Do you think in 20 years China will be more powerful than the United States ? - Page 2 - GoFuckYourself.com

ControlThy · 10-02-2004, 02:07 AM

Quote:

Originally posted by project_naughty
At present, the entire non-nuclear military might of China is only able to defeat 2 US carrier battle groups, and that is according to the Chinese' own boasts.

As for Europe (my continent) then the only word I have is "LOL".
We are a dying continent with an aging population and a booming Muslim birth rate. We are also saddled with socialism, which everyone knows doesn't work, but which our unelected leaders in the EU are pushing and pushing until it ruins us.

America's problems are coming from within - the naive "flower-children" of the 60s are the ones who hold influential posts now. It is they who are driving America in it's current direction of self-hate. It was those same people who lost the political war (but not the military war) in Vietnam. Those same people who spat at the returning US marines are the ones who are now telling America's children how to think.

What America needs is a severe dose of "anti-idiotarianism" so that it can rid itself of it's idiotarian left and stupid religious right.

America can rule forever as the standard-bearer of freedom, and I am all for that. But America has to want that too.

I reluctantly hope that Bush gets another 4 years, simply because the consequences for the world of a Kerry term in office are too frightening to think of.

You should move to the US at once

Ironhorse · 10-02-2004, 02:08 AM

Quote:

Originally posted by theking
No...not in 20 years and possibly...if not probably...never.

Ignore it and it will go away?

ControlThy · 10-02-2004, 02:10 AM

Quote:

Originally posted by Ironhorse
Ignore it and it will go away?

Theking likes ignoring issues.

Ironhorse · 10-02-2004, 02:14 AM

Quote:

Originally posted by mrskin
I dont disagree with that but i was trying to illustrate a point - be it 20 or 50 or even 100 there are certain things that america has that china dosnt have and will never have.

Complete road and rail infrustructure;
a fully armed civilian population;
thousands of the best jet fighters;
thousands of nuclear weapons;
at least 20-30 delta submarines that cruise the oceans of the world, their location not known by anyone in the world other than the people on board the submarine all armed with about 20 nuclear warheads each;
10 operational or near operational air craft carriers - which has been up to 15 at one point;
thousands of the best tanks;
military training vis-a-vis their troops esp. special forces, delta, rangers, navy seals etc.

I think it's funny how all that stuff in your list runs on petroleum that will, in 20 years, only be available in the Middle East..

BRISK · 10-02-2004, 02:28 AM

Quote:

Originally posted by Ironhorse
I think it's funny how all that stuff in your list runs on petroleum that will, in 20 years, only be available in the Middle East..

You think oil only exists in the middle east?

Rich · 10-02-2004, 02:29 AM

If the Chinese start consuming like Americans it will take the resources of 4 earths to sustain.

Ironhorse · 10-02-2004, 02:33 AM

Quote:

Originally posted by BRISK
You think oil only exists in the middle east?

It will in 20 years..

If you don't think oil is a finite resource about to go extinct you need to do some more reading..

Rich · 10-02-2004, 02:35 AM

Quote:

Originally posted by mrskin
Evidence once again of the dumbness of the average lefty....

Anyone who has studied economics can work out that China cannot sustain current growth into the extended future.

China's current GDP growth is merely an effect of China opening up some of its trade and modernising parts of its work force.

Population alone does not equate to power or development potential. 1 worker with 1 machine or 1 computer is 10 times more effective than 10 workers without any machines. The technological infrustructure and capability of America would take decades to develop in China.

In 20 years time or so oil will be more scarce than it is now, yet America will still have trillions of barrels in its reserve stockpiles. China will not.

I could go on and on but frankly im not getting paid to teach. Socialism does not work and it not only makes the rich poorer but it makes the poor poorer aswell.

And for all you tools out there that think that the democrats are responsible for the surpluses america received in the clinton era - go and study economics.
It was reagans tax cut implementations and economic policies that led to the economic growth during the clinton era, it takes years for economic benefits to sink in not months.

The current economic climate is as a result of clinton's poor economic management and his failure to properly track down terrorists and in particular bin laden.

Damn if only Clinton were never elected, the USA would be a utopia by now.

BRISK · 10-02-2004, 02:46 AM

Quote:

Originally posted by Ironhorse
It will in 20 years..

If you don't think oil is a finite resource about to go extinct you need to do some more reading..

Thanks, I thought oil grew on magical oil trees.

And if you think oil will only exist in the middle east in 20 years, you might want to do a bit of reading yourself

http://www.usatoday.com/money/indust...il-sands_x.htm

Ironhorse · 10-02-2004, 02:54 AM

Quote:

Originally posted by BRISK
Thanks, I thought oil grew on magical oil trees.

And if you think oil will only exist in the middle east in 20 years, you might want to do a bit of reading yourself

http://www.usatoday.com/money/indust...il-sands_x.htm

I have done extensive reading on this, and this is some of the most environmentally unfriendly way to extract a resource, not to mention so much more expensive and as I mentioned before..finite.

