|
OP is ignorant. The rise of China (which was inevitable) to Mexican levels of prosperity does not mean America is fucked or will fall, except in GDP rankings. The rise of China is unquestionably a good thing for the average American.
OP's perception of America's industrial base is also ignorant. America has the largest manufacturing output in the world, it's just that as a share of GDP, it has steadily declined over the past 50 years. What has taken its place? Industries with high human capital, e.g. the tech industry. This is a good thing, because it gives laborers more leverage (the capital is in labor's hands, not the owners), is a more productive use of capital and is immune from automation for the foreseeable future. I don't understand why some people pine for the days when everyone worked on the floor; those jobs require little skill and should be shipped out to poorer nations and eventually automated.
OP's perception of the laziness of America's workforce is likewise ignorant. Amongst developed countries, Americans generally rank at the top in terms of hours worked. In fact, it is well known that the income gaps between Americans and Europeans is largely due to the fact that Europeans work much less rather than any gap in productivity between the two.
|
On December 07 2010 03:27 domovoi wrote:
OP's perception of the laziness of America's workforce is likewise ignorant. Amongst developed countries, Americans generally rank at the top in terms of hours worked. In fact, it is well known that the income gaps between Americans and Europeans is largely due to the fact that Europeans work much less rather than any gap in productivity between the two.
Yeah, that part of the OP bothered me as well. I've traveled quite a bit and talked to many people of different cultures, and as a by product of this, I've come to realize that Americans are some of the hardest working people in the world. A bit of a tangent, but we get a lot of shit for being obese, watching a lot of TV, etc, but thats a direct result of us working so damn much. The sense of entitlement the OP points out might be true of the current youth generation, but I think that is symptomatic of all Generation Y people--not just Americans.
|
On December 07 2010 03:17 clementdudu wrote:Show nested quote +On December 07 2010 02:37 Scrapiron wrote:On December 07 2010 01:45 HeIios wrote:On December 06 2010 23:09 kazansky wrote:
For example, it still seems almost impossible to contact with regular chinese people, because they refuse to learn and speak english Oh don't worry, soon enough we will all have to learn mandarin- Lets see how many of us westerners are able to become fluent  . This is not a true statement. English is the language of the world (even though its really hard to learn apparently and has a lot of holes) and this is something that will not change just because China's GDP is high than the US's. Most of Europe, parts of Africa, Russia, most of North America and quite a few places in South America have a very large portion of people that speak English at least at a basic level. There is no reason for China to not just learn English as well (their international employees and such already do). French was the world's language for centuries,it changed with the shift of power,what makes you think its going to go otherwise with english?
French was never really the "world's language" so much as it was "Europe's language." France never had the same global imperialistic reach and power that Great Britain and the United States had/have had over the past 200+ years. English is the first global language.
|
On December 07 2010 04:09 xDaunt wrote:Show nested quote +On December 07 2010 03:17 clementdudu wrote:On December 07 2010 02:37 Scrapiron wrote:On December 07 2010 01:45 HeIios wrote:On December 06 2010 23:09 kazansky wrote:
For example, it still seems almost impossible to contact with regular chinese people, because they refuse to learn and speak english Oh don't worry, soon enough we will all have to learn mandarin- Lets see how many of us westerners are able to become fluent . This is not a true statement. English is the language of the world (even though its really hard to learn apparently and has a lot of holes) and this is something that will not change just because China's GDP is high than the US's. Most of Europe, parts of Africa, Russia, most of North America and quite a few places in South America have a very large portion of people that speak English at least at a basic level. There is no reason for China to not just learn English as well (their international employees and such already do). French was the world's language for centuries,it changed with the shift of power,what makes you think its going to go otherwise with english? French was never really the "world's language" so much as it was "Europe's language." France never had the same global imperialistic reach and power that Great Britain and the United States had/have had over the past 200+ years. English is the first global language.
check pre-WWI history.
