NationStates Jolt Archive

http://www.iht.com/articles/2005/01/25/business/trade.html
We all know that the US's current account deficit is ultimatly unsustainable, and needs to be corrected at some point. Now, the UN is calling for the other industrialized countries to speed up developement.
I welcome this call. Japan is export-driven, and a large portion of that goes to the US. But it hasn't grown significantly in God knows how long, and the government can use more economic reforms. As for Europe, they have also had dead economies, with the exception of the UK and Greece. Even those two, however, can go further. I'm actually surprised that Europe isn't growing faster than the US economy, actually.

I think Japan's economy it's stagnant. There's no more room to build. So their investing overseas like US and especially superbig in China.

How come Europe stopped growing? I thought they would increase even bigger now with the EU opening up other nations. Strange..

Here's an interesting related article.
http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/business/4148635.stm

The problem that the EU faces is that its population is aging at a much greater rate than either the US or Japan.

The EU nations together have been effectively at zero population growth for the past ten years. The working population is ageing out faster than the American or Japanese.

This will cause productivity problems very soon - problems that can only be solved by one of two means - massive increases in childbearing, or increases in immigration.

Europe, may, in a desperate attempt to stay productive, import so many Islamic immigrants that its whole culture is transformed permanently.

In many ways, much like the waves of Hispanics entering America. But I think I know which transformation I would rather undergo.

Not too big on Islam.

The trade deficit is definitely a problem for us because it represents American dollars flowing out of the country by the billions. The budget deficit I think is less of a problem because we also provide credit for foreign debters. All major industrial countries have large national debts similar to the American debt, and rapidly industrializing nations such as India and China also have large and expanding debts. Japan is the most indebted industrialized nation, as their debt is 160% of their GDP and much of it financed by American and other foreign sources. However Bush's massive military spending might push our budget deficits to unsustainable levels like Japan's.

I think Japan's economy it's stagnant. There's no more room to build. So their investing overseas like US and especially superbig in China.

How come Europe stopped growing? I thought they would increase even bigger now with the EU opening up other nations. Strange..
The conversion to the euro has hurt badly the French, Germans, and Italians. Combined with a general boycott of French stuff, for good or ill, and add to that their socialist welfare states gives you why the EU as a whole has a stagnant, crap economy.

I think Japan's economy it's stagnant. There's no more room to build. So their investing overseas like US and especially superbig in China.
In a developed economy, land doesn't matter as much.
How come Europe stopped growing? I thought they would increase even bigger now with the EU opening up other nations. Strange..
Because its love affair with socialism has turned sour. The large public sector has led to inefficiency and waste. The high tax rate stiffles economic innovation. And their labor and welfare policies make for inflexible labor markets. It's a wonder why more companies there haven't shipped out to Eastern Europe. They're just as socialist, but at least labor is cheap there.

The trade deficit is definitely a problem for us because it represents American dollars flowing out of the country by the billions. The budget deficit I think is less of a problem because we also provide credit for foreign debters. All major industrial countries have large national debts similar to the American debt, and rapidly industrializing nations such as India and China also have large and expanding debts. Japan is the most indebted industrialized nation, as their debt is 160% of their GDP and much of it financed by American and other foreign sources. However Bush's massive military spending might push our budget deficits to unsustainable levels like Japan's.
But that's what they said about Reagan. But it turned out that the economy grew faster than the budget deficit. This is gonna be similar, as the economy is growing at a healthy pace.

Glad I am that I live in canada. i wonder how strong this country would start to look if we actually got a right of center party in?

The problem that the EU faces is that its population is aging at a much greater rate than either the US or Japan.

The EU nations together have been effectively at zero population growth for the past ten years. The working population is ageing out faster than the American or Japanese.

This will cause productivity problems very soon - problems that can only be solved by one of two means - massive increases in childbearing, or increases in immigration.

Europe, may, in a desperate attempt to stay productive, import so many Islamic immigrants that its whole culture is transformed permanently.

In many ways, much like the waves of Hispanics entering America. But I think I know which transformation I would rather undergo.

Not too big on Islam.
Same here.

Glad I am that I live in canada. i wonder how strong this country would start to look if we actually got a right of center party in?
You might become an economic powerhouse? :p

The problem that the EU faces is that its population is aging at a much greater rate than either the US or Japan.

The EU nations together have been effectively at zero population growth for the past ten years. The working population is ageing out faster than the American or Japanese.

This will cause productivity problems very soon - problems that can only be solved by one of two means - massive increases in childbearing, or increases in immigration.

Europe, may, in a desperate attempt to stay productive, import so many Islamic immigrants that its whole culture is transformed permanently.

In many ways, much like the waves of Hispanics entering America. But I think I know which transformation I would rather undergo.

Not too big on Islam.

I think that's fine. In fact, it is very good, as it brings millions out of poverty. But I think our Hispanics are better off. At least many can look for jobs that exist.

...with the exception of the UK and Greece.
Shall we just say "with the exception of the UK"... We have seen how Greece has manipulated it's statistics.

But that's what they said about Reagan. But it turned out that the economy grew faster than the budget deficit. This is gonna be similar, as the economy is growing at a healthy pace.
I agree, part of the reason why our economy is growing is because of government expenditures. A enormous part of our economy consists of activity by countless contractors and related businesses that profit off of the military and other aspects of our government. Planned government spending is a much more consistent creator of jobs than just a complete free market without any government involvement.

