NationStates Jolt Archive

Please answer the following(also explain):

1. Do you think the US needs a challenger in the world?
2. Do you think there should be one unified world power?
3. Who do you think could be the next superpower(only one)?
4. Do you think China will be able to challenge the US by 2020?
5. If China became a superpower by 2020, who would you support? (US or China)
Any other RELATED opinions.

My answers:
1. Most certainly. The US is growing too big, corrupt, and greedy.
2. Yes, if it can be peacefully attained and 75% or so of the world agrees to it.
3. China. The signs are quite strong and many people are saying it.
4. Hopefully. China is growing at 9% per year, faster than anything ever.
5. China. I love the cuisine. The US sucks and China is cool!

The US sucks, blah blah blah blah.. is that all you have to say? China is on the verge of bust... it's economy has already shown signs of overheating and it will face serious problems. 9% is an overestimated amount.. and is totally overblown. China suffers massive unemployment (some estimates put it at 20-25%, and underemployment. If you want to talk about corrupt, look at the Chinese government.

Additionally, the social situation in China is becoming a powder-keg. There have been increasing amounts of riots where protesters have stormed police buildings and police have been completely outnumbered.

Well thats just because Americans havent learned how to organize since the 1970s.

Well thats just because Americans havent learned how to organize since the 1970s.

What the heck are you talking about? I want the US to be prosperous because I don't want to end up in a country where I can't a job. Seriously, keep your insults to yourself. You may not like Bush or whatever, but do not wish ill on me or any other American citizen.

What about the rest of the things I mentioned? What about the fact that China's bid for Unocal has fallen through? What about the fact that they cannot afford higher oil prices while the US can and has done very well?

Bust. China's economy is going to collapse before 2020 due to lack of an educated workforce, lack of refined materials (iron ore being the major issue here, there simply isn't enough iron ore on the entire planet to provide every Chinese citizen with a "Western" lifestyle), and more. I'd love a confederate EU to be the next superpower, though I doubt it'll happen before 2020.

EDIT: Replace "iron ore" with "refined iron". The cost to China of importing/smelting the required quantities would bankrupt them.

Sel Appa, question for you. Have you visited China, and if so, what parts?

Bust. China's economy is going to collapse before 2020 due to lack of an educated workforce, lack of refined materials (iron ore being the major issue here, there simply isn't enough iron ore on the entire planet to provide every Chinese citizen with a "Western" lifestyle), and more. I'd love a confederate EU to be the next superpower, though I doubt it'll happen before 2020.

EDIT: Replace "iron ore" with "refined iron". The cost to China of importing/smelting the required quantities would bankrupt them.

Yep. Thanks for bringing up other issues. Also I'm not sure when, but I think in 2020, 28% of China's population will be over 60. That was brought up by a different poster. They have lack of social infrastructure.

China's population will have to decline for it to be a competitor.. same goes for India.

I would like for the US and EU to work more closely together as partners. That would be the best thing.

What the heck are you talking about? I want the US to be prosperous because I don't want to end up in a country where I can't a job. Seriously, keep your insults to yourself. You may not like Bush or whatever, but do not wish ill on me or any other American citizen.

What about the rest of the things I mentioned? What about the fact that China's bid for Unocal has fallen through? What about the fact that they cannot afford higher oil prices while the US can and has done very well? Finally some one i can relate to. china is doing better than it has in recent year but doesnt put it any where near SuperPower Status Unless things go along with C&C Generals i dont think China Stands a Chance

People have quoted that 9% figure for years and its' no longer true. The Chinese don't publish their true growth figures and estimates from foreign sources are incomplete at best because of the secrecy. One major knock against the performance of China is they have more energy problems now than the USA did during the California blackouts. China has tried to control oil inflation by using price controls for gasoline and heating oil. As a result they have less refined gasoline and shortages similar to the 1970's. This is the result of inexperienced chinese core leadership trying to manage an emerging market economy and failing.
Today China is wealther than in 1980 but their government spending is out pacing economic growth. It is similar to the collapse of the treasure fleet in 1422. With the US dependant on China to buy our bonds, who will buy China's? Inflation will hit them hard in the years ahead.
It is only the Boeing, Wal-Mart and Airbus of the world keeping China afloat. Their moden generation of leadership saw that foreign investment would prop up the country and it has. They are now realizing that the government cannot replace that if it wanted to.

And no, the USA does not suck. It's you that suck because you wear our pants, use our phones, buy our goods and then claim you're superior. I stand with the other 75% of the world's population - European colonialism is the devil. We're tired of you dictating how we should live. And the irony of it all, Mugabe says the same thing.

I think most Americans would like to believe China is going bust, but that just is not the case. The rate of their growth may slow down a bit once their money is valued properly, however no other country other than maybe India can even come close to the out-put of China by pure volume of it's populace. China is not going bust any time soon. In fact, quite the opposite.

And no, the USA does not suck. It's you that suck because you wear our pants, use our phones, buy our goods and then claim you're superior. I stand with the other 75% of the world's population - European colonialism is the devil. We're tired of you dictating how we should live. And the irony of it all, Mugabe says the same thing.

Yep. Also take the US and China. For a economy to perform well you must have a efficient central bank that is independent from the government. If you don't have that you are in serious trouble. China's central bank is very, very weak.

China's economy is going to collapse before 2020 due to lack of an educated workforce

That's not true. In fact China puts out 6 engineers for every one engineer that the US does. China is putting out very highly skilled workers. They know it's the way of the future and they've jumped on it big time.

Where do people get such inaccurate information anyway? Wishful thinking perhaps?

I think most Americans would like to believe China is going bust, but that just is not the case. The rate of their growth may slow down a bit once their money is valued properly, however no other country other than maybe India can even come close to the out-put of China by pure volume of it's populace. China is not going bust any time soon. In fact, quite the opposite.

funny you don't even back yourself up. China's economic and social problems are multiplying. Care to explain the greater amount of riots? What stability does China have right now?

http://www.findarticles.com/p/articles/mi_m0WDP/is_2000_Nov_27/ai_67542459

"Tang projected that more than 35 million Chinese will be laid off as a result of state-owned enterprise reforms, adding another two million to four million government officials will lose their jobs.

The report estimated 3.5 million urban youths enter the labor market annually and millions of farmers migrate to cities.

Accession to the WTO and reforms that accompany it will bring long-term economic benefits that may add 1-2 percentage points to GDP growth, ADB China representative Bruce Murray said at a news conference.

But China will have to implement ''substantial structural adjustments across a wide range of sectors, including agriculture, automobile, banking, insurance and telecommunications,'' the report said.

China's agricultural sector is particularly vulnerable as prices this year dropped even when production was hit by drought, Tang said.

Rural incomes have increased only marginally, less than 2%, this year, while urban incomes leapt by more than 8%, the report said.

About 230 million Chinese live below the international baseline for poverty of $1 a day, and 670 million live on less than $2 a day, the report said."

http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/articles/A25793-2004Apr19.html

That's not true. In fact China puts out 6 engineers for every one engineer that the US does. China is putting out very highly skilled workers. They know it's the way of the future and they've jumped on it big time.

Where do people get such inaccurate information anyway? Wishful thinking perhaps?

China may do that, but these workers are very unskilled compared to their US counterparts. Additionally, 620 million Chinese only make $2 dollars a day. As far as I see it, China is in serious trouble and in deep danger of over heating.

China may do that, but these workers are very unskilled compared to their US counterparts. Additionally, 620 million Chinese only make $2 dollars a day. As far as I see it, China is in serious trouble and in deep danger of over heating.

Yes, they make less money, but they are no less skilled, in fact in a lot of cases they are more skilled. Like I said, I'm not sure where people get this kind of information. I suppose it's not uncommon for misinformation to become accepted as truth. Follow the news and economic news papers. The only thing that is really wrong with China's system is that their money is under valued, thus giving the illusion that they are not doing as well as they are. Listen, I don't care about China one way or the other to be honest, I live in Canada. I just follow these things.

I think for Americans it's more of a pissing contest thing and that is why they are more willing to accept bad or inaccurate information, because they don't want any other nation to rival them. They don't like the fact that because of China and India they have the highest trade deficit in their history, they don't like the fact that it's China mostly who is buying up all American debt at the moment. (Japan is buying some too, but mostly China) So, I dunno, I just don't find Americans very objective when it comes to China. I sure wouldn't want to have to worry about China holding all the cards of my country in the next 50 years because we owed them so much money we'd never be able to pay it off. I think there is a lot of resentment towards China by Americans, and it might be rightfully placed. But don't go making shit up about them either that is simply not true. Because that does no one a service.

Yes, they make less money, but they are no less skilled, in fact in a lot of cases they are more skilled. Like I said, I'm not sure where people get this kind of information. I suppose it's not uncommon for misinformation to become accepted as truth. Follow the news and economic news papers. The only thing that is really wrong with China's system is that their money is under valued, thus giving the illusion that they are not doing as well as they are. Listen, I don't care about China one way or the other to be honest, I live in Canada. I just follow these things.