BRISK · 10-02-2004, 03:15 AM

Quote:

Originally posted by Ironhorse
I have done extensive reading on this, and this is some of the most environmentally unfriendly way to extract a resource, not to mention so much more expensive and as I mentioned before..finite.

You honestly think that ALL oil outside of the middle east will be used up within the next 20 years?

Tipsy · 10-02-2004, 03:31 AM

These threads are always interesting if nothing else for all the 'experts' who are so sure of their limited knowledge in a subject, when in reality they know little more than those they attempt to ridicule.

Dave77 · 10-02-2004, 03:33 AM

God bless America!

$5 submissions · 10-02-2004, 03:35 AM

The Chinese historically have been always a powerful cultural and military power (at least in Asia). It's only a question of time until its economy rivals that of the US and its military reaches parity with the US.

Usually when countries become richer they tend to develop democratic civil societies. Unfortunately, China may become one of the biggest exceptions to this rule since it comes from millenias of strong autocratic governments.

Definitely would be interesting to see what happens.

spanky part 2 · 10-02-2004, 04:13 AM

Quote:

Originally posted by mrskin
Evidence once again of the dumbness of the average lefty....

Anyone who has studied economics can work out that China cannot sustain current growth into the extended future.

China's current GDP growth is merely an effect of China opening up some of its trade and modernising parts of its work force.

Population alone does not equate to power or development potential. 1 worker with 1 machine or 1 computer is 10 times more effective than 10 workers without any machines. The technological infrustructure and capability of America would take decades to develop in China.

In 20 years time or so oil will be more scarce than it is now, yet America will still have trillions of barrels in its reserve stockpiles. China will not.

I could go on and on but frankly im not getting paid to teach. Socialism does not work and it not only makes the rich poorer but it makes the poor poorer aswell.

And for all you tools out there that think that the democrats are responsible for the surpluses america received in the clinton era - go and study economics.
It was reagans tax cut implementations and economic policies that led to the economic growth during the clinton era, it takes years for economic benefits to sink in not months.

The current economic climate is as a result of clinton's poor economic management and his failure to properly track down terrorists and in particular bin laden.

You my friend are a republican tool.

Maybe go back to school, and study history. Every republican administration since ww2 has had a recession. Very simple, when the poor and middle class suffer, the upper class make a shitload of money.

God I hate conservative fucks. Why don't you just go to fox network and post there.

rxcashmoney · 10-02-2004, 05:31 AM

I'm still on page one of this thread, but I wanted to post the following.

Mr Skin and Project Naughty, I don't think I've read any better threads other than this on GFY due to both of your postings.

Excellent reading. One of the few times I've ever read this board where my knowledge went up, not down.

Kicker · 10-02-2004, 06:19 AM

project_naughty · 10-02-2004, 06:21 AM

Quote:

Originally posted by rxcashmoney
I'm still on page one of this thread, but I wanted to post the following.

Mr Skin and Project Naughty, I don't think I've read any better threads other than this on GFY due to both of your postings.

Excellent reading. One of the few times I've ever read this board where my knowledge went up, not down.

Thanks, dude.

Since I joined this site I've learned so much about the industry, which is helping me with my current projects, but absolutely nothing about anything else (but then again this is an adult forum after all).
In fact, I'm astounded by the lack of knowledge most people here have about anything other than adult. I put it down to the probable fact that the majority of people here are no more than 17 years old and still stupid. Jeez, when I was 17 I was one dumb fuck.
Although not true for everyone, age and experience really can sort a person's head out.

baddog · 10-03-2004, 11:47 AM

Quote:

Originally posted by Sausage
US is on the way out (unfortunately) .. and China and Europe are on the way in. Its pretty obvious too.

Europe? hahahaha . . .they can't make up their minds what they want to do

baddog · 10-03-2004, 11:51 AM

Quote:

Originally posted by TheLegacy

Sad that Iraq now has better resources in firemen, police, electrical than USA right now - if that money was spent on us - image how better off society would be??

that has to be about the dumbest thing I have ever read

oh, BTW, if Kerry got elected, he would spend more money, and send in more troops than Bush has there (would most likely start the draft again) because he thinks it can be won in 6 months . . .you two deserve each other . . .can he run for prime minister?

baddog · 10-03-2004, 11:55 AM

Quote:

Originally posted by M_M
its gonna be a lot more than 20 years for oil to become scarce

he said MORE scarce . . . every day there is less oil than there was the day before

baddog · 10-03-2004, 12:03 PM

Quote:

Originally posted by Veterans Day
please stop making sense, the 18 year olds cant contemplate. Thanks

I am sure brains are erupting all over the Internet, and their poor moms are waling down to the basement only to find Johnny staring off into the distance, with gray matter oozing out of their skulls

baddog · 10-03-2004, 12:08 PM

Quote:

Originally posted by XP
Everyone knows US soldiers are double-pussy.
They don't enter any area, before double airbombings.

there is no honor in death . . . WTF? Why put your military at risk if you can bomb your enemy into submission from 1,000 miles away?

dumbass . . . even the Engish knew enough to let their long bows do their thing before sending in the foot soldiers

baddog · 10-03-2004, 12:10 PM

Quote:

Originally posted by Ironhorse
It will in 20 years..