|
I've heard French is still the official language of diplomacy because it's tricky.
|
On December 07 2010 04:14 lofung wrote:Show nested quote +On December 07 2010 04:09 xDaunt wrote:On December 07 2010 03:17 clementdudu wrote:On December 07 2010 02:37 Scrapiron wrote:On December 07 2010 01:45 HeIios wrote:On December 06 2010 23:09 kazansky wrote:
For example, it still seems almost impossible to contact with regular chinese people, because they refuse to learn and speak english Oh don't worry, soon enough we will all have to learn mandarin- Lets see how many of us westerners are able to become fluent . This is not a true statement. English is the language of the world (even though its really hard to learn apparently and has a lot of holes) and this is something that will not change just because China's GDP is high than the US's. Most of Europe, parts of Africa, Russia, most of North America and quite a few places in South America have a very large portion of people that speak English at least at a basic level. There is no reason for China to not just learn English as well (their international employees and such already do). French was the world's language for centuries,it changed with the shift of power,what makes you think its going to go otherwise with english? French was never really the "world's language" so much as it was "Europe's language." France never had the same global imperialistic reach and power that Great Britain and the United States had/have had over the past 200+ years. English is the first global language. check pre-WWI history.
Right, that's exactly my point. Before WWI, no one outside of Europe mattered. All of the global power was centralized there (aside from the US and, to some extent, Japan). By the time WW2 was over, Europe was no longer the center of global politics and power.
|
The US is in a crossroad and it has to make a decision on the sort of country it will be. Is it going to continue its highly unstable trickle down economics with inflated military and massive debt. This path is unstable because it is based on fake money and growth. It is also unstable socially because it requires the other 99% of people to think that they can reach that top 1%.
Or it could take the more stable path, which involves the creation of a more stable society. This is done by cutting military spending, which currently consumes 50% of the government budget. The savings should then be used to create real economy through investment in infrastructure (which includes education) and innovations (such as green technologies). All of this should encourage growth in the middle class.
By looking at the midterm results, it seems that top 1% is doing a great job in making sure that the US is still a trickle down economy. Like all great magicians, keeping the masses distracted through the use of entertainment and fear. Rome is burning and people are more concern about who is winning dancing with the stars. The scary thing is that this is happening all over the western world.
|
On December 07 2010 06:28 DJ_Amal wrote:
The US is in a crossroad and it has to make a decision on the sort of country it will be. Is it going to continue its highly unstable trickle down economics with inflated military and massive debt. This path is unstable because it is based on fake money and growth. It is also unstable socially because it requires the other 99% of people to think that they can reach that top 1%.
Or it could take the more stable path, which involves the creation of a more stable society. This is done by cutting military spending, which currently consumes 50% of the government budget. The savings should then be used to create real economy through investment in infrastructure (which includes education) and innovations (such as green technologies). All of this should encourage growth in the middle class.
By looking at the midterm results, it seems that top 1% is doing a great job in making sure that the US is still a trickle down economy. Like all great magicians, keeping the masses distracted through the use of entertainment and fear. Rome is burning and people are more concern about who is winning dancing with the stars. The scary thing is that this is happening all over the western world.
Military spending is not 50% of the budget. It's about 20%.
More importantly, I'd argue that trickle down economics is what made the US what it is today. Economic crashes and recessions are nothing new. They've always fixed themselves. The last thing we need is for the government to step in and "fix" things.