Totally wrong and flawed thinking. The workers here in the US are more skilled. I'm not sure where you get your thinking. It is disinformation and is false. You should look at the real facts. China's economy has so many problems. You are in deep denial about it (probably because of your hate of the US). China has huge problems. Underemployment, growing unemployment (even with economic growth), hyperinflation risks, a weak central bank and fuel that is too expensive for them. I am following the news. You are the one who isn't.

I'm not making any of this up. If you have issues with reality, then don't post in this thread.

1. Do you think the US needs a challenger in the world?
2. Do you think there should be one unified world power?
3. Who do you think could be the next superpower(only one)?
4. Do you think China will be able to challenge the US by 2020?
5. If China became a superpower by 2020, who would you support? (US or China)
1. Yes, many of the greatest advancements were made during the cold war. Humans thrive on challenge/one-upsmanship, thus with a challenger we'd rocket forward in tech.
2. Yes, with me preferably in charge.
3. Hopefully, Canada, realistically, the EU or India.
4. Yes.
5. Neither, GO CANADA.

Totally wrong and flawed thinking. The workers here in the US are more skilled.

That's simply not true. It's not. (As far as educated people in China goes and there is way more of them than in the USA)

Anyway, I've said what I had to say, take it how you like. Believe as you like. I'm sure I won't change your mind, nor do I care to.. I'm just saying that's not true. I have nothing to prove..I say China is no where near going bust, but hey, I guess we shall see huh.

Have a nice evening.. :)

I think most Americans would like to believe China is going bust, but that just is not the case. The rate of their growth may slow down a bit once their money is valued properly, however no other country other than maybe India can even come close to the out-put of China by pure volume of it's populace. China is not going bust any time soon. In fact, quite the opposite.

And this from a doctorate in Poli Sci? Come on Steph! I thought you were better than that. Due to all the Chinese Corruption, the economy is going to tank first before anything else.

China being a superpower might happen one day but it won't be before 2020. In fact, I'll wager odds that their economy collapses in 10 years. They just can't continue on the path that they are. If they want to avoid economic disaster, they need to slow down and regroup otherwise, there'll be a catastrophic economic disaster for China and that'll have economic repercussions throughout the world.

That's simply not true. It's not. (As far as educated people in China goes and there is way more of them than in the USA)

Anyway, I've said what I had to say, take it how you like. Believe as you like. I'm sure I won't change your mind, nor do I care to.. I'm just saying that's not true. I have nothing to prove..I say China is no where near going bust, but hey, I guess we shall see huh.

Have a nice evening.. :)

You have a doctorate in political science? Give me it, because I think I deserve it more. You are not accepting the reality. Come on. Economic growth can be superficial. In China's case you are buying into the official story from the government. There are more educated people in the US because of better training and better funded tech schools. China has issues with all sorts of things. Yeah, you might have a political science doctorate, but apparently you know next to nothing about economics.

I provide plenty of sources including one from the Washington Post.

I'm predicting capital flight from China (something that happened to Argentina).

1. Do you think the US needs a challenger in the world?
No, we need anotehr superpower who will WORK WITH US.
2. Do you think there should be one unified world power?
As long as video games are still excessively violent.
3. Who do you think could be the next superpower(only one)?
Russia, if they play their cards right.
4. Do you think China will be able to challenge the US by 2020?
No
5. If China became a superpower by 2020, who would you support? (US or China)
USA
Any other RELATED opinions.
1) China is overrated.
2) US government is only corrupt because we have no superpower allies.

1. The US needs no challenger. The Cold War made both sides do a lot of grim things. What we need now is the world to unify and eliminate rogue nations, once and for all.
2. Ah, do you mean one world government? If that is the case, no. Too much chance for a socialist revolution.
3. Hard to say. I think China and India will be more powerful, but will never reach what the US and the UK were capable of. I think the era of hyperpower will end when the US becomes a mere superpower
4. No, not globally. And I very much doubt it will be able to kick the US out of Asia, either.
5. USA all the way. :p

1. Do you think the US needs a challenger in the world?
2. Do you think there should be one unified world power?
3. Who do you think could be the next superpower(only one)?
4. Do you think China will be able to challenge the US by 2020?
5. If China became a superpower by 2020, who would you support? (US or China)

1. Depends what you mean by "A challenger". If that challenger is totalitarian, fascist, communist, fundamentalist, (insert other wacky ideals here) then no, we've come far too close to outright nuke war once already and I'm not desperate for a second attempt just to wave two fingers at the Yanks. If they're only challenging on economic terms then perhaps, I'm no economic expert.

2. If we can get all the countries of the world to sign up to some grand vision, sure. If not, there's no rush.

3. India or China. Hopefully not the EU as economic superpower status tends to lead to an arrogant, unhappy and overworked population. I'd rather that we in Europe stay a little more lazy, a little less sucessful and a lot happier than everyone else.

4. Don't know, would've said yes but there seems to be a bit of conflict on that point.

5. USA. China's repressive, militaristic, has no concern for human rights and spies on it's own people constantly. Some say the same for the USA true, but there is no comparison.

Chinese economy has problems but they can probably overcome them.



"Nobel Laureate optimistic about China's economic growth (06/27/05)



Nobel Prize laureate Robert Fogel is optimistic about China's sustained economic growth, giving a prediction of at least 8 percent annually in the coming 35 years.

"China is likely to grow in GDP at 8 percent per annum or more for at least a generation, that is to 2040, and perhaps beyond that date," said Fogel, director of Center for Population Economics of the University of Chicago, during the 2005 Annual Conference of the Chinese Economists Society, a three-day event that ended in southwest China's Chongqing Municipality on June 26.

The 1993 Nobel Economics Prize winner said China's goal to achieve 3,000 US dollars of per capita GDP in 2020 is rational, and dismissed skepticism over China's robust economic growth.

The target set by the Chinese leadership is well within the experience of the rapidly growing Southeast Asian economies, he added.

Contrary to suspicions over the possible overstatement of China's growth rate due to exaggerated reports from some localities, Fogel said the actual growth of the Chinese economy ingeneral has been rather "understated," particularly in the servicesector.

China's education and health sectors, for example, are contributing tremendously to its economic growth, but have not been calculated into the country's GDP growth, he said.

Fogel also noticed some potential impediments to China's sustained economic growth -- staggering amount of non-performing loan, under performing state firms, pollution and water shortage, among others. "Although I recognize the importance of these issues, I shall not dwell on them," he said, "I view them as issues that need to be addressed during the course of economic growth and I believe that they will be addressed."

The rapid development of state-of-the-art technologies and a foreseeable surge in capital investment in the coming decades willalso help China achieve its growth target, he added."

Please answer the following(also explain):

1. Do you think the US needs a challenger in the world?
2. Do you think there should be one unified world power?
3. Who do you think could be the next superpower(only one)?
4. Do you think China will be able to challenge the US by 2020?
5. If China became a superpower by 2020, who would you support? (US or China)
Any other RELATED opinions.

My answers:
1. Most certainly. The US is growing too big, corrupt, and greedy.
2. Yes, if it can be peacefully attained and 75% or so of the world agrees to it.
3. China. The signs are quite strong and many people are saying it.
4. Hopefully. China is growing at 9% per year, faster than anything ever.
5. China. I love the cuisine. The US sucks and China is cool!

I can't believe you are stupid enough to say that. You support the challenge of US hedgemony BECAUSE YOU LIKE CHINESE FOOD. You think we suck why? Probably foreign policy, but you are another commy-liberal bast@rd.

*snip*
Aye. A winner of the 1974 Nobel Prize for economics was optimistic about Africa's chance for growth as well. :p

^1993

I love being an American at times, we've gone from bashing Japan into bashing China because they might just dare compeate. :rolleyes:

Those who ignore China tend to get nasty surprises. China is old, very very old. We talk of it as if it is a devloping new nation, and not an empire that expanded farther, lasted longer, and acomplished more than anything the West came up with. The fact that it is still here with much of the same ideals and culture as it has had throughout the ages (wither Rome now?) tells me that China has staying power. They may never challenge the US as a superpower status before the US itself collaspes, but I'm willing to bet that they will still be hanging around, and powerful, for a very, very long time.

China is already challenging the United States, my friends. There's a reason why the good ol US of A is in deficit. Where do you think all your companies are going?

Shanghai is booming so hard that it's going to overtake Hong Kong, and that's really saying something. Their workforce may not be all that educated in some areas (e.g. Chongqing), but they're simply looking for work. Not great pay.

So China is collecting huge amounts of money because cheap labor is appealing - especially in the minds of American companies.

I disagree with the Cold War comment. North Korea seems to be gearing up, so the USA is going to have to look out. Technically, they've broadcasted that they're cutting down their nukes, so they aren't so much of a threat anymore.

But as for the US needing a challenger. Yes, she does need one. Every first-world country is competing against each other for better popularity, technological advances, income, blahblahblee.

And who would I support? That's a tough question seeing as how I'm a mix of the two (culturally). But I'd support the United States because I don't like the Central Government one bit.