If you don't think oil is a finite resource about to go extinct you need to do some more reading..

if you think that finite resource will only be available in the middle east, you are the one that should do the reading

dready · 10-03-2004, 12:13 PM

China's demand for raw resources will drive up prices so high that they will fuck most western economies royally.

baddog · 10-03-2004, 12:15 PM

Quote:

Originally posted by baddog
if you think that finite resource will only be available in the middle east, you are the one that should do the reading

to help get you started http://pubs.usgs.gov/of/1997/ofr-97-463/97463pl1.html

Cman · 10-03-2004, 12:20 PM

20? More like 5. Especially if Bush gets reelected

baddog · 10-03-2004, 12:20 PM

Quote:

Originally posted by Ironhorse
I have done extensive reading on this, and this is some of the most environmentally unfriendly way to extract a resource, not to mention so much more expensive and as I mentioned before..finite.

you think that if push came to shove, being "environmentally friendly" would ever be uttered? As far as expense goes, trust me, money is not an issue, as the costs would only be passed onto the consumer

jayeff · 10-03-2004, 12:30 PM

20 years is probably too short a time scale, but yes, China is at least a candidate to be more powerful than the US in the not too distant future.

Globalisation and the misplaced belief of Americans in the superiority they ascribe to themselves will ensure the continued downward slide of the US. Europe doesn't suffer from the latter and may get a temporary reprieve if there is enough drive to pull together the 450 million people who live in EU countries. But it is also a high-wage area that the pendulum is swinging away from.

The big stumbling block in China could be their political development: not because of their brand of socialism per se (and right now capitalism isn't serving the west too well), but because it is hard to see the present leadership surviving the pressures which are building up there. There is no way to know, if the lid does blow, how long it will take things to settle, or what direction they will go off in afterward.

I don't put much faith in this kind of forecast. As a teenager in the sixties, I got used to predictions that WW3 would be a nuclear conflict between the US and the USSR. That wasn't some kind of left-wing conspiracy theory: many US and European government policies were/are a result of the extent to which that forecast was given credence. We know how that all evaporated...

bdld · 10-03-2004, 01:55 PM

i certainly hope not, but i do see this as a possibility in 50+ years.

Lykos · 10-03-2004, 02:06 PM

And i am preety sure they will be..there is just too many of them...

VeriSexy · 10-03-2004, 02:43 PM

20 years is way too long. Here's some stats

http://www.atimes.com/atimes/Global...y/FA23Dj01.html

"China recycles trade surplus into US Treasury bonds
American companies may have forgotten what Henry Ford propounded when he first built his Model T: If you do not pay high enough wages to your workers, they can't afford to buy your product. One simple basis for that Bush boom is that China is recycling its US$100 billion-plus trade surplus with the US back into dollars, and especially into US Treasury bonds. Almost half of the US Treasury bonds are now owned in Asia. So China is financing Bush's bold economic experiment: running two or more wars simultaneously with a huge budget and trade deficit, and equally huge tax handouts for the richest Americans.

One has to question the long-term economic rationale for China of putting its long-term assets into very low-interest bonds in a currency that has already dropped recently by a third - and is going to drop even more. It certainly makes strategic sense: if push came to shove over, for example, the Taiwan Strait, all Beijing has to do is to mention the possibility of a sell order going down the wires. It would devastate the US economy more than any nuclear strike the Chinese could manage at the moment. "

China Issues US$78 BLN Of Treasury Bonds In 2003
http://au.news.yahoo.com/040130/3/nibj.html

CHINA TO ISSUE EQUIVALENT OF US$4.6 BLN IN T-BONDS
http://news.tradingcharts.com/futures/5/8/54028985.html

CHINA'S CENTRAL BANK QUICKENS MONEY WITHDRAWAL
http://news.tradingcharts.com/futures/9/5/54130559.html

China float might hit US Treasuries-PIMCO's Keller
http://www.forbes.com/markets/bonds...rtr1004460.html

China is an important buyer of U.S. Treasury securities, holding $119.4 billion of them at the end of April, U.S. Treasury Department figures show.

China's New 'Self-Defense' Tool: U.S. Bonds
http://www.iht.com/IHT/PS/98/ps040398a.html

http://www.oneworld.net/article/view/73234/1/
China is also using its large foreign currency reserves--a total of $356 billion--to buy more U.S. treasury bonds, which provide U.S. investors with capital for re-investment

http://wwwc.house.gov/International...08/bian2021.htm
The People?s Republic of China presently receives approximately $4 billion each year from American taxpayers in the form of interest income on U.S. Treasury bonds held by the Chinese government. The PRC also enjoys a $100 billion annual trade surplus with the United States, giving them an estimated $400 billion current account. Yet the government of China continues its discriminatory evasion of payment to American bondholders. It is the position of the Chinese government that China should not have to honor their nation?s full faith and credit sovereign obligations if they choose not to. Such an insular worldview, flaunting the flagrant disregard of established principles of international trade and commerce, will not serve the interests of the PRC in the community of nations and is inconsistent with the status of the PRC as a most favored trading partner and member of the World Trade Organization. Such a posture can only act to harm the long term interests of both the United States and China.

