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

polish_aristocrat · 10-01-2004, 08:10 AM

The topic says it all.

StuartD · 10-01-2004, 08:12 AM

If Bush keeps running things, eventually either the US will rule the world OR Morroco will be more powerful than the US.

I hear they have a lot of monkey power.

Phoenix · 10-01-2004, 08:13 AM

why so long?

The Euro will soon be more powerful then the USD

theking · 10-01-2004, 08:16 AM

No...not in 20 years and possibly...if not probably...never.

Trent Edison · 10-01-2004, 08:19 AM

In 20 years China will count 10 blillions of population and were all fucked because it will be too tight for them on their homeland.

nofx · 10-01-2004, 08:22 AM

I hope they come invade and take over the US.

atom · 10-01-2004, 08:29 AM

china is buying all of our steel.

Pleasurepays · 10-01-2004, 08:35 AM

i would imagine they will at some point or another. empires grow and die... and are replaced by others. China seems like a likely candidate for being the next big one.

Veterans Day · 10-01-2004, 08:37 AM

Quote:

Originally posted by nofx
I hope they come invade and take over the US.

idiot

Argoz · 10-01-2004, 08:47 AM

only in 2050

Pleasurepays · 10-01-2004, 08:48 AM

Quote:

Originally posted by Pixhell
only in 2050

and on a thursday. late afternoon... sometime before dinner.

.:St Ides:. · 10-01-2004, 08:49 AM

not sure call me lets discuss it

nofx · 10-01-2004, 08:49 AM

Quote:

Originally posted by Veterans Day
idiot

dude how the fuck do you think they could ever transport the amounts of people it would take to invade the US?

well unless they are the first to invent teleportation then they could hehe

TheLegacy · 10-01-2004, 08:51 AM

currently the billions of dollars in debt - along with stretching the resources of america, I cant see USA hanging on.

This war, and future occupations that Bush has will suck every bit of life from america, china has one focus - and use the money they have towards their own country and security.

As Kerry said, if the 80 billion (*more I think) would be spent on america - then we all would be in a better place. Look after your own home before helping someone else.

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??

evelknievel · 10-01-2004, 08:53 AM

Quote:

Originally posted by atom
china is buying all of our steel.

Not just steel.....over 30% of all construction materials produced WORLD WIDE are being sent to China.

Domestic costs are going up and up, because there is a shortage and the suppliers are in a postion to gouge due to the China profits...

Sausage · 10-01-2004, 08:59 AM

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

mrskin · 10-01-2004, 09:04 AM

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.

Kard63 · 10-01-2004, 09:05 AM

unfortunately yes

mrskin · 10-01-2004, 09:08 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.

Rofl

Talk about debt - the EU has yet to prove it isnt a complete disaster - Most of the large EU countries are running defecits that make the current US defecit look like a pin head percentage wise.

Rest assured that if bush's full tax cuts are implemented and rendered permanent, the american economy will be stronger than ever before in a couple of years.

Tax cuts are not tax cuts if theyre not permanent.

fr33s3x · 10-01-2004, 09:08 AM

yes i think so

zentz · 10-01-2004, 09:12 AM

it already is

M_M · 10-01-2004, 09:13 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.

its gonna be a lot more than 20 years for oil to become scarce

beergood · 10-01-2004, 09:19 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.

Well said. Its sad how little most demo anti-Bush fanatics understand about basic economics.(I don't like either candidate for the record.)

Sorry guys but China will eventually go the way of the Soviet Union. Same old shit just another century.

Veterans Day · 10-01-2004, 09:20 AM

listen to mr skin all you dumbfucks.

mrskin · 10-01-2004, 09:21 AM

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 mean to compile a list isnt even sensible.

Look at it this way - currentlly america spends a little of 50% of the total world expenditure on military & warfare and that represents about 2-4% of america's GDP. In wartime scenarios military expenditure can jump to 20% of GDP quite easily. In WW2 it jumped far beyond that. THat would equate to (at a 20% jump) america spending 5 times more than the rest of the whole world put together. to match that china would need to grow its economy by like 9 trillion +4%(x20) (like 20 trillion or something), in 20 years.

Veterans Day · 10-01-2004, 09:23 AM

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.

Bingo, but everyone is so up in clintons ass, its sick.

KRL · 10-01-2004, 09:28 AM

No. The power of the United States in every category of what makes the world run and operate is too solidly entrenched into the systems of everything everywhere.