However there is a problem to this thinking. After WWII the USA had a massive debt, the effects of which was minimized by rapid economic growth due partly to huge government spending on the military. During Reagan's years our economy grew too but in this day and age with outsourcing and declining wages, I am pessimistic as to whether our economy can grow fast enough to keep up with debt.

Shall we just say "with the exception of the UK"... We have seen how Greece has manipulated it's statistics.
Really? I thought it might even be overheating.

Really?
Really.

I agree, part of the reason why our economy is growing is because of government expenditures. A enormous part of our economy consists of activity by countless contractors and related businesses that profit off of the military and other aspects of our government. Planned government spending is a much more consistent creator of jobs than just a complete free market without any government involvement.

However there is a problem to this thinking. After WWII the USA had a massive debt, the effects of which was minimized by rapid economic growth due partly to huge government spending on the military. During Reagan's years our economy grew too but in this day and age with outsourcing and declining wages, I am pessimistic as to whether our economy can grow fast enough to keep up with debt.
I'd point to the IT sector to show you that your pessimism is misplaced. In the early 1990s, chips and modems were being made overseas. Today, there is no shortage of jobs in that sector, even if they are different. Outsourcing leads to cheaper materials and services, opening the doors to new fields of innovation and job creation. I actually think that not enough jobs are being outsourced.

I'd point to the IT sector to show you that your pessimism is misplaced. In the early 1990s, chips and modems were being made overseas. Today, there is no shortage of jobs in that sector, even if they are different. Outsourcing leads to cheaper materials and services, opening the doors to new fields of innovation and job creation. I actually think that not enough jobs are being outsourced.
The IT sector which is comparably small, and by no means characterizes the entire American economy. Overall, wages in the US are declining and radical new innovations/paradigm shifts which come every few years do not make nearly enough high quality, high paying jobs. Outsourcing is definitely good for the international economy, but at the expense of our local economy. Sure specialized services (such as tech support) are cheaper but less and less people need them because they are getting poorer.

The trade deficit is a clear and undeniable indication that every year, there is a net outflow of money from the US to other parts of the world, as if we are a colony being impoverished by a mother country according to 18th century rules of mercantilism. Perhaps you may argue new capital is created here to make up for the outflow but the newest and richest corporations/combinations are formed outside the US... steel corporations, biotech, and other firms are fast growing in India and China and not here.

http://www.iht.com/articles/2005/01/25/business/trade.html
We all know that the US's current account deficit is ultimatly unsustainable, and needs to be corrected at some point. Now, the UN is calling for the other industrialized countries to speed up developement.
I welcome this call. Japan is export-driven, and a large portion of that goes to the US. But it hasn't grown significantly in God knows how long, and the government can use more economic reforms. As for Europe, they have also had dead economies, with the exception of the UK and Greece. Even those two, however, can go further. I'm actually surprised that Europe isn't growing faster than the US economy, actually.

Woa, i also want that European economies to grow faster. Its easy to "want", not easy to do. Basically, European economy is export-driven, we export stuff mainly to the US. Since the world isnt doing that great, the Europe gets caught by the balls: The big countries of Europe dont go well, the smaller countries of Europe, which supply the stuff the big countries need, get dragged down too. And then, there is no confidence in Europe, our consumer confidence is awful. Still, Europe is quite diverse in grownth terms; Italy, Germany and France, which are the largest economies of Europe arent doing well. Poland, and some new members, and spain, are having gronth rates of 3-5%, so its hard to say that the European economy is "dead".

The problem with growing economies is that after a while there's not much room left to grow. I mean, how many VCRs can a family get? How many people buy yachts, and how many of those change it every year?

So, economies start exporting their goods to keep growing. Right now, the US is the big importer, but it now too is becoming saturated, not to mention that they're running out of money through the deficit.

That leaves the so called Third World, and the problem with it is that people don't have the money to buy stuff. Only certain segments in China and India have the capacity to buy things and support the other economies. Thankfully their populations are extremely big and have a lot of room to grow. But it's going to take some time, especially if their economies are going to develop in a stable fashion. You don't want to have another 80s MBA (Mexico-Brazil-Argentina) in your hands.

Woa, i also want that European economies to grow faster. Its easy to "want", not easy to do. Basically, European economy is export-driven, we export stuff mainly to the US.
Who's we? That different for each indiviual country. Germany for example exports more to Eastern Europe then to the US. The Netherlands hardly export anything since they don't produce that much. Luxemburg....well. You get my meaning.
Since the world isnt doing that great
From everthing I heard about the state of the world economy it's booming at the moment.
And then, there is no confidence in Europe, our consumer confidence is awful.
And thats whats the real problem. People take their money to the bank rather then spending it on stuff like new clothes. Eventhough some sectors are doing suprisingly well.

first i will leave you with this http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/business/4208499.stm
then this http://www.ecademy.com/node.php?id=28065 you can accutaly post on this site if you sign up

so i think us UKs are doing preety good for ower selfs

The IT sector which is comparably small, and by no means characterizes the entire American economy. Overall, wages in the US are declining and radical new innovations/paradigm shifts which come every few years do not make nearly enough high quality, high paying jobs. Outsourcing is definitely good for the international economy, but at the expense of our local economy. Sure specialized services (such as tech support) are cheaper but less and less people need them because they are getting poorer.

The trade deficit is a clear and undeniable indication that every year, there is a net outflow of money from the US to other parts of the world, as if we are a colony being impoverished by a mother country according to 18th century rules of mercantilism. Perhaps you may argue new capital is created here to make up for the outflow but the newest and richest corporations/combinations are formed outside the US... steel corporations, biotech, and other firms are fast growing in India and China and not here.

