Conquer Club

The US' time in the sun is coming to an end. In a few years' time China will be the dominant world economy and they are going to be calling the shots.

Is this a good or a bad thing, bearing in mind the huge social and market reforms it has undergone? Does anyone care? What will a humbled and browbeaten america look like?

I'm going to start Mandarin lessons.

In all honesty I doubt that much of importance will change.

The problem with China is that is not a democratic country and being the global power may cause problems. But the USA which is democratic, never respected democracy and freedom out of its borders so it can't be much worse.

Well, it isn't like China's going to start any trends. The big difference will be that the average US citizen will learn a bit about personal responsibility. Hell, if we're lucky we'll finally get rid of our stupid patriotism. Problems can always be fixed, but I'm not sure how long it will take our country to shape up.

Frigidus wrote:Well, it isn't like China's going to start any trends. The big difference will be that the average US citizen will learn a bit about personal responsibility. Hell, if we're lucky we'll finally get rid of our stupid patriotism. Problems can always be fixed, but I'm not sure how long it will take our country to shape up.

Stupid patriotism never goes away. We still have it even though we aren't important since the Byzantine Empire.

Ntetos wrote:The problem with China is that is not a democratic country and being the global power may cause problems. But the USA which is democratic, never respected democracy and freedom out of its borders so it can't be much worse.

Democracy as in what ? Do you really think that an opinion of an average worker from Ohio affects "trends" in USA to much bigger effect than say opinion of a worker from China? The whole story of "you can be whatever you want to be" even a president was created by media so that the people have this illusion of liberty, freedom etc. You are really not free in any society. Once you choose to be part of any group you have to follow the rules, written and unwritten, otherwise you become an outcast. Once you are an outcast your chances for advancing within the group are close to none. But everybody hopes that either themselves or their offspring will move to the "next layer". What they do not realize is that those layers are getting wider in time and less important But ... who cares, let us enjoy the ride while it lasts

heavycola wrote:The US' time in the sun is coming to an end. In a few years' time China will be the dominant world economy and they are going to be calling the shots.

Will they? That is still an open question. They have yet to make the transition from "cheep goods" to "high tech" and are currently in this process. Wage inflation is a major problem. The government is dropping their subsudy for oil. No matter how the government might want to waffle on the issue, pressure on industry for China to go green will only increase.

Given this there is no doubt that they are going to be a major player in the world economy. Whether they can be "dominant" between the EU or North America (because it's really more than the US) is open to question. Really it's not the US who should be worried ... It's India. As China rises to power India will loose what little it has.

heavycola wrote:The US' time in the sun is coming to an end. In a few years' time China will be the dominant world economy and they are going to be calling the shots.

Is this a good or a bad thing, bearing in mind the huge social and market reforms it has undergone? Does anyone care? What will a humbled and browbeaten america look like?

I'm going to start Mandarin lessons.

I strongly disagree heavycola.

Presently, China is recognized as an emerging superpower in terms of military might and economics.

However, you haven't seen the entire thing yet...

Take the 08 Olympics as an example, I'm a Canadian citizen and was applying for a China Visa in late June this year. Turned out to be more complex than I thought. They need tons of documents to prove that you are going to stay in China and not cause any trouble, and then you will "peacefully" leave the country. The government has stated that it wants to encourage on the expansion of tourism during the Olympics, but with such strict "border controls", how is that even possible? Recent Chinese news has reported that the amount of booked rooms in 4 stars Beijing hotels is 50% of what the goernment expected. For 5 star hotels, it was only 10% of what the government expected...

There's other issues too, consider the Sichuan earthquake. Many Sichuan parents has blamed local officials for corrution (since the schools there easily collapsed in the earthquake), and investigations carried out by the CPC has proven that this is true. They have begun to prosecute them.

Also, what about wealth inequality? Some ppl are living their asses off with millions or billions of RMB (some through smuggling and other illegal stuff), while much of the population is trying to live in poverty...

And what about health issues? China is one of the countries with the most smokers...

Smog is a huge concern in cities such as Beijing and Tianjin. Pollution in China has reached extreme levels this over the 21st century. How are the Chinese going to survive? They'll most likely become environmental refugees...

