.
NOTIFY: N | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | PERMALINK | TOP | HOME
... China can be a scary place. They are every bit as prideful as Americans, and at least as patriotic (or is that "nationalistic", as they're not us). They nearly ALL see China's rise to domination as some kind of definate, Manifest Destiny".
... But they have no liberty... very sad. What's even more sad is that most of those I met who actually know they are being manipulated and having terrible truths hidden from them, don't really care all that much. It's a relative thing. Compared to twenty-five years ago they've got mountains of cash, stuff they can buy, and more freedom (relatively speaking) than they've ever known.
... Still, I was pretty upset to see them cheering when 9/11 went down. That upset me pretty bad. (American news didn't discuss that much, did they? Think about why that might be...) Hell, people were setting off firecrackers for God's sake. 
NOTIFY: N | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | PERMALINK | TOP | HOME
China probably will never be number 1. There are some potentially passive catastrophes ahead of China right now. There’s an AIDS crisis in rural China. The one child policy is working out a bit too well. The majority of the families are having only boys. A lot of families that have girls kill them, especially families in rural areas. In some places, the boys outnumber the girls ten to one. Many people in China are still very superstitious and fall easily to cults like Falun Gong and mystical crap like Fung Shui, the ancient magical art of not making stuff look like crap.
"I swallowed a bug." -River Tam
NOTIFY: N | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | PERMALINK | TOP | HOME
Quote:
Originally posted by GunRunner:
Well at least for the next ten years we will have assured military dominance beyond the Taiwan strait due to the fact they lack any creditable power projection capability in their navy i.e. they have no Carriers and only a few guided missile Destroyers.
Yeah, but they have cash... and how long does it take to buy pretty much anything you want ? Well they already have :
http://www.findarticles.com/p/articles/mi_m0JIW/is_1_57/ai_113755343
3 carriers bought, negotiations to buy / build several more.
Seems they have their act together more than you would like to believe.
Hell, soon they will be ahead of the US in space as well
http://english.aljazeera.net/NR/exeres/7AE1968B-9551-42E8-820F-9D4E977
E8F8F.htm
NOTIFY: Y | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | PERMALINK | TOP | HOME
Quote:They can have the Kievs and the Varyag! Varyag just spent two decades rotting away in the Ukrane and the Kievs are a joke. The US has 14 carriers each with more fixed wing jets than all three combined (that’s assuming they could get all three operational and train the pilots for carrier operations) and we have 12 amphibious assault ships that can carry over half of what they carry plus a MEU. Plus if you count in NATO you can add 5 more dedicated flat tops and at least one other Harrier capable deck. Those Russian carriers were designed to launch their missiles and then get blown out of the water when NATO air and sea forces sweep the seas clean of anything that flies the hammer and sickle, that’s why they don’t carry many if any reloads for their big surface to surface missiles and that’s why they are hard to reload while underway (you have to roll the missile out on deck and load it or bring it in by crane).
Originally posted by GinoBiffaroni:Quote:
Originally posted by GunRunner:
Well at least for the next ten years we will have assured military dominance beyond the Taiwan strait due to the fact they lack any creditable power projection capability in their navy i.e. they have no Carriers and only a few guided missile Destroyers.
Yeah, but they have cash... and how long does it take to buy pretty much anything you want ? Well they already have :
http://www.findarticles.com/p/articles/mi_m0JIW/is_1_57/ai_113755343
3 carriers bought, negotiations to buy / build several more.
Seems they have their act together more than you would like to believe.
Hell, soon they will be ahead of the US in space as well
http://english.aljazeera.net/NR/exeres/7AE1968B-9551-42E8-820F-9D4E977
E8F8F.htm
Also remember just buying a flat top or two doesn’t mean they have a creditable force Argentina had a carrier in the Falklands War, which was on paper superior to any of the Royal Navy’s carriers (ironically the carrier was built in England). But when the attack sub HMS Conquer sunk one of their light cruisers they had to turn tail because they had no defenses that could take on an SSN. The PLAN is the same way their two best ships (well they did built another ship but I don’t have the specs on hand) are two Russian destroyers built to fight surface battles and don’t have the sophisticated sonar systems of dedicated ASW units. A US SSN could run wild in a sea of PLAN warships if they ever ventured in to deep water. You need to have a full hierarchy of trained personnel that takes decades to develop. The US has been playing the carrier game for over 70 years that kind of experience can’t be bought.
EV Nova Firefly mod Message Board:
http://s4.invisionfree.com/GunRunner/index.php?act=idx
NOTIFY: Y | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | PERMALINK | TOP | HOME
"At one time, only slightly more than a lifetime ago, the same was being said about the Japanese - that they had no innovation and that they had begged, borrowed, or stolen everything they had from the US and the British. By the time it was too late they had beaten the Russians and were well on their way towards becoming an imperialist power;"
The only reason that the Japanese were able to focus their economy towards innovation is because of massive American investment and trade with the Japanese economy post WWII. Despite their relative strength in innovation and technology (second only to the US), they have lost ground to the US over the past 15 years due to their overaly restrictive economic policies.
In any event, with regards to China, I actually got the opportunity to work there (in the heartland) for a few months, and I can tell you, with all honesty, that it will take several decades before they even begin to approach the economic and military strength of the US. Quite simply, despite their vasts amounts of cash, they DO NOT have their act together from a policy standpoint. Their political system is slowly coming apart at the seams, and they are constantly putting down local riots. Their education system is virtually nonexistent, and I can tell you from first-hand experience that their "university" educated engineers are about on par with your average US high school student in terms of knowledge and experience. Pretty dismal. Their best long-term asset, Western-educated nationals, are more likely to stay in their adopted countties than to return to China. The Economist recently reported that something like 70-80% of Chinese that go to be educated in the US actually stay in the US to work.
Even if the current long-term economic growth rates continue, by 2025 the Chinese economy will still only be 1/4 the size of the US, and by 2055 it will still only be 1/2 the size. So we're at least looking at another 70-80 years of US dominance. And this is assuming that China can keep up a growth rate of 8-10 % per year, which I personally believe is highly unlikely for two reasons:
1) Trend growth rates decrease as economies grow larger (e.g. the US trend rate is 3.0-3.5%, Russia is 6.0-6.5%)
2) At some point all the political turmoil bubbling underneath the surface will explode outward, and who knows what the outcome of that will be.
NOTIFY: N | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | PERMALINK | TOP | HOME
"Despite their relative strength in innovation and technology (second only to the US), they have lost ground to the US over the past 15 years due to their overaly restrictive economic policies."
It still baffles me that nobody gets it. The more restriction, regulation, control, taxes, etc... the LESS growth, development and inovation you get.
Freedom = Prosperity
But everyone wants MORE laws, MORE restrictions, MORE taxes. Can't resist the urge to meddle.
We are the most prosperous country on the gorram planet, but nobody wants to admit it is because we have MORE FREEDOM (not PERFECT freedom, but way more than anyone else.)
grumble grumble grumble
~~~~~
"Funny and sexy. You have no idea. And you never will."
NOTIFY: Y | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | PERMALINK | TOP | HOME
If the US is "the most prosperous country on the gorram planet" then why is the standard of living so far down the list?
Nearly everything I know I learned by the grace of others.
NOTIFY: N | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | PERMALINK | TOP | HOME
It boggles my mind that people are so unwilling to see where we're going right now.
People who used to shop at Filene's are shopping at Target; people who used to shop at Target are shopping at Wal-Mart.
We're sliding down, and cheap goods from China are making it SEEM like nothing's happening. If we're not careful, we're gonna pull a 'Rome'.
I'm not sayin' we can't bounce back from this, but it's gonna take some tough choices, like- have less meaningless crap to fill up your life, but if you must have it, buy American. (Personally, I see us turning into a purely service and retail economy, producing nothing, not even movies and music- Canada and Mexico will end with those jobs)
Look around; we don't need terrorists with a nuclear bomb to destroy us, if nothing changes, we'll have the economy of 'Dark Angel' without a 'Pulse'.(shame on those that don't get the reference
)
The world economy is shaking America's buying power down to her roots, and the only ones who will come out on top...well, they're the ones on top- now, I mean.
I remember when $100,000 a year meant you were practically rich, now it means you can afford to send your kids to college.
Chrisisall, living in the United States of Debt
P.S., will someone please take that hammer out of Bush's hand? There's enough nails in our collective coffin allready.....
NOTIFY: Y | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | PERMALINK | TOP | HOME
"I remember when $100,000 a year meant you were practically rich, now it means you can afford to send your kids to college."
I think this is largely due to inflation and the rising cost of higher education, but I don't think it's an indication of overall weakness in our economy. Even if families cannot pay for college out of their own funds, the US government and banking industry allows pretty flexible and solid lending opporunities, such that loans for higher education, on average, are a better investment than they ever have been in this country.
Additionally, over the past 20 years we've been able to maintain steady, solid growth while keeping down inflation, increased per capita purchasing power due to the lower prices of commodities, significant increases in productivity, and an unemploymen rate of 5.0%, which is phenomenal compared to our semi-socialist European friends. Also, the violent crime rate is at a 30-year low in this country. You can choose to be negative about the US economy, but quite frankly, the statistics show otherwise.
And your point about the US economy becoming primarily service-based is largely irrelevant. It comes down to comparative advantage - why produce the goods here when they can be bought at a cheaper price from another country? Maunfacturing hasn't been the backbone of the US economy for 40 years now, so it's ahistorical to pretend this is some sort of new phenomenon or that "it's all Bush's doing." Our economy should specialize in the areas in which it has the best advantage, which is quite clearly services, technology, and innovation. A great example is the Internet. It was developed by DARPA and then turned over to private industry and academia, and look at its effects: hundreds of thousands of jobs in the US alone (when in 1980 there were 0 Internet-related jobs). The US economy spawned an entirely new industry because it focused its energies in the areas where it had the most advantage - technological reserach and development. Trying to revert the US economy to what it was in the 1940's and 1950's (i.e. a primarily manufacturing economy) would be utterly devastating not only for the US economy, but for the world. Our best bet to continue producing ideas and innovation - these are not tangible commodities, but I would argue they are far more valuable then, say, manufactured toy or piece of furniture. Not to be a jerk, but this is all pretty standard neo-liberal economic theory.
NOTIFY: N | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | PERMALINK | TOP | HOME
Quote:
Originally posted by rue:
If the US is "the most prosperous country on the gorram planet" then why is the standard of living so far down the list?
Nearly everything I know I learned by the grace of others.
Depends on who makes the list, as noted in this NY Times article:
http://www.nytimes.com/2005/04/17/weekinreview/17bawer.html?ex=1271390
400&en=44ea05b3e068feb5&ei=5090&partner=rssuserland&emc=rss
"THE received wisdom about economic life in the Nordic countries is easily summed up: people here are incomparably affluent, with all their needs met by an efficient welfare state. They believe it themselves. Yet the reality - as this Oslo-dwelling American can attest, and as some recent studies confirm - is not quite what it appears...