The only way the balance of power could shift would be either through a catastrophic natural event, such as a meteor hit, or a massive biological warfare terror event. Other than those two scenarios I can't see any country close to displacing us anytime soon.

beergood · 10-01-2004, 09:33 AM

reaganomics - look it up fucktards

warlock5 · 10-01-2004, 09:33 AM

Quote:

Originally posted by beergood
Sorry guys but China will eventually go the way of the Soviet Union. Same old shit just another century.

Hate to break it to you, but China is very different than the Soviet Union. China understands that they need the free market. Right now their problem is corruption and lack of human rights. Politically they may be communist right now, but every day they are moving a step away from it. It'll take some time, but eventually they'll figure out how much damage their gigantic state-funded projects damage their economy along with their stranglehold on free speech and human rights.

As for economics, its not a science. Some people want to credit Reagan for the 90s boom, some want to credit Clinton, anyone considered the internet and computers?

Indeed · 10-01-2004, 09:36 AM

Sausage · 10-01-2004, 09:38 AM

Quote:

Originally posted by mrskin
Rofl

Talk about debt - the EU has yet to prove it isnt a complete disaster - Most of the large EU countries are running defecits that make the current US defecit look like a pin head percentage wise.

Rest assured that if bush's full tax cuts are implemented and rendered permanent, the american economy will be stronger than ever before in a couple of years.

Tax cuts are not tax cuts if theyre not permanent.

The combined power of europe eclipses that of the US. But you have some solid points

Not that I claim to be an economics guru .... but the Euro is pretty damn high ..... and the US$ is pretty damn low .... ?? Any economics experts care to explain that for an econ reject like me ;)

Sausage · 10-01-2004, 09:40 AM

Quote:

Originally posted by KRL
No. The power of the United States in every category of what makes the world run and operate is too solidly entrenched into the systems of everything everywhere.

The only way the balance of power could shift would be either through a catastrophic natural event, such as a meteor hit, or a massive biological warfare terror event. Other than those two scenarios I can't see any country close to displacing us anytime soon.

The US is a very small part of the world .... a VERY small part. I am honestly glad the US has the lion share of the power today, but .... history has shown that is never lasts.

mrskin · 10-01-2004, 09:43 AM

We understand very little about atoms and yet Chemistry is a Science.
We understand very little about energy, matter, motion, magnetics etc and yet Physics is a science.
So im not sure what the point of saying economics isnt a science is.

Noone now claims that government spending greats a greater long term economic boost than tax cuts.
Simply put it works like this - if you spend money on schools etc then the money is wound up as an expenditure into the economy and that money does not recirculate as it does if you give money back to consumers who then place a portion of it in banks where money is reinvested into the economy (thereby decreasing interest rates and boosting investment even further), and the remainder is spent according to market forces.

Most economists would argue that economics is a science, its only lefties who argue it isnt.

mrskin · 10-01-2004, 09:49 AM

Quote:

Originally posted by Sausage
The combined power of europe eclipses that of the US. But you have some solid points Not that I claim to be an economics guru .... but the Euro is pretty damn high ..... and the US$ is pretty damn low .... ?? Any economics experts care to explain that for an econ reject like me ;)

Ok first - there is no combined power of the EU. THe EU does not have a combined fiscal operation, a combined military operation a combined anything. It has a mumbo jumbo of everyone doing a little bit of their own thing and sharing a little bit of everyone elses stuff to do some joint things.
That dosnt work well when you need the EU as a whole to move in one direction as they tend to move in 6.
America is of course comprised of states, but the connection between state and federal government is far more precedented and operational than in the EUs instance. Therefore the EU may have a combined GDP of slightly more than the US, but the reality of the cpacity of that GDP to have an effect on the world or another nation in a targeted fashion is very dim.

As for the value of the Euro. You have to understand that America by in large dictates the movements of currencies. It is the main trader of currencies and if it wants to crash the value of the Euro it will sell its euros. At the moment it dosnt need to crash the EU because it is already flopping left right and centre. And so america has a huge amount of the euros in reserve, hence having raised the value of the euro. But if need be when its important to shit the power back a little in the US favour it will sell of some of its euros.

project_naughty · 10-01-2004, 09:57 AM

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.

Veterans Day · 10-01-2004, 10:04 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.

please stop making sense, the 18 year olds cant contemplate. Thanks

mrskin · 10-01-2004, 10:06 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.

I agree 100%

Very nicely said

theking · 10-01-2004, 10:15 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.