|
On December 07 2010 04:22 xDaunt wrote:Show nested quote +On December 07 2010 04:14 lofung wrote:On December 07 2010 04:09 xDaunt wrote:On December 07 2010 03:17 clementdudu wrote:On December 07 2010 02:37 Scrapiron wrote:On December 07 2010 01:45 HeIios wrote:On December 06 2010 23:09 kazansky wrote:
For example, it still seems almost impossible to contact with regular chinese people, because they refuse to learn and speak english Oh don't worry, soon enough we will all have to learn mandarin- Lets see how many of us westerners are able to become fluent . This is not a true statement. English is the language of the world (even though its really hard to learn apparently and has a lot of holes) and this is something that will not change just because China's GDP is high than the US's. Most of Europe, parts of Africa, Russia, most of North America and quite a few places in South America have a very large portion of people that speak English at least at a basic level. There is no reason for China to not just learn English as well (their international employees and such already do). French was the world's language for centuries,it changed with the shift of power,what makes you think its going to go otherwise with english? French was never really the "world's language" so much as it was "Europe's language." France never had the same global imperialistic reach and power that Great Britain and the United States had/have had over the past 200+ years. English is the first global language. check pre-WWI history. Right, that's exactly my point. Before WWI, no one outside of Europe mattered. All of the global power was centralized there (aside from the US and, to some extent, Japan). By the time WW2 was over, Europe was no longer the center of global politics and power.
so you're pretty much saying that pre WWI Europe=world,and that french was Europe's language.I can see why you disagreed now.(ps:french was spoken outside of Europe too,russian/asians diplomatic relations from the 17th to the 20th century were moslty in french).
Oh and just so you know,french wasnt just for international relations,as in most courts in Europe it was even more spoken than the country's language.
/hijackthread off
|
On December 06 2010 17:15 Consolidate wrote:Show nested quote +On December 06 2010 16:26 pfods wrote:On December 06 2010 16:19 frantic.cactus wrote:On December 06 2010 15:55 pfods wrote:On December 06 2010 15:14 frantic.cactus wrote:On December 06 2010 14:50 pfods wrote:On December 06 2010 14:46 frantic.cactus wrote:On December 06 2010 14:36 vek wrote:On December 06 2010 12:14 frantic.cactus wrote:
As a well educated middle class emerges they will question their government. This is always the way with Authoritarian regimes. When this happens China has to either get in line with the rest of the Democratic world or fall by the wayside.
The general feeling among people according to my uncle is that people support the government because the government is supporting the people and doing great things to improve everyones quality of life. I'm sure if things weren't going so well people would want to do something about it but right now things are great. "Democracy" these days seems slow and corrupt in my opinion. My point exactly, "Right now things are great" However we're talking about the China of the future an cannot judge the political motivations of the population by the current concensus on the street. What happens when China heavy handed government starts getting in the way of trade or contraversial public policy. What we must remember is the current governmental organisation has done a great job getting their country populace out of the paddy fields and into the factories but the step up to where the majority of the population are working white collar jobs is yet to come and when it does it's bringing the winds of change with it. " However we're talking about the China of the future an cannot judge the political motivations of the population by the current concensus on the street. " This is a rather damning statement for you to say, considering you too are arguing about the future political motivations of the country, only your reasoning is based off of nothing but conjecture. No, not conjecture. I'm forming a hypothesis based on historical trends and wherever there has been industrilasation social reform follows. The best example of this is the Great British industrial revolution in the 18th-19th century. It brought about a new class "the middle class" who became wealthy and they demanded change to the traditional process of only the Aristocracy (the ruling class) being able to decide governmental policy. And they got it, a group of people overturned a tradition that dated back almost 1000 years. Funnily enough last year I had to write a paper on Political reform in authoriterian states and chose Singapore as my case study. My reasoning is based on many hours studying the political and historical views of some of the greatest thinkers on the subject and my own thesis which was formed from this information. EDIT: I'm also horribly Dyslexic >< The already IS a rising