All this was illuminated last year in a study by a Swedish research organization, Timbro, which compared the gross domestic products of the 15 European Union members (before the 2004 expansion) with those of the 50 American states and the District of Columbia. (Norway, not being a member of the union, was not included.)
After adjusting the figures for the different purchasing powers of the dollar and euro, the only European country whose economic output per person was greater than the United States average was the tiny tax haven of Luxembourg, which ranked third, just behind Delaware and slightly ahead of Connecticut."
You can download the .pdf of the report here:
http://www.timbro.com/euvsusa/
"Keep the Shiny side up"
NOTIFY: Y | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | PERMALINK | TOP | HOME
Just adding this from info on the CIA home page about economic trends, etc. The answer to the question "How many years before China is No. 1?" is 11.
NOTIFY: Y | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | PERMALINK | TOP | HOME
Haywood. What if Neo-Liberal (love that phrase) economic theory is wrong? I think we all get the point about comparative advantage but even Smith and Ricardo expected one of the trading partners to make *something.*
The problem as I see it is two fold. First service economies do not create wealth they add value. Service industries are second order economic entities, someone somewhere has to have created the wealth that they then spend on services. If nobody creates wealth how can they continue to spend it?
Second problem is that the US has no monopoly on "good ideas." In fact overall it hasn't created that many from "whole cloth" a lot of major innovation came from elsewhere it's just that America was far far better at seizing potential and exploiting it than anyone else. This idea that the US can create a brain trust who's ideas somehow buy the material goods that it no longer produces is an interesting idea for Science Fiction writers. What would a US economy based on that principle look like? Would it be a servant state? Where the few that earn the foreign exchange keep the rest of the population as various forms of domestic servant? Or would it be some pseudo socialist dictatorship with smart folks forced to think to support the unthinking, unworking masses?
I ask because I can't imagine how you could have a society that makes nothing but ideas. I can't imagine how they could maintain a big enough long term advantage or how they force the rest of the world to accept interlectual property as a reserve currency?
I believe this is like phantom WMD's. There are people now profiting big time from the current "neo-liberal" economic regime. They have no interest in if it's sustainable as long as they get to profit from it now and they sell these dumb ideas of some kind of innovation economy to reassure the masses that what they see with their own eyes is not true...
NOTIFY: Y | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | PERMALINK | TOP | HOME
Quote:Yes, I must try to remember that all I see is false; the ice caps are not melting, the climate is not changing, our standard of living is as good as it was 25 years ago, war is fast becoming obsolete as we are but one world, united in the common good, our leaders are caring and articulate and foward-looking, corporate America has re-discovered the value of the individual....
Originally posted by Hayward79:
Our best bet to continue producing ideas and innovation - these are not tangible commodities, but I would argue they are far more valuable then, say, manufactured toy or piece of furniture. Not to be a jerk, but this is all pretty standard neo-liberal economic theory.
What a deluded dumass I can sometimes be, thinking that all ain't well all the time....
Chrisisall, ignoring that little fire in his kitchen, 'cause his statistics show his house burning down to be an unlikely event.
NOTIFY: Y | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | PERMALINK | TOP | HOME
I'm going to disagree with this neo-liberal thing, whatever it is. We need to be in manufaturing as well as information industries or we have no impact on innovation and gain nothing from it.
The gas-powered vehicle clearly has to go. It's totally inevitable, and it will happen in the next 20 years. The companies that produce the best alternatives will become corporate superpowers. Since the purchase for Chrysler by Daimler, there are only two major American automakers, and both are in perilous danger of going bankrupt this year. If this happens, then you can pretty much bet that the winner of this alternative energy car thing, and event which turn an industry on its head, and yield upwards of a trillion dollars in revenue long term, will not be us.
This same idea could be applied to a lot of manufacturing that the US has already been more or less pushed out of. TVs, Computers, anything with a remote possibility of innovation should be kept alive if we're to benefit at all from that innovation.
I guess I'm wasting space, let me put it more simply. I agree with Fletch. And Chris. I don't got a lot to add here.
NOTIFY: Y | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | PERMALINK | TOP | HOME
I wonder how many people bemoaning the loss of manufacturing jobs have ever HELD one? Standing on an assembly line, doing mindless repetative work, feet aching, talking to no one, hearing nothing but a machine humm, trying to not go insane waiting for your pathetic 1/2 hour lunch in the cafeteria so you can bitch about the previous 4 hours you spend standing on the line.
Now imaging being the person on the end of the line that has to check the work of the other people on the line. Write them up. Point out their mistakes. Yup, the dreaded QA aditor. Been there, done that.
~~~~~
"Funny and sexy. You have no idea. And you never will."
NOTIFY: Y | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | PERMALINK | TOP | HOME
If it paid the bills, I could do it.
But if it paid crap, I could understand the resentment...
Chrisisall, with bills
NOTIFY: Y | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | PERMALINK | TOP | HOME
Thank you HAYWARD79 for providing sound economic theory to this discussion.
As for China buying US Debt, I have no problem with a country buying it at the highest prices in 50 years. Funding our economic growth at a cheap price. Communist have much to learn about capitalism.
Only the half mad are wholly alive!
E.A.
NOTIFY: Y | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | PERMALINK | TOP | HOME
"Yes, I must try to remember that all I see is false; the ice caps are not melting, the climate is not changing, our standard of living is as good as it was 25 years ago, war is fast becoming obsolete as we are but one world"
Since you are but one of 6 billion + people in this world, I actually do think you have a serious case of tunnel vision if you are only going to look at the situation based on your own, limited experiences. In my experience, people are doing far better today than they were, say in, 1977, when unemployment was around 9% and inflation in double digits. However, I know better than to rely just on what I perceive around me; I look at overall trends and statistics. They aren't perfect, but they informative and I suggest you approach them with an open-mind rather than with some half-based, preconceived notions about isolationism and quasi-socialist economic thought.
Secondly, about the US not having a monopoly on innovative ideas: I never claimed that the US did have a "monopoly" in this area, I simply made the point that that is where our best advantage lays. For some reason, some people keep pretending that the loss of manufacturing is some sort of new thing in this country - it isn't. As to ideas not creating new jobs, nothing could be further from the truth. Again, look at the pioneering innovation that took place in Silicon Valley in the 80's and 90's. The development of computer technology, software, and the Internet is indeed a "whole cloth" invention created almost entirely by US and Japanese innovation, and as such, it has added hundreds of thousands of jobs to those two economies. The US is also currently leading the way in research in high-tech areas such as nanotechnology and biotechnology. It has even recently started to catch up to Japan in the area of robotics. And finally, almost every innovation in manufacturing over the past 50 years has been developed from the ground-up in US university and corporate research labs.
NOTIFY: N | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | PERMALINK | TOP | HOME
Quote:
Originally posted by MtnScott:
Thank you HAYWARD79 for providing sound economic theory to this discussion.
Chrisisall
NOTIFY: Y | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | PERMALINK | TOP | HOME
Quote:Revel in all the statistics you want to pal, I'm sure they are a great comfort to you, and your VAST chair-bound 'UN-limited' experience. No need to get out into the world and talk to real people, those are just 'limiting' experiences. No, by all means, stay home in front of a computer and read the numbers that are meaningful; the Alliance would like if we all believed what we were told.
Originally posted by Hayward79:
I actually do think you have a serious case of tunnel vision if you are only going to look at the situation based on your own, limited experiences. I know better than to rely just on what I perceive around me; I look at overall trends and statistics.
I come in contact with hundreds of people every day in this college town that I live in, many from outside the country, and talking with them is further limiting me it seems. I'm also very young, as it only takes most of the fingers of only one hand to count the decades I've been wittness to, so my perspective hasn't had time to develope. And, I've never been to Hawaii or Alaska, so how can I hope to know the whole country (Magnum P.I. and Northern Exposure aside...)?
At least I can refrain from calling you an idiot; you're new here, and I don't know you very well.
(I'm trying to break out of my tunnel-vision-like assessments of people)
Chrisisall, who was a little more gracious as a brand newbie...(at least I hope I was
)
NOTIFY: Y | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | PERMALINK | TOP | HOME
Most estimates Iv read have put China as the worlds number 1 economy in as little as 10 years. Militarily it is hard to say so I won’t comment.
Thing is, all estimates about Chinas growth as great world power, and indeed all estimates about the US’s decline fail to take into account the fact that the worlds supply of oil is slowly but surely running out. Within ten years the entire global economy could be thrown into chaos by the soaring price of oil. In that situation emerging world power will be Russia (Who are sitting on the world largest supplies of untapped oil)
It like every power and economist on earth has their fingers in their ears and is chanting “It won’t run out. It won’t run out.”
So if the oil remains the century belongs to China. If it runs out, for a time its Russias, then where all doomed. Well except France who actually generates enough Nuclear power to survive without oil. Well until one of there reactors blows up and irradiates most of Europe.
--------------------------------------------------
Who do you suppose is in there?
NOTIFY: N | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | PERMALINK | TOP | HOME
Fact.
Last September China became the number 2 Industrial power in the world.
Fact.
China is the #2 holder of US Debt. Japan is #1.
Most American's don't care about God, Family, the USA as much as they care about $$$$.
Don't believe me, how many 3 day a week church going Christians buy Made In China because it's 10% cheaper, even though China is Communist and bans religion? Walmart is the #1 importer of Chinese goods.
China could sink our economy overnight by calling in our debt. True, it would hurt them, but who do you think take poverty better, them or us.
Japan and Russia at least say they are our friends, but China hasn't even pretended to, yet we ignore it.
Japanese people think they make better 'Americans' then we do, the Chinese don't like us.
All you need for the success of evil is for good people to do nothing.
NOTIFY: Y | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | PERMALINK | TOP | HOME
Quote:Who cares that the Chinese government doesn't like us? We know all their secret Kung-Fu moves now, and can turn this to our advantage!
Originally posted by RC71:
Japan and Russia at least say they are our friends, but China hasn't even pretended to, yet we ignore it.
Chrisisall Caine
NOTIFY: Y | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | PERMALINK | TOP | HOME
"Most estimates Iv read have put China as the worlds number 1 economy in as little as 10 years."
Well, then they weren't basing their esimated on total GDP, and I'm not sure what a more relevant criteria there would be in determining the #1 economy. The Economist did a study in 2003 I think that said if China averages 8-10% GDP growth over the next 20 years, and the US averages 3-4% growth, then China's economy will still only be 1/4 the size of the US economy. I will try to find the link to the article and will post it.
NOTIFY: N | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | PERMALINK | TOP | HOME
You are correct. No one comes close to us in total dollars, but issue is how strong is number one when a country like china can put us in a depression overnight.
In 1982 the Japanese made it clear to the US that they were done being told what to do and they were going to tell us how it going to be.
We slapped a tarriff and on them for not letting the US sell rice in Japan. They held the debt out and in a matter of days the tariff was repealed and we still couldn't sell rice on the Japanese open market.