Excellent critique.

theking · 10-01-2004, 10:16 AM

Quote:

Originally posted by mrskin
We understand very little about atoms and yet Chemistry is a Science.
We understand very little about energy, matter, motion, magnetics etc and yet Physics is a science.
So im not sure what the point of saying economics isnt a science is.

Noone now claims that government spending greats a greater long term economic boost than tax cuts.
Simply put it works like this - if you spend money on schools etc then the money is wound up as an expenditure into the economy and that money does not recirculate as it does if you give money back to consumers who then place a portion of it in banks where money is reinvested into the economy (thereby decreasing interest rates and boosting investment even further), and the remainder is spent according to market forces.

Most economists would argue that economics is a science, its only lefties who argue it isnt.

Excellent critique.

theking · 10-01-2004, 10:17 AM

Quote:

Originally posted by mrskin
Ok first - there is no combined power of the EU. THe EU does not have a combined fiscal operation, a combined military operation a combined anything. It has a mumbo jumbo of everyone doing a little bit of their own thing and sharing a little bit of everyone elses stuff to do some joint things.
That dosnt work well when you need the EU as a whole to move in one direction as they tend to move in 6.
America is of course comprised of states, but the connection between state and federal government is far more precedented and operational than in the EUs instance. Therefore the EU may have a combined GDP of slightly more than the US, but the reality of the cpacity of that GDP to have an effect on the world or another nation in a targeted fashion is very dim.

As for the value of the Euro. You have to understand that America by in large dictates the movements of currencies. It is the main trader of currencies and if it wants to crash the value of the Euro it will sell its euros. At the moment it dosnt need to crash the EU because it is already flopping left right and centre. And so america has a huge amount of the euros in reserve, hence having raised the value of the euro. But if need be when its important to shit the power back a little in the US favour it will sell of some of its euros.

Excellent critique.

theking · 10-01-2004, 10:17 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.

Excellent critique.

Pleasurepays · 10-01-2004, 10:19 AM

mrskin,

I coordially invite you to be my father.

Please respond soon.

Your new son.

Pleasurepays

Vitasoy · 10-01-2004, 10:20 AM

I have no idea, but time will tell ;)

EviLSuperstaR · 10-01-2004, 11:10 AM

Quote:

Originally posted by polish_aristocrat
The topic says it all.

At the pace things are going, it will take definitely less than 20 years

benoitlc666 · 10-01-2004, 11:17 AM

Quote:

Originally posted by zentz
it already is

EXACTLY!!! China is already more powerful than the US.

Look beyond matter.

And even if you want to look at it from a financial perspective, there is more money in Chinese banks than they know what to do with.

Goatse · 10-02-2004, 01:44 AM

Their military could give the US one hell of a fight. The major difference between the two nations is the lack of diplomatic influence. The US meddles in the internal affairs of virtually every nation on Earth, they have military bases everywhere, they have alliances and deals with every country. This allows them to get away with murder (literally). China, on the other hand, is pretty much isolated.

Slinx · 10-02-2004, 01:49 AM

The US government would send some troops and coca cola with special drugs to control the chinese population.

ControlThy · 10-02-2004, 01:57 AM

Quote:

Originally posted by mrskin
Most of the large EU countries are running defecits that make the current US defecit look like a pin head percentage wise.

Can you name those countries?

XP · 10-02-2004, 02:01 AM

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 remember normandia scene from "Saving Private Ryan", nothing changed in 60 years at all!

Chinese soldiers are more disciplined. They also have a bigger army in quantity. They have 1.3 billions of people to spare!

Think, if one chinese kills 4 men with kung-fu, there will be no one except chinese in the whole world!

ControlThy · 10-02-2004, 02:03 AM

Quote:

Originally posted by mrskin
Ok first - there is no combined power of the EU. THe EU does not have a combined fiscal operation, a combined military operation a combined anything. It has a mumbo jumbo of everyone doing a little bit of their own thing and sharing a little bit of everyone elses stuff to do some joint things.
That dosnt work well when you need the EU as a whole to move in one direction as they tend to move in 6.

I agree.

But they are working on several things you have mentioned in your post, like a European military and a foreign ministry so Europe speaks with 1 voice and not 5 or 10.

A constitution would definitely make Europe more like the US.

10-01-2004, 08:10 AM	#1
polish_aristocrat Too lazy to set a custom title Join Date: Jul 2002 Posts: 40,377	Do you think in 20 years China will be more powerful than the United States ? The topic says it all. __________________ I don't use ICQ anymore.