The Economy:US to buy back national debt
http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/business...nomy/411973.stm

It now says it will begin repurchasing Treasury bonds before they fall due, as early as next February, cutting back on the $3.6 trillion (£2.4 trillion) it owes to the public.

US Dollar Implosion - Part II
http://www.gold-eagle.com/editorial...ield120503.html

Asians Aren't Dumping U.S. Treasuries -- Yet
http://quote.bloomberg.com/apps/new...id=aCvJZvr6BM4I

China also has emerged a key U.S. Treasury holder. Maintaining its 8.3 peg to the U.S. dollar means buying lots of dollar assets. Politicians and manufacturers who complain that Beijing manipulates its currency to gain an unfair advantage fail to appreciate its role in holding down U.S. borrowing costs.

China Now Second In Oil Consumption
China's fast-growing economy has overtaken Japan to become the world's second largest consumer of crude oil after the US
http://www.ruggedelegantliving.com/change/a/002062.html

China has total of 270 million cellular users as of the end of 2003 and around 60 million new users were added in the same year. See:
http://www1.chinadaily.com.cn/en/do...tent_259693.htm (the news in 08/2003)

Broadband users in China:17.4 million. see: http://www.infoworld.com/article/04...ecommunications

China produced around 225 million tons of iron and steel and imported other 35 million tons in 2003 for the construction.
See: http://www.worldsteel.org/media/wsif/wsif2003.pdf

55% of the world cement (Another infrastructure construction index) was used in China. See http://www.economist.com/displaysto...tory_id=2446908

More that 13 million of PCs were sold in China in 2003. See http://biz.yahoo.com/rc/040212/tech_china_pcs_1.html

International trade in 2003
China topped 840B$ (import < export) in 2003. See: http://www1.chinadaily.com.cn/en/do...tent_294145.htm

Mcdonads?s Business in China:
http://breaking.tcm.ie/2004/02/26/story135939.html

China has more than 400B$ reserve. See: http://www.china.org.cn/e-company/0.../page031222.htm
China has 160B$ external debt. Reserve >> debt

Here's world military spending

http://www.cdi.org/budget/2004/worl...ry-spending.cfm

China is also pushing Europe to lift the Arms embargo so they can buy more high tech weapons and tech transfers. Imagine what will happen if they got a copy of the Euro Fighter and started mass producing.
http://www.contumacy.org/bbs/index....ames;read=26893
http://www.euobserver.com/index.pht...3&aid=14196

They also got their first batch of SU30MKK from Russia.
http://www.kanwa.com/edaily.htm

China more than doubling budgeted military spending this year
http://www.spacewar.com/2004/040423060406.hm15bwqn.html
China's official defense budget in 2004 is more than 25 billion dollars.

But when off-budget funding for foreign weapons system imports is included, total defense-related expenditures this year should soar to between 50 and 70 billion dollars, said Richard Lawless, the deputy undersecretary of defence.

polish_aristocrat · 04-02-2008, 08:35 AM

time for a bump 3.5 years later

any new opinions?

spunkmister · 04-02-2008, 08:45 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by polish_aristocrat

time for a bump 3.5 years later

any new opinions?

yeah you're still an idiot

xmas13 · 04-02-2008, 08:47 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by polish_aristocrat

time for a bump 3.5 years later
any new opinions?

I predict Greenland will be taking over the world with its ice exports and its army of penguins by 2150.

Rochard · 04-02-2008, 09:39 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by XP

Everyone knows US soldiers are double-pussy.
They don't enter any area, before double airbombings.
They are like cleaning ladies.
They have no courage.

I'm not sure what planet your living on there skippy.

Russia invaded Afghanistan in the 1980s and got their asses kicked. We knocked on the door and a month later Afghanistan was ours. We also had two large scale engagements with Iraq, and both times we kicked their asses so quickly it was funny.

I'm not saying that the US can kick China's ass, but calling the US military "pussys" is a bit out there.

FelixFlow · 04-02-2008, 12:22 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by TheLegacy

currently the billions of dollars in debt...

correct me if i'm wrong, but isnt the national debt at 9 Trillion dollars so far ??? (and counting!)

O MARINA · 04-02-2008, 12:27 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by spunkmister

yeah you're still an idiot

oh please, and who the fuck are you?

ADL Colin · 04-02-2008, 12:38 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by polish_aristocrat

time for a bump 3.5 years later

any new opinions?

Sure.

After WW II we lived in a bipolar world with two camps. That which was supportive of and supported by the US and one supportive of and by the USSR. A little under 20 years ago the USSR collapsed and a power vacuum was created. Briefly there was and has been a more monopolar world with the US as the "World's Only Superpower". Too many Americans tend to think this will last forever.