And last but not least, has anyone here ever heard of a authoratarian state becoming a "superpower"? Just look at internet censorship first. Uncyclopedia: Blocked because it makes fun of the CPC government. Wikipedia : Sensitive articles such as Tibet and Falun Gong are blocked Chinese versions of the articales are completely blocked off so most of the citizens do not gain good knowledge of the facts. Youtube: Often blocked due to anti-CPC videos. Ppl, plz tell me how such an undemocratic country could become a superpower...

Take the 08 Olympics as an example, I'm a Canadian citizen and was applying for a China Visa in late June this year. Turned out to be more complex than I thought. They need tons of documents to prove that you are going to stay in China and not cause any trouble, and then you will "peacefully" leave the country. The government has stated that it wants to encourage on the expansion of tourism during the Olympics, but with such strict "border controls", how is that even possible?

Really? I got a visa for China 3 years ago very easily. It was much easier than the visa for US even though I needed to go there for medical reasons.

Joodoo wrote:

heavycola wrote:The US' time in the sun is coming to an end. In a few years' time China will be the dominant world economy and they are going to be calling the shots.

Is this a good or a bad thing, bearing in mind the huge social and market reforms it has undergone? Does anyone care? What will a humbled and browbeaten america look like?

I'm going to start Mandarin lessons.

I strongly disagree heavycola.

Presently, China is recognized as an emerging superpower in terms of military might and economics.

However, you haven't seen the entire thing yet...

Take the 08 Olympics as an example, I'm a Canadian citizen and was applying for a China Visa in late June this year. Turned out to be more complex than I thought. They need tons of documents to prove that you are going to stay in China and not cause any trouble, and then you will "peacefully" leave the country. The government has stated that it wants to encourage on the expansion of tourism during the Olympics, but with such strict "border controls", how is that even possible? Recent Chinese news has reported that the amount of booked rooms in 4 stars Beijing hotels is 50% of what the goernment expected. For 5 star hotels, it was only 10% of what the government expected...

everyone is having trouble with visas at the moment. So what?

Also, what about wealth inequality? Some ppl are living their asses off with millions or billions of RMB (some through smuggling and other illegal stuff), while much of the population is trying to live in poverty...

China has lifted 200 million of its people out of poverty in a single decade. That took teh west hundreds of years.

And last but not least, has anyone here ever heard of a authoratarian state becoming a "superpower"? Just look at internet censorship first. Uncyclopedia: Blocked because it makes fun of the CPC government. Wikipedia : Sensitive articles such as Tibet and Falun Gong are blocked Chinese versions of the articales are completely blocked off so most of the citizens do not gain good knowledge of the facts. Youtube: Often blocked due to anti-CPC videos. Ppl, plz tell me how such an undemocratic country could become a superpower...

...because everyone assumes that if China is going to grow up big and strong it will need to become just like the west to do so. Not so. When China decided it wanted large-scale economic growth it turned its efforts to doing so in a way that no decentralised liberal democracy could have managed.

China has lifted 200 million of its people out of poverty in a single decade. That took teh west hundreds of years.

200 million? I am curious to see the data on this one. Also, for China to have a flourishing culture for going on 4000 years, and only really getting its shit together the last 50 years, and most of that from 1) stolen/pirated technology and 2) cheap-ass labor which allows them to the sweat shop for the world, does not impress me one bit.

Rethink this one HC, I believe that this is not your best work.

As to individual freedoms=superpower link, the Soviet Union was a superpower.

But I think the closer definition would be whether a "Economic Superpower" can be a totalitarian government; I would probably not concur. One of the foundations for individual freedom is private ownership of property; China has made significant advances in its trade zones for this. However, in the backwaters and rural areas away from Shanghai/Hong Kong, the government system is much stronger and so is the poverty/lack of technological advancement. China, as a totalitarian/communist government, by its very definition, is incompatible with economic "superpower". China's economy is actually in shambles right now, and the weak dollar is actually hurting China and its exports.

heavycola wrote:

...because everyone assumes that if China is going to grow up big and strong it will need to become just like the west to do so. Not so. When China decided it wanted large-scale economic growth it turned its efforts to doing so in a way that no decentralised liberal democracy could have managed.

Yeah, totally different, it became more liberal, and decentralized fiscal power whilst giving people more rights. Nothing like decentralized liberal Western democracy. Fantastic analysis from Heavycolon there, once again.

Napoleon Ier wrote:

heavycola wrote:

...because everyone assumes that if China is going to grow up big and strong it will need to become just like the west to do so. Not so. When China decided it wanted large-scale economic growth it turned its efforts to doing so in a way that no decentralised liberal democracy could have managed.