middle class in china, and things are exactly the same. I don't know how you can just dismiss Tienanmen square as if it doesn't have any correlation. Educated college students and educated citizens in general(most likely coming from middle class familes) demanded reform, and they even had a moderate amount of support in the government (Zhou Enlai and those who supported his power struggle). Then the Chinese government had them slaughtered. That was a call to reform right there, and it was stamped out almost immediately and covered up. I just don't see how you this situation will be ANY different based solely on a burgeoning middle class, when history shows that economic inequality or a dire economic situation, are far more motivational forces for people demanding change. I never dismissed the Tienammen square masacre but I avoided adressing it because it really has no place in this argument. 20 years ago the politcal scene within China looked very different compared to today, just like in 20 more years it will look equally as foreign. You can't transpose that incident into a discussion about Chinas political future as the country is developing so fast in so many areas. As has been made clear over the last 20 years China liberalised it's economic policies and has embraced the trend of globalisation here by making it a major player on the world scene. They have to much invested in the outside world to commit such atrocities again. And I know that there is a rising middle class in China. But it is RISING and at the same pace that China is modernising it's workforce. And because Chinas new wealth is just beginning to trickle down to the masses it will be a while before we see a class with the political and economic clout required for social upheaval of the political system. And don't expect it to be a civil war or anything absurd like that. When the time comes it will be Chinas leaders who step down from their office for the good of the nation they sacrificed so much to build. There was a really interesting article in a Time magazine by Fareed Zakaria a few weeks ago analysing Chinas economic growth and what it meant for America. I'm sure you would find it illuminating (I think he even adressed the atrocity in Tienammen square). It was a very good article. The recent BS china has employed in Tibet has been an absolute shit show. It's really not much different from the 1989 protests. China is absolutely willing to commit further atrocities. And even assuming your scenario is correct about the trickle down of wealth increasing the clout of the average citizen, I think you're putting far too much faith in the leaders of the communist party. The party is loaded with corruption and cronyism, and there is no way that they would give up their cushy positions for the betterment of the country. Tibet is a weird situation. The 17 Point Agreement made between the PLA and the Dali Lama near the end of the Chinese Civil War granted China sovereignty but allowed for the region to remain autonomous. The Dali Lama later fled the country and renounced the agreement. China responded in kind. The 2008 riots started with Tibetian attacks attacks against the Han Chinese in the area. That much is clear. Exact information illustrating the extent of China's crackdown is unclear. Outside sources estimate that roughly 1000 Tibetian rioters were detained with a portion sent to 're-education camps'. China views Tibet as a separatist movement. Under the previously mentioned 17 Point Agreement, Tibet is technically under China's sovereign rule. Tibetans claim that the agreement is void due to the fact that it was obtained by force. That is largely irrelevant. Hawaii are also forcibly coerced into joining the United States, but so many mainland Americans have moved there that the remnants of Hawaii's separatist movement his been effectively silenced. What America did to Hawaii is what China is doing to Tibet. More and more Han Chinese are populating the area to the point where a separatist sentiment will disappear. No nation had recognized Tibet under the independent rule of the Dali Lama. However, during the Cold War, the US began using Tibet as a sticking point against China. The current Dali Lama is hopelessly in bed with the US. What should happen is irrelevant. There is no such thing as a legitimate claim to independence. What will happen is the gradual assimilation of Tibet into mainland China. In 50 years time, Tibet will be to China what Hawaii is the the United States. Taiwan, on the other hand, will likely remain independent from China. China is pragmatic enough to realize that the opportunity has long passed. China officially claims sovereignty over Taiwan, but that is merely an empty statement to save face. In given time, I fully expect China to 'officially' cede control. The relationship between the Taiwanese and Chinese is better than most people expect.
I'm gonna have to disagree with the last part of this as well. While there are huge differences between China's relationship with Tibet and Taiwan, I don't think it is a given that Taiwan remain independent from China.