If you're going to support China because their cuisine is great, I call you weird and laugh a bit. Really, their government does atrocious things, and you'd do well not to endorse them (off NationStates that is :D).


It's funny how none of the people here are from China. Just thought I'd point that out :D

... maybe the nation-wide firewall blocked this site out too /:

I hate the PRC gov just as much as everyone else, but i'm fairly optimistic about chinese economy growth( i'm sure they will be many bumps along the road though)

I would rather have a Democratic China and USA as superpowers then the US as the sole Superpower.

1. Do you think the US needs a challenger in the world?
2. Do you think there should be one unified world power?
3. Who do you think could be the next superpower(only one)?
4. Do you think China will be able to challenge the US by 2020?
5. If China became a superpower by 2020, who would you support? (US or China)
Any other RELATED opinions.

My answers:
1.Oh yes. Preferably I'd like to see a multi-polar world, not just a bi-polar one. Give me the US, China, a more unified EU, India and maybe Brasil as world powers. The US would be much more considerite in it's foreign policy if there were 3 or four other nations that could stand up to the US.
2.Certainly. A unified world means less war, which means less suffering, less death, less loss and ultimately more happiness. A unified world government could better deal with the serious poverty in Africa and parts of Asia as it would have a freer hand in giving aid, equalizing income, enforcing minimun wages and workers rights, etc. Plus with only one nation on earth military spending could be drastically slashed, meaning greater resources for all sorts of other things.
3.China or India. Both will be one someday.
4.Yes. She may not be as powerful as the US by 2020, but she will be a significant challenger.
5.Niether. The US is so right wing it scares me, along with being an international douchebag, and China is Authoritarian and oppressive. I honestly couldn't support either and sleep well at night, so in a war or other conflict I would be neutral.
Related Opinion - I hope we can all agree about the two things we don't need when it comes to US-Sino relations. Those would be a war, or another Cold War. Please, we need cooler heads, not scaremongers, Domino-theorists and jingoists. The last Cold war was a mistake, spawning unneccisary conflicts, wasting billions in arms building, and bringing the world to the brink of utter annihilation. And if I search the keyword China on this site alone I will find plenty of Americans ready to start the whole thing again. We need to stop it now. We should cooperate with China, find our similarities and respect our differences, cooperate in a world we're going to have to share. That is my related opinion.

Compuq, so what? I can name dozens of analysts who aren't optimistic.

China is already challenging the United States, my friends. There's a reason why the good ol US of A is in deficit. Where do you think all your companies are going?

Not at all. China is our bitch (pardon my language), but China needs us to live. If we aren't prosperous they might as well go down the gutter. The US has a trade deficit for other reasons.

Shanghai is booming so hard that it's going to overtake Hong Kong, and that's really saying something. Their workforce may not be all that educated in some areas (e.g. Chongqing), but they're simply looking for work. Not great pay.

Um, not at all. Urban unemployment is growing and growing, and civil unrest is growing too. China is getting closer to a state of civil strife. This should not be confused with civil war. Colombia is in state of civil war. I think China will have to deal with more numerous riots over piss poor conditions and growing unemployment.


I disagree with the Cold War comment. North Korea seems to be gearing up, so the USA is going to have to look out. Technically, they've broadcasted that they're cutting down their nukes, so they aren't so much of a threat anymore.

A comment here.. China does not want North Korea to get nuts. Reason: China has many billions investigated in South Korea. If North Korea goes nuts, China will lose a lot of investment.

But as for the US needing a challenger. Yes, she does need one. Every first-world country is competing against each other for better popularity, technological advances, income, blahblahblee.

She needs more partners. Not challengers. We saw the last time we had a challenger. The whole world was almost destroyed (Cuban missile crisis anyone?). If anything the US needs more partners in this world. China is a partner. We help them, they help us. Relations may not be dandy, but they aren't cold.

The US isn't responsible for all the war and suffering in the world. If anything we need more economic powers to help us counter terrorism, not stand up against us. If they stand-up against us there will be thousands of terrorist attacks because they are too busy worrying about the US and not terrorism.


It's funny how none of the people here are from China. Just thought I'd point that out :D


I've seen someone from Hong Kong.

Shanghai is booming so hard that it's going to overtake Hong Kong, and that's really saying something.

The difference between Shanghai and the rest of mainland China was probably the biggest contrast I've ever seen in any single country. I don't think it'd be a stretch to say that even Beijing has more than 15 years of catching up to do, so it's difficult for me to imagine China competing with the U.S. by 2020.

Preferably I'd like to see a multi-polar world, not just a bi-polar one.

You want a multi-polar world? You might as well say "I think geopolitical instability is really cool!"

I'm seeing someone from Hong Kong myself. In fact, I can look away from this computer, look in the mirror and see someone from Hong Kong.

But I'm assuming you meant someone else, so I know you've seen someone from Hong Kong, and I've seen her too. But you can't count Hong Kong as a part of China at this time. Another couple of decades, and go ahead. She's British, by the way, if we've seen the same person. That is, if you aren't talking about me.

But I meant in this thread anyway.

I never said China wants North Korea to go nuts.

All the first world countries need challengers. I will stand by that opinion. A challenger means incentive to keep going. That's what I meant. The 'challenge' between the US and China would be quite subdued, I would think. It would be Communism and Capitalism all over again, but China is the USSR and it isn't looking to start a nuclear war over Cuba.

You will notice that there may be huge amounts of unemployment, but the main economic zones (that's what really counts in China) are doing quite well.

And your first comment, Mesatecala, it's a kind of two way who-needs-who.

The difference between Shanghai and the rest of mainland China was probably the biggest contrast I've ever seen in any single country. I don't think it'd be a stretch to say that even Beijing has more than 15 years of catching up to do, so it's difficult for me to imagine China competing with the U.S. by 2020.

That's true, and I agree with you in saying that China won't be competing with the US by 2020. But Beijing doesn't really care about everyone else, and they sure as hell don't care about the guys up in XinJiang. It doesn't require a country to be rich all around to become a superpower though.

I'm seeing someone from Hong Kong myself. In fact, I can look away from this computer, look in the mirror and see someone from Hong Kong.

Well, I was talking about someone on this forum. I'm sorry for being ambigious.

I will clarify my statements in the future. My apologies.


All the first world countries need challengers. I will stand by that opinion. A challenger means incentive to keep going. That's what I meant. The 'challenge' between the US and China would be quite subdued, I would think. It would be Communism and Capitalism all over again, but China is the USSR and it isn't looking to start a nuclear war over Cuba.

My opinion is there should be more good partnership. Not bad challenges that could push this world into war. China isn't communist. It has a capitalist economy with a very badly inefficent, corrupt government.

And I thought the Argentine government was inefficient.

You will notice that there may be huge amounts of unemployment, but the main economic zones (that's what really counts in China) are doing quite well.

The main economic zones are starting to overheat in China. I'm seeing this already. Higher oil prices are putting a strain on China's economy. We, in the US, can sustain higher oil prices and guess what? We are doing so greatly.

Shanghai will not be able to take over Hong Kong - not in the near future. Economically Shanghai may attract more investment, but politically, socially and intellectually there's a lot more to Hong Kong than to Shanghai. At least over here people aren't so nationalistic, and the bureaucracy and corruption is far less than in Shanghai.

Not at all. China is our bitch (pardon my language), but China needs us to live. If we aren't prosperous they might as well go down the gutter. The US has a trade deficit for other reasons.


I thought that this worked both ways?

(Not that I can name sources, but that was the general idea I've been getting.)

I made at typo in the earlier post. China ISN'T the USSR.

It has declared itself Communist, by the way. Not USSR kind of Communist, but Marxist-Communist in a sense. NOthing really communism anymore. They don't even call North Korea a communist state. It's run by KimJongIlism, I believe. But that's neither here nor there.

I will agree with you that there should be more good partnership. But evenpartnership has its mini-challenges hidden in between them. 'we'll help each other, but let's see who does better, okay?' It's perfectly real life, because I know I think that when I'm in class.

And the SEZs are overheating, but they ARE expanding albeit slowly. I know you're well-informed, Mesatecala, and I applaud you for that -- especially when there seem to be so few people who give a damn about China.

Shanghai will not be able to take over Hong Kong - not in the near future. Economically Shanghai may attract more investment, but politically, socially and intellectually there's a lot more to Hong Kong than to Shanghai. At least over here people aren't so nationalistic, and the bureaucracy and corruption is far less than in Shanghai.

That is true and I stand corrected. Thankyou.

(Especially when Hong Kong has the most kickass mass transit system in the entire world.)

Shanghai and Hong Kong are really different.

Hong Kong remained free and capitalist after the communist party came to power in the mainland. Since then HK developed both its physical and financial infrastucture. Shanghai only really began to develop in 1990(though the foundations of its growth were layed in the early 1980's) anyway, Shanghai has not developed a stable financial infrastucture to become a major global center yet. Maybe in 30 or 40 years.

My culinary statement is officially withdrawn.

To me, China is Kerry and the US is Bush(well Bush is the US from certain points of view). Lesser of the two.