Perhaps you never heard of the comparative advantage.

first i will leave you with this http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/business/4208499.stm
then this http://www.ecademy.com/node.php?id=28065 you can accutaly post on this site if you sign up

so i think us UKs are doing preety good for ower selfs
Yes, but what I meant to say was that there is still plenty of room to grow. The UK has almost half of its economy owned by the state, and that part is as inefficient as heck. If more were to be privatized, then wallets in the UK would bulge.

The problem with growing economies is that after a while there's not much room left to grow. I mean, how many VCRs can a family get? How many people buy yachts, and how many of those change it every year?

How did people get VCR's in the first place? They were invented. Beforehand, the option of viewing a movie was only available at a cinema. But viewing it at home was far more convinient. In short, what I mean to say is that innovation always creates new things. Remember, back at the turn of the last century, there was a movement in the US to close the patent office, as they thought there was nothing left to invent.

What I'm surprised about is a lack of talk about Japan. Japan has an extremely advanced consumer market, and despite their years in the doldrums, they seem to buy a lot. Japan has also made progress this year. Junchiro Koizumi has removed much of the uber socialist and protectionist policies that Japan seems to worship over their emperor, and the banking sector has cleaned up. Prices are rising there, all but ending a spate of deflation. But I wonder if this growth is sustainable.

Perhaps you never heard of the comparative advantage.
I have heard of the comparative advantage, it believes in the unification of the world economy and maximizing the production of each part of the world according to the advantages that each part of the world offers. This will inevitably lead to making this part of the globe (the US) poorer. Right now the USA has no advantage in any type of production except for a few extremely high tech goods which are quickly becoming obsolete anyways. The Chinese and Indians are just as educated and get paid less on everything they do - from making clothes to programming computers. As an American who has an affection for his country this makes me very uncomfortable, but I have come to accept that free trade isn't going to go away, and since America is getting poorer I have been trying to improve my Chinese skills.

I have heard of the comparative advantage, it believes in the unification of the world economy and maximizing the production of each part of the world according to the advantages that each part of the world offers. This will inevitably lead to making this part of the globe (the US) poorer. Right now the USA has no advantage in any type of production except for a few extremely high tech goods which are quickly becoming obsolete anyways. The Chinese and Indians are just as educated and get paid less on everything they do - from making clothes to programming computers. As an American who has an affection for his country this makes me very uncomfortable, but I have come to accept that free trade isn't going to go away, and since America is getting poorer I have been trying to improve my Chinese skills.
The manufacturing sector of the US is dead, and that is not a bad thing. We are moving toward a service economy, and I believe that will be our niche.

The manufacturing sector of the US is dead, and that is not a bad thing. We are moving toward a service economy, and I believe that will be our niche.
What do you mean by service economy? If you mean low paid craftsmanship that there always will be a local demand for, like plumbing, and low paid restaurant jobs, I agree. I disagree that the USA can sustain the high tech service and finance jobs which are much better off in India or China.

The manufacturing sector of the US is dead, and that is not a bad thing.
Not it's a good thing.Then the US will have to import all goods. So if those that export to the US want to apply pressure all they have to do is stop their exports!!! :D

What do you mean by service economy? If you mean low paid craftsmanship that there always will be a local demand for, like plumbing, and low paid restaurant jobs, I agree. I disagree that the USA can sustain the high tech service and finance jobs which are much better off in India or China.
That's not true. The US has a significant educational and creativity base that economies need to take advantage of. On top of that, such mundane differences as time changes are having a larger-than-expected impact on outsourced jobs.
BTW, there's plenty of money in the plumbing and carpenter businesses. I wouldn't call them low wage.

Not it's a good thing.Then the US will have to import all goods. So if those that export to the US want to apply pressure all they have to do is stop their exports!!! :D
Well, I didn't mean that. Thhere will be very few manufacturing jobs, and its impact on the economy will be minimal. What I see, however, is the continued mechanization of manufacturing to the point that very few human operators will be needed. In that case, the US looks just as attractive for a factory as China. So China might one day specialize in labor intensive manufacturing, like textiles or steelmaking.

Yes! China's economy is booming, and China is likely to be the Major Superpower of the world within 30 years. I cannot wait, the country that was once so great, will once again take its position on the world stage, and rule as the Middle Kingdom. 但是也有那些人说中国的经济发展速度太快。。。有一个可能性会太热了。我洗碗不会发生啊！中国！起来，不愿做奴隶的人们。。。！！！

I heard about that! This is awful for America! And its all George Bushs fault! See! I knew he would lead to our downfall!

I thought this was relevant to the discussion at hand.

http://money.cnn.com/2005/01/26/news/international/world_deficits.reut/index.htm

The Japanese and European economies would have to grow quite a bit (and buy quite a bit of American goods) to end the current-account deficit.

Well, I didn't mean that.
I know you didn't. But I do. :D

Thhere will be very few manufacturing jobs, and its impact on the economy will be minimal. What I see, however, is the continued mechanization of manufacturing to the point that very few human operators will be needed. In that case, the US looks just as attractive for a factory as China. So China might one day specialize in labor intensive manufacturing, like textiles or steelmaking.
Maintanace, installation, upgrading and purchase of this equipment is more expensive then producing in 3rd world countries. So I very much doubt that.
:D

I thought this was relevant to the discussion at hand.

http://money.cnn.com/2005/01/26/news/international/world_deficits.reut/index.htm

The Japanese and European economies would have to grow quite a bit (and buy quite a bit of American goods) to end the current-account deficit.
I find that very relevant. If Americans saved just a bit more, we probably wouldn't see such a drastic decline in the dollar.