NOTIFY: Y | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | PERMALINK | TOP | HOME
Unregistered Companion: was that 8 hour a week, shit pay job better than no job and no prospects of a job? because that is what we are talking about here. My family were coal miners for generations. That truely is a NASTY job, nobody would want their kids to have to do that for a living. Well the mine closed and those people became unemployed and you know what? They discovered that there was worse things than being a miner, being unemployed being one of them.
The people that want you to believe this is ok don't say "well you'll loose that manufacturing job and be unemployed for the foreseeable future" they say "well you didn't really want *that* job not when there are all these marvellous theoretical high tech jobs we will replace it with."
If there is a job for those people to move into then dandy, I don't want anybody doing drudge work if there is an alternative, but this is not going to be a choice between drudge work or a better job, this is a choice between a job and no job.
Manufacturing, like farming, mining and some knowledge based professions are important because they are a primary source of wealth. The service industries that replace them only add value. If you are in a steel town and the mills close, who has money to spend at the shops and restaurants that support those service jobs.
NOTIFY: Y | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | PERMALINK | TOP | HOME
Haywood, you are absolutely correct. Free trade grows markets and thus makes a bigger pie. A smaller slice of a bigger pie might still be larger than the bigger slice of a smaller pie we're all used to. We get that, really.
The problem is that there isn't some nice mom out there cutting up this economic wealth and handing it out according to need or according to virtue. The US gets the slice it can grab and hold onto in the fight for a share. I don't see how that can be done if the economic "body" is weak.
I still say that all these theories are very nice but unproved. The fact that people say "well high tech is moving to India but that's ok because it leaves us free to exploit The Next Big Thing" without being able to say what the "Next Big Thing" is worries me.
Right now there are very few things the US is so good at that she has a sustainable comparative advantage. What pays the bills going forward?
NOTIFY: Y | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | PERMALINK | TOP | HOME
The lack of understanding of basic economics and Finance in this discussion is amazing...
Positives of China buying US Debt...
1. Interest rates stay low.
a. Buying House Cheaper
b. Business' Cost of Capital Lower (=Economic Growth)
2. as mentioned before, they are buying US Debt at 50 year highs. (much the same as the Japanese did with real estate in the 80's)
China Own 2.5% of US debt. US treasuries are sold on an open Market, China can not "call" in the debt. They would have to sell it on the open market. This would cause rates to rise and would hurt our economy. At the same time China would hurt their own economy more as the value of the debt they are holding plummets in value as they are trying to sell it. Political Pressure that is already intense would exponentially grow to float the Yuan, in turn, leading to the collapse of Chinas cost advantages. Protectionism would raise its ugly head and Imports from china would Drop, thus Killing China's fledgling economy. Without a strong US economy, Chinas falls apart. They know this.
NOTIFY: N | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | PERMALINK | TOP | HOME
China isn't going to dump US debt -- what advantage is there in that? However they are not just giving the US money and that's that, the US has to repay that debt at some time and it has to finance those repayments somehow.
This is just like a credit card, you run up a bill and in theory the loan company can sell on your debt, crap on your credit rating and make your life hell but where's the profit in that? No for them the best solution is that you keep making minimum payments all your life, which is what the US is doing with that debt at the moment.
The problem with China isn't that they will dump the bonds but that they will stop buying them because then interest rates will rise and the underlying weaknesses in the current economy will be revealed. A day will come when that happens, it won't be any time soon but when it does there will be problems.
NOTIFY: Y | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | PERMALINK | TOP | HOME
Quote:Well you can take on 10,000 screaming Chinamen with your Kung-Fu, I'll keep my M-249 and stand behind you…
Originally posted by chrisisall:Quote:Who cares that the Chinese government doesn't like us? We know all their secret Kung-Fu moves now, and can turn this to our advantage!
Originally posted by RC71:
Japan and Russia at least say they are our friends, but China hasn't even pretended to, yet we ignore it.
Chrisisall Caine
EV Nova Firefly mod Message Board:
http://s4.invisionfree.com/GunRunner/index.php?act=idx
NOTIFY: Y | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | PERMALINK | TOP | HOME
Hayward,
Re: China statistics
I got mine off the CIA homepage, and while I respect the Economist I don't respect regurgitated analyses that might have added flaws. The analysis you quoted failed to take into account the inevitable parity of currencies that will come with having twice the United State's rate of growth. I said 11 years someone else said 10, I think this is pretty pretty solid stuff. It's somewhere on the order of a decade.
Can this change? Sure. But there are basically four things that can change it.
Two that would improve our situation vis a vis China:
1. An economic recovery in America. I think this is just about inconceivable, it would require a drastic overhaul of American fiscal policy, which I think would have to involve about 75% reduction in federal spending and an 80% reduction in taxation. I think it's possible, but quite frankly I think it's very unlikely.
2. A collapse of the Chinese economy. This is another I frankly don't see coming. A collapse of the Chinese govt. would accellerate economic growth, just about the only thing that would slow it is the Chinese govt. taking some totally lunatic economic stance. On second thought, I take it back, this one IS possible.
Two would make things worse and might hasten a Chinese take-over:
3. An accelleration of the Chinese economic growth. This is only going to happen if the communists lose power in a relatively peaceful manner. It's unlikely, but somewhat more possible than 1 and 2.
4. An economic collapse in the United States. This is a very real reality. I would place this as most likely of the 4 and perhaps more likely to happen then not happen.
Follow this scenario:
A. Bush's insane spending will force an increase in revenue by the next administration, assuming that admin is a democrat, which is probably a safe assumption, they will do it by raising taxes.
B. When The Benator/Hillary ticket wins in '08, they will inherit the enormous debt of Bush in the mega trillions.
C. Being democrats they raise taxes on businesses and working people making hiring Americans in white collar labor markets no longer feasible. (It's already not feasible to hire Americans in working class blue collar labor markets because of the incredibly unfavorable tax and regulatory structure in the US)
D. White collar employers will flee the US in favor of Japan, Korea and India, as well as Canada, Mexico and possibly Eastern Europe. Tax revenues will fall because the work force will be shrinking.
E. The Nelson administration will be tied to its overdrawn expenses because it will have inherited the bait-and-switch campaign supporters, such as the drug companies, and because it will have overgrown social experiments such as Hillary's health plan, and it will be bogged down in a war in Iran because it will have inherited the New World Order crowd.
F. At a completely loss to cover the expenses, and unwilling to reduce expenditures to their sweetheart deals with Halliburton, Pfiezer, et al. Ben Nelson and Hillary Clinton will launch a truly hairbrained economic revenue scheme. I have no idea what this will be, but I trust that they will think of something along the lines of Wilson's War Debt reparations.
G. The new economic madness paradign will rapidly precipitate a stock market crash. A great depression will follow.
This is just one possible Scenario. It's possible Bush himself will cause this kind of disaster through a similar sequence of events.
Anyway, should something like this transpire, China will leap rapidly into first place.
NOTIFY: Y | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | PERMALINK | TOP | HOME
"I got mine off the CIA homepage, and while I respect the Economist I don't respect regurgitated analyses that might have added flaws. The analysis you quoted failed to take into account the inevitable parity of currencies that will come with having twice the United State's rate of growth. I said 11 years someone else said 10, I think this is pretty pretty solid stuff. It's somewhere on the order of a decade."
I have yet to find ANY analysis that puts the Chinese economy anywhere near the US economy in size in the next 25 years, much less the next 10 or 11. I checked the CIA site and could not find this information anywhere. Also, for any economic information that the CIA does report, they don;t provide the method used for nay of their projections, while The Economist does. What was the CIA report that you found using as their basis for the comparison??? I'm sorry, but what you're saying just doesn't make any sense.
Also, what the in the 'verse do parity of currencies (which, just so you know, do not necessarily normalize due to grwoth rates, especially when when the exchange rate is artificially pegged by the Chinese government) rates ultimately have to do with total economic output?
NOTIFY: N | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | PERMALINK | TOP | HOME
"Follow this scenario:"
I tried, but it honestly defies logic, and is alarmist propaganda to boot.
NOTIFY: N | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | PERMALINK | TOP | HOME
I don't know why everyone seems so terrified of China's becoming a superpower in a few years' time. Really, so what?
Britain, Spain and France were all once superpowers, with Britain & Spain claiming most of the globe between them. Did that destroy the economies of all other countries? No.
And when America's turn came to rise to power, did Europe and the rest of the world collapse into abject poverty? No.
Are Europe and Australia crawling along in the mud now, just because America is rich? Um, no.
Did America invade Canada, Mexico and the whole of South America, claiming it all as US territory, just because it was rich? No.
So what do you think will happen when China gets rich? Do you think America will suddenly collapse into miserable poverty? No.
Do you think China is just itching to send great armies into the rest of the world? Do you think China wants to invade America and seize whole continents as its own? Don't be daft!!! Why waste the money?
They only want the same thing as all other Third World countries want: to develop as quickly as possible and make as much money as they can, to give their people a better life.
You are wrong to say the Chinese don't like America---they deeply admire everything western, everything American, from fast food to the NBA---they even want to look like westerners, because they think westerners are more beautiful.
(By the way, that remark about them cheering over 9/11 must have been some of the ethnic minority Muslim groups in China, not the mainstream Chinese. Just like westerners, the mainstream worries about their own Muslim groups kicking up.)
It is not true that religion is not allowed---Buddhist and Taoist temples thrive in China now, while Muslim mosques and Christian churches are open for anyone to attend. It is missionaries of any kind that are frowned upon, as in other parts of the world, because they often mix religion and politics together.
The vast majority of Chinese are not remotely interested in politics at all---they just want to make money to send their kids to college and buy a car.
How is that so different from us westerners? Why is that so awful and scary?
So for all those American guys busy barricading themselves in their houses with machine guns ready for the big invasion, you really ought to relax and get out more. Come on over and do some country line-dancing with the Chinese---they love it, and you can show them some new steps!
And if you could make some Chinese friends and forget about racial prejudice, you would see what wonderful people they really are.
If western civilization collapses, it won't be because the Chinese got rich---it will be because of climate change. And who did that, I wonder?
Anyway, that's just my opinion.
NOTIFY: N | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | PERMALINK | TOP | HOME
Quote:Certain people so bent on controlling the world and it's oil that the understanding of what's good for America in the long term has gotten lost in the shuffle.
Originally posted by Nellie:
If western civilization collapses, it won't be because the Chinese got rich---it will be because of climate change. And who did that, I wonder?
Thanks, Nellie, for the positivity- a rare and wonderful thing on RWE!
So we take our place in between Europe and Australia...poor rich folk in the U.S., they'll have to take one less vacation per year due to the hard times
Chrisisall, rich in spirit (not that he couldn't use a yacht...)
NOTIFY: Y | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | PERMALINK | TOP | HOME
Quote:Is different from standard of living. GDP does not take into account money distribution. Geezer, you should know better.
gross domestic products
Nearly everything I know I learned by the grace of others.
NOTIFY: N | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | PERMALINK | TOP | HOME
Quote:I did. Assembly line. It convinced me that I wasn't cut out for that kind of work. But service jobs (of which I've held many) are just as onerous in their own way.