Now, naturally and as they always do, things are changing. There are two main power considerations I think; military and economic. Economically the US has been or is in the process of being joined by the EU. Soon, within a few decades they will quite likely be joined by China. India could also come into play down the road. None of these entities will be capable of dominating the other economically. China has political hurdles they have to jump over but they have handled them masterfully so far.

As far as military there are too many possibilities. Equal economic powers mostly have the option to become equal military powers but it is a choice they have to make. Will the EU become more nation-like and form a military under one command? Will the temptation of being a military superpower for China be too strong? Will the recognition that there will be multiple economic powers mean that US leadership will care less about military options? Maybe we'll all just "get along" but history gives very little hope of that.

lhizy_05 · 04-02-2008, 12:40 PM

20 yrs from now?
?maybe yes, maybe no? coz i dont have an idea...

ADL Colin · 04-02-2008, 12:54 PM

"IF China's GDP were to grow indefinitely at 11 percent a year -- 9 percent real growth plus 2 percent inflation -- and the U.S. experienced 5.5 percent growth -- 3.5 percent real and 2 percent inflation -- it would take the Chinese 40 years to catch up in terms of nominal GDP. "

Quite obviously 10%+ annual growth rate for four decades is a hell of an achievement. Not sure how likely that is. The US used to have that high of growth. On the other hand, China only needs GDP per capita about 1/4 that of the US in order to match its total GDP output because of its massive population.

slapass · 04-02-2008, 01:03 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by mrskin

And for all you tools out there that think that the democrats are responsible for the surpluses america received in the clinton era - go and study economics.
It was reagans tax cut implementations and economic policies that led to the economic growth during the clinton era, it takes years for economic benefits to sink in not months.

The current economic climate is as a result of clinton's poor economic management and his failure to properly track down terrorists and in particular bin laden.

You are a tool. Bush Sr raised taxes and Clinton took office after him. Clinton benefited from a time of peace. We could maybe still have this if it wasn't for Bush Jr. And just a heads up but bin laden is still out there. He never was in Iraq.

Martin · 04-02-2008, 01:04 PM

Doesn''t matter 2012 is almost here. We're all dooomed anyway...

Vick! · 04-02-2008, 01:21 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by ADL Colin

"IF China's GDP were to grow indefinitely at 11 percent a year -- 9 percent real growth plus 2 percent inflation -- and the U.S. experienced 5.5 percent growth -- 3.5 percent real and 2 percent inflation -- it would take the Chinese 40 years to catch up in terms of nominal GDP. "

Quite obviously 10%+ annual growth rate for four decades is a hell of an achievement. Not sure how likely that is. The US used to have that high of growth. On the other hand, China only needs GDP per capita about 1/4 that of the US in order to match its total GDP output because of its massive population.

you didn't mentioned the decline in US economy resulted by useless wars, ditching of USD and adoption of EURO as currency of trade between countries etc etc.

ADL Colin · 04-02-2008, 01:40 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Vick!

you didn't mentioned the decline in US economy resulted by useless wars, ditching of USD and adoption of EURO as currency of trade between countries etc etc.

Nor did I mention the possibility of another G7 currency intervention, the possibility of a China/Taiwan conflict or the loss of asset value the Chinese government faces over a depreciating dollar. The Chinese and Americans have a vested interest in each other. The US is 30% of Chinese exports. China turns those dollars back around and buys US bonds.
Of course we could go on and on.

But it seems that 40 years is the reasonable time-frame in which China approaches the US and EU in economic power.

corbu · 04-02-2008, 01:42 PM

i think they already are more powerful.

ADL Colin · 04-02-2008, 01:51 PM

Apparently the result of a Goldman Sachs projection (for whatever that is worth)

http://www.photius.com/rankings/gdp_...rojection.html

China passes the EU and US in GDP between 2040 and 2050.

Anyway, the devil is in the details. We look to be heading toward a multipolar world where the EU, US, China and eventually India will all be economic superpowers.

yys · 04-02-2008, 01:53 PM

It's going to take them a lot longer then 20 years to stand up a credible blue water navy; even the Chinese admit that. Without that capability their ability to project force is pretty much nil. As it stands they'd have a hard time landing men on Taiwan let alone any country more then a few hundred miles away.

The U.S. rules the oceans and will for the foreseeable future;thats just the way it is.

ADL Colin · 04-02-2008, 02:00 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by yys

It's going to take them a lot longer then 20 years to stand up a credible blue water navy; even the Chinese admit that. Without that capability their ability to project force is pretty much nil. As it stands they'd have a hard time landing men on Taiwan let alone any country more then a few hundred miles away.

The U.S. rules the oceans and will for the foreseeable future;thats just the way it is.

They have an interesting strategy though and it reminds me of German WW II strategy. They are building "U-boats" like crazy. Assumably as a threat against US carriers.

But yeah they have a long way to go in the overall scheme Navy-wise.

sacX · 04-02-2008, 02:00 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by mrskin

Evidence once again of the dumbness of the average lefty....