Whoever called me a commie liberal bastard is 1/2 correct. I'm a socialist, not communist, I am liberal in most respects(except gay rights and maybe another thing or two), and finally, I have my parents' marriage certificate right here, so...

It's funny how none of the people here are from China. Just thought I'd point that out

I think that has more to do with a language barrier...

And I'm Chinese, but not living in China.

If China goes out, so do half the things in your local supermarket in USA. And good luck trying to find someone to replace China. Companies will lose big.

On the Chinese economy, China has just recently revalued the RMB, ending the peg to the US dollar. It is an understatement to say that China is not trying everything she can to control her economy. We're not suicidal. We know what needs to be done, and we will do it.

Shanghai and Hong Kong are really different.

Hong Kong remained free and capitalist after the communist party came to power in the mainland. Since then HK developed both its physical and financial infrastucture. Shanghai only really began to develop in 1990(though the foundations of its growth were layed in the early 1980's) anyway, Shanghai has not developed a stable financial infrastucture to become a major global center yet. Maybe in 30 or 40 years.

Hong Kong remained free and capitalist because of the British. Come a couple of decades when the Central Government is allowed to induct its own laws (which it already is), and it's going to change radically.

I thank the British, even though I do not always like them, for allowing Hong Kong to prosper and for laterally granting so many jobs in Shenzhen. It showed China how to make a city grow from a rural fishing village to a high-class financial banking kingdom.

Hong Kong is already going down. Mass unemployment, overcrowding, protests in the streets, 'Long Hair' in LegCo, article 23 and a fake democratic system.

But that doesn't really contribute to the main statement much. If anything is's contradicting what I said. Sorry. I just thought I'd point something out.

Zuo, I think it's the firewall. There are plenty of people in places like Beijing who have full capacity to kick butt on this forum. (Beijing does, afterall, hold BEIMUN)

It might be so...

I learned of Nationstates right after I came back from China last year, so I never had a chance to test it out...

Please answer the following(also explain):

1. Do you think the US needs a challenger in the world?
2. Do you think there should be one unified world power?
3. Who do you think could be the next superpower(only one)?
4. Do you think China will be able to challenge the US by 2020?
5. If China became a superpower by 2020, who would you support? (US or China)
Any other RELATED opinions.

My answers:
1. Most certainly. The US is growing too big, corrupt, and greedy.
2. Yes, if it can be peacefully attained and 75% or so of the world agrees to it.
3. China. The signs are quite strong and many people are saying it.
4. Hopefully. China is growing at 9% per year, faster than anything ever.
5. China. I love the cuisine. The US sucks and China is cool!

China has about as much a chance at being a super power as India has . But only if they change their form of government . As of now they are not even close .

Please answer the following(also explain):

1. Do you think the US needs a challenger in the world?
2. Do you think there should be one unified world power?
3. Who do you think could be the next superpower(only one)?
4. Do you think China will be able to challenge the US by 2020?
5. If China became a superpower by 2020, who would you support? (US or China)
Any other RELATED opinions.


1) Yes, as you have said the US is too corrupt and is becoming dangerously extremist and hegemonic.

2) Yes

3) There will be more than one superpower within the next 20-30 years. I think the world is about to enter an age of regional superpowers. Not in the sense that they are superpowers within their own region, but in the sense that these powers ARE a region in themselves, or at least make up a significant proportion of a region. For example, the US, the EU, China, India, Brazil. etc. These are states (mostly) with large areas, large populations and increasingly powerful economies.

4) China is challenging the US already.

5) What do you mean "IF China BECAME a superpower"??? China has been a superpower for most of the Second half of the 20th Century. The only area in which it has failed to compete with the US is economically, and it is now making massive strides in this area. Another reason it has never reallly been mentioned as a Superpower is that it was for the most part of the last century relatively isolationist and although it was a major power, it never really made its power felt.

5) What do you mean "IF China BECAME a superpower"??? China has been a superpower for most of the Second half of the 20th Century. The only area in which it has failed to compete with the US is economically, and it is now making massive strides in this area. Another reason it has never reallly been mentioned as a Superpower is that it was for the most part of the last century relatively isolationist and although it was a major power, it never really made its power felt.

China is not competitive with the U.S. in terms of military power either, especially force-projection capability.

1) Yes, as you have said the US is too corrupt and is becoming dangerously extremist and hegemonic.


Oh give me a damn break.... what about China? The Chinese government is so corrupt and horribly inefficient. It is also the one that is hegemonic. Look at Tibet... the US becoming dangerously extremist? In your dreams.


5) What do you mean "IF China BECAME a superpower"??? China has been a superpower for most of the Second half of the 20th Century. The only area in which it has failed to compete with the US is economically, and it is now making massive strides in this area. Another reason it has never reallly been mentioned as a Superpower is that it was for the most part of the last century relatively isolationist and although it was a major power, it never really made its power felt.

China is not a superpower. And in fact its military is limited to 100 miles beyond its waters. Its navy has improved only marginally. Its economy is in trouble and there is an AIDS epidemic in China I previously forgot to mention.

Zuo:

If China goes out, so do half the things in your local supermarket in USA. And good luck trying to find someone to replace China. Companies will lose big.

Capital flight. Capital displacement. Learn the two concepts.. if China has an economic decline, capital flight will occur to other parts of Asia.

On the Chinese economy, China has just recently revalued the RMB, ending the peg to the US dollar. It is an understatement to say that China is not trying everything she can to control her economy. We're not suicidal. We know what needs to be done, and we will do it.

What the problem with China is economic over-heating, inflation, unemployment, civil unrest that is spreading and a government that is increasingly inefficient.

If China does not do radical reforms it will be in trouble in ten years.

Capital flight. Capital displacement. Learn the two concepts.. if China has an economic decline, capital flight will occur to other parts of Asia.

Okay, first off, Chinese government would seize all holdings. You know how much damage to coorperations that would do, especially considering how much the companies have in China? Then, you've got the fact that coorperations have to rebuild their properties in other countries. Another blow to the companies' wallets.

What the problem with China is economic over-heating, inflation, unemployment, civil unrest that is spreading and a government that is increasingly inefficient.

Sure, reforms are necessary. I suppose you're going towards the view that China needs to turn to a democracy. I say no. A nation this big, with this much economical power, needs to remain under the command of one, capable leader in order for it to not meltdown on itself. Maybe in 10-20 years, China would be ready. If not, then buy. Hu Jintao, the current President, is doing what he can to fix that idiot Jiang Zeming's mess.

Okay, first off, Chinese government would seize all holdings. You know how much damage to coorperations that would do, especially considering how much the companies have in China? Then, you've got the fact that coorperations have to rebuild their properties in other countries. Another blow to the companies' wallets.

The Chinese government would not act fast enough as it would be stuck in a bureaucrat entanglement. Capital flight can occur overnight. It has happened to several countries I've been to (Ecuador and Argentina). Companies would relocate easily.


Sure, reforms are necessary. I suppose you're going towards the view that China needs to turn to a democracy. I say no. A nation this big, with this much economical power, needs to remain under the command of one, capable leader in order for it to not meltdown on itself. Maybe in 10-20 years, China would be ready. If not, then buy. Hu Jintao, the current President, is doing what he can to fix that idiot Jiang Zeming's mess.

I say yes. I think China can be a democracy as is India is. India is afterall the world's largest democracy. Economical power? A lot of is superficial. Hu Jintao has to act fast or things could turn ugly. Massive unemployment is leading to civil unrest.

1. Do you think the US needs a challenger in the world?
2. Do you think there should be one unified world power?
3. Who do you think could be the next superpower(only one)?
4. Do you think China will be able to challenge the US by 2020?
5. If China became a superpower by 2020, who would you support? (US or China)
Any other RELATED opinions.
_________________________________
1) Sorta.
2) Eh.
3)Still US. Or, the USSR will make a comeback :P.
4)No.
5) USA. China would get nuked till theres nothing left :P.

India is afterall the world's largest democracy.

India is a republic. The largest democracy is probably one person. You, me and everyone else.

India is a republic. The largest democracy is probably one person. You, me and everyone else.

Yak yak yak.. semantics.. move onto something else.

It is also the one that is hegemonic. Look at Tibet... the US becoming dangerously extremist? In your dreams.


The invasion of Tibet was a restoration of territorial sovereignty.

You want to dig up history, eh? What about the kingdom of Hawaii, that got annexed by the United States in 1898? The Americans promised to help the Filipinoes achieve independence from the Spanish, but what happened? They became the colonisers themselves.

More recently in history: Japan, Taiwan, South Korea, and Vietnam - only in the Asian region.

Very recently in history: Afghanistan and Iraq.

You want to dig up history, eh? What about the kingdom of Hawaii, that got annexed by the United States in 1898? The Americans promised to help the Filipinoes achieve independence from the Spanish, but what happened? They became the colonisers themselves.

1898?

The filipinos did get independence.

More recently in history: Japan, Taiwan, South Korea, and Vietnam - only in the Asian region.

Very recently in history: Afghanistan and Iraq.