I wonder how many people bemoaning the loss of manufacturing jobs have ever HELD one?
(PS Your description is pretty accurate for the traditional assembly line. Dirty, hot, boring, nasty work. The secret, I found, was not to look at the clock. Once you started looking, you were done for. Then you would look again and go oh man! only five minutes have gone by! this day is gonna be FOREVER And look again, and again .... I have not done clean-room assembly, it may be different.
Service jobs I have held - waiting tables (twice), child-care (once), hospital aide (once), home-cleaning (twice), gas-station attendent (once). Fortunately except for the waiting jobs, my employers were relatively decent. In most service jobs, one works at the whim of arbitrary and demanding bosses.)
Nearly everything I know I learned by the grace of others.
NOTIFY: N | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | PERMALINK | TOP | HOME
Quote:That was an interesting choice for a base value, which I'm sure you winnowed out b/c it 'proved' your point.
In my experience, people are doing far better today than they were, say in, 1977, when unemployment was around 9% and inflation in double digits.
In reality, over the decades, US poverty rates are up, and inflation-adjusted WAGES (not income, which includes investement returns) are down. Numbers of uninsured - up. Children living in poverty - up.
As for unemployment, the US and other economies count it differently. The US looks at ONLY those currently receiving unemployment benefits. Other countries look at real unemployment. However, if you go far enough down through the info at the US BLS, you will see that it counts REAL unemployment (males only) at ~ 12%.
Nearly everything I know I learned by the grace of others.
NOTIFY: N | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | PERMALINK | TOP | HOME
Yes, it would be truly terrible if the rich actually had to work for a living, rather than get others to do their work for them.
How will they cope, not gettin' a new yacht every year.
Citizen, kickin' bottom or what?
More insane ramblings by the people who brought you beeeer milkshakes!
Remember, the ice caps aren't melting, the water is being liberated.
NOTIFY: Y | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | PERMALINK | TOP | HOME
Quote:This is a discussion I've had with my co-workers. We did a throw-away calcuation which you can reproduce with minimal effort. Take the per-capita GDP of China (in US dollars) and multiply it by the number of Chinese. Do the same for the US. The TOTAL economies of both countries are roughly the same. The difference is that most of the Chinese economy is internal.
I have yet to find ANY analysis that puts the Chinese economy anywhere near the US economy in size in the next 25 years, much less the next 10 or 11.
Speaking of oil, both the Chinese and Japanese are in competition for Russian oil. They are both trying to induce Russia to run the eastern pipeline being built in their direction.
Nearly everything I know I learned by the grace of others.
NOTIFY: N | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | PERMALINK | TOP | HOME
Quote:I somehow lost the ability to edit this post. But I wanted to add that the reason why the BLS looks only at males is b/c they don't quite know how to count female 'homemakers'. They also exclude the disabled and students. So there are all these women who are of age, not disabled and not students, who may or may not be in the labor market. It makes for an uncertain female unemployment number. They dispense with that by simply not counting females.
However, if you go far enough down through the info at the US BLS, you will see that it counts REAL unemployment (males only) at ~ 12%.
They also discuss the uncertainty regarding women and male students are are doing what they are doing (staying at home/ attending school) for the reason thay they couldn't find gainful employment.
They don't discuss underemployment (PT or temp workers who want/need FT permanent jobs). If you have some type of job, you are employed.
They also don't discuss wages in that particular statistic.
When it comes to manufacturing v other work, there is information elsewhere regarding total historical manufacturing v other types of jobs but you have to look pretty hard for that. (Agricultural is another category that is broken out of total employment.)
As for recent job additions to the US economy, I have not personally taken the time to see if figures are available for the types are jobs added v the types of jobs lost.
Based on overall trends, my guess is that most jobs gained are service.
Nearly everything I know I learned by the grace of others.
NOTIFY: N | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | PERMALINK | TOP | HOME
I guess that depends on whether we are looking at total output, living standards, military might, regional influence, economic growth rate, environmental impact, or toothbrushes per capita.
Quote:The reason why DC, Luxembourg, Delaware and Connecticut are so high on the scale is because they have large flows of capital pouring through them, not because of high production or good living standards: Connecticut is the haven of insurance companies, Delaware -unlike other states- allows off-shore incorporation, DC has lobbying firms connected with Washington, and Luxembourg is a tax haven. Large money changes hands there. Yet few would argue that New Haven and Washington DC have a high standard of living. The stats by themselves point out the problem of using per capita GDP as a measure of living standards: it doesn't account for money flowing into (and out of) the boundary.
All this was illuminated last year in a study by a Swedish research organization, Timbro, which compared the gross domestic products of the 15 European Union members (before the 2004 expansion) with those of the 50 American states and the District of Columbia. (Norway, not being a member of the union, was not included.)
After adjusting the figures for the different purchasing powers of the dollar and euro, the only European country whose economic output per person was greater than the United States average was the tiny tax haven of Luxembourg, which ranked third, just behind Delaware and slightly ahead of Connecticut.
And as Rue pointed out there is the problem of distribution. If you have three ballplayers sitting on the bench with an average salary of $700,000 you figure they must be pretty wealthy and have no cause to complain. But if two are making $50,000 and the third is making $2,000,000 that creates a whole different picture. Using averages is fallacious and misleading when you are dealing with unbounded values.
I know someone who has been to China several times. It has a vast and varied economic landscape. In the cities, no matter which direction you turn you will see six or seven construction cranes. In the outskirts you will see relatively modern building with primitve toilets and no AC. On the one hand, there is a mag-lev train under construction. On the other hand, road repairs are done entirely by hand and five people will wait on you in the stores because of underemployment.
China's most significant bar to becoming THE biggest per capita economy is energy (not just oil) and the next biggest is water. Unless they can solve those significant factors they will be numerically bigger than the USA in just five years or so, but per capita they will still have a long way to go. But to the other nations in the region (Japan, Koreas, Indonesia etc) China alread IS the largest economy.
------------------------
Please don't think they give a shit.
NOTIFY: Y | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | PERMALINK | TOP | HOME
"As for unemployment, the US and other economies count it differently. The US looks at ONLY those currently receiving unemployment benefits. Other countries look at real unemployment"
Actually, this is quite wrong. The methods for determining unemployment, as reported by magazines such as The Economist and Time, are roughly equal, with a margin of error of about +/- 1.0%. I'm sorry to have to call you out on this, but you are apreading false information.
As to wage growth, you sort of undermined your own argument by pointing out that wage statistics do NOT count investment income (and about 50% of the middle class in the US owns some sort of equity in investments). Wage stats also do not take into account the appreciation in real property, which historically outpaces inflation (and incidentally, home ownership % in the US is at an ALL-TIME high). And finally, wage stats do not take into account purchasing-power parity.
I think a basic econ course is in order for you. I always love it when people parade out wage statistics to support their negativity on the US economy - it's a predictable argument and easily shot down.
"Unless they can solve those significant factors they will be numerically bigger than the USA in just five years or so"
Again, this is so wrong that it hardly even bears mentioning again. Honestly, look up the statistics on total output of the US and Chinese economies. Please, do it so that you stop giving out false information.
NOTIFY: N | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | PERMALINK | TOP | HOME
Quote:How do YOU measure total output? GDP is a misleading figure because it includes all sorts of money transactions that have little to do with production, productivity, or living standards. In terms of output (tons of agricultural produce, tons of concrete, etc) it is a well-known and commonly accepted fact that China is numerically ahead of us on many fronts.
Again, this is so wrong that it hardly even bears mentioning again. Honestly, look up the statistics on total output of the US and Chinese economies. Please, do it so that you stop giving out false information.
steel www.aiis.org/speeches/speech92.html
grain: China approx 4.3 Mtons, USA approx 2.5 Mtons
cement: China approx 630 Mtons USA approx 90 Mtons www.nrcan.gc.ca/mms/cmy/content/2002/17.pdf
Cotton: China approx 5 Mtons USA approx 4 Mtons http://r0.unctad.org/infocomm/anglais/cotton/market.htm
So... what are YOUR stats?
---------------------------------
Please don't think they give a shit.
NOTIFY: Y | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | PERMALINK | TOP | HOME
Quote:Only 50% of the middle class has "some sort" of investments? Honestly, I would have thought it would be quite a bit higher than 50% which indicates to me that investment income in the middle class is quite low- prolly accounting for 10% of total income.
As to wage growth, you sort of undermined your own argument by pointing out that wage statistics do NOT count investment income (and about 50% of the middle class in the US owns some sort of equity in investments). Wage stats also do not take into account the appreciation in real property, which historically outpaces inflation (and incidentally, home ownership % in the US is at an ALL-TIME high). And finally, wage stats do not take into account purchasing-power parity.
---------------------------------
Please don't think they give a shit.
NOTIFY: Y | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | PERMALINK | TOP | HOME
I am not "apreading (sic) false information" regarding US v European unemployment figures.
http://europa.eu.int/comm/employment_social/news/2003/apr/eurostat_feb
_en.html
The Eurostat definition of unemployed people are those aged 15 to 74 and who, following the International Labour Organisation (ILO) definition:
- are without work
- are available to start work within the next two weeks
- and have actively sought employment at some time during the previous four weeks.
The US definition is those people who are currently receiving unemployment benefits. It does not take into account those who have dropped off the rolls due to long-term unemployment.
Your comment (below) is in error.
Quote:
Actually, this is quite wrong. The methods for determining unemployment, as reported by magazines such as The Economist and Time, are roughly equal, with a margin of error of about +/- 1.0%. I'm sorry to have to call you out on this, but you are apreading false information.
Nearly everything I know I learned by the grace of others.
NOTIFY: N | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | PERMALINK | TOP | HOME
Quote:For a good reason. Corporate income, mergers and corporate investment income do not contribute to personal spendable income. If you want to talk about personal income, for most Americans, it is wages.
wage statistics do NOT count investment income
And I'm sure you are aware of the deceptive nature of arithmetic averages, which is essentially what the GDP is. Median is also somewhat skewed, mode is probably the most reliable indicator of what Americans are earning per year.
Given available statistics, however, what you see is this:
http://www.monthlyreview.org/0405yates.htm
Basically they tell us that, with one exception, workers in the United States have been taking a beating for the past thirty years. The single exception is roughly the period from 1995 to 2000. From 1995 to 2000, wages (unless otherwise indicated, wages will refer to “real” wages, a measure of the purchasing power of our wages) began to grow significantly after two decades of stagnation ...
Most of the increases in total income have gone to the owners of capital
Nearly everything I know I learned by the grace of others.
NOTIFY: N | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | PERMALINK | TOP | HOME
Quote:Finally, I did not make this statement, but I will address your comment.
"Unless they can solve those significant factors they will be numerically bigger than the USA in just five years or so"
The CIA factbook reports the Chinese GDP for 2004 was ~ 7.3 trillion, for 2003 it was ~ 5.7 trillion (+ 28%). The same source says the US GDP was ~ 11.7 trillion for 2004, and ~ 10.4 trillion for 2003 (+ 12.5%). Following these projections, the US GDP will be 13.1 trillion for 2005 and 14.8 trillion for 2006. The Chinese GDP will be 9.1 trillion for 2005 and 12.5 trillion for 2006. In sum, by 2006 they will be roughly equivalent, and China will definitively surpass the US in 2007.