Anyone who has studied economics can work out that China cannot sustain current growth into the extended future.

China's current GDP growth is merely an effect of China opening up some of its trade and modernising parts of its work force.

Population alone does not equate to power or development potential. 1 worker with 1 machine or 1 computer is 10 times more effective than 10 workers without any machines. The technological infrustructure and capability of America would take decades to develop in China.

In 20 years time or so oil will be more scarce than it is now, yet America will still have trillions of barrels in its reserve stockpiles. China will not.

I could go on and on but frankly im not getting paid to teach. Socialism does not work and it not only makes the rich poorer but it makes the poor poorer aswell.

And for all you tools out there that think that the democrats are responsible for the surpluses america received in the clinton era - go and study economics.
It was reagans tax cut implementations and economic policies that led to the economic growth during the clinton era, it takes years for economic benefits to sink in not months.

The current economic climate is as a result of clinton's poor economic management and his failure to properly track down terrorists and in particular bin laden.

1. Do you seriously think China can't stockpile oil, or pay the price of inflated energy costs. They're the ones with the trillions of USD, and no trade deficit. Btw USA has less than one billion barrels of oil in it's Strategic Petroleum Reserve (not trillions)

2. The US is more socialist than China. Medicare, companies with huge pension costs, massive farm subsidies. Just look at the US budget versus Chinese budget.

3. Republicans have spent like fuckwits for the first 6 years of Bush, Clinton had surpluses sure there was a Republican congress, but he didn't veto the deals he signed them. So meh.

4. Smart opening, and modernising of an economy can lead to productivity gains over a very long time. How do you think all economies grow. Why would China suddenly hit a ceiling you give no reason for that.

5. You're right 1 worker in 1 country versus another are not the same. It depends on productivity. Productivity gains in China are massive, and gaining very quickly. China is no longer the place where just cheap plastic toys are manufacture. Most computer hardware comes out of China, and increasingly the designs also.

10-02-2004, 03:31 AM	#62
Tipsy Confirmed User Join Date: Jul 2001 Location: See sig Posts: 6,989	These threads are always interesting if nothing else for all the 'experts' who are so sure of their limited knowledge in a subject, when in reality they know little more than those they attempt to ridicule. __________________ Ignorance is never bliss.

10-02-2004, 03:33 AM	#63
Dave77 Registered User Join Date: May 2004 Location: Tampa Posts: 48	God bless America! __________________

10-02-2004, 03:35 AM	#64
$5 submissions I help you SUCCEED Industry Role: Join Date: Nov 2003 Location: The Pearl of the Orient Seas Posts: 32,195	The Chinese historically have been always a powerful cultural and military power (at least in Asia). It's only a question of time until its economy rivals that of the US and its military reaches parity with the US. Usually when countries become richer they tend to develop democratic civil societies. Unfortunately, China may become one of the biggest exceptions to this rule since it comes from millenias of strong autocratic governments. Definitely would be interesting to see what happens. __________________ Need a NON-ADULT income stream? We build your YOUTUBE CHANNEL for only $20 per video! For Hire: $3/hour or $400 per month Marketing Specialist Virtual Assistants

10-02-2004, 06:19 AM	#67
Kicker Confirmed User Industry Role: Join Date: Apr 2002 Location: TakeBucks.com - Porn Star Academy Posts: 7,040	Sure __________________ TakeBucks.com and Real-Bucks.com *65% \| $30 PPS \| 10% referral!!!* TryAnalFisting.com - ratio is 1:85. No joke! ========================= Alex Affiliate Manager support@takebucks_dot_com

10-03-2004, 12:13 PM	#75
dready Confirmed User Industry Role: Join Date: Oct 2002 Location: Toronto, ON Posts: 5,247	China's demand for raw resources will drive up prices so high that they will fuck most western economies royally. __________________ ICQ: 91139591

10-02-2004, 02:29 AM	#56
Rich So Fucking Banned Join Date: Jan 2003 Posts: 11,486	If the Chinese start consuming like Americans it will take the resources of 4 earths to sustain.

10-02-2004, 05:31 AM	#66
rxcashmoney Registered User Join Date: Jul 2004 Posts: 69	I'm still on page one of this thread, but I wanted to post the following. Mr Skin and Project Naughty, I don't think I've read any better threads other than this on GFY due to both of your postings. Excellent reading. One of the few times I've ever read this board where my knowledge went up, not down.

10-03-2004, 12:20 PM	#77
Cman Confirmed User Join Date: Jun 2004 Location: Canada Posts: 697	20? More like 5. Especially if Bush gets reelected __________________ I could put stuff here, but you don't care.