The US restored democracy to those nations (except vietnam).

The US is a good nation...

1898?

The filipinos did get independence.

No. It became an American colony.


The US restored democracy to those nations (except vietnam).

The US is a good nation...

Actually!

Before the Korean War broke out in 1950, the Korean peninsula was split into two halves. The northern half was a Soviet/China supported communist, butthe southern half was not democratic. It was an American-backed totalitarian state.

Same to be said for South Vietnam. It was ruled by a massively unpopular American-backed totalitarian state.

Taiwan was a one-party state only until the 1990s, forty years after being American-backed.

No. America did not actively spread democracy to these countries. All America wanted was anti-communist countries to contain the spread of Chinese communism (which was all official American paranoia. The Chinese had little intention of spreading Communism worldwide.).

Please answer the following(also explain):

1. Do you think the US needs a challenger in the world?
2. Do you think there should be one unified world power?
3. Who do you think could be the next superpower(only one)?
4. Do you think China will be able to challenge the US by 2020?
5. If China became a superpower by 2020, who would you support? (US or China)
Any other RELATED opinions.

1. Yes. That'll make things competitive, and increase the output of both challenger and defender. Therefore, they will progress faster; if only out of spite of their challengers.

2. No. It will be impossible. Mankind will never be able to unify itself as a single entente. Many countries would see it as political assimilation, while others would be either too proud or too unstable to be placed together.

3. America will be higher than China, only marginally.

4. By that time we will probably be firing nukes from space. So I'm really not about to start a world war.

5. China. I lived in it, and I've helped my country plenty. I've been in America as well, and it smells. It's also not very safe.

No. It became an American colony.

It gained independence. And the US later help liberate it in the 40s from the Japanese.


Before the Korean War broke out in 1950, the Korean peninsula was split into two halves. The northern half was a Soviet/China supported communist, butthe southern half was not democratic. It was an American-backed totalitarian state.

Blatant anti-americanism. South Korea was a lot better then the North. Way better. That's why it is so much better these days. It is a very advance economic power.

Same to be said for South Vietnam. It was ruled by a massively unpopular American-backed totalitarian state.

Actually the US withdrew support for the dictator Diem...

Taiwan was a one-party state only until the 1990s, forty years after being American-backed.

For the better. Again economic reasons. Countries have to undergo transition periods.

No. America did not actively spread democracy to these countries. All America wanted was anti-communist countries to contain the spread of Chinese communism (which was all official American paranoia. The Chinese had little intention of spreading Communism worldwide.).

The US did in fact encourage it, and these nations eventually became democratic after growing their economies. Again another transition process to prevent a turn to communism.

The chinese had little intention? Vietnam anyone? (The Chinese even attacked the Vietnamese themselves after and lost)

It gained independence. And the US later help liberate it in the 40s from the Japanese.

ACtually, we liberated it from the Spanish first after the Spanish American war. It stayed that way till the Japanese tossed us off those Islands. Then we took it back from them. It wasn't till AFTER World War II that the Philippines became a free and independent nation.

ACtually, we liberated it from the Spanish first after the Spanish American war. It stayed that way till the Japanese tossed us off those Islands. Then we took it back from them. It wasn't till AFTER World War II that the Philippines became a free and independent nation.

http://www.ualberta.ca/~vmitchel/fw5.html

The Tydings-McDuffie Act of 1934 established the Commonwealth of the Philippines which at the end of a ten year transition period would become the fully independent Republic of the Philippines. A plebiscite on the constitution for the new Republic was approved in 1935 and the date for national independence was set for July 4, 1946.

--

The process was in place before the war.

http://www.ualberta.ca/~vmitchel/fw5.html

The Tydings-McDuffie Act of 1934 established the Commonwealth of the Philippines which at the end of a ten year transition period would become the fully independent Republic of the Philippines. A plebiscite on the constitution for the new Republic was approved in 1935 and the date for national independence was set for July 4, 1946.

--

The process was in place before the war.

However, until that process went through, they were still technically part of the United States. Can't deny that fact.

However, until that process went through, they were still technically part of the United States. Can't deny that fact.

I know that. However, we had no interests in holding the Philippines for good like what China wants with Tibet.

It gained independence. And the US later help liberate it in the 40s from the Japanese.

The Filipinoes declared independence, but American troops invaded and occupied the Philippines, turning it into an American colony.


Blatant anti-americanism. South Korea was a lot better then the North. Way better. That's why it is so much better these days. It is a very advance economic power.
No. Really. In 1948 elections were held in Korea to see how the people wanted it to be run. When the results turned out to be that the Korean people wanted communism, America declared that the elections were invalid and occupied South Korea. Democracy came to South Korea as late as 1980.



Actually the US withdrew support for the dictator Diem...
After it was clear that he was a liability in the latter stage of the war, yes, of course. No use keeping somebody as useless and corrupt as Diem.


For the better. Again economic reasons. Countries have to undergo transition periods.
Not economic reasons, but because the GMD was the strongest party in Taiwan and the most anti-Communist then, that's why the Americans backed Taiwan - only because it is anti-communist.


The US did in fact encourage it, and these nations eventually became democratic after growing their economies. Again another transition process to prevent a turn to communism.
Eventually, mostly after it was clear that the Cold War was won by the Americans. So it's "American prestige" first, "democracy" second.


The chinese had little intention? Vietnam anyone? (The Chinese even attacked the Vietnamese themselves after and lost)
Actually, the Chinese and Vietnamese were not on right terms for a long time. I doubt that China wanted to occupy Vietnam, especially with the political turmoil back home (in 1978 China was reeling at the aftermath of Mao's death and Deng was just trying to consolidate his power). So no. China isn't hegemonic. We certainly do not go all across the world to invade other nations on faulty reasons.

China never fought Vietnam after America fought them.

The No. Really. In 1948 elections were held in Korea to see how the people wanted it to be run. When the results turned out to be that the Korean people wanted communism, America declared that the elections were invalid and occupied South Korea. Democracy came to South Korea as late as 1980.

Not 100% accurate. You do know that Korea was DIVIDED at the end of World War II right? The US got the Southern Half and the USSR got the Northern half. I've just been reading up on the division of Korea and can you point to where elections were held please because I'm not seeing it. YOu know why? Because it was a SELF-PROCLAIMED government meaning it wasn't elected at all. Now as for your elections that I just found: In August 1948 Rhee Syngman became the first president of South Korea, which was hereafter an independent nation. U.S. forces evacuated Korea afterwards. (wikipedia) Yes he was brought over from the US but he won the presidential election and we left. Interesting isnt it?

China never fought Vietnam after America fought them.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/China-Vietnam_conflict

Try again

No. Really. In 1948 elections were held in Korea to see how the people wanted it to be run. When the results turned out to be that the Korean people wanted communism, America declared that the elections were invalid and occupied South Korea. Democracy came to South Korea as late as 1980.

It was best they didn't turn communist and excellent they invalidated the elections. They didn't know what they wanted, so again they needed at transition period. They have a strong economy because of that with a great manufacturing sector. I'd prefer to have a transitional non-elected government with a strong economy, over one communist government with a non-existent economy (like North Korea).


Not economic reasons, but because the GMD was the strongest party in Taiwan and the most anti-Communist then, that's why the Americans backed Taiwan - only because it is anti-communist.

You mean the KMT? Anything anti-communist is fine by me. Afterall, I think it was good what they did for the economy. Afterall, how is Taiwan doing economically? Pretty well.. they had some trouble in recent years because of the asian financial crisis, but all in all pretty good.

Eventually, mostly after it was clear that the Cold War was won by the Americans. So it's "American prestige" first, "democracy" second.

Well, I like what was done in South Korea and Taiwan. In Asia, there are several countries called the "Asian tigers". Strong economic nations.

http://geography.about.com/od/urbaneconomicgeography/a/econtigers.htm

"Four of the Pacific Rim territories have been called "Economic Tigers" due to their aggressive economies. They have included South Korea, Taiwan, Singapore, and Hong Kong. Since Hong Kong has been absorbed as the Chinese territory of Xianggang, it is likely that its status as a tiger will change. The four Economic Tigers have even challenged Japan's dominance of the Asian economy."

I doubt that China wanted to occupy Vietnam, especially with the political turmoil back home (in 1978 China was reeling at the aftermath of Mao's death and Deng was just trying to consolidate his power). So no. China isn't hegemonic. We certainly do not go all across the world to invade other nations on faulty reasons.

China attacked Vietnam. However, during the war with the United States.. how did you think all those weapons were funneled into North Vietnam?

Vietnam and Afghanistan weren't on faulty reasons. They were proper, correct wars.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/China-Vietnam_conflict

Try again

Holy crap. I didn't think it was that bloody.

Chinese casualities: Disputed. Perhaps 20,000-60,000 killed, 40,000 wounded

Vietnam casualities: Disputed. Perhaps 60,000 killed or wounded
•10,000 civilian casualties

And the war lasted: February 17-March 16, 1979

That's a bloody conflict that is totally overshadowed by ignorance.. the Chinese lost maybe as much as we did KIA in one month? WTF?