What the Chinese report is something else.
And again, I mentioned that it was a topic we were kicking around about a year ago where I work, and I'm not going to re-research it. At the time, according to available economic consensus, the Chinese total economy was about on par with the US.
Nearly everything I know I learned by the grace of others.
NOTIFY: N | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | PERMALINK | TOP | HOME
Hayward:
1. Any financial analysis which doesn't take currency into account is pure fantasy.
2. Consider Japan's growth from 1966 to 1989:
* Nikkei went from 1000 to 38900 at the high.
* The yen went from $.001 to $0.01
If you looked at the growth and said it was @39X you'd be way off, it was quite clearly 389X.
3. This is not the case in China because of hte fixed currecy, but it will be the case in the near future.
4. This currency change will be a result of investment and growth, and so the CIA's parity figure of $7T+ for China currently is entirely Justified.
5. The CIA gives China and US growth and GDP stats and the math was real simple. The 11 years in easily solid. If I were to guess I'd say 7 years is quite possible.
Nellie,
Even if you, like I assume Hayward does, agree with the idea of Communism, there is still great reason for concern.
When people attack China, or the Chinese, on this board, they mean the Chinese govt. I'm friends with a fair number of Chinese, and non-blood related to some, and I assure you, I have nothing against the Chinese people. The communist govt. of China is the only one under attack here.
China is a real threat. It's not a big country, it's an imperial power that invades and conquers other nations on a regular basis and then systematically dismantles their govts., outlaws their languages and destroys their cultures.
The Communist Party hierarchy is a Borg/Alliance, it's a systematic destroyer and assimilater of all things not it. Since coming to power, they have annexed: Manchuria, Tibet, Xinjiang, Mongolia, N. Korean, Vietname, Cambodia, Taiwan, Hong Kong, Macao.
Chinese influence in Malaysia has gotten quite prevelant. I can't help but notice a pattern here. You don't have to be a right wing capitalist to be threatened by this. If you care at all about the people of the earth and their myriad cultures, their personal freedoms and the individual nations that are likely to be overrun, then you should be at least a little wigged by what's going on.
I'm aware that George W. Bush is doing the same thing in Iraq that China does every couple of years, but the fact that Bush is evil doesn't make China right, it makes them equally wrong.
We're talking about a country that randomly executes its citizens every time there is an uprising or people disagree with the govt. Even under Bush, whom I utterly despise, The US govt. is still far better than the Chinese govt.
I don't think we should stop China's economic growth, but there's another side to this. We have to do something to keep ourselves competitive. Once the madness called Bush/PNAC is gone, the US will still need to be there to protect nations around the world. China has plans on the middle east just as Bush does, and are making inroads into South America via Chavez, and plan to sponsor terrorist campaigns to overthrow other central and south american govts. and put in more robo-states. This is not good. It's an issue of some concern to many people here.
Quote:Quote:
Nellie:
If western civilization collapses, it won't be because the Chinese got rich---it will be because of climate change. And who did that, I wonder?
Chrisisall:
Certain people so bent on controlling the world and it's oil that the understanding of what's good for America in the long term has gotten lost in the shuffle.
People bent on controling the world and its oil includes not only PNAC, but also the Chinese govt.
And for the co2 emissions, just for the record, though US is still 1st place, it only just nudges out china for 2005 eastimates (china around 1.2mmt, and the US around 1.4mmt) But US usage is likely to fall and china is rising. Under Kyoto, the US would have to cut to 1.2mmt, but no restriction would be placed on China. If China continues its trend of emulating us, with four times the population, it's easy to see China's co2 base as hitting 5mmt in the absence of serious intervention which Kyoto would bans in the instance of China.
Just shootin' some clay pigeons.
NOTIFY: Y | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | PERMALINK | TOP | HOME
Re: Oil
I hope everyone knows that China has said it will aid Iran militarily in an effort to control mideast oil.
This isn't a conspiracy theory, they printed it in an official statement in the people's daily. That's the great thing about being the dictator of a totalitarian empire, you can say exactly what you mean.
They also appear to own Chavez.
NOTIFY: Y | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | PERMALINK | TOP | HOME
And so here we are, playing the lifeboat game: only so much oil, only so much food, only so much capacity in the carbon cycle to go around. Some of this is inevitably as a result of our increasing (world) population- there does seem to be a limit on what can be farmed, raised, fished and cut. But in terms of energy sources for the mechanization that that has made us so productive (and our lives so much easier) there are alternatives to oil: conservation, solar power, and hydrogen for example. Take conservation: we could raise CAFE (vehicle fuel efficiency) standards by 10% (easily done), convert power transmission from AC to DC which saves at least 10%, subsidize home insulation, invest in mass transportation (how about land-ferries that use rail lines?), convert our power generating plants to turbines with waste-heat recovery, and take conservation into account with land-use plans. Hydrogen, as ity turns out, can be easily produced from "wet" ethanol using a cerium catalyst, and also from water using solar power. There should be be no reason why an oil shortage has us over a barrel, so to speak.
---------------------------------
Please don't think they give a shit.
NOTIFY: Y | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | PERMALINK | TOP | HOME
Quote:Eloquently and succinctly said.
only so much oil, only so much food, only so much capacity in the carbon cycle to go around
Nearly everything I know I learned by the grace of others.
NOTIFY: N | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | PERMALINK | TOP | HOME
Quote:Another Neo-Lib meme! Where's you proof? Or the link?
Originally posted by SignyM:
Hydrogen, as it turns out, can be easily produced from "wet" ethanol using a cerium catalyst, and also from water using solar power.
This kind of unsubstanciated hyperbole is what you think passes for facts?
This is just another attempt to make Bush look bad.
Pathetic.
AURaptorisall
NOTIFY: Y | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | PERMALINK | TOP | HOME
Quote:
Originally posted by rue:Quote:Eloquently and succinctly said.
only so much oil, only so much food, only so much capacity in the carbon cycle to go around
It's hard indeed to imagine that you ever passed 1st grade history.
The above is almost unworthy of my much-sought-for attention. I'll bend way down there to reply, though.
(You don't know as much as me
)I'm done with this childishness.
Hayward79isall
NOTIFY: Y | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | PERMALINK | TOP | HOME
OH WAIT! This was from Chrisisall,
Quote:I can answer that. It was all over the internet a long time ago. Unfortunately, the news items have been removed by the various internet publications. So this reference will have to do:
Originally posted by SignyM:
Hydrogen, as it turns out, can be easily produced from "wet" ethanol using a cerium catalyst, and also from water using solar power.
originally posted by AUraptoris all:
Another Neo-Lib meme! Where's you proof? Or the link?
This kind of unsubstanciated hyperbole is what you think passes for facts?
This is just another attempt to make Bush look bad.
http://www.it.umn.edu/news/inventing/2004_Summer/harvestinghydrogen.ht
ml
Quote:The original publication was in Science, February, 2004.
Lanny Schmidt ... has just invented a reactor that extracts hydrogen from ethanol.
OK. I really messed up. Yup, I did. Anyway, this is the answer.
Now that I think about it, it was that easy to mistake this post from the real Auraptor.
Nearly everything I know I learned by the grace of others.
NOTIFY: N | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | PERMALINK | TOP | HOME
Hey there Chrisisall - how ya doing?
Nearly everything I know I learned by the grace of others.
NOTIFY: N | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | PERMALINK | TOP | HOME
Hey, Rue! LOL, I thought I might confuse and make fun at the same time. Sure is easy to 'mock'(ha ha) some people!! It's fun too, as AUR said.
Boy this place is fun sometimes
(Great new thread HK started, huh?)
Chrisisall
NOTIFY: Y | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | PERMALINK | TOP | HOME
Hey, wait a minute! I resemble that!
Yeah, that is a great thread. But it's something I need to really think about - bend my mind ... in new directions ... must ... try ... to ... hang ...
AAAAAAAAHHHHHHHhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhh
Nearly everything I know I learned by the grace of others.
NOTIFY: N | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | PERMALINK | TOP | HOME
Quote:
Originally posted by Signym:
And so here we are, playing the lifeboat game: only so much oil, only so much food, only so much capacity in the carbon cycle to go around. Some of this is inevitably as a result of our increasing (world) population- there does seem to be a limit on what can be farmed, raised, fished and cut. But in terms of energy sources for the mechanization that that has made us so productive (and our lives so much easier) there are alternatives to oil: conservation, solar power, and hydrogen for example. Take conservation: we could raise CAFE (vehicle fuel efficiency) standards by 10% (easily done), convert power transmission from AC to DC which saves at least 10%, subsidize home insulation, invest in mass transportation (how about land-ferries that use rail lines?), convert our power generating plants to turbines with waste-heat recovery, and take conservation into account with land-use plans. Hydrogen, as ity turns out, can be easily produced from "wet" ethanol using a cerium catalyst, and also from water using solar power. There should be be no reason why an oil shortage has us over a barrel, so to speak.
Yay. Well put.
Here's some more:
1. We now have giant battery cells which you can put in your basement and attach to solar cells on the roof. This conversion costs about $10K per household and it's spreading here in upstate new york. It makes a house entirely self sufficient. And we have all electric heat here, and last night it was 20 below zero, so trust me when I say we use a lot of power.
2. There are windmill farms, a la burt rutan, springing up around here, and entire towns and their industries can be supported by them, this is a working reality here in hickland, not a dreamt up fantasy. This can even power some moderate industry.
3. The toyota prius with a few mods can be upgraded to 250mpg. It was originally going to sell with these mods in place until the oil companies lobbied Toyota to prevent them from doing it. There's a company here that adds them for you, they've done it on about 10,000 vehicles. This also has an all electric switch so you use no gas if all you do in a day is drive half an hour to work each day, and then you can swing it back into gas mode for long drives.
These are cheap solutions if taken over the long haul, especially when compared to maintaining a constant military presence in the middle east. I remember reading somewhere on a lefty blog that the Bush admin had cost us $27K per household. I don't doubt that it's true, and that's just in five years. Think of the cost of the next 15 years of this kind of policy.
Plus, the admin push to have US automakers move away from this sort of thing is bankrupting Ford and GM. These companies subsist on govt. contracts, so don't think for a second the admin doesn't have this kind of pull. When this happens we are definitely going to see a little unhappiness on Wall Street.
If you want to talk expense, look at the total cost in the stock market that these policies have cost us.
By not persuing aggressive growth policy for US companies, all US companies, not just a few sweethearts, we have made investing in America less attractive. This bad policy of not heeding tax®ulation differences and the resulting outsourcing problem started with Clinton but Bush has exacerbated or at least continued that policy.
The market alone had lost over seven trillion in value and is still down over five trillion in value, to say nothing of lost growth potential.
