| Forum Index > General Forum |
|
Sufficiency
Canada23833 Posts
You think most of the stuff right now are 'Made in China'. But as China's work force shrinks, labour price will rise, and the big companies can easily move elsewhere for cheaper labour... such as Southeast Asia (I am already seeing products from these regions on the rise), India, and certain parts of Africa. The income disparity in China is already causing a lot of trouble. Just look at the ethnic riots in the last couple of years, all happened in poor provinces. | ||
|
bellweather
United States404 Posts
On December 06 2010 11:30 Consolidate wrote: The direct method is through government subsidies. But the two-party system is a mess. I expect nothing from Congress. Americans need to learn how to be industrious again. College graduates need to feel compelled toward productive careers, but they find themselves without adequate incentive. Projecting much? Your first post cites nothing concrete in terms of argument; you throw out vague phrases like "inefficient service sector" and "complacent public" with the hopes of drawing in some sort of debate. I'd usually call troll, but for some reason I think you are attempting to be serious. | ||
|
Carras
Argentina860 Posts
| ||
|
TALegion
United States1187 Posts
(Ironic joke) | ||
|
Consolidate
United States829 Posts
On December 06 2010 11:46 Sufficiency wrote: China has a huge aging population and a shrinking work force. It can't sustain its growth for the next 20 years. This much is a fact. You think most of the stuff right now are 'Made in China'. But as China's work force shrinks, labour price will rise, and the big companies can easily move elsewhere for cheaper labour... such as Southeast Asia (I am already seeing products from these regions on the rise), India, and certain parts of Africa. The income disparity in China is already causing a lot of trouble. Just look at the ethnic riots in the last couple of years, all happened in poor provinces. If it relies on pure manufacturing for it's growth, then your point is arguable. As it stands, China is investing heavily into hi-tech sectors and affording copious research grants to grow it's specialized workforce. Whether or not ~8%-10% growth is perfectly maintainable is a cosmetic concern. | ||
|
pfods
United States895 Posts
On December 06 2010 10:39 AcrossFiveJulys wrote: Scientifically we don't know how to do fusion yet. So no, they aren't building fusion plants. The day we can do fusion is the day we no longer have to worry about energy  They are building fission plants, which the US has too. Fission plants are more efficient and environment friendly than some other forms of energy, but only if no accidents happen. I'm aware of the difference. And i'm aware that they don't exist yet. Which is why i said " their recent claims of having developed a fusion reactor are true". If this claim is true though, then it has serious implications. Even their goal of 200 fission reactors by 2020 is a big deal. | ||
|
Hatsu
United Kingdom474 Posts
On December 06 2010 11:56 Consolidate wrote: Whether or not ~8%-10% growth is perfectly maintainable is a cosmetic concern. Again, I must beg to differ and I am not alone: "But even if the 8% rule is no longer based on sound economics, it clearly still carries a lot of weight with government officials." http://www.economist.com/node/12606998 | ||
|
pfods
United States895 Posts
On December 06 2010 11:00 Retgery wrote: I would be more afraid that China currently own 10% of USA's dept (about 170 billion) right this second, and if they suddenly stop covering they can send your ecnomy into a tail spin and you'll be in another depression This is scare tactics used by debt hounds in the US congress and senate. If china did call in the debt, we just wouldn't pay. What would chinas response be? Would they attempt to topple the dollar? If they did that, they would bring down half of the worlds majors economies. They would literally be committing national suicide if they did that. Not to mention if they tried we'd slap a 200% tariff on any Chinese imports, or something ridiculous like that. If you want to see an economy go into a tail spin, think of china with no US trade. | ||
TanGeng
Sanya12364 Posts
On December 06 2010 12:01 Hatsu wrote: Again, I must beg to differ and I am not alone: "But even if the 8% rule is no longer based on sound economics, it clearly still carries a lot of weight with government officials." http://www.economist.com/node/12606998 What are they going to do? Engineer a bubble. AFAIK, China already has a huge bubble in real estate. | ||
Manifesto7
Osaka27148 Posts
| ||
|
Judicator
United States7270 Posts
On December 06 2010 12:03 pfods wrote: This is scare tactics used by debt hounds in the US congress and senate. If china did call in the debt, we just wouldn't pay. What would chinas response be? Would they attempt to topple the dollar? If they did that, they would bring down half of the worlds majors economies. They would literally be committing national suicide if they did that. Not to mention if they tried we'd slap a 200% tariff on any Chinese imports, or something ridiculous like that. If you want to see an economy go into a tail spin, think of china with no US trade. No the US wouldn't retaliate. Neither side will make a move, both economies are both very intertwined that its in the best interest for both to work together. Neither side really holds the upper hand where they can force the other, but China has gotten better part of the deal (emphasis on the relative nature of the word better). | ||
|
Consolidate
United States829 Posts
On December 06 2010 11:48 InsideTheBox wrote: Projecting much? Your first post cites nothing concrete in terms of argument; you throw out vague phrases like "inefficient service sector" and "complacent public" with the hopes of drawing in some sort of debate. I'd usually call troll, but for some reason I think you are attempting to be serious. Yes. I made it explicit that I am partially projecting my own motivations. Government spending numbers are concrete enough. I can provide a few more if you are interested. As my talk of a complacent public, I don't know what evidence there is beyond broad observations. That the service sector is stealing away talent other industries is fairly well-known. The fact that financial institutions are either incompetent or corrupt is fairly accepted as well. Goldman Sachs sold junk mortgage-backed securities rated as AAA, while also purchasing an absurd amount of credit-default swaps against the very product they were peddling. This was a clever maneuver that made them a good deal of money, but this is money won on successful gambling at the expense of others who bet poorly. This sort of money made is zero-sum and not productive - thus I consider it to be an inefficient sector contributing to the growth of the economy. Any other objections? (yeah yeah passive-aggressive i know*) | ||