Holy crap. I didn't think it was that bloody.

Chinese casualities: Disputed. Perhaps 20,000-60,000 killed, 40,000 wounded

Vietnam casualities: Disputed. Perhaps 60,000 killed or wounded
•10,000 civilian casualties

And the war lasted: February 17-March 16, 1979

That's a bloody conflict that is totally overshadowed by ignorance.. the Chinese lost maybe as much as we did KIA in one month? WTF?

Vietnam and China Do not get along at all!

It was best they didn't turn communist and excellent they invalidated the elections. They didn't know what they wanted, so again they needed at transition period. They have a strong economy because of that with a great manufacturing sector. I'd prefer to have a transitional non-elected government with a strong economy, over one communist government with a non-existent economy (like North Korea).
So the United States has the right to tell what other nations have to do? And that's not hegemonic? Not extremist?



You mean the KMT? Anything anti-communist is fine by me. Afterall, I think it was good what they did for the economy. Afterall, how is Taiwan doing economically? Pretty well.. they had some trouble in recent years because of the asian financial crisis, but all in all pretty good.
But the Americans weren't doing it for democracy first. The Americans were only interested in their own goals before anyone else.


Well, I like what was done in South Korea and Taiwan. In Asia, there are several countries called the "Asian tigers". Strong economic nations.

http://geography.about.com/od/urbaneconomicgeography/a/econtigers.htm

"Four of the Pacific Rim territories have been called "Economic Tigers" due to their aggressive economies. They have included South Korea, Taiwan, Singapore, and Hong Kong. Since Hong Kong has been absorbed as the Chinese territory of Xianggang, it is likely that its status as a tiger will change. The four Economic Tigers have even challenged Japan's dominance of the Asian economy."
We are still an Asian tiger!!! :mad: Lol.


China attacked Vietnam. However, during the war with the United States.. how did you think all those weapons were funneled into North Vietnam?
China attacked Vietnam - but it wasn't for territorial purposes. I don't know. You tell me. From China? Hardly.


.[/QUOTE]
Vietnam and Afghanistan weren't on faulty reasons. They were proper, correct wars.[/QUOTE]
Based on hegemonic motives.

Vietnam and China Do not get along at all!

I thought it was just a small skirmish.. with a few thousand dead on each side...

Neither my father nor my grandfather fought in Vietnam, and they were part of the army, so that makes me think carefully. But it's not that bloody. China's been through worst things.

China must be destroyed before it's too late.

That country must be overrun by good western armies i don't care if they are americans, mexicans, germans, british. I seriously don't care, i've been saying this for years I WILL NOT ALLOW TO SEE OUR WESTERN CULTURE WHICH HAS RULED THE WORLD FOR CENTURIES BEING OVERTHROWN BY A LESSER CHINESE CULTURE, THEY EAT THEIR OWN KIDS, AND EVEN DOGS FOR GOD'S SAKE.

I tell you now, if the chinese threat isn't destroyed now it may be too late for us to supress it, China must be ocupied and dismembered into many tiny countries so it would never become a threat again.

AND IF THE MODERATORS THINK THIS WAS RACIST (FOR THEY CLAIM ALL MY POSTS TO BE) KEEP IN MIND THAT I ALSO CARE FOR YOU. VILLAIN YOU CAN CALL ME, BUT WHO IS MORE VILLAIN, ME OR THOSE WHO OPRESS PEOPLE AND KILL CHILDREN BECAUSE THEY HAVE A LOT OF POPULATION?

Vietnam and Afghanistan weren't on faulty reasons. They were proper, correct wars.
Based on hegemonic motives.

Afghanistan was not about hegemonic motives. It came about from a terrorist attack that rocked the United States.

Now if your talking USSR, I'll concede it because that was precisely why they invaded Afghanistan in the first place. :D

In the People's Republic of China, the war has largely been forgotten. It is rarely mentioned in official circles and most history textbooks do not give it much notice.

In Vietnamese history textbooks, the war is considered to be a small border skirmish, which is mentioned by two or three lines. Only the old people in the North of Vietnam know about the war well.

Ah. No wonder I didn't notice the war and my fore fathers never told me. ;)

Ah. No wonder I didn't notice the war and my fore fathers never told me. ;)

Yea because China and Vietnam fought for only 1 month. Both sides suffered massive casualties in one month than we did in the entire vietnam war. Now that's frightening.

So the United States has the right to tell what other nations have to do? And that's not hegemonic? Not extremist?

Nope. In fact it was best for the people. They got a very strong economy now and jobs. OMG. I'm sure anyone wants that. I guess you dont and would rather be working on a rice farm.


The Americans were only interested in their own goals before anyone else.

If they have jobs that's great for the people of the country.


China attacked Vietnam - but it wasn't for territorial purposes. I don't know. You tell me. From China? Hardly.

The Chinese had nearly the amount of casualities we did, in one month.

.
Based on hegemonic motives.

You sound like a broken record. Why do the two countries have democratic governments now?

Afghanistan was not about hegemonic motives. It came about from a terrorist attack that rocked the United States.

Now if your talking USSR, I'll concede it because that was precisely why they invaded Afghanistan in the first place. :D
The war was multi-causal. Not only to root out Afghanistan, but to rock Russia in the south and China in the west.

HEGEMONIC.

You sound like a broken record. Why do the two countries have democratic governments now?

Vietnam is a democracy? How when its only one party?

The war was multi-causal. Not only to root out Afghanistan, but to rock Russia in the south and China in the west.

HEGEMONIC.

Have proof to back it up? :D

Vietnam is a democracy? How when its only one party?

Iraq and Afghanistan.

Not Vietnam. I myself am not really happy we did not stay longer in Vietnam and win. But hell, I did not live in the time. It is just that three of my relatives are Vietnam vets. Two of which did two years each.

China must be destroyed before it's too late.

That country must be overrun by good western armies i don't care if they are americans, mexicans, germans, british. I seriously don't care, i've been saying this for years I WILL NOT ALLOW TO SEE OUR WESTERN CULTURE WHICH HAS RULED THE WORLD FOR CENTURIES BEING OVERTHROWN BY A LESSER CHINESE CULTURE, THEY EAT THEIR OWN KIDS, AND EVEN DOGS FOR GOD'S SAKE.

I tell you now, if the chinese threat isn't destroyed now it may be too late for us to supress it, China must be ocupied and dismembered into many tiny countries so it would never become a threat again.

AND IF THE MODERATORS THINK THIS WAS RACIST (FOR THEY CLAIM ALL MY POSTS TO BE) KEEP IN MIND THAT I ALSO CARE FOR YOU. VILLAIN YOU CAN CALL ME, BUT WHO IS MORE VILLAIN, ME OR THOSE WHO OPRESS PEOPLE AND KILL CHILDREN BECAUSE THEY HAVE A LOT OF POPULATION?

Your hate mongering is historically incorrect.

1) Western Civilization has not ruled the world. It also has not ruled for 'centuries', unless you're taking in America's quasi british beginnings? Those were barely american. All 'western' civilization was just European colonization.

2) It's impossible to take China by the mainland, and cut it up into little pieces. Not only would you be feeling the end of the UN (if China doesn't start it - which we won't), but trade embargoes and the like can be put.

3) We don't eat our own kids. We don't eat dogs either. We eat cow's blood and pig intestines. Get the facts straight.

4) Yes, I'm sure we're such dangerous villains here. Oh what with your near genocidal early campaigns against Native Americans, African slavery, Japanese imprisonment. We tell citizens to be quiet, but NO...you guys have done nothing wrong I guess (sarcasm).

I'm Chinese, from China, recently moved to Canada in over a little half a month.

Iraq and Afghanistan.

Not Vietnam.

Sorry! Discussing one to many wars in this thread! LOL

I myself am not really happy we did not stay longer in Vietnam and win. But hell, I did not live in the time. It is just that three of my relatives are Vietnam vets. Two of which did two years each.

Thank them for their service for me :)

Nope. In fact it was best for the people. They got a very strong economy now and jobs. OMG. I'm sure anyone wants that. I guess you dont and would rather be working on a rice farm.
So the United States has the right to say "what's best for the people"? If they had installed a better dictator, instead of one that was just anti-communist, that would have been better. At that point in time, in 1948, America had been hegemonic - only.


If they have jobs that's great for the people of the country.No. Economic development is a lot more than just jobs.



The Chinese had nearly the amount of casualities we did, in one month.
So? What has that got to do with my previous post?


You sound like a broken record. Why do the two countries have democratic governments now?

Vietnam doesn't have a democratic government. Afghanistan may be "democratic" in the "ballot style" government, but people are still living in fear of explosions and violence. America is not the best occupier of out of all occupiers. They need to learn from the British. :p

Have proof to back it up? :D
Not really. But wars are never - NEVER solo-causal. And given America's past record of wars and foreign policy, it is pretty safe to say that America's war against terror is not just a war against terror, but also to extend American influence in the world.

Of course, there is no historiography on this yet. Afghanistan is too short to be classified as academic subject of history.