10-01-2004, 08:12 AM	#2
StuartD Sofa King Band Join Date: Jul 2002 Location: Outside the box Posts: 29,903	If Bush keeps running things, eventually either the US will rule the world OR Morroco will be more powerful than the US. I hear they have a lot of monkey power. __________________ This is me on facebook This is me on twitter

10-01-2004, 08:13 AM	#3
Phoenix BACON BACON BACON Industry Role: Join Date: Nov 2002 Location: Poems everybody, the laddie fancies himself a poet Posts: 35,462	why so long? The Euro will soon be more powerful then the USD __________________ Skype Phoenixskype1 Telegram PhoenixBrad https://quantads.io

10-01-2004, 08:16 AM	#4
theking Nice Kitty Industry Role: Join Date: Sep 2002 Location: The good old USA!!! Posts: 21,053	No...not in 20 years and possibly...if not probably...never. __________________ When you're running down my country hoss...you're walking on the fighting side of me! FOR THE LYING LOWLIFE POSTING AS PATHFINDER...https://gfy.com/fucking-around-and-pr...athfinder.html

10-01-2004, 08:19 AM	#5
Trent Edison Too lazy to set a custom title Join Date: Jun 2003 Location: Freeport 7 Posts: 6,132	In 20 years China will count 10 blillions of population and were all fucked because it will be too tight for them on their homeland. __________________

10-01-2004, 08:22 AM	#6
nofx Too lazy to set a custom title Join Date: Nov 2002 Location: Virgin Mary's womb Posts: 16,826	I hope they come invade and take over the US. __________________ Often times I wonder why There's love and hate, theres live or die. When sickness comes I must decide: When feelings go, theres suicide.

10-01-2004, 08:29 AM	#7
atom Confirmed User Join Date: Apr 2002 Location: Minneapolis Posts: 2,740	china is buying all of our steel. __________________ Have Chargebacks? Send me a message. ChargebackHelp.com

10-01-2004, 08:35 AM	#8
Pleasurepays BANNED - SUPPORTING TUBES Join Date: Aug 2002 Location: I live in a pile of boogers Posts: 11,913	i would imagine they will at some point or another. empires grow and die... and are replaced by others. China seems like a likely candidate for being the next big one.

10-01-2004, 08:47 AM	#10
Argoz Confirmed User Industry Role: Join Date: Aug 2002 Location: Qc Posts: 3,006	only in 2050

10-01-2004, 08:49 AM	#12
.:St Ides:. Confirmed User Join Date: Jul 2004 Posts: 4,857	not sure call me lets discuss it

10-01-2004, 08:51 AM	#14
TheLegacy SEO Connoisseur Industry Role: Join Date: Apr 2003 Location: Brantford, Ontario Posts: 17,120	currently the billions of dollars in debt - along with stretching the resources of america, I cant see USA hanging on. This war, and future occupations that Bush has will suck every bit of life from america, china has one focus - and use the money they have towards their own country and security. As Kerry said, if the 80 billion (*more I think) would be spent on america - then we all would be in a better place. Look after your own home before helping someone else. 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?? __________________ SEO Connoisseur Microsoft Teams: Robert Warren SEO Telegram: @TheLegacy54 RobertWarrenSEO.com

10-01-2004, 08:59 AM	#16
Sausage Confirmed User Join Date: Oct 2002 Location: Australia Posts: 3,012	US is on the way out (unfortunately) .. and China and Europe are on the way in. Its pretty obvious too.

10-01-2004, 09:04 AM	#17
mrskin Registered User Join Date: May 2004 Posts: 34	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.

10-01-2004, 09:05 AM	#18
Kard63 Confirmed User Join Date: Nov 2003 Location: 237 619 975 Posts: 8,944	unfortunately yes __________________

10-01-2004, 09:08 AM	#20
fr33s3x Confirmed User Join Date: Apr 2003 Posts: 5,064	yes i think so __________________

10-01-2004, 09:12 AM	#21
zentz Confirmed User Industry Role: Join Date: Nov 2003 Posts: 8,053	it already is __________________ Programs that owe me money ---- Epassporte.com ~ $2700 \| Protraffic.com ~ $2600 \| XonDemand.com ~ $3000 Email: [email protected]

10-01-2004, 09:20 AM	#24
Veterans Day Confirmed User Join Date: Jul 2003 Location: The Windy City Posts: 8,403	listen to mr skin all you dumbfucks. __________________ Build a Massive Traffic Network, Hands FREE, Totally Automated Last edited by Veterans Day; 10-01-2004 at 09:24 AM..