|
frantic.cactus
New Zealand164 Posts
| ||
|
keynest
United States57 Posts
A good read on this topic will be "The Myth of Asia’s Miracle" by Paul Krugman. http://media.ft.com/cms/b8268ffe-7572-11db-aea1-0000779e2340.pdf 1. 8~10% is NOT perfectly maintainable. We went through this: "Wow this country is growing so fast it will surpass the US in no time by maintaining this insane growth." The first was the Soviet Union. The second was Japan. The third was so called four tigers. Now we are talking about this again. The thing is that as you mobilize more and more resource for economic developement the next marginal labor or resource will be less efficient because you mobize more efficient ones first. Even now educated Chinese work force is having diffculty finding a job. This mobilization of resource will hit the wall sooner or later. Remeber. it's easy to reduce your time when you run 100m in 20 seconds, but not when you run in 9.8 seconds. 2. China is not politically stable. Although it looks remarkably stable now, but the government is basically comforting the population at large using economic growth. When the mobilization of resources slows down, Chinese citizens will not put up with shits they are putting up with now. 3. China is rapidly aging. This means that shrinking workerforce and decreased supply of cheap labor, which will drive up the wage and put China in a less competitive position. Even if China undertakes the US for the biggest economy in the world, that would not mean the end of the world. They are Communists in name only, and nations don't go to war for colonies anymore. There might be some qurrels around regional politics around Middle East and Asia, but it does not involve some Doomsday scenarios like the cold war. China and the US will be rivals but do not have to be enemies. | ||
|
Consolidate
United States829 Posts
On December 06 2010 12:01 Hatsu wrote: Again, I must beg to differ and I am not alone: "But even if the 8% rule is no longer based on sound economics, it clearly still carries a lot of weight with government officials." http://www.economist.com/node/12606998 China will likely fake its numbers if necessary. As long as actual growth remains relatively reasonable, foreign interests probably won't be too effected. To be frank, I haven't looked deeply into the impact China's aging workforce will have on it's economy. All that I know is that this concern hasn't really discouraged foreign-investment. | ||
|
blitzkrieger
United States512 Posts
On December 06 2010 11:00 Retgery wrote: I would be more afraid that China currently own 10% of USA's dept (about 170 billion) right this second, and if they suddenly stop covering they can send your ecnomy into a tail spin and you'll be in another depression We'd just invade Canada for natural resources like in Fallout 3. I heard the US military is working on an Igloo breaking bomb that can penetrate even the latest Maple Syrup armor of the Canadian armies :D China and USA are in symbiosis, kind of like Tasteless and Artosis. If America falls for any reason Canada is more than likely to suffer a ton as well economically and maybe even from nuclear winds or bio/chemical weapons. Canada is tied to America pretty closely in many ways. | ||
|
SamuraiJJ
Taiwan22 Posts
If you take a good look at Asian countries, you would find how competitive the education system is compared to USA and how everyone struggled to get a normal job. six figure for a starting salary in China definitely requires much more than what you have thought. | ||
|
AlexDeLarge
Romania218 Posts
On December 06 2010 10:11 sk` wrote: Since 4 can be labeled as the cause of 1, 2, and 3 only 4 needs to be stated. In Japan, we actually have a 7.5 hour work day and our per-person GDP is higher than the states. I was born American, but I will curse the day when I have to live there again. I go back constantly for business trips and I am always appalled at how shitty the American worker has become - lazy, constantly complaining, insane unearned sense of entitlement. It is no longer if Atlas shrugs or not, the weight of the unproductive world (American world) has bloated to unbearable levels. Atlas changed countries. Ayn Rand reference or totally unrelated? | ||
|
keynest
United States57 Posts
On December 06 2010 12:20 SamuraiJJ wrote: six figure for a starting salary in China definitely requires much more than what you have thought. Six figure for a starting salary? What kind of career is that? I don't think even in the US you can find handful of positions that have six figures for a starting salary. | ||
|
pfods
United States895 Posts
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. We saw how China handled that with Tienanmen Square. China is the perfect mix of freedom and authoritarianism. Enough freedom to make people happy(or think they're happy), and enough authoritarianism to make sure everyone stays in line. And the wealthier china gets, the happier the majority of its citizens will be. The only real way china is going to see any serious reform is complete economic devastation, where the progress that the communist party touts around as a measure of the success of the party is no longer a viable option in assuaging peoples concerns with their lack of freedom. | ||
| ||
|
|
BSL20 Non-Korean Champi…
CSO Cup
BSL20 Non-Korean Champi…
Bonyth vs Sziky
Dewalt vs Hawk
Hawk vs QiaoGege
Sziky vs Dewalt
Mihu vs Bonyth
Zhanhun vs QiaoGege
QiaoGege vs Fengzi
FEL
BSL20 Non-Korean Champi…
BSL20 Non-Korean Champi…
Bonyth vs Zhanhun
Dewalt vs Mihu
Hawk vs Sziky
Sziky vs QiaoGege
Mihu vs Hawk
Zhanhun vs Dewalt
Fengzi vs Bonyth
Sparkling Tuna Cup
Online Event
uThermal 2v2 Circuit
The PondCast
[ Show More ] |
|
|
EPT