As for Japan and Europe, yes, they'd have to grow by a lot to end our CAD. However, while they alone cannot end it, they can certainly put a major dent into it. They are just waiting to grow, if you ask me, and are held back only by inflexible bureaocracies, bloated state monopolies, high tax rates, and welfare that generates an eternal labor trap.

Maintanace, installation, upgrading and purchase of this equipment is more expensive then producing in 3rd world countries. So I very much doubt that.
:D
Depends on the production rate.

How did people get VCR's in the first place? They were invented. Beforehand, the option of viewing a movie was only available at a cinema. But viewing it at home was far more convinient. In short, what I mean to say is that innovation always creates new things. Remember, back at the turn of the last century, there was a movement in the US to close the patent office, as they thought there was nothing left to invent.
Yes, yes, innovation and nicer models year in year out. But you are selling them to the same people, your sales don't grow or can only grow as fast as the population. And as population growth tends to level out...

Yes, yes, innovation and nicer models year in year out. But you are selling them to the same people, your sales don't grow or can only grow as fast as the population. And as population growth tends to level out...
I don't believe that. My mom buys a new car once every four years (and is buying a second one this summer). We went from no computer ten years ago to a total of two, and they are replaced once every two years. It's not just population growth that affects consumption, but also wealth and life attitude.

Now, I know I'm berating other countries for being too socialist. Truth be told, however, the US can cut down a bit. The best thing the US can do is to eliminate Fannie Mae's special status. While it is a private company that is traded among shareholders, it enjoys tax-free status, and federal funding and bailouts in the form of grants. There are other things the US can get rid of, but I can't go that far off topic.

Not it's a good thing.Then the US will have to import all goods. So if those that export to the US want to apply pressure all they have to do is stop their exports!!! :D

Yeah, with severe consequences for their own economies.

Depends on the production rate.
No. It depends on the price at which they are selling them.

Yeah, with severe consequences for their own economies.
Thats why we have to build up the markets in China. And perhaps India. Lot's of potential consumers.

No. It depends on the price at which they are selling them.
Well that's what production can determine.

Yes! China's economy is booming, and China is likely to be the Major Superpower of the world within 30 years. I cannot wait, the country that was once so great, will once again take its position on the world stage, and rule as the Middle Kingdom. 但是也有那些人说中国的经济发展速度太快。。。有一个可能性会太热了。我洗碗不会发生啊！中国！起来，不愿做奴隶的人们。。。！！！

Unfortunately(In my view, at least), it's going the way of capitalism to get that. It has largely left its socialist ideas behind, which is a great loss.(Again, that's in MY opinion; I realize other people don't think the same way)

Well that's what production can determine.
Only if they can keep production costs lower then the 3rd world countries.
Cheap commodities with a decent quality often go better then more expensive products with superior quality. See Japan.

Unfortunately(In my view, at least), it's going the way of capitalism to get that. It has largely left its socialist ideas behind, which is a great loss.(Again, that's in MY opinion; I realize other people don't think the same way)
No, it is going the capitalist way, and that is undisputed. While it calls itself communist, it really isn't, and is pretty much a mixed economy dictatorship.
But to add my little opinion, the Chinese people are far better off than they were under socialism. They were never taking a great leap forward with that.

http://www.iht.com/articles/2005/01/25/business/trade.html
We all know that the US's current account deficit is ultimatly unsustainable, and needs to be corrected at some point. Now, the UN is calling for the other industrialized countries to speed up developement.
I welcome this call. Japan is export-driven, and a large portion of that goes to the US. But it hasn't grown significantly in God knows how long, and the government can use more economic reforms. As for Europe, they have also had dead economies, with the exception of the UK and Greece. Even those two, however, can go further. I'm actually surprised that Europe isn't growing faster than the US economy, actually.
Well, Europe has an age issue, and Socialist policies which dampen private industry. Japan, on the other hand, is too monopolized, with little competition amongst the stagnant, giant corporations. Both areas need more entreupenerial pizzaz!

Well, Europe has an age issue, and Socialist policies which dampen private industry. Japan, on the other hand, is too monopolized, with little competition amongst the stagnant, giant corporations. Both areas need more entreupenerial pizzaz!
Japan, however, is easy to fix. Just get rid of all of the protectionist and socialist programs, and they should be fine. But there seems like a political inertia to do it. Japan worships its five or six big brands with a fervor that it used to worship emperors.

Well, Europe has an age issue, and Socialist policies which dampen private industry. Japan, on the other hand, is too monopolized, with little competition amongst the stagnant, giant corporations. Both areas need more entreupenerial pizzaz!
Japan has the same crappy birthrate as Germany.

Only if they can keep production costs lower then the 3rd world countries.
Cheap commodities with a decent quality often go better then more expensive products with superior quality. See Japan.
But the Japanese were able to keep their products quite cheap. That's not to say they were of poor quality, but they were surprisingly cheap. It still costs less to build things in Japan than most other countries.

Japan has the same crappy birthrate as Germany.
Really? From my experience with the Japanese media...Well, let's just say that I, as a hater of sex, was very disturbed...

Japan, however, is easy to fix. Just get rid of all of the protectionist and socialist programs, and they should be fine. But there seems like a political inertia to do it. Japan worships its five or six big brands with a fervor that it used to worship emperors.
Well, that is because in reality, Japan has little of a democracy. The real power (although the degree is lessening) lies in the hands of a few powerful individuals who run monopolies. The fact that they're such good buddies is the problem; starting a new, successful business in Japan is nearly impossible.