Your hate mongering is historically incorrect.

1) Western Civilization has not ruled the world. It also has not ruled for 'centuries', unless you're taking in America's quasi british beginnings? Those were barely american. All 'western' civilization was just European colonization.

2) It's impossible to take China by the mainland, and cut it up into little pieces. Not only would you be feeling the end of the UN (if China doesn't start it - which we won't), but trade embargoes and the like can be put.

3) We don't eat our own kids. We don't eat dogs either. We eat cow's blood and pig intestines. Get the facts straight.

4) Yes, I'm sure we're such dangerous villains here. Oh what with your near genocidal early campaigns against Native Americans, African slavery, Japanese imprisonment. We tell citizens to be quiet, but NO...you guys have done nothing wrong I guess (sarcasm).

I'm Chinese, from China, recently moved to Canada in over a little half a month.

Look i don't have anything against chinese people, it is against their goverment who kills children if the family has more than one, and i'm german so i know what's to be seen as a murderer, my family served germany in WWII and god knows we didn't hate jews.

If you are chinese as you claim then you should see the flaws on your goverment and then you may look at Taiwan, Tibet or other countries you seek to ocupy, well since i've been living all my live on this western trashcan as you say, i've grown quite resentful, chinese come here trying to take jobs to some good-working people, some claim to be superior i won't deny it when you repelled the huns that was achievment but as i say why then do you come to western countries to live and to steal jobs and space (well canada is a exception lots of free space) if your culture is so superior?

btw i also don't like some chinese costumes.

So the United States has the right to say "what's best for the people"? If they had installed a better dictator, instead of one that was just anti-communist, that would have been better. At that point in time, in 1948, America had been hegemonic - only.

Ok I guess you ignored my post because it didn't fit your history. The Communist Government was Self-Proclaimed! In 1948 they did hold an election and guess what? The commie government didn't win. We left in 1948.

Vietnam doesn't have a democratic government. Afghanistan may be "democratic" in the "ballot style" government, but people are still living in fear of explosions and violence. America is not the best occupier of out of all occupiers. They need to learn from the British. :p

Learn from the British? HAHAHA!! They couldn't hold on to the United States because we decided to fight and had the best terrain to do it. Sorry but no. I saw what they did to Africa and the world doesn't need that disaster again.

So the United States has the right to say "what's best for the people"? If they had installed a better dictator, instead of one that was just anti-communist, that would have been better. At that point in time, in 1948, America had been hegemonic - only.

I think yes it does. Especially if it brings them way better jobs and a way better economy. They'll thanks us later.e


No. Economic development is a lot more than just jobs.

Yep, it is a better standard of living, better services for the people of the nation, better healthcare and longer life spans.

Vietnam doesn't have a democratic government. Afghanistan may be "democratic" in the "ballot style" government, but people are still living in fear of explosions and violence. America is not the best occupier of out of all occupiers. They need to learn from the British. :p

Again, I didn't say Vietnam. I said Afghanistan and Iraq.

Afghanistan is very democratic. People are still living in fear of explosions and violence? Dude wake up. It takes a lot more then just three or four years to rebuild a nation from scratch. Afghanistan was completely and totally destroyed thanks to the Soviets and the proceeding civil war.

America most definitely is the best because we got a mission of stability and economic freedom. Learn from the British? Tell me what territory does the British still hold outside of some islands?

Not really. But wars are never - NEVER solo-causal. And given America's past record of wars and foreign policy, it is pretty safe to say that America's war against terror is not just a war against terror, but also to extend American influence in the world.

I wouldn't doubt it but then again, we wouldn't be doing this except that 9/11 happened.

Of course, there is no historiography on this yet. Afghanistan is too short to be classified as academic subject of history.

Again not true. Current Afghanistan yes, I'll grant you that. But the overall Afghan history... it'll be worth studying.

America most definitely is the best because we got a mission of stability and economic freedom. Learn from the British? Tell me what territory does the British still hold outside of some islands?

On the flip side, tell me what territory we still hold outside of some islands?

I think most Americans would like to believe China is going bust, but that just is not the case. The rate of their growth may slow down a bit once their money is valued properly, however no other country other than maybe India can even come close to the out-put of China by pure volume of it's populace. China is not going bust any time soon. In fact, quite the opposite.

I'm an economist, and no, China is not going to bust. They are doing extremely well, and is mostly because of the americans. They are the ones sending their industries to china, giving them jobs, allowing them to capitalize their country, and them amercians buys chinese products increasing their commercial deficit and increasing china's wealth.
By 2020 China a superpower? i don’t think so. Maybe by 2030.
If someone has to rule over the world as the supreme superpower I would prefer the UE. They have their pros and cons but they are the more socially advance, way over the US.

On the flip side, tell me what territory we still hold outside of some islands?

Tell me.. did we go after a country the size of India like the British? If not, we wouldn't have lost anything to begin with because we didn't have any major overseas holdings.

Tell me.. did we go after a country the size of India like the British? If not, we wouldn't have lost anything to begin with because we didn't have any major overseas holdings.

Nice dodge of the question.

Nice dodge of the question.

yep. I'm a political science major. :p It is required for my degree.

Tell me.. did we go after a country the size of India like the British? If not, we wouldn't have lost anything to begin with because we didn't have any major overseas holdings.

No you don't ocupy countries you raid them and make agreements with them so you can still plunge out their resources, oh and about america's mission of stability i don't know if you believe a chosen people by god to bring balance to the world.

No you don't ocupy countries you raid them and make agreements with them so you can still plunge out their resources, oh and about america's mission of stability i don't know if you believe a chosen people by god to bring balance to the world.

And I thought I sometimes had issues with run-on sentences.. dude.. that's horrible.. read that again.. you'll run out of breath. Besides it being blatantly false. So we plunged them out of their resources? Is that why South Korea is doing so well now?

I wouldn't doubt it but then again, we wouldn't be doing this except that 9/11 happened.
9/11 was more of a trigger than a cause.


Again not true. Current Afghanistan yes, I'll grant you that. But the overall Afghan history... it'll be worth studying.

Yeah. I meant current turmoil in Afghanistan.

I'm an economist, and no, China is not going to bust. They are doing extremely well, and is mostly because of the americans. They are the ones sending their industries to china, giving them jobs, allowing them to capitalize their country, and them amercians buys chinese products increasing their commercial deficit and increasing china's wealth.

Actually, I think you ignored alot of the arguements on why we think that the Chinese Economy will bust so why don't you try looking at those arguements and tell us where we are wrong.

By 2020 China a superpower? i don’t think so. Maybe by 2030.

Why?

yep. I'm a political science major. :p It is required for my degree.

I am too but at least, I try to answer questions which is what the voters want! :p

Yeah. I meant current turmoil in Afghanistan.

You know anything about Afghanistan? You know how many years of civil war it has been in? A country cannot fix itself in a few years from scratch.

And I thought I sometimes had issues with run-on sentences.. dude.. that's horrible.. read that again.. you'll run out of breath. Besides it being blatantly false. So we plunged them out of their resources? Is that why South Korea is doing so well now?

first of all "dude" english is not my native tongue, and i wrote that in a hurry so you will forgive, won't you?

You know anything about Afghanistan? You know how many years of civil war it has been in? A country cannot fix itself in a few years from scratch.

And the Americans aren't helping.

EDIT: We're hijacking this thread. Let's back on topic.

first of all "dude" english is not my native tongue, and i wrote that in a hurry so you will forgive, won't you?

Well... even if I'm in a hurry I remember to use the period. Also spanish is my first language. :)

And the Americans aren't helping.

PROVE IT!

How the hell not? We got rid of the taliban who were doing next to nothing for the country. We helped them rebuild their schools, their infrastructure and so many other things.. they have a bit of a ways to go, but they are on the right track.

Well... even if I'm in a hurry I remember to use the period. Also spanish is my first language. :)

well i'm sorry but we don't have such a good education system here, so that makes us miss some periods and comas.

And the Americans aren't helping.

Excuse me but we aren't the ones trying to sabatoge their democracy. We're not the ones blowing ourselves up to kill civilians! We are their helping them to establish security and infrastructure that is really virtually non-existant.

Of course, judging by your Korean Arguements, I'm not surprised by this.

If you want we can debate Afghanistan somewhere else.

If you want we can debate Afghanistan somewhere else.

That might be a good idea!

You have a doctorate in political science? Give me it, because I think I deserve it more. You are not accepting the reality. Come on. Economic growth can be superficial. In China's case you are buying into the official story from the government. There are more educated people in the US because of better training and better funded tech schools. China has issues with all sorts of things. Yeah, you might have a political science doctorate, but apparently you know next to nothing about economics.

I provide plenty of sources including one from the Washington Post.

I'm predicting capital flight from China (something that happened to Argentina).

What happened to Argentina was because they didn’t pay their debt. They owned 90 billions and didn’t have near that much.
They case with China is all the opposite. They have so much money that they are buying the US debt. For that reason, if China bust so will the US.
It is true that the US has more qualified workers, but they don’t have enough to cover their needs, so that is why the US is the biggest importer of qualified workers in the world. Ask Bill Gates.
China can do the same thing. They can just import qualified workers and in the meanwhile educated their own people so the can cover their needs with their own in 15 years.