10-03-2004, 12:30 PM	#79
jayeff Confirmed User Join Date: May 2001 Posts: 2,944	20 years is probably too short a time scale, but yes, China is at least a candidate to be more powerful than the US in the not too distant future. Globalisation and the misplaced belief of Americans in the superiority they ascribe to themselves will ensure the continued downward slide of the US. Europe doesn't suffer from the latter and may get a temporary reprieve if there is enough drive to pull together the 450 million people who live in EU countries. But it is also a high-wage area that the pendulum is swinging away from. The big stumbling block in China could be their political development: not because of their brand of socialism per se (and right now capitalism isn't serving the west too well), but because it is hard to see the present leadership surviving the pressures which are building up there. There is no way to know, if the lid does blow, how long it will take things to settle, or what direction they will go off in afterward. I don't put much faith in this kind of forecast. As a teenager in the sixties, I got used to predictions that WW3 would be a nuclear conflict between the US and the USSR. That wasn't some kind of left-wing conspiracy theory: many US and European government policies were/are a result of the extent to which that forecast was given credence. We know how that all evaporated...

10-03-2004, 01:55 PM	#80
bdld $100,000 Join Date: Dec 2001 Posts: 11,452	i certainly hope not, but i do see this as a possibility in 50+ years.

10-03-2004, 02:06 PM	#81
Lykos Too lazy to set a custom title Industry Role: Join Date: Apr 2003 Location: World Posts: 31,032	And i am preety sure they will be..there is just too many of them... __________________

10-03-2004, 02:43 PM	#82
VeriSexy Join The Royal Family Join Date: Apr 2002 Posts: 25,463	20 years is way too long. Here's some stats http://www.atimes.com/atimes/Global...y/FA23Dj01.html "China recycles trade surplus into US Treasury bonds American companies may have forgotten what Henry Ford propounded when he first built his Model T: If you do not pay high enough wages to your workers, they can't afford to buy your product. One simple basis for that Bush boom is that China is recycling its US$100 billion-plus trade surplus with the US back into dollars, and especially into US Treasury bonds. Almost half of the US Treasury bonds are now owned in Asia. So China is financing Bush's bold economic experiment: running two or more wars simultaneously with a huge budget and trade deficit, and equally huge tax handouts for the richest Americans. One has to question the long-term economic rationale for China of putting its long-term assets into very low-interest bonds in a currency that has already dropped recently by a third - and is going to drop even more. It certainly makes strategic sense: if push came to shove over, for example, the Taiwan Strait, all Beijing has to do is to mention the possibility of a sell order going down the wires. It would devastate the US economy more than any nuclear strike the Chinese could manage at the moment. " China Issues US$78 BLN Of Treasury Bonds In 2003 http://au.news.yahoo.com/040130/3/nibj.html CHINA TO ISSUE EQUIVALENT OF US$4.6 BLN IN T-BONDS http://news.tradingcharts.com/futures/5/8/54028985.html CHINA'S CENTRAL BANK QUICKENS MONEY WITHDRAWAL http://news.tradingcharts.com/futures/9/5/54130559.html China float might hit US Treasuries-PIMCO's Keller http://www.forbes.com/markets/bonds...rtr1004460.html China is an important buyer of U.S. Treasury securities, holding $119.4 billion of them at the end of April, U.S. Treasury Department figures show. China's New 'Self-Defense' Tool: U.S. Bonds http://www.iht.com/IHT/PS/98/ps040398a.html http://www.oneworld.net/article/view/73234/1/ China is also using its large foreign currency reserves--a total of $356 billion--to buy more U.S. treasury bonds, which provide U.S. investors with capital for re-investment http://wwwc.house.gov/International...08/bian2021.htm The People?s Republic of China presently receives approximately $4 billion each year from American taxpayers in the form of interest income on U.S. Treasury bonds held by the Chinese government. The PRC also enjoys a $100 billion annual trade surplus with the United States, giving them an estimated $400 billion current account. Yet the government of China continues its discriminatory evasion of payment to American bondholders. It is the position of the Chinese government that China should not have to honor their nation?s full faith and credit sovereign obligations if they choose not to. Such an insular worldview, flaunting the flagrant disregard of established principles of international trade and commerce, will not serve the interests of the PRC in the community of nations and is inconsistent with the status of the PRC as a most favored trading partner and member of the World Trade Organization. Such a posture can only act to harm the long term interests of both the United States and China. The Economy:US to buy back national debt http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/business...nomy/411973.stm It now says it will begin repurchasing Treasury bonds before they fall due, as early as next February, cutting back on the $3.6 trillion (£2.4 trillion) it owes to the public. US Dollar Implosion - Part II http://www.gold-eagle.com/editorial...ield120503.html Asians Aren't Dumping U.S. Treasuries -- Yet http://quote.bloomberg.com/apps/new...id=aCvJZvr6BM4I China also has emerged a key U.S. Treasury holder. Maintaining its 8.3 peg to the U.S. dollar means buying lots of dollar assets. Politicians and manufacturers who complain that Beijing manipulates its currency to gain an unfair advantage fail to appreciate its role in holding down U.S. borrowing costs. China Now Second In Oil Consumption China's fast-growing economy has overtaken Japan to become the world's second largest consumer of crude oil after the US http://www.ruggedelegantliving.com/change/a/002062.html China has total of 270 million cellular users as of the end of 2003 and around 60 million new users were added in the same year. See: http://www1.chinadaily.com.cn/en/do...tent_259693.htm (the news in 08/2003) Broadband users in China:17.4 million. see: http://www.infoworld.com/article/04...ecommunications China produced around 225 million tons of iron and steel and imported other 35 million tons in 2003 for the construction. See: http://www.worldsteel.org/media/wsif/wsif2003.pdf 55% of the world cement (Another infrastructure construction index) was used in China. See http://www.economist.com/displaysto...tory_id=2446908 More that 13 million of PCs were sold in China in 2003. See http://biz.yahoo.com/rc/040212/tech_china_pcs_1.html International trade in 2003 China topped 840B$ (import < export) in 2003. See: http://www1.chinadaily.com.cn/en/do...tent_294145.htm Mcdonads?s Business in China: http://breaking.tcm.ie/2004/02/26/story135939.html China has more than 400B$ reserve. See: http://www.china.org.cn/e-company/0.../page031222.htm China has 160B$ external debt. Reserve >> debt Here's world military spending http://www.cdi.org/budget/2004/worl...ry-spending.cfm China is also pushing Europe to lift the Arms embargo so they can buy more high tech weapons and tech transfers. Imagine what will happen if they got a copy of the Euro Fighter and started mass producing. http://www.contumacy.org/bbs/index....ames;read=26893 http://www.euobserver.com/index.pht...3&aid=14196 They also got their first batch of SU30MKK from Russia. http://www.kanwa.com/edaily.htm China more than doubling budgeted military spending this year http://www.spacewar.com/2004/040423060406.hm15bwqn.html China's official defense budget in 2004 is more than 25 billion dollars. But when off-budget funding for foreign weapons system imports is included, total defense-related expenditures this year should soar to between 50 and 70 billion dollars, said Richard Lawless, the deputy undersecretary of defence. __________________ Looking for a KICK ASS TEEN SPONSOR? Check out ROYAL CASH - THE KING OF TEEN! Incredible webmaster tools FHGs, Morphing Blog and RSS Feeds, Embedded FLV & WMV Videos. With TOP RATIO Sites like TeenStarsOnly.com - Earn $$ with our New Site & Bonus Payouts!! ATMovs.com \| iTeenVideo.com \| TeenSexMovs.com \| TeenSexMania.com