10-01-2004, 09:21 AM	#25
mrskin Registered User Join Date: May 2004 Posts: 34	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 mean to compile a list isnt even sensible. Look at it this way - currentlly america spends a little of 50% of the total world expenditure on military & warfare and that represents about 2-4% of america's GDP. In wartime scenarios military expenditure can jump to 20% of GDP quite easily. In WW2 it jumped far beyond that. THat would equate to (at a 20% jump) america spending 5 times more than the rest of the whole world put together. to match that china would need to grow its economy by like 9 trillion +4%(x20) (like 20 trillion or something), in 20 years.

10-01-2004, 09:23 AM	#26
Veterans Day Confirmed User Join Date: Jul 2003 Location: The Windy City Posts: 8,403	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. Bingo, but everyone is so up in clintons ass, its sick. __________________ Build a Massive Traffic Network, Hands FREE, Totally Automated

10-01-2004, 09:28 AM	#27
KRL Entrepreneur Join Date: Oct 2002 Location: USA Posts: 31,429	No. The power of the United States in every category of what makes the world run and operate is too solidly entrenched into the systems of everything everywhere. The only way the balance of power could shift would be either through a catastrophic natural event, such as a meteor hit, or a massive biological warfare terror event. Other than those two scenarios I can't see any country close to displacing us anytime soon. __________________ If you would like to develop your domains, you can lease inexpensive foreign labor from the leaders in the field at iWebmasters.com TO LOWER YOUR COSTS AND INCREASE YOUR PRODUCTION! * * * * * * * * * * * * Domains Adult News KRL's Newsletter Biz Tips Just Listed Domains

10-01-2004, 09:33 AM	#28
beergood Confirmed User Join Date: Jun 2003 Location: United States Posts: 2,918	reaganomics - look it up fucktards __________________ icq: 320340263

10-01-2004, 09:36 AM	#30
Indeed Confirmed User Join Date: Oct 2002 Posts: 1,892	yes

10-01-2004, 09:43 AM	#33
mrskin Registered User Join Date: May 2004 Posts: 34	We understand very little about atoms and yet Chemistry is a Science. We understand very little about energy, matter, motion, magnetics etc and yet Physics is a science. So im not sure what the point of saying economics isnt a science is. Noone now claims that government spending greats a greater long term economic boost than tax cuts. Simply put it works like this - if you spend money on schools etc then the money is wound up as an expenditure into the economy and that money does not recirculate as it does if you give money back to consumers who then place a portion of it in banks where money is reinvested into the economy (thereby decreasing interest rates and boosting investment even further), and the remainder is spent according to market forces. Most economists would argue that economics is a science, its only lefties who argue it isnt.

10-01-2004, 09:57 AM	#35
project_naughty Confirmed User Join Date: Apr 2004 Posts: 568	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.

10-01-2004, 10:19 AM	#42
Pleasurepays BANNED - SUPPORTING TUBES Join Date: Aug 2002 Location: I live in a pile of boogers Posts: 11,913	mrskin, I coordially invite you to be my father. Please respond soon. Your new son. Pleasurepays Last edited by Pleasurepays; 10-01-2004 at 10:21 AM..

10-01-2004, 10:20 AM	#43
Vitasoy GFY HALL OF FAME DAMMIT!!! Join Date: Oct 2003 Posts: 58,202	I have no idea, but time will tell ;) __________________ [email protected]

10-02-2004, 01:44 AM	#46
Goatse Confirmed User Join Date: Sep 2003 Posts: 2,086	Their military could give the US one hell of a fight. The major difference between the two nations is the lack of diplomatic influence. The US meddles in the internal affairs of virtually every nation on Earth, they have military bases everywhere, they have alliances and deals with every country. This allows them to get away with murder (literally). China, on the other hand, is pretty much isolated.

10-02-2004, 01:49 AM	#47
Slinx Confirmed User Join Date: May 2003 Posts: 823	The US government would send some troops and coca cola with special drugs to control the chinese population.

10-02-2004, 02:01 AM	#49
XP Confirmed User Industry Role: Join Date: Mar 2001 Location: Thailand Posts: 384	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 remember normandia scene from "Saving Private Ryan", nothing changed in 60 years at all! Chinese soldiers are more disciplined. They also have a bigger army in quantity. They have 1.3 billions of people to spare! Think, if one chinese kills 4 men with kung-fu, there will be no one except chinese in the whole world! __________________ BP4L