But it gets worse. When you look at how Bush's deficit spending fiscal policy has effected the US dollar, it has slashed the value by nearly 50% vs. other world currencies. Some of this is flux, but at least half of it is outside of the usual cyclical flow. When absolute buying power is figured in, it tops 50%. Paring it down and giving Bush the benefit of extreme bad luck on the cyclical timing, you'd still have to accept a minimum of 30% currency devaluation of all net assets held by Americans in dollars.
The total net dollar asse
NOTIFY: Y | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | PERMALINK | TOP | HOME
Quote:
Originally posted by rue:Quote:Is different from standard of living. GDP does not take into account money distribution. Geezer, you should know better.
gross domestic products
I know enough to read not only the entire NY Times article, but also the Timbro report. It ain't just GDP. The report also addresses standard of living. Please actually check out the links before you get all smarmy.
"Keep the Shiny side up"
NOTIFY: Y | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | PERMALINK | TOP | HOME
Quote:
Hydrogen, as it turns out, can be easily produced from "wet" ethanol using a cerium catalyst, and also from water using solar power.
I forgot to slam this idea. I think it's good to get all these ideas out. But turning farmland into an energy source as ethanol would be a worldwide ecological disaster and is just so much worse an idea than simply burning hydrocarbons that, well, it makes me lean toward the hummus offensive.
But the solar/battery solution is very workable, plus wind, all sorts of things. I'm also a fan of more nuclear if necessary. It's very clean and efficient. But only where it's needed. Cities maybe.
This reminded me.
I just read the worst idea I think I've ever heard: Stop global warming by creating a giant plankton carbon sink. There are many variations of this plan, but then all involve drastically altering the composition of ocean life to alter teh rate at which plankton takes in co2. The wonderful thing is that plankton is most rapidly evolving community of species on the planet, in part because it has constant fluid congegation with the planets largest DNA database. So, a rapidly evolving, potentially unstoppable force could be modified to take in much more co2. The best endgame I ran into was: what if we can't shut it off? well we'd basically throw the world into a permanent ice age. Sweet. Anyway this now tops 'Invade and occupy the middle east to secure our energy needs' as the worst solution to a current problem.
NOTIFY: Y | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | PERMALINK | TOP | HOME
Good Grief! That's the last time I ever try to say anything positive about Real World Events, or anything at all.
I was really shocked at how upset everyone is getting over this, with Dreamtrove even starting to throw around "Commie b-stard" type accusations at me and Hayward! Amazing!
Yes, you're right that there's a big difference between the Chinese people and the government, and I was talking about the people, because I'm not interested in politics. Neither are they---they all say they love peace and hate war.
Just for the record, Inner Mongolia is a Chinese province, but Mongolia (Outer Mongolia)is an independent country, nothing to do with China (look on a map). As for Malaysia, millions of Chinese immigrants happen to live there, just like millions live in the USA, so of course there's some Chinese cultural influence! Good thing, too!
Remember that people always used to get hysterical about the Russian threat, too, and look what happened to that.
I just think people shouldn't get so hot under the collar about everything, and should think more about international cooperation, because we are all on this beautiful little planet together.
Goodbye---it was nice talking to you...
NOTIFY: N | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | PERMALINK | TOP | HOME
Geezer,
And yet, the both the report and the article on the report consistently base their conclusions on 'per capita purchasing power', a faulty statistic. As SignyM pointed out, this number averages corporate and institutional numbers into individual ones.
It does not look at real WAGES, nor at purchases made by default - for example, health insurance and health care, transportation or education expenses picked up by US consumers in a larger share than by EU ones.
Further, it does not look at the normal measures of quality of life - average level of education, literacy, etc.
Finally, it does not address social mobility, which is low and dropping in the US and England, but higher in other countries.
Nearly everything I know I learned by the grace of others.
NOTIFY: N | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | PERMALINK | TOP | HOME
Nellie,
Didn't mean to offend anyone, but what I said and the rest of this was light compared to normal banter here, which is suprisingly light compared to normal banter anywhere else. People here are more civil than I've seen just about anywhere. But we are not going to always agree.
Re: Mongolgia. Surprisingly I was not actually pulling this out of my ass. China and the USSR spent many years mucking around in mongolian politics, but my reference was to that and the annexation of inner mongolia in 1947 with Mao's USSR sponsored soviet republic of china, etc. That a nation was formerly party of an empire ruled from within your country is not a good reason for annexation, because if that were so, then every place in the world is owned four times over and the war would never end.
Re: China. As I said, I'm related to some of them, and know a great many more. They sometimes have a serious interest in politics. I know a couple of people who spent time in prison, one for twenty years because they disagreed with one of Mao's mad mandates of how healthcare was to be administered. They had previously served in his revolution, but that apparently was worth nothing when dissent was uttered.
This isn't hysteria. Ten million people are dead because of Chinese agression, and it isn't even slowing down. What's going to happen if there's an uprising in Taiwan over the disassembling of their democratic govt.? This is a very likely scenario. I think there is a lot of cause for genuine concern.
There was a lot of cause for genuine concern with the Soviet Union, a nation that killed 30 million of it's own people and conquered and robotized at least a dozen sovereign nations and fed revolutions in at least a dozen more to the same end.
I like peace as much as the next guy, more even, but when you're in a room with a loonie with an AK-47, the peaceful solution is not to wait and see if he kills everyone.
NOTIFY: Y | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | PERMALINK | TOP | HOME
Quote:What about spreading micronized iron across the ocean surface? Apparently, iron is the limiting nutrient is surface waters, and seeding the water with iron causes plankton blooms.
I just read the worst idea I think I've ever heard: Stop global warming by creating a giant plankton carbon sink. There are many variations of this plan, but then all involve drastically altering the composition of ocean life to alter teh rate at which plankton takes in co2. The wonderful thing is that plankton is most rapidly evolving community of species on the planet, in part because it has constant fluid congegation with the planets largest DNA database. So, a rapidly evolving, potentially unstoppable force could be modified to take in much more co2. The best endgame I ran into was: what if we can't shut it off? well we'd basically throw the world into a permanent ice age. Sweet. Anyway this now tops 'Invade and occupy the middle east to secure our energy needs' as the worst solution to a current problem.
---------------------------------
Please don't think they give a shit.
NOTIFY: Y | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | PERMALINK | TOP | HOME
Quote:Well, this is what happens when an economy can't offer jobs with livable wages to most of its' people. Thinking about China as a specific example, it was an empire (with a real emperor and fuedal structure) not too long before the Communist takeover. The culture, somewhat like Japan, seems to be more about blending in than standing out. Our focus on freedom and individuality is just that- OURS. The main concern of the average Chinese seems to be bent more towards economic issues rather than theories of governance... altho with an increasing standard of living there does also seem to be more involvement with environmental issues and the problems of provincial/ local corruption.
This isn't hysteria. Ten million people are dead because of Chinese agression, and it isn't even slowing down. What's going to happen if there's an uprising in Taiwan over the disassembling of their democratic govt.? This is a very likely scenario. I think there is a lot of cause for genuine concern.
There was a lot of cause for genuine concern with the Soviet Union, a nation that killed 30 million of it's own people and conquered and robotized at least a dozen sovereign nations and fed revolutions in at least a dozen more to the same end.
---------------------------------
Please don't think they give a shit.
NOTIFY: Y | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | PERMALINK | TOP | HOME
Yeah, this is one of the parts of the really bad plan. It's the one that fortunately won't work because there's not enough available biomass, but even that will dangerously alter the eco balance of the earth in a way potentially more catastophic than global warming. In spite of dire predictions, Global warming is a relatively innocuous event, since it is reversing a longstanding trend of global cooling, thus setting the earth back millions of year. But most of the land was land then, and most of the species of lifeforms were in some form alive and well. Since the iron level was never at the height proposed, and since this also, if it worked and was effective, could, like the bio-engineered superplankton idea also plunge the world into a permanent ice age, there's nothing natural about the solutions.
Here's a short list of better ideas:
1. Stop producing greenhouse gasses at an uncontrolled rate.
2. Intentionally accellerate global warming, it's a terrible plan, but it's not as bad as the permanent ice age one.
3. Invade an occupy Iraq to cure our energy supply. This is one of the worst plans I've ever heard, but only second to this plankton thing.
4. I'm still leaning toward the hummus offensive.
NOTIFY: Y | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | PERMALINK | TOP | HOME
Quote:No, please, at least drop a few comments from time to time, we need niceness in here too!
Originally posted by Nellie:
Good Grief! That's the last time I ever try to say anything positive about Real World Events, or anything at all.
Goodbye---it was nice talking to you...
I understand it gets pretty fast and furious in here, but don't let it upset you, a lot of times folk here are just playin', albeit HARD.
In any case, be well.
Chrisisall
NOTIFY: Y | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | PERMALINK | TOP | HOME
Signym,
I don't buy it. We got this same 'communism is in the nature of Russians' argument all the time during the cold war, but this turned out to be more or less hogwash. I can't think that it's true about the chinese. It's certainly not true about the Taiwanese or the Hong Kongese. So they used to be oppressed by something else, and now they're oppressed by the commies. Doesn't mean they like it.
NOTIFY: Y | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | PERMALINK | TOP | HOME
Thank you so much, Chrisisall, for your kind words---you surprised me! 
I realize now that Dreamtrove must have a lot of relatives from Taiwan, who are naturally terrified of being "swallowed up" by China, so they stir up lots of scary stories and drag up all that stuff from the war half a century ago, in order to keep Daddy America fighting for them.
Remember how terrified everyone was when the British had to hand back Hong Kong to China a few years ago? There were predictions that all the Hong Kong people would be thrown into prison, tortured, executed or dragged away into darkest Mainland, never to be seen again. All the capitalist trading and businesses would be destroyed, everyone's property would be seized, and there would be wholesale slaughters of babies, kittens and fluffy bunny rabbits.
Did any of that stuff happen to Hong Kong? Well, NO, actually---it's all business as usual there, and China is now busy building a rival to Hong Kong: the new "enterprise city" of Shenzhen.
So quit tossing around these numbers of millions of people killed here and millions more there, Dreamtrove---that has happened on both sides of every war in every country. Every country has done terrible things and endured terrible things, and if we all keep dragging up this historical stuff, we might as well just have one continuous planetary war and never stop.
I'll never forget the news item about one Muslim group who threw hand grenades and machinegun fire into a mosque while a different Muslim group were praying on their knees inside, all because of some quarrel that happened nearly 1000 years ago, for Pete's sake!
No one thought the Berlin Wall would ever fall down. It was unthinkable that people would ever walk freely in the sunshine from one side to the other without being shot. But it did---one day, the people tore it down.
Let go of the past, Dreamtrove, and move on---things have changed. Things always change, and sometimes the most wonderful things happen unexpectedly.
OK, I really am going to shut up now...it's all Chrisisall's fault for saying nice things!
NOTIFY: N | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | PERMALINK | TOP | HOME
Nellie,
I'm appalled. No, they're from Beijing. The Chinese people are somewhat concerned that their govt. is evil. Just like the American people are somewhat concerned that the govt. of George W. Bush is evil.