04-02-2008, 08:35 AM	#83
polish_aristocrat Too lazy to set a custom title Join Date: Jul 2002 Posts: 40,377	time for a bump 3.5 years later any new opinions? __________________ I don't use ICQ anymore. Last edited by polish_aristocrat; 04-02-2008 at 08:36 AM..

04-02-2008, 12:40 PM	#90
lhizy_05 Confirmed User Join Date: Jan 2008 Posts: 379	20 yrs from now? ?maybe yes, maybe no? coz i dont have an idea...

04-02-2008, 12:54 PM	#91
ADL Colin Too lazy to set a custom title Join Date: Feb 2001 Location: Tube Titans, USA Posts: 11,929	"IF China's GDP were to grow indefinitely at 11 percent a year -- 9 percent real growth plus 2 percent inflation -- and the U.S. experienced 5.5 percent growth -- 3.5 percent real and 2 percent inflation -- it would take the Chinese 40 years to catch up in terms of nominal GDP. " Quite obviously 10%+ annual growth rate for four decades is a hell of an achievement. Not sure how likely that is. The US used to have that high of growth. On the other hand, China only needs GDP per capita about 1/4 that of the US in order to match its total GDP output because of its massive population. __________________ Adult Date Link - $50 PPS starting NOW! -- good and JUICY! skype = "adultdatelink"

04-02-2008, 01:04 PM	#93
Martin "Assassins" Industry Role: Join Date: Dec 2001 Location: At home Posts: 17,277	Doesn''t matter 2012 is almost here. We're all dooomed anyway... __________________

04-02-2008, 01:42 PM	#96
corbu Confirmed User Join Date: Nov 2003 Location: los angeles Posts: 1,461	i think they already are more powerful. __________________ Katie Ayanami

04-02-2008, 01:51 PM	#97
ADL Colin Too lazy to set a custom title Join Date: Feb 2001 Location: Tube Titans, USA Posts: 11,929	Apparently the result of a Goldman Sachs projection (for whatever that is worth) http://www.photius.com/rankings/gdp_...rojection.html China passes the EU and US in GDP between 2040 and 2050. Anyway, the devil is in the details. We look to be heading toward a multipolar world where the EU, US, China and eventually India will all be economic superpowers. __________________ Adult Date Link - $50 PPS starting NOW! -- good and JUICY! skype = "adultdatelink"

04-02-2008, 01:53 PM	#98
yys Confirmed User Join Date: Aug 2001 Posts: 1,922	It's going to take them a lot longer then 20 years to stand up a credible blue water navy; even the Chinese admit that. Without that capability their ability to project force is pretty much nil. As it stands they'd have a hard time landing men on Taiwan let alone any country more then a few hundred miles away. The U.S. rules the oceans and will for the foreseeable future;thats just the way it is.