Really? From my experience with the Japanese media...Well, let's just say that I, as a hater of sex, was very disturbed...
The Japanese and the central European countries + France are infamous for having sex. Yet they have extremely low fertility rates. Why? Birth control.
The Japanese fertility rate, btw, stands at 1.3 children per mother, making it among one of the lowest in the world.

But the Japanese were able to keep their products quite cheap. That's not to say they were of poor quality, but they were surprisingly cheap. It still costs less to build things in Japan than most other countries.
But they often where often of less quality then Western products. But because they were of decent enough quality and low priced they sold well. Cause that was what the consumer wanted. Decent quality at a low price. And the Japanese managed to keep producing them at a cheap price thanks to the massive industrialisation after the war. People from the country flogged to the cities giving the manufacturers a huge pool of workers to draw from.

Really? From my experience with the Japanese media...Well, let's just say that I, as a hater of sex, was very disturbed...
Having sex isn't the same as having a high birthrate if you use birth control.

But they often where often of less quality then Western products. But because they were of decent enough quality and low priced they sold well. Cause that was what the consumer wanted. Decent quality at a low price. And the Japanese managed to keep producing them at a cheap price thanks to the massive industrialisation after the war. People from the country flogged to the cities giving the manufacturers a huge pool of workers to draw from.
Yes. And if you look today, the countries that have trouble maintaining industries (like the US) are also some of the most urbanized. China is extremely rural, but as more people move into the cities, there is a bigger labor pool.

Yes. And if you look today, the countries that have trouble maintaining industries (like the US) are also some of the most urbanized. China is extremely rural, but as more people move into the cities, there is a bigger labor pool.
Yes. So? Your point?

Yes. So? Your point?
I don't know. You just lost me in thinking how beautiful the world is.

Ah, the birth control explains it. Still, Japan doesn't really need population growth, as it is too packed anyway. Lack of youthful citizens could be made up by an influx of Chinese, while the old people are encouraged to retire in China.

I don't know. You just lost me in thinking how beautiful the world is.
Nah, not really. Thirty one soldiers dead in one day makes things seem a lot uglier...

Nah, not really. Thirty one soldiers dead in one day makes things seem a lot uglier...
That's another topic.

Ah, the birth control explains it. Still, Japan doesn't really need population growth, as it is too packed anyway. Lack of youthful citizens could be made up by an influx of Chinese, while the old people are encouraged to retire in China.
Yes, Japan doesn't have much immigration, partly because of policy, and partly because of culture. The policy is easy to change, but the culture is not. Stilll, Japan does have a lot of potential to make a strong recovery, if only they had the will to.

Ah, the birth control explains it. Still, Japan doesn't really need population growth, as it is too packed anyway. Lack of youthful citizens could be made up by an influx of Chinese, while the old people are encouraged to retire in China.
China has pretty much the same problem. One child policy.
And it's not just the birthcontrol. Thats just one reason. Other reasons can be a lack of child daycare. So women often can't have a career and children at the same time. Often making them choose a career over children. Or make them choose to have children later on. To high expenses for raising just one child. Making parents decide against a second or more children. Schooling can also be a factor. The longer it takes them to finish whatever it is they are studying the later they will decide to have a family. If they are in their late 20's when they finshed school the will first want to build a career. A child unfriendly enviroment. In many western countries families with more then one or two children are frowned upon. They are often portrayed as anti social alcoholics, criminals etc...A picture that is kept up through the media's. You can often see that in movies. Those are some of the factors that are responsible for it. I'm sure there are many more.

I don't believe that. My mom buys a new car once every four years (and is buying a second one this summer). We went from no computer ten years ago to a total of two, and they are replaced once every two years. It's not just population growth that affects consumption, but also wealth and life attitude.
Yes, so now assuming that you will replace both cars every four years, we can say that your household is buying 0.5 cars every year. Is she going to get a third and make it 0.75 card per year? Or she may buy 1 car every year. Let's say she has the means and buys 1 car every year. Then she does well at work and buys 2 cars every year. You have gone from buying .25 cars each year to 2. That's an 800% increase!

Hey, we're on a roll! Let's buy 3 cars each year! Wait, what? Why do we need a third car when there are only two people in driving age in the household?

See? Once the market is saturated (which hasn't happened to the US yet, but pretty much has in Europe and Japan) there isn't really that much incentive to spend and make the economy grow.

You are right when you say that wealth and life attitude (better known as consumer behavior in economics) affect consumption, but only so much. After reaching certain level of comfort people start to save more and more of their available income. At that moment producers have to start looking for new markets if they want their businesses to grow at a faster rate than population (especially if population is growing more slowly than inflation).

Also, try to remember that economics deal with whole populations, so what you see happening at home may not be an accurate reflection of what goes on outside.

The US is not getting poorer, the jobs are just shifting out of older industries and the jobs are being moved to China because its cheap, this provides us with cheap products and provides the chinese with a large increase income.

In 30 years time, incomes in china will increased dramatically and become athe most important group for global companies. Providing jobs for people around the world to work for them and the cycle will come full circle.


As for Europe, It is doing fine economically and much of eastern europe is booming.

Yes, so now assuming that you will replace both cars every four years, we can say that your household is buying 0.5 cars every year. Is she going to get a third and make it 0.75 card per year? Or she may buy 1 car every year. Let's say she has the means and buys 1 car every year. Then she does well at work and buys 2 cars every year. You have gone from buying .25 cars each year to 2. That's an 800% increase!