A few this about this global imperial menace called China which thinks it has a divine right to control every country that has asians in it:
1. The British made a lease deal with imperial China. After that ended, it made sense for the british to leave. Hong Kong should have then become an independent country, but it was annexed by Beijing. It's a place that I've actually been too, and the people were most definitely not communists. Also they spoke two languages, neither of which was the language of Beijing.
2. Taiwan is a sovereign nation that apart from being occupied in WWII by China has never really been Chinese. It's been more or less an independent nation since its founding 400 years ago. As a wealthy independent democratic nation with 23 million people in it, the parallels to Iraq are obvious.
3. I certainly have heard of the dismantling of Hong Kong's elected govt. and the replacement with a Communist govt. agency.
4. This is a world being taken over by a system that accepts no dissent, where the people comply because they are forced to comply, it's ant hill society.
5. This is my clay pigeon of the moment:
Quote:
So quit tossing around these numbers of millions of people killed here and millions more there, Dreamtrove---that has happened on both sides of every war in every country.
Particular when one or more sides is a socialist.
and this:
Quote:
Let go of the past, Dreamtrove, and move on---things have changed.
Not on your life!
Things have changed all right, evil has the upper hand. I'm not going to sit back and let Nellie's engine of perpetual genocide take over. A million here a million there, who's counting? who cares? right? Not on my watch!
Everyone knew the Berlin Wall was coming down, that was the objective, and that, btw, was a symbolic defeat of communism. This doesn't happen accidentally. For the reign of terror in China to end someone has to work for it. Remember the massacre in and around Tiananmen Square?
Well, the reality is that the Chinese really did kill ten million people, and they will do it again if they're not stopped. And they will do it in the name of power, absolute power, over the Earth. Somewhere, maybe in the Middle East, maybe in South America, they will fund a revolution which will go out of control and millions will die. It's inevitable. Yeah, you can quote me on that.
So, to your plea "Please turn a blind eye to the marching empire," I respond:
Hell No!
Not in a million years. In my book, people have:
1. A right to life, and the right that that right should not be taken away.
2. A right to freedom, to swing their arms as long as their doing so does not interfere with anyone else.
3. A right to assemble or take part in any activity, in any group, even any nation state, and therein set up any rules of conduct they wish, without being systematically dismantled by someone who happens to have a bigger gun.
Didn't find your post particularly nice, and not stomping for Taiwan here, but if I was, then so what? Someone should be stomping for Taiwan here.
NOTIFY: Y | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | PERMALINK | TOP | HOME
I thought this was an informative article that addressed 'quality of life' in the US:
Source: Brandeis University
Date: 2005-10-29
URL: http://www.sciencedaily.com/releases/2005/10/051029093925.htm
Hunger In America Rises By 43 Percent Over Last Five Years
Hunger in American households has risen by 43 percent over the last five years, according to an analysis of US Department of Agriculture (USDA) data released today. The analysis, completed by the Center on Hunger and Poverty at Brandeis University, shows that more than 7 million people have joined the ranks of the hungry since 1999.
The USDA report, Household Food Security in the United States, 2004, says that 38.2 million Americans (13% of the entire US population) live in households that suffer directly from hunger and food insecurity, including nearly 14 million children. That figure is up from 31 million Americans in 1999.
"This is an unexpected and even stunning outcome," noted center director Dr. J. Larry Brown.
Nearly everything I know I learned by the grace of others.
NOTIFY: N | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | PERMALINK | TOP | HOME
And for those waho maintian that privately- provided services are more efficient that government-provided ones:
Source: University of California - San Francisco
Date: 2005-11-10
URL: http://www.sciencedaily.com/releases/2005/11/051110215547.htm
Study Finds Billions Of Health Insurance Dollars Used For Administrative Costs
Billing and insurance paperwork consume at least one out of every five dollars of private insurance health spending in California, according to a new study by health policy researchers.
The findings suggest that about $230 billion in health care spending nationally is devoted to insurance administration.
Nearly everything I know I learned by the grace of others.
NOTIFY: N | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | PERMALINK | TOP | HOME
Just wondering if there is any reponse to the two articles.
Nearly everything I know I learned by the grace of others.
NOTIFY: N | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | PERMALINK | TOP | HOME
One cites incredible need, while the other cites incredible waste. The polar ends of this polarized country.
I count myself lucky that I'm only hungry when I forget to make my lunch.
And insurance companies are just the inevitable socialist/capitalist by-product of a hopelessly over-complicated and mis-managed legal system combined with a healthcare system that has the $ appetite of the economic dragon that it is!!!
*end of mini-rant*
Dragonslayer Chrisisall
NOTIFY: Y | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | PERMALINK | TOP | HOME
Thanks for your opinions.
I know being close to the holidays people are busy and all, but I have just completed a major project that's been draggin' on for 8 months and right at the moment I'm free, FREE, FREE !.
Wanders around the empty city. Hello ? Hello ? Is anybody there ?
Nearly everything I know I learned by the grace of others.
NOTIFY: N | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | PERMALINK | TOP | HOME
I wasn't going to comment because I don't see this as a major problem facing our nation. The real issue here is we just need to get society up and running again or this is nothing compared to the disaster we may face. Focusing too closely on what may be a symptom of a decayed society may lead to a solution which is not really best for society as a whole. There is no end of ways to get fed if you need food in this country. The food stampedes in india this week speak of a much worse problem, and the problem is even worse in africa. If america cannot get its act together, that could be us in just a couple decades. If this seems alarmist, bear this in mind. Russia went from being the wealthiest nation on earth to having 10 million people starve to death in the streets in just ten short years from 1910 to 1920.
NOTIFY: Y | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | PERMALINK | TOP | HOME
Quote:Oddly eonough, India has plenty of food. It produces more than enough for everybody and there are surpluses stacked in warehouses. If I remember rightly, the calculation went that if all the sacks of surplus (in India) were stacked on top of each other, they'd reach to the moon and back.
The food stampedes in india this week speak of a much worse problem, and the problem is even worse in africa.
The problem there, like in the US, is distribution. There it is baldy based on caste and sex. Here, it is also based on caste, with our 'untouchables' being poor folk. (And yes I know, caste was outlawed in India. But caste still is the de facto determinant of who gets food and who doesn't.)
If you think there is always a way to get enough food in the US, then you have not spent much time without money. B/c, sure as the sun rises, even benefits to which you are clearly entitled sooner or later run out. Then you are out of luck.
Africa has severe problems with drought and AIDS. But even then, distribution is a major factor. War and corruption being two major kinks.
Nearly everything I know I learned by the grace of others.
NOTIFY: N | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | PERMALINK | TOP | HOME
The ultimate relevant necropost!
-----------
Pity would be no more,
If we did not MAKE men poor - William Blake
NOTIFY: Y | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | PERMALINK | TOP | HOME
China won't be number 1, not yet anyways... that's not to say they won't continue gaining and they are very good long term chess players, the USA would have to continue to screw things up for another 5 yrs.
I always had tipped them to become some sort of economic military global Superpower but I thought the USA should remain ahead, this was at a time it wasn't really popular to back the idea of a strong dragon as they were still almost running around in those old Maoist Communist suits and S.Korea and Japan were seen as the powers. I'm not really shocked by China's growth but kind of shocked at how rapidly the West is falling backwards, its not just biden or Trump lots and lots of ground was lost during the Obama and Bush-Jnr years.
NOTIFY: N | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | PERMALINK | TOP | HOME
China will have to compete with India for the spot now. I'm sure they're way ahead, but in time. US will oof
NOTIFY: Y | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | PERMALINK | TOP | HOME
China can eat my balls.
--------------------------------------------------
Vaccinated People: "You need to get muh vaccination shots that don't work because I got muh vaccination shots that don't work and I'm afraid of people that didn't get muh vaccination shots that don't work because muh vaccination shots that don't work don't work."
NOTIFY: Y | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | PERMALINK | TOP | HOME
maybe less than 10 the way things are going
NOTIFY: N | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | PERMALINK | TOP | HOME
Quote:China Is Now the World’s Largest Economy. We Shouldn’t Be Shocked.
Originally posted by JAYNEZTOWN:
maybe less than 10 the way things are going
China has now displaced the U.S. to become the largest economy in the world. Measured by the more refined yardstick that both the IMF and CIA now judge to be the single best metric for comparing national economies, the IMF Report shows that China’s economy is one-sixth larger than America’s ($24.2 trillion versus the U.S.’s $20.8 trillion). Why can't we admit reality? What does this mean?
This week (October 15, 2020), the IMF presented its 2020 World Economic Outlook providing an overview of the global economy and the challenges ahead. The most inconvenient fact in the Report is one Americans don’t want to hear—and even when they read it, refuse to accept: China has now displaced the U.S. to become the largest economy in the world. Measured by the more refined yardstick that both the IMF and CIA now judge to be the single best metric for comparing national economies, the IMF Report shows that China’s economy is one-sixth larger than America’s ($24.2 trillion versus the U.S.’s $20.8 trillion).
Despite this unambiguous statement from the two most authoritative sources, most of the mainstream press—with the exception of The Economist—continue reporting that the U.S. economy is No. 1. So, what’s going on?
While the yardstick most Americans are accustomed to still shows that the Chinese economy is one-third smaller than the U.S., when one recognizes the fact that $1 buys nearly twice as much in China than in the U.S., the Chinese economy today is one-sixth larger than the U.S. economy.
For the U.S. to meet the China challenge, Americans must wake up to the ugly fact: China has already passed us in the race to be the No. 1 economy in the world. Moreover, in 2020, China will be the only major economy that records positive growth: the only economy that will be bigger at the end of the year than it was when the year began. The consequences for American security are not difficult to predict. Diverging economic growth will embolden an ever more assertive geopolitical player on the world stage.
More at https://nationalinterest.org/feature/china-now-world%E2%80%99s-largest
-economy-we-shouldn%E2%80%99t-be-shocked-170719
The Joss Whedon script for Serenity, where Wash lives, is Serenity-190pages.pdf at https://www.mediafire.com/two
NOTIFY: Y | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | PERMALINK | TOP | HOME
How might China achieve continuing useful, purposeful growth? Perhaps by shutting down what is useless and purposeless economic activity. Report: Over 140,000 Chinese Gaming Firms Shut Down in 2021
Computer Games count as growth, but some growth, measured in renminbi, isn't really growth. For example: Heroin. China is aware that Americans' Spending on Illicit Drugs Nears $150 Billion Annually; Appears to Rival What Is Spent on Alcohol
https://www.rand.org/news/press/2019/08/20.html
Excessive Drinking is Draining the U.S. Economy
The cost of excessive alcohol use in the U.S. was almost a quarter trillion dollars in 2010. $250 billion counts as economic activity, but does the American economy need more of that kind of activity?
https://www.cdc.gov/alcohol/features/excessive-drinking.html
China is also aware that American Video game spending hits record $56.9 billion in 2020
https://www.usatoday.com/story/tech/gaming/2021/01/15/video-game-spend
ing-2020-reaches-record/4172689001/
Report: Over 140,000 Chinese Gaming Firms Shut Down in 2021
https://www.pcmag.com/news/report-over-140000-chinese-gaming-firms-shu
t-down-in-2021
China's government hasn't been issuing licenses for new games, and companies are shutting down as a result.
