And this bit of spelling criticism is brought to you by a Canadian who only realized after the fact that he had a misspelling in his own thread title. How funny is that?Please Register or Log in to view the hidden image!
Firstly I recognized it, admitted it, and changed it as much as I could, that's being Canadian an American would probably insist that what he did was right. Secondly I didn't misspell anything...I just used the wrong word...so are we seeing the American education system at work yet again? Please Register or Log in to view the hidden image! About Zhongguo: Red hot ladies and gents, and it does not look like it will slow down significantly for a long time. I am starting to hear and read many people that China has a good 15 years of 7-10% growth in her, I can't even imagine that, and I don't nessecarily believe that because China can probably grow that quickly but can the world economy absorb all that production? As long as China pumps billions into the US propping her economy up China will grow, eventually to such a size where she will determine international economy policy.
All they need is a good rice blight, the right broken dam, or big enough cracks forming in their single party. Any of a thousand things could send them tumbling into ruin and chaos. While their population does lend them more strength than I am comfortable with, it also could be seen as their greatest weakness. Even if by some miracle they continue to boom without disturbance, would any of you want that? You always complain about America, but it seems to me that from your point of view you would be trading one master for another. And the new master would watch you very carefully and would probably use the stick a hell of a lot more than the carrot.
All they need is a good rice blight Brazil, Argentina,Uruguay, the US,etc. would be happy to supply all the rice China needs, she has in excess of $600 billion in savings she can easily survive any such draught. the right broken dam Three Gorges specifically? That would be a disaster yes, and it could have serious political implications. While their population does lend them more strength than I am comfortable with, it also could be seen as their greatest weakness. The greatest weakness in China is the comprimise btwn capitalism and a Leninist state (not Marxist), and how class conflicts, and growing tension btwn the cities and rural areas will play out. Even if by some miracle they continue to boom without disturbance, would any of you want that? I would of course, China isn't going to bother me frankly China is possibly the best thing that has happened to the world economy ever. China is not the United States, since I am from Canada and can easily reside in Latin America any time I want, all I see is big bucks coming from China. You see China did what the US can't, provide a market large enough to make nations like those in Mercorsur, and Canada, Russia, etc. grow because of China's almost unending demand. Because of China, Mercorsur is bound to be the world's bread basket, should the US get rid of her agricultural subsidies her agri. biz will be at a significant comparative disadvatage against the likes of Brazil and Argentina. Canada also should benefit from increased demand of her natural resources. To be fair there will be some losers in all this, nations like the US, some European states, and other industrial nations because they don't have natural resources to sell in abundance, they have a over paid work force, and their companies are moving industrial jobs to the BRIC countries. But I would have to say the twin growth of China and India will pull the thrid world out of poverty, and the second world (according to my definitions nations above Global GDP per capita yet below that of $20,000) will become part of the first. The United States has not been able to do that, and she can't, with a market of 2 billion persons India and China will provide to the world what the West simply could not. That's capitalism, if you don't like it Clock...try another alternative. You always complain about America, but it seems to me that from your point of view you would be trading one master for another. No...because China isn't interested in the America's China is interested in East Asia. You see you are (like most scared Americans) forgetting that this China rising is also a rise in the EU, and other regional blocs. We are going into a multipolar world, meaning by definition there is no "master" as there is now, only a collection of increasingly large custom unions, and nations: >China >United States and NAFTA >EU >India >Mercorsur >Possible Russian union >the rest It won't be China then the rest, no it will be a world divided by a horizontal chain of command not a vertical one. And the new master would watch you very carefully and would probably use the stick a hell of a lot more than the carrot. Oh no...American cold war xenophobia is back with a vengence...only this time it doesn't seem you can win. Please Register or Log in to view the hidden image!
*cough* *ahem* *cough* Ahh...I see. The wrong word. So it was bad grammar, not bad spelling. How Canadian of you.
cough* *ahem* *cough* Robitussin Ahh...I see. The wrong word. So it was bad grammar, not bad spelling. How Canadian of you Well now ur getting the hang of it...good.
I was scouring the web for even more economic statistics, and I came to some shocking conclusions about China’s GDP observe: GDP PPP: 1975: 206,290,000,000 1980: 403,337,000,000 1982: 536,630,000,000 1984: 736,589,000,000 1986: 964,471,000,000 1988: 1,277,110,000,000 1990: 1,484,133,000,000 1992: 1,969,449,000,000 1994: 2,636,988,000,000 1996: 3,371,676,000,000 1998: 4,092,062,000,000 2000: 4,882,797,000,000 2002: 5,860,852,000,000 2004: 7,811,000,000,000 2006: 9,100,000,000,000 2025: 25,155,000,000,000 That is an increase of about 12,193% in 50 years, the United States in turn: GDP PPP: 1975: 1,627,092,000,000 2025: 18,881,000,000,000 The United States about 1160%.... Trade: China: 1840: 37,700,000 1900: 117,500,000 1929: 650,000,000 1950: 550,000,000 1975: 7,689,000,000 2004: 593,400,000,000 Net increase from 1975:7717% United States: 1840: 111,700,000 1900: 1,370,800,000 1929: 5,157,000,000 1950: 9,993,000,000 1975: 108,856,000,000 2004: 804,000,000,000 Net increase from 1975:738% Impressive ain't it... Please Register or Log in to view the hidden image!
Not to say it isn’t impressive, however what does it mean? The conclusion I come to is that the US was doing pretty good in 1975 and had reached an economic plateau – perhaps one that all countries reach – hence there wasn’t much more improvement to make; whereas China must have been completely shit and hence could do quite a bit of growing. I wonder what the data would look like for Japan, SK, Taiwan, Singapore, HK . . . . is there really any meaning in the data other than to say the country was doing shit and , after adopting the school of philosophy called “capitalism” now has capitol? If you take similar data for Saudi Arabia do you reach the same conclusion? UAE? Kuwait? Iran? India?
Not to say it isn’t impressive, however what does it mean? Everything… The conclusion I come to is that the US was doing pretty good in 1975 and had reached an economic plateau – perhaps one that all countries reach – hence there wasn’t much more improvement to make; whereas China must have been completely shit and hence could do quite a bit of growing. That doesn’t explain why by 2025 China will be a significantly larger economy, what this shows is that China started from a low base indeed, but within 30 years has become the world’s second largest economy, with enough trade to significantly change the world economy, and China now has the US’ purse strings. Who do you think is keeping the American afloat, and avoiding a massive economic depression? The world economy right now is in the worse shape its been since the 70’s and the façade of economic growth is hiding the massive inefficiencies in the system, a depression is very likely…save your money ppl. I wonder what the data would look like for Japan, SK, Taiwan, Singapore, HK . . . . is there really any meaning in the data other than to say the country was doing shit and , after adopting the school of philosophy called “capitalism” now has capitol? If you take similar data for Saudi Arabia do you reach the same conclusion? UAE? Kuwait? Iran? India? Actually India and Brazil are the best comparisons both nations in 1975 were much larger then China’s GDP: GDP PPP 1975 Brazil: 220,252,000,000 India: 262,842,000,000 China: 206,290,000,000 GDP PPP 2004 Brazil: 1,381,875,000,000 India: 3,284,739,000,000 China: 7,035,859,000,000 GDP PPP 2025 Brazil: 2,372,000,000,000 India: 9,808,000,000,000 China: 25,155,000,000,000 It’s the way China capitalized that is the success story, with high savings, large investments, mercantilist policies, and without a democracy, which throws in the face of IMF dogma. China also was lucky that she choose just the right moment to reform.