Hey, we're on a roll! Let's buy 3 cars each year! Wait, what? Why do we need a third car when there are only two people in driving age in the household?

See? Once the market is saturated (which hasn't happened to the US yet, but pretty much has in Europe and Japan) there isn't really that much incentive to spend and make the economy grow.

You are right when you say that wealth and life attitude (better known as consumer behavior in economics) affect consumption, but only so much. After reaching certain level of comfort people start to save more and more of their available income. At that moment producers have to start looking for new markets if they want their businesses to grow at a faster rate than population (especially if population is growing more slowly than inflation).

Also, try to remember that economics deal with whole populations, so what you see happening at home may not be an accurate reflection of what goes on outside.
Of course not. But I was using it as an anecdote, as there has been an explosion in consumer goods. There is likely to be moreso in the future. If they make, say, a heated mattress that is safe and cheap, they will fly from store shelves.
My absolute favorite real life example is the internet. Ten years ago, it barely existed. Today, there are whole markets that have been created around it. Inventions as groundbreaking may not come along soon, but that does not mean that innovation will slow down.

China has pretty much the same problem. One child policy.
And it's not just the birthcontrol. Thats just one reason. Other reasons can be a lack of child daycare. So women often can't have a career and children at the same time. Often making them choose a career over children. Or make them choose to have children later on. To high expenses for raising just one child. Making parents decide against a second or more children. Schooling can also be a factor. The longer it takes them to finish whatever it is they are studying the later they will decide to have a family. If they are in their late 20's when they finshed school the will first want to build a career. A child unfriendly enviroment. In many western countries families with more then one or two children are frowned upon. They are often portrayed as anti social alcoholics, criminals etc...A picture that is kept up through the media's. You can often see that in movies. Those are some of the factors that are responsible for it. I'm sure there are many more.
Well, China's one child policy hasn't stopped pop. growth at all, and all those factors apply to the US as well.

That's another topic.
Sorry, just feeling depressed today...Hard to see the world as a lovely place...

Yes, Japan doesn't have much immigration, partly because of policy, and partly because of culture. The policy is easy to change, but the culture is not. Stilll, Japan does have a lot of potential to make a strong recovery, if only they had the will to.
Well, Japan needs to emigrate its older population, which will drain the welfare system, and accept in an infusion of fresh, young immigrants, most likely China, since it is overloaded with young, working men with no wives.
But yeah, changing the slightly xenophobic culture of Japan would be difficult...

China has pretty much the same problem. One child policy.
And it's not just the birthcontrol. Thats just one reason. Other reasons can be a lack of child daycare. So women often can't have a career and children at the same time. Often making them choose a career over children. Or make them choose to have children later on. To high expenses for raising just one child. Making parents decide against a second or more children. Schooling can also be a factor. The longer it takes them to finish whatever it is they are studying the later they will decide to have a family. If they are in their late 20's when they finshed school the will first want to build a career. A child unfriendly enviroment. In many western countries families with more then one or two children are frowned upon. They are often portrayed as anti social alcoholics, criminals etc...A picture that is kept up through the media's. You can often see that in movies. Those are some of the factors that are responsible for it. I'm sure there are many more.
Population growth in China faces several problems. Firstly, the one child per family growth policy is rarely enforced outside of the cities, and in the countryside most couples have more than one child. Population growth in China is still a severe problem which strains resources. Secondly, due to the Chinese culture, Chinese families prefer having boys and many mothers get abortions if their ultrasound indicates they will have a girl. So while most nations in the world have more women than men (since female life expectancy is higher), China goes against the trend and has about 40 million more men than women.

Well, Japan needs to emigrate its older population, which will drain the welfare system, and accept in an infusion of fresh, young immigrants, most likely China, since it is overloaded with young, working men with no wives.

I wonder why more haven't moved to Hawai'i for the winter. That state is crawling with the Japanese.

But they often where often of less quality then Western products. But because they were of decent enough quality and low priced they sold well. Cause that was what the consumer wanted. Decent quality at a low price. And the Japanese managed to keep producing them at a cheap price thanks to the massive industrialisation after the war. People from the country flogged to the cities giving the manufacturers a huge pool of workers to draw from.
Japanese consumer products immediately after the war had crappy quality but after a few years Japan became the world's second most advanced scientific society and now Japanese cars and electronic devices are second to none.

Population growth in China faces several problems. Firstly, the one child per family growth policy is rarely enforced outside of the cities, and in the countryside most couples have more than one child. Population growth in China is still a severe problem which strains resources. Secondly, due to the Chinese culture, Chinese families prefer having boys and many mothers get abortions if their ultrasound indicates they will have a girl. So while most nations in the world have more women than men (since female life expectancy is higher), China goes against the trend and has about 40 million more men than women.
It's a problem cause people have higher life expectancies. But their birth rate is the same as that of France. And yeah. The girl shortage will become a problem for them.

A very disturbing problem, if you look at it from a Christian point of view...A Communist Gay Superpower? That...is just...?

Just last week China's population reached 1.3 billion with the birth of a baby boy in Beijing (of course a BOY, and in the heart of China, Beijing...must be all lies). The one child policy does work, and often in the most gruesome ways. My best friend, from Guangdong in Southern China (one of the richest provinces) has two sisters and one brother. How come? Corruption and bribery. The daddy is very rich. I also know someone whose job it is to go around as a detective and find out if any women are pregnant with second babies... if so, they are given forced abortions. Mental patients, and many of the ethnic minorities are given forced abortions too. Concerning the rich daddy...yes China is no more Communist than America. Just only in name, as the Chinese Communist Party first of all don't want to lose power, and secondly they cannot lose face (to the whole world). People are getting richer and richer all around me, but most of the people, of course, stay the same, and work for a pittance. McDonalds in Beijing pays 27 Renminbi per day, which works out at just under £2 or $4 a day. And that is a good job (we must remember that also, goods in China are much, much, much cheaper). Just last year it was announced that now, more than half of the country's population lives in towns now, and people are leaving the rural areas fast, which the government is petrified about: they desperately need farmers. Furthermore in total, there are over 200 million migrant workers, drifting from province to province looking for work. China really does have a long way to go...