China's gaming market is getting a lot smaller.
South China Morning Post reports that the National Press and Publication Administration (NPPA) hasn't approved new games for release since the end of July 2021. That means small and large gaming companies alike haven't been able to introduce new titles for nearly six months.
Larger companies have been able to offset the financial challenges posed by this pause on game releases by laying off employees, according to the report, but smaller companies haven't fared as well. The state-run Securities Daily reportedly said 140,000 such firms have shut down.
South China Morning Post reports that the NPPA "has neither provided an official explanation for the latest suspension nor any hint on when the process for new video game approvals will resume." It previously approved somewhere from 80-100 new titles for release each month.
This ad hoc moratorium on new releases follows the introduction of stricter gaming regulations. Tencent started using facial recognition in July 2021 to stop kids from playing games at night, and that August, the NPPA said minors couldn't play online games from Monday to Thursday.
Similar restrictions were introduced for other services as well. Douyin, the Chinese version of TikTok, started limiting younger people to just 40 minutes of usage every day in September 2021. (And started to enforce five-second pauses between videos for all users in October.)
The Joss Whedon script for Serenity, where Wash lives, is Serenity-190pages.pdf at https://www.mediafire.com/two
NOTIFY: Y | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | PERMALINK | TOP | HOME
China's probably having second thoughts about releasing Covid with Fauci.
--------------------------------------------------
Vaccinated People: "You need to get muh vaccination shots that don't work because I got muh vaccination shots that don't work and I'm afraid of people that didn't get muh vaccination shots that don't work because muh vaccination shots that don't work don't work."
NOTIFY: Y | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | PERMALINK | TOP | HOME
Quote:China is doing fine compared to the USA:
Originally posted by 6IXSTRINGJACK:
China's probably having second thoughts about releasing Covid with Fauci.
https://ourworldindata.org/coronavirus-data?country=CHN~USA
China's low death rate from Covid (4,636) probably has something to do with China's intolerance of crooked businessmen such as Trump. (Chinese acting like Trump don't get sued. Instead, a Chinese version of Trump would be shot dead.) The Chinese aren't any more tolerant of anti-vaccination than they are of a Trumpish conman.
Lai “endangered national financial security and financial stability,” said a commentary on the state TV website. The death penalty “was his own responsibility, and he deserved it,” the commentary said.
https://apnews.com/article/world-news-tianjin-china-asset-management-2
f5d1248477a8e044d9fa7b6899ca406
Everybody in China wears a mask, except the guy who will be executed because nobody cares what happens to him:
https://storage.googleapis.com/afs-prod/media/26908534723144dd9c8aa8a7
2733f2e0/1000.jpeg
The Joss Whedon script for Serenity, where Wash lives, is Serenity-190pages.pdf at https://www.mediafire.com/two
NOTIFY: Y | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | PERMALINK | TOP | HOME
Quote:
Originally posted by second:
China's low death rate from Covid (4,636)
LOL...
The only thing less trustworthy than American News is Chinese News.
You're an idiot.
--------------------------------------------------
Vaccinated People: "You need to get muh vaccination shots that don't work because I got muh vaccination shots that don't work and I'm afraid of people that didn't get muh vaccination shots that don't work because muh vaccination shots that don't work don't work."
NOTIFY: Y | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | PERMALINK | TOP | HOME
Quote:If you call the Chinese death-rate a lie, then why not declare China's entire GNP a lie?
Originally posted by 6IXSTRINGJACK:Quote:
Originally posted by second:
China's low death rate from Covid (4,636)
LOL...
The only thing less trustworthy than American News is Chinese News.
You're an idiot.
Make the Chinese GNP only 50% of America's rather than 120% of America's.
No, make it 25%.
It could be kind of the same as Trump's election. Trump arbitrarily reduced the number of votes for Biden and increased his vote count to declare himself the winner. You can do the same with China's GNP versus the USA's GNP. Or with the Covid-19 deaths! No matter what China claims, make your revised number for China twice as much as the number of American dead declared by the CDC.
There are so many problems that could be fixed by Americans using fake numbers!
The Joss Whedon script for Serenity, where Wash lives, is Serenity-190pages.pdf at https://www.mediafire.com/two
NOTIFY: Y | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | PERMALINK | TOP | HOME
Quote:
Originally posted by second:Quote:If you call the Chinese death-rate a lie, then why not declare China's entire GNP a lie?
Originally posted by 6IXSTRINGJACK:Quote:
Originally posted by second:
China's low death rate from Covid (4,636)
LOL...
The only thing less trustworthy than American News is Chinese News.
You're an idiot.
Make the Chinese GNP only 50% of America's rather than 120% of America's.
No, make it 25%.
It could be kind of the same as Trump's election. Trump arbitrarily reduced the number of votes for Biden and increased his vote count to declare himself the winner. You can do the same with China's GNP versus the USA's GNP. Or with the Covid-19 deaths! No matter what China claims, make your revised number for China twice as much as the number of American dead declared by the CDC.
There are so many problems that could be fixed by Americans using fake numbers!
The Joss Whedon script for Serenity, where Wash lives, is Serenity-190pages.pdf at https://www.mediafire.com/two
China's death rate is a lie because nobody dies of Covid.
You should never believe anything that comes out of China's news, dummy.
--------------------------------------------------
Vaccinated People: "You need to get muh vaccination shots that don't work because I got muh vaccination shots that don't work and I'm afraid of people that didn't get muh vaccination shots that don't work because muh vaccination shots that don't work don't work."
NOTIFY: Y | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | PERMALINK | TOP | HOME
Quote:There are news stories about Chinese big shots who act like Trump being executed. Chinese stories say the swift removal from power of greedy and dishonest businessmen was necessary for the Chinese economy to grow larger than the American economy. China is telling the truth.
Originally posted by 6IXSTRINGJACK:
China's death rate is a lie because nobody dies of Covid.
You should never believe anything that comes out of China's news, dummy.
China locks down city of more than a million people after 3 Covid-19 cases found
From CNN's Beijing Bureau
https://www.cnn.com/world/live-news/omicron-variant-coronavirus-news-0
1-04-22/h_3b123705b04966a607c05bcfce263d1d
A city in central China has gone into lockdown to curb the spread of Covid-19, according to local authorities.
The municipal government of Yuzhou, Henan province said all 1.2 million residents will be confined to their homes after just two asymptomatic cases were reported Sunday. A third local asymptomatic infection was identified Monday, the government added.
Barring essential services such as supermarkets, all public facilities including schools, public transport and shopping malls have suspended operations.
Those who work in essentials industries, including supermarkets, medicine production, and energy plants, are allowed to go to work after presenting a negative Covid-19 test, the government said.
China reported 108 new local cases across three provinces on Monday, including 95 in northwestern Shaanxi province, eight in southeastern Zhejiang, and five in Henan, according to the National Health Commission (NHC).
The country also reported 21 new local asymptomatic cases, including 19 in Henan and two in Shanghai, the NHC said. China counts symptomatic and asymptomatic cases separately.
Lockdowns: The Yuzhou lockdown mirrors the strict restrictions imposed on residents of the northwestern city of Xi'an, capital of Shaanxi.
Since December, the ancient city has been grappling with China's largest community coronavirus outbreak since Wuhan, the original epicenter of the pandemic.
To date, more than 1,700 cases have been reported in the city. While the number pales in comparison to those in many other countries, the outbreak pushed China's caseload in the final week of 2021 to the highest level since March 2020.
Xi'an's 13 million residents have been confined to their homes since December 23. Many are growing desperate as they run out of essential supplies, including groceries, and fall short on medical attention.
Zero Covid: Xi'an authorities launched a fifth round of mass testing on Tuesday, vowing to eliminate the outbreak.
But the frustrations of residents underscore the growing challenge facing China's zero-Covid policy, which relies on a playbook of mass testing, extensive quarantines and snap lockdowns to stamp out any resurgence of the virus.
While the stringent measures have largely shielded the majority of the country from the worst aspects of the pandemic, as local outbreaks continue to flare up, the outcry in Xi'an raises the question of just how long zero-Covid can be sustained before public support begins to taper off, with millions of residents trapped in an seemingly endless cycle of lockdowns.
The Joss Whedon script for Serenity, where Wash lives, is Serenity-190pages.pdf at https://www.mediafire.com/two
NOTIFY: Y | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | PERMALINK | TOP | HOME
Quote:
Originally posted by second:
China is telling the truth.
That's all you ever need to know about Second.
--------------------------------------------------
Vaccinated People: "You need to get muh vaccination shots that don't work because I got muh vaccination shots that don't work and I'm afraid of people that didn't get muh vaccination shots that don't work because muh vaccination shots that don't work don't work."
NOTIFY: Y | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | PERMALINK | TOP | HOME
Quote:There is part of China that never had Chairman Mao in control. That part, Taiwan, certainly outshines mainland China economically. Taiwan grows faster than China. America has had its own foolish little Chairman Maos, Trump and George Bush. Both of them managed to crash the American economy in the style of Mao Tse-tung crashing the Chinese economy. Trump literally had his own version of Mao's Great Leap Forward, Trump's Make America Great Again. What a pair of ill-planned economic fiascoes both were. Neither the Communist Party nor Republican Party want to talk about it.
Originally posted by 6IXSTRINGJACK:Quote:
Originally posted by second:
China is telling the truth.
That's all you ever need to know about Second.
Country comparison Taiwan vs China
https://countryeconomy.com/countries/compare/taiwan/china?sc=XE34
The Joss Whedon script for Serenity, where Wash lives, is Serenity-190pages.pdf at https://www.mediafire.com/two
NOTIFY: Y | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | PERMALINK | TOP | HOME
Quote:
Originally posted by second:Quote:There is part of China that never had Chairman Mao in control. That part, Taiwan, certainly outshines mainland China economically. Taiwan grows faster than China. America has had its own foolish little Chairman Maos, Trump and George Bush. Both of them managed to crash the American economy in the style of Mao Tse-tung crashing the Chinese economy. Trump literally had his own version of Mao's Great Leap Forward, Trump's Make America Great Again. What a pair of ill-planned economic fiascoes both were. Neither the Communist Party nor Republican Party want to talk about it.
Originally posted by 6IXSTRINGJACK:Quote:
Originally posted by second:
China is telling the truth.
That's all you ever need to know about Second.
The disconnect from reality is astounding.
Who's a cheerleader for censorship and tyranny in the 2020's again?
If you want to talk about an ill-planned economic fiasco, how about we address Joe Biden's* shit economy right now.
--------------------------------------------------
Vaccinated People: "You need to get muh vaccination shots that don't work because I got muh vaccination shots that don't work and I'm afraid of people that didn't get muh vaccination shots that don't work because muh vaccination shots that don't work don't work."
NOTIFY: Y | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | PERMALINK | TOP | HOME