Yeah, totally different, it became more liberal, and decentralized fiscal power whilst giving people more rights. Nothing like decentralized liberal Western democracy. Fantastic analysis from Heavycolon there, once again.

China had only become liberal economically. Socially, it gives really little freedom to it's ppl...
The word democracy is filtered out of chat engines and discussion about it may even lead to an arrest...

Curmudgeonx wrote:

China has lifted 200 million of its people out of poverty in a single decade. That took teh west hundreds of years.

200 million? I am curious to see the data on this one. Also, for China to have a flourishing culture for going on 4000 years, and only really getting its shit together the last 50 years, and most of that from 1) stolen/pirated technology and 2) cheap-ass labor which allows them to the sweat shop for the world, does not impress me one bit.

Rethink this one HC, I believe that this is not your best work.

From wikipedia, taken from teh Journal of Economic Development:
'China’s sustained growth fueled historically unprecedented poverty reduction. The World Bank uses a poverty line based on household real consumption (including consumption of own-produced crops and other goods), set at $1 per day measured at Purchasing Power Parity. In most low-income countries this amount is sufficient to guarantee each person about 2000 calories of nutrition per day, plus other basic necessities. In 2007, this line corresponds to about 900 RMB per year. Based on household surveys, the poverty rate in China in 1981 was 64% of the population. This rate declined to 10% in 2004, indicating that about 500 million people have climbed out of poverty during this period.[3]'

I was way off...

As to individual freedoms=superpower link, the Soviet Union was a superpower.

But I think the closer definition would be whether a "Economic Superpower" can be a totalitarian government; I would probably not concur. One of the foundations for individual freedom is private ownership of property; China has made significant advances in its trade zones for this. However, in the backwaters and rural areas away from Shanghai/Hong Kong, the government system is much stronger and so is the poverty/lack of technological advancement. China, as a totalitarian/communist government, by its very definition, is incompatible with economic "superpower". China's economy is actually in shambles right now, and the weak dollar is actually hurting China and its exports.

At work right now - i'l reply to this later

As long as the USA has the food, it does not matter. We have been "giving away", the bottom line American trade currency (don't kid yourself with all that feel good "ingenuity" and "creativity" stuff), in exchange for boat loads of cheap throw-away consumable goods. Even durable goods are throw-away because they are so relatively cheap.

But when that paradigm of trade comes to an end because the Chinese currency appreciates / dollar free falls, the one and only question to ask is whether American liberalism will have the stomach to shut down the pipeline on cheap food, the same way OPEC would shut down the pipeline on cheap oil...

When some people can't afford to feed their kids anything but McD's "crap" because their cost of driving to work has tripled over the past three years, there is a problem of perception. If you take the gloves all the way off, the price of the McD's burger starts to go up too, so you've screwed your own population in order to get out of a solvency crisis. On the other hand, if you favor domestic food production over food exports, you have free trade issues (not the ones we usually hear discussed - but ones that hit the emotional core of liberalism). You could not back out of free trade on the premise of starving the world... but if you were able to extract yourself from free trade entanglements on other pretexts, then the stage would be set for a "we won't let our own people starve" movement in Congress which would break not only China but most of the "rapid industrializing" world.

If China has raised 200MM people from poverty, it has done the lions share of that by simply diverting agricultural labor and land, without any ostensible concern for food security. The people working in Chinese agriculture now are 70 year old senior citizens who depend on their children to come home from their "high pay" jobs in the cities for harvest time. That policy is only sustainable as long as food remains cheap on the international market.

Remember folks that what broke the Soviet command economy was that they bought too many tanks and space ships, and not enough trucks and infrastructure to simply get the tractors to the farmers and the food back to the market.

If you think this is far fetched analysis, ask yourself why there is buzz around water becoming the next "oil", and consider how much water it takes to irrigate a hectare of crops.

Based on household surveys

Laughable

Curmudgeonx wrote:

Based on household surveys

Laughable

If you are a researcher and you want to find out the income of Chinese households, who else are you going to ask? The government?

I feel I must express my approval of the zing factor just injected into in this topic.

I was sort of under the impression that everyone knew by now that china was going to rise to prominence within our lifetimes. China already does high tech, mixes private enterprise in a political environment that is very complex, and has an incredible migrant workforce which can reduce pressure on wages upward.