Bump.

Just last week China's population reached 1.3 billion with the birth of a baby boy in Beijing (of course a BOY, and in the heart of China, Beijing...must be all lies). The one child policy does work, and often in the most gruesome ways. My best friend, from Guangdong in Southern China (one of the richest provinces) has two sisters and one brother. How come? Corruption and bribery. The daddy is very rich. I also know someone whose job it is to go around as a detective and find out if any women are pregnant with second babies... if so, they are given forced abortions. Mental patients, and many of the ethnic minorities are given forced abortions too. Concerning the rich daddy...yes China is no more Communist than America. Just only in name, as the Chinese Communist Party first of all don't want to lose power, and secondly they cannot lose face (to the whole world). People are getting richer and richer all around me, but most of the people, of course, stay the same, and work for a pittance. McDonalds in Beijing pays 27 Renminbi per day, which works out at just under £2 or $4 a day. And that is a good job (we must remember that also, goods in China are much, much, much cheaper). Just last year it was announced that now, more than half of the country's population lives in towns now, and people are leaving the rural areas fast, which the government is petrified about: they desperately need farmers. Furthermore in total, there are over 200 million migrant workers, drifting from province to province looking for work. China really does have a long way to go...
No, China is implementing Capitalism, but it is far from not being Communist anymore. And while the one child policy may stem the birth rate, well, your very first point proved that it is ineffective. 1.3 billion!

China population growth rate is still too high; the one child policy is not well enforced in rural areas, where the government does not have enough resources to enforce it in such a vast countryside. Therefore rural families still have large numbers of children.

I'd say China is even more capitalistic than the USA, because China has fewer environmental protection laws, there is no minimum wage, employers can fire anyone at any time, universal health care was abolished decades ago so the health system is not as comprehensive as the American one. It is truly a dog eat dog world in China's economy.

No, since there is still little private industry, except from foreigners. All those things you described are characteristic of Communism, but do not define it. Without free, private markets and more than one party, there is no capitalism.

No, since there is still little private industry, except from foreigners.Where did you get the information that China does not have much private enterprise? Virtually all consumer goods in China are produced by non-state corporations such as Haier. The state only owns some heavy industry such as steel and petroleum refining, but in the past few years the central government privatized most of the Manchurian industries and laid off millions of workers who were formerly secure under the communist system. And the huge amount of foreign investment confirms that China's economy has become a free market, as foreign corporations are willing to put capital in Chinese factories which have less safety/environmental regulations and lower wages than American manufacturing.

All those things you described are characteristic of Communism, but do not define it. Without free, private markets and more than one party, there is no capitalism.
All the things I have described are characteristic of capitalism, not communism. Under communism there are guaranteed wages and guaranteed health benefits, neither of which China has. Also, a capitalist economic system can run perfectly well under a one party government, and China's current one party Communist dictatorship is communist in name only, and in all other respects China's markets are more free and unregulated than in the USA.

I'd say China is even more capitalistic than the USA, because China has fewer environmental protection laws, there is no minimum wage, employers can fire anyone at any time, universal health care was abolished decades ago so the health system is not as comprehensive as the American one. It is truly a dog eat dog world in China's economy.
You're confusing a capitalist state with a state that just doesn't care. Traditional monarchies and feudal fiefdoms had no services other than the bare basics (protection), yet they had little or no free market.That is the essence of capitalism, and not a lack of government control.
And lest you forget, the free market is not 100% free there. Labor unions are owned by the state. The government banks are their primary banks. And until this year, all foreign companies needed to enter business in China through a venture with the state, or a domestic company. Even many major domestic companies, like Lenovo, are owned by the state in a significant portion, and propably controlled by them. Chinese markets are not even as free as markets in Western Europe, although they are heading there.

You're confusing a capitalist state with a state that just doesn't care. Traditional monarchies and feudal fiefdoms had no services other than the bare basics (protection), yet they had little or no free market.That is the essence of capitalism, and not a lack of government control.
The essence of capitalism is the willful accumulation of capital and the investment of this capital in new ventures. The old feudal societies lacked these features. Guilds produced the same things for generations, there was no ambition to expand, and prices were kept high by guild-mandated monopolies. Craftsmanship in feudal times was conservatively viewed as a venerable art rather than a potentially profitable and expandable business. China today has all the features of capitalism. Entrepreneurs and existing businessmen are awash with money from domestic and foreign sources, which they are putting into new factories, mines, plantations, and other capitalistic enterprises.

And lest you forget, the free market is not 100% free there. Labor unions are owned by the state.
China outlaws all labor unions except for the Communist Party, which has around 50 million members. Not only does that represent a small portion of the vast Chinese workforce, the Party no longer serves as collective protection for labor because even if you are a member of the Party you won't be immune from wage cuts and layoffs. The leaders of the country no longer embrace socialist principles and in the past few years millions upon millions of card-carrying Party members have lost their manufacturing jobs in the quest to privatize and reform the bloated state run industries.