If anything Taiwan's domestic politics have shifted to be more favorable toward reunification. I think your prediction would've been more timely maybe 10 years ago when the KMT lost control to the pro-independent DPP under Chen Shui Bian. But the KMT has returned to power and surprisingly has warmed relations with China again. Hu Jintao has also adopted a middle road position regarding Taiwan, accepting the status quo--this cost him a lot politically because hawks within the party and the army wanted him to follow Jiang's hard-line stance toward Taiwan. Because of economic ties and the recent detente, the relationship between China and Taiwan will probably only get closer in the coming years. In a few decades who knows, perhaps they'll reunify.
|
On December 07 2010 06:34 xDaunt wrote:Show nested quote +On December 07 2010 06:28 DJ_Amal wrote:
The US is in a crossroad and it has to make a decision on the sort of country it will be. Is it going to continue its highly unstable trickle down economics with inflated military and massive debt. This path is unstable because it is based on fake money and growth. It is also unstable socially because it requires the other 99% of people to think that they can reach that top 1%.
Or it could take the more stable path, which involves the creation of a more stable society. This is done by cutting military spending, which currently consumes 50% of the government budget. The savings should then be used to create real economy through investment in infrastructure (which includes education) and innovations (such as green technologies). All of this should encourage growth in the middle class.
By looking at the midterm results, it seems that top 1% is doing a great job in making sure that the US is still a trickle down economy. Like all great magicians, keeping the masses distracted through the use of entertainment and fear. Rome is burning and people are more concern about who is winning dancing with the stars. The scary thing is that this is happening all over the western world. Military spending is not 50% of the budget. It's about 20%. More importantly, I'd argue that trickle down economics is what made the US what it is today. Economic crashes and recessions are nothing new. They've always fixed themselves. The last thing we need is for the government to step in and "fix" things.
That and more than half the population is employed by small businesses with less than 1000 employees. It's nowhere near the 1% that Amal is implying. Trickle down does work.
Source
|
It's only a matter of time that China will become the number one power, and I think there is nothing to fear because we will only benifit economically from it.
America needs to put its priorities first and that is the health and well being of its citizens. We need to invest in education which will be the key to having a competitive market in the furture do to the eventual decline of manufacturing as a percentage of GDP.
If we all just come together through Starcraft II we all should be A-OK :D
|
"The pursuit of happiness is the quest for nominal wealth."
That line hit home pretty hard with me...damn...now I'm rethinking my career choices...
|
Cut down on the amount of wall street dawgs / economy / administrative bullcrap and put those resources into actual industry.
|
public is way to easily swayed by the media... they say global warning everybody panics..
we dont have to many nuclear reactors=cleanest and most efficient energy
we could have solar panels and those wind energy things in the desert and be producing so much energy but the enviromentalist say no T.T
basically the government is way to inefficient too T.T
|
It's been inevitable [maybe for the past 10-20 years] that China would eventually surpass the US as the world's leading economic superpower. Unfortunately for China, if they want a middle class comparable to the US in size, all the natural resources on our planet won't be enough for them to achieve this.
On a side note, throughout human history, shifts in global super powers usually lead to wars, so I hope this transition doesn't get us all killed.
|
I guess this is why so many US citizens are trying to immigrate to China. Oh wait...
More seriously, China's demographics are not great and getting worse fast. I like India, or even Brazil's growth prospects a lot more.
|
On December 07 2010 03:17 chevron wrote:Show nested quote +On December 06 2010 10:05 Consolidate wrote:On December 06 2010 09:51 infinitestory wrote:
China has its own share of hurdles that it needs to go over first, including overpopulation, human rights issues, etc. which is delaying and will delay their rise for some time to come. But America needs to get its act together, and instead of acting like the status quo will be alright forever, we need to actually get something done.