Admittedly i didnt spend the time to go through each argument against it, but China is seriously no joke. Its hard to say much without being an alarmist, but there are just advantages that China has that other countries seemingly do not. Whether or not everything is going to be positive is a rather silly argument, things are never all good or bad when talking about the effects of highly industralized economies.

It probably wont be that long before you start hearing about Shanghai and other cities as the like, as being right on level of your London, Paris, New York type cities as far as global centers of importance. The fact that cities of over a million people more or less sprout up from nothing at a rather impressive rate, should be evidence to the fact that there is incredible movement and growth within China.

heavycola wrote:

Curmudgeonx wrote:

Based on household surveys

Laughable

If you are a researcher and you want to find out the income of Chinese households, who else are you going to ask? The government?

HC is actually pretty right about this, its sort of questionable to suggest that you can really chart a lot of different statistics in the manner that the government often puts out, or at least that seems to be a rather common claim made.

got tonkaed wrote:

heavycola wrote:

Curmudgeonx wrote:

Based on household surveys

Laughable

If you are a researcher and you want to find out the income of Chinese households, who else are you going to ask? The government?

HC is actually pretty right about this, its sort of questionable to suggest that you can really chart a lot of different statistics in the manner that the government often puts out, or at least that seems to be a rather common claim made.

In a Western or European society, I have no problem with "household surveys" (whatever the logistics are). But are you trying to tell me that in the back fields of China where communism still has a deathgrip on the individual, that two grinning fools with clipboards are going to get the truth from some scared-shitless rice farmer?

Methodology is fine, the actualization of that methodology made me laugh. GT and HC, put yourself into the shoes of the "risen up from poverty" hoi polloi.

Aesop's Fables

The Trees And The Axe

A MAN came into a forest and asked the Trees to provide him a handle for his axe. The Trees consented to his request and gave him a young ash-tree. No sooner had the man fitted a new handle to his axe from it, than he began to use it and quickly felled with his strokes the noblest giants of the forest. An old oak, lamenting when too late the destruction of his companions, said to a neighboring cedar, "The first step has lost us all. If we had not given up the rights of the ash, we might yet have retained our own privileges and have stood for ages."

Moral
Nothing bothers a man more than to see he has aided his own undoing.

Curmudgeonx wrote:

got tonkaed wrote:

heavycola wrote:

Curmudgeonx wrote:

Based on household surveys

Laughable

If you are a researcher and you want to find out the income of Chinese households, who else are you going to ask? The government?

HC is actually pretty right about this, its sort of questionable to suggest that you can really chart a lot of different statistics in the manner that the government often puts out, or at least that seems to be a rather common claim made.

In a Western or European society, I have no problem with "household surveys" (whatever the logistics are). But are you trying to tell me that in the back fields of China where communism still has a deathgrip on the individual, that two grinning fools with clipboards are going to get the truth from some scared-shitless rice farmer?

Methodology is fine, the actualization of that methodology made me laugh. GT and HC, put yourself into the shoes of the "risen up from poverty" hoi polloi.

'scared shitless rice farmer' is quite an assumption to make about half a billion people. Why is he scared shitless? Why does he say he is richer than he is? If the government asks you how much money you make, would you over- or understate the amount?
That aside, why woudl you be scared into telling two independent researchers, obviioulsy not chinese, that you earn more money than you do?

There is nothing wrong with the methodology. Now, back to whatever the argument was.

Curmudgeonx wrote:

got tonkaed wrote:

heavycola wrote:

Curmudgeonx wrote:

Based on household surveys

Laughable

If you are a researcher and you want to find out the income of Chinese households, who else are you going to ask? The government?

HC is actually pretty right about this, its sort of questionable to suggest that you can really chart a lot of different statistics in the manner that the government often puts out, or at least that seems to be a rather common claim made.

In a Western or European society, I have no problem with "household surveys" (whatever the logistics are). But are you trying to tell me that in the back fields of China where communism still has a deathgrip on the individual, that two grinning fools with clipboards are going to get the truth from some scared-shitless rice farmer?

Methodology is fine, the actualization of that methodology made me laugh. GT and HC, put yourself into the shoes of the "risen up from poverty" hoi polloi.

China hasn't been communist since the 1980s economic reforms... The government says that it's communist, but how can it be true when you have so many privatized industries in the country?
However, China still has much grip on social freedom...