China doesn't have a 100% free market but it is far less restrictive than the American and European economies. Taxes are low and corporate tax evasion is rampant.

The government banks are their primary banks.
That is true, no one gets anywhere without securing a loan from one of the government banks. But the banks' lending policies are highly liberal and interest rate is low, stimulating a vast amount of both grassroots entrepreunership and large scale corporate activity.

And until this year, all foreign companies needed to enter business in China through a venture with the state, or a domestic company. Even many major domestic companies, like Lenovo, are owned by the state in a significant portion, and propably controlled by them.
Hence the move to deregulation and privatization in recent years. The government has already largely withdrawn its interest from the major industries such as steel. Any regulations on foreign and domestic companies in China are insignificant compared to the cost adding regulations experienced by western economies.

Chinese markets are not even as free as markets in Western Europe, although they are heading there.
Western European markets are even less free than the US. Western European governments have strict laws about labor rights, environmental regulations, and universal health care. China has little regulation of private business, and even the state owned businesses have long abolished the principle of the "iron rice bowl" - guaranteed medical care, guaranteed pension for life, guaranteed place of residence.

The essence of capitalism is the willful accumulation of capital and the investment of this capital in new ventures. The old feudal societies lacked these features. Guilds produced the same things for generations, there was no ambition to expand, and prices were kept high by guild-mandated monopolies. Craftsmanship in feudal times was conservatively viewed as a venerable art rather than a potentially profitable and expandable business. China today has all the features of capitalism. Entrepreneurs and existing businessmen are awash with money from domestic and foreign sources, which they are putting into new factories, mines, plantations, and other capitalistic enterprises.
I said that, basically.

China outlaws all labor unions except for the Communist Party, which has around 50 million members. Not only does that represent a small portion of the vast Chinese workforce, the Party no longer serves as collective protection for labor because even if you are a member of the Party you won't be immune from wage cuts and layoffs. The leaders of the country no longer embrace socialist principles and in the past few years millions upon millions of card-carrying Party members have lost their manufacturing jobs in the quest to privatize and reform the bloated state run industries.
Still, China has the only unionized Wal-Marts. Why? They use their unions for industrial espionage. That is why the acquisition of IBM's PC unit by Lenovo is coming under scrutiny.
China doesn't have a 100% free market but it is far less restrictive than the American and European economies. Taxes are low and corporate tax evasion is rampant.
You're confusing capitalism with corruption. China probably does not have a system to fight white collar crime like some other countries. But if they see something they view as illegal, they'll definitly stop it.

That is true, no one gets anywhere without securing a loan from one of the government banks. But the banks' lending policies are highly liberal and interest rate is low, stimulating a vast amount of both grassroots entrepreunership and large scale corporate activity.
So? The government pulls all the strings on their banking system. Asside from that, there is no transperancy, no checks and balances, no nothing that would come from competing with other banks.

I said that, basically.
So China indeed has a capitalist economy rather than something close to the primitive and localized system of feudalism.

Still, China has the only unionized Wal-Marts. Why? They use their unions for industrial espionage. That is why the acquisition of IBM's PC unit by Lenovo is coming under scrutiny.
Walmart is not afraid of the Chinese Communist labor cartels because state labor unions in China have long abandoned its concern for labor. Members of the Communist party never ever agitates for labor rights, and always defers to the employers. Official Chinese labor policy does not care about western-style worker rights. The only strikes and labor agitations happen outside of the Communist party, and are easily crushed by employers who bring in lowly paid strike breakers from the vast Chinese workforce and who often resort to force.

You're confusing capitalism with corruption. China probably does not have a system to fight white collar crime like some other countries. But if they see something they view as illegal, they'll definitly stop it.
Corporate and entrepreneurial tax evasion is corrupt in that it breaks laws, but it makes the system more capitalistic and less collectivist. It is far more capitalistic to bribe a tax collector and evade taxes than to pay taxes which go to funding public spending.

So? The government pulls all the strings on their banking system. Asside from that, there is no transperancy, no checks and balances, no nothing that would come from competing with other banks.
True, the bad loans to inefficient state owned corporations have caused financial difficulties for Chinese banks and Chinese banking is definitely not up to modern standards. However, in the 1980s and 90s they still provided billions for a dynamic economy and even though they are state owned their funds have helped transform the Chinese economy from a collectivist one into one teeming with ambitious businessmen and capitalists. Privatization of the banks is one agenda of the govt which would make the Chinese economy even more efficient.

So China indeed has a capitalist economy rather than something close to the primitive and localized system of feudalism.
I never said they were primative. I was just using the primative economies as an example that not everything is capitalist or communist. Maybe they are a mixture of both, or they are creating their own brand of capitalism, but it is still not as free as many other countries.

True, the bad loans to inefficient state owned corporations have caused financial difficulties for Chinese banks and Chinese banking is definitely not up to modern standards. However, in the 1980s and 90s they still provided billions for a dynamic economy and even though they are state owned their funds have helped transform the Chinese economy from a collectivist one into one teeming with ambitious businessmen and capitalists. Privatization of the banks is one agenda of the govt which would make the Chinese economy even more efficient.
Well if they were truely more capitalist, they'd divide the banks into shares, and auction them all off. But they'll never do that. Why? It has far too much damage on the economy in the short term, even though it'd probably benefit them in the long term. They need a good economy so no more Tianmen Squares happen, or worse. It's all about the Communists' control, and capitalism shuns such government controls.

bump

bump
And I'd like to add a little something: only Western Europe needs to grow. Eastern Europe is growing at a phenominal rate.