Knowing Chinese is going to be very useful in the next couple decades ;D Overpopulation really isn't the problem. The solution to the problem is the issue China will need to deal with in the near future. The one child policy will lead to a rapidly aging workforce. Still, the policy if more favorable compared to India's electing to disregard overpopulation as a problem. Human rights issues in China are both overblown by the West and underestimated by the Chinese public. With the supreme goal of maintaining economic stability, China has little tolerance for unrest and often deals with it brutally. However, actual life in China doesn't feel like living under a police state. While corruption in is China is prevalent at the local level, the upper echelons of the government are fairly unaffected. The official policy and attitudes against corruption betrays no tolerance for such behavior. Corrupt politicians usually face Draconian measures. This last point is wrong. Corruption is not only local but systemic and reaches up into the peaks of Party Central. I'm not sure what you meant by "9 politburos" but I'm guessing you were referring to the Politburo Standing Committee. There is a great deal of controversy over the business affairs of current and former PSC members' family (see for instance Wen Jiabao's wife, also, Jiang Zhemin's family). There is no way corruption at that level gets reported, and your claim that "the upper echelons of government are fairly unaffected" is false. For more on this, see Richard McGregor's "The Party." Also, another point I'd have to disagree on is the "draconian measures" put in place to fight corruption. Every year, Hu Jintao and Wen Jiabao rally against corruption, promising change and sometimes even political reform--see Wen's controversial speech from earlier this year. However in actual practice there has been little movement against corruption. The few executions/prison terms you see of party bosses caught for embezzlement are show trials and the result of political infighting, not a real measurement of progress. The best example of this is the sacking of Chen Liangyu, Shanghai's party boss (a politburo level position) in 2006. Most commentators believe his removal was the result of Hu/Wen's maneuvering against the "Shanghai Gang", a powerful bloc in the Party led by Hu's predecessor and political rival Jiang. Moreover, the Party's Discipline and Inspection Committee is a means of factional competition between elites (again, see the sacking of the Shanghai party secretary), not a body that is empowered with really cracking down on corruption in any meaningful way. I think you are significantly underplaying the detriment corruption is having on the Party and its legitimacy in the eyes of the Chinese public. That said, I think the upcoming Congress in 2012 might offer some promise for change.
Let's not confuse corruption with incompetence. The fact that we don't hear about top party leaders's cash stash is not due to their virtue but rather political necessity. It doesn't mean that they don't trade in other means, power, position, opportunities, the list goes on.
And to be frank, I don't blame them, it's the way China works, find me someone who works for the government and is absolutely clean, I will say he is either a retard or lying. He is probably incompetent as well. How do you get shit done in China and not get your hand dirty?
You are writting this as if the evil comes from the party when it fact it is a model which the Chinese have chosen for their society. It has being like that for thousands of years, why blame the party for it now?
This won't change until true balance of power is implemented which won't be until the party goes away.
|
On December 07 2010 09:51 haduken wrote:
it's the way China works
for 5% of the population. the rest get f...everyday.
|
On December 07 2010 08:59 KaiserJohan wrote:
Cut down on the amount of wall street dawgs / economy / administrative bullcrap and put those resources into actual industry.
LOL care to elaborate?
"Wall street dawgs" provide a plethora of much needed services. Initial public offerings let people invest in what I'm assuming is "actual industry" to you, which is critical to what we, as a nation, like to tout as American innovation. Debt origination; you want all of those public sector goods like roads/hospitals/parks? The government, both on a federal and state level push out IOUs (muni bonds) to finance such projects. General investment advisory; retirement funds (including those giant multi billion dollar pension funds that service the pensions of teachers, policemen, firefighters, etc), letting your money make its own money, etc etc. Market clearing, to lessen the impact of market search friction and provide liquidity; try finding someone to buy from (or sell to) individuals, or corporations, the debt, equity, derivatives, etc that floats without this mechanism. The list goes on and on and on. Yes, the firms that make up the financial sector act in their best interest; that does NOT mean that it is useless, corrupt or a drain on society. Every for-profit corporation acts in accordance with its own interests, doing otherwise would be asinine (and if it's a public company, pretty much illegal for upper management to do without shareholder consent). The media's been putting on a show, as it so oft does, ironically, because it's good business for them.
I won't comment on "economy/ administrative bullcrap" since I have no idea what you're even referring to (I don't think you do either, but I'll be here if you want to clarify).
|
|
|
|
|
|
EPT