That might be a good idea!

But I can't guarantee you the best quality debate, though. As you have correctly guessed, I know little about contemporary Afghanistan.

Wait till I get my International Relations degree. Lol.

What happened to Argentina was because they didn’t pay their debt. They owned 90 billions and didn’t have near that much.
They case with China is all the opposite. They have so much money that they are buying the US debt. For that reason, if China bust so will the US.
It is true that the US has more qualified workers, but they don’t have enough to cover their needs, so that is why the US is the biggest importer of qualified workers in the world. Ask Bill Gates.

That's an extremely simplistic view. First off the US can afford to have debt (and pretty much always has), and the Chinese are not buying US debt. There is just simply a trade deficit I expect to narrow greatly.

But I can't guarantee you the best quality debate, though. As you have correctly guessed, I know little about contemporary Afghanistan.

Wait till I get my International Relations degree. Lol.

LOL!

If you want we can debate Afghanistan somewhere else.

damn you killed this thread with that!

European colonialism is the devil. We're tired of you dictating how we should live. And the irony of it all, Mugabe says the same thing.

Um Mugabe isnt the guy you want to be like

That's an extremely simplistic view. First off the US can afford to have debt (and pretty much always has.
That is true. More than 80% of the dollar bills are outside the US.
All the oil in the world is negotiated in USD. The Fed can just print more money to cover the US deficit without any big impact in the inflation, specially with oil prices going up.

While I disagree with your answers, completly, I think you raised a good question that people should be asking.

The US has always had a challenger. Of course you are probably refering to the fact that there has been a shift of power greatly in the favor of the US, never mind the fact that we've had to work damned hard to get to were we are today. Some of Europe is pissed off because they have always seen things through a balance of power and see a single power as dangerous, which may or may not be entirely true (case in point for Europe: World War I and World War II).

No, there shouldn't be a unified world power, and there isn't today. Just because the US might be the strongest country; militarily, economically, politically, socially, or what have you, currently, doesn't mean we are a unified world power. People have the right to choose to adhere to Western, American, or whatever ideals they want. Of course, some might think we force our views on people (true in some instances) or that they are indoctrinated ignorants who just don't know any better.

China will be a superpower (and there are always more than one) in this century, at the very least they will have strong influence throughout the world. This is how I see China. They've been asleep for a few hundred years and are recently waking up. The world is completly different from when they last were a superpower and right now they are just testing the waters. They are trying to see what has changed exactly. There aggression towards Taiwan recently is just them testing the waters -- seeing who the key players are. My biggest fear is that while the big cities and coasts enjoy prosperiety and the wonders of capitalism, the countryside will be psychologically in a different, perhaps a more feudal mentality (case in point: Japan from 1920-40s). The European Union will be a big key player. India (note that they have a big enough population to actually challenge China militarily, maybe a reason for the US and Europe to have such an interest there) will be a key ally. Australia is the America of the Pacific (sorry Aussie's, you know it's true!!!), or are trying to be. The list goes on.

China will be a superpower, but when, who knows? We can only speculate what lies 15 years down the way. If, and when, they become a superpower, I'll support the US. Of course, you are foreseeing some conflict perhaps? We'll see. If history teaches us anything -- learn Chinese and prepare for some trouble ahead!

On a personal note, if you live in the US, and you think it sucks: try to change things or GET OUT!!!

That is true. More than 80% of the dollar bills are outside the US.
All the oil in the world is negotiated in USD. The Fed can just print more money to cover the US deficit without any big impact in the inflation, specially with oil prices going up.

Since oil in the world is negotiated in USD is one of the many reasons why we are going to maintain an upper hand in the world.

While I disagree with your answers, completly, I think you raised a good question that people should be asking.

The US has always had a challenger. Of course you are probably refering to the fact that there has been a shift of power greatly in the favor of the US, never mind the fact that we've had to work damned hard to get to were we are today. Some of Europe is pissed off because they have always seen things through a balance of power and see a single power as dangerous, which may or may not be entirely true (case in point for Europe: World War I and World War II).

No, there shouldn't be a unified world power, and there isn't today. Just because the US might be the strongest country; militarily, economically, politically, socially, or what have you, currently, doesn't mean we are a unified world power. People have the right to choose to adhere to Western, American, or whatever ideals they want. Of course, some might think we force our views on people (true in some instances) or that they are indoctrinated ignorants who just don't know any better.

China will be a superpower (and there are always more than one) in this century, at the very least they will have strong influence throughout the world. This is how I see China. They've been asleep for a few hundred years and are recently waking up. The world is completly different from when they last were a superpower and right now they are just testing the waters. They are trying to see what has changed exactly. There aggression towards Taiwan recently is just them testing the waters -- seeing who the key players are. My biggest fear is that while the big cities and coasts enjoy prosperiety and the wonders of capitalism, the countryside will be psychologically in a different, perhaps a more feudal mentality (case in point: Japan from 1920-40s). The European Union will be a big key player. India (note that they have a big enough population to actually challenge China militarily, maybe a reason for the US and Europe to have such an interest there) will be a key ally. Australia is the America of the Pacific (sorry Aussie's, you know it's true!!!), or are trying to be. The list goes on.

China will be a superpower, but when, who knows? We can only speculate what lies 15 years down the way. If, and when, they become a superpower, I'll support the US. Of course, you are foreseeing some conflict perhaps? We'll see. If history teaches us anything -- learn Chinese and prepare for some trouble ahead!

On a personal note, if you live in the US, and you think it sucks: try to change things or GET OUT!!!

though your points are good, there are not entirely accurate.

There will be a war between China and US, for the US will be afraid to lose its position, if you don't remember let us go back to WWI, if England didn't fought against Germany, Germany would have becomed the most powerful country in Europe, so WWI was a fight for the survival of germany, in other words England which was the most powerful country in Europe perhaps the world had to fight this new power that was rising. It'll be the same in this case US will try to weaken the chinese slowly perhaps, but there will be a point when either chinese or americans will start fighting, americans to conserve their power and chinese to gain it.

Since oil in the world is negotiated in USD is one of the many reasons why we are going to maintain an upper hand in the world.
A few months before the US attacked Irak, the Iraqi government decided to trade their oil in Euros. Considering that Irak has the second largest proven oil reserve in the world that would have been a blow to US possibilities to cover their deficit by printing money, specially if other oil exporters countries imitated Irak.
After the US occupied Irak, the put an American in charge of the Iraqi oil and one of his first decisions (if not his first) was to trade the Iraqi oil back in USD.
Just for info.

The US sucks, blah blah blah blah.. is that all you have to say? China is on the verge of bust... it's economy has already shown signs of overheating and it will face serious problems. 9% is an overestimated amount.. and is totally overblown. China suffers massive unemployment (some estimates put it at 20-25%, and underemployment. If you want to talk about corrupt, look at the Chinese government.

Additionally, the social situation in China is becoming a powder-keg. There have been increasing amounts of riots where protesters have stormed police buildings and police have been completely outnumbered.


i think that is a good thing for the goverment the best job you can if you unimployed or uneducated is the military.

not to mention that everyone does a year or so of military service anyway.



will they be better than i america is somthing that is hard to answer,who knows what will happen by 2020,but i hope america stays because i know what to expect for them,china would be a whole new ball game.



becides what type of superpower anyway a econmic superpower?military?technolgical?

because my money is on them to become military if anything.they got the man power to do it,they have a huge arms industry and the wall of china :headbang: to block invaiders lol.

in my book america is technological for obvious reasons,economic not so much because they are now rivaled by the E.U.

A few months before the US attacked Irak, the Iraqi government decided to trade their oil in Euros. Considering that Irak has the second largest proven oil reserve in the world that would have been a blow to US possibilities to cover their deficit by printing money, specially if other oil exporters countries imitated Irak.

Ask yourself a question: Why? We were going to attack them and they were going to do that to get back at us. Too bad for Saddam we stuck by our word.

After the US occupied Irak, the put an American in charge of the Iraqi oil and one of his first decisions (if not his first) was to trade the Iraqi oil back in USD.
Just for info.

This is blatantly false. We do not control their oil reserves. It is up to the current Iraqi government.

Your info is a bit on the biased side, and is influenced by anti-war opinions.

Ask yourself a question: Why? We were going to attack them and they were going to do that to get back at us. Too bad for Saddam we stuck by our word.



This is blatantly false. We do not control their oil reserves. It is up to the current Iraqi government.

Your info is a bit on the biased side, and is influenced by anti-war opinions.

And the new Iraqi goverment is a puppet of the US, so that's that and there's nothing you say that will change it.

Isn't it obvious? you invade a country, "free" it, and then it so happens a new democratic goverment raises to aid its people.

let us be honest america has a puppet goverment in Iraq and that statement is not influenced by anti-war opinions.

And the new Iraqi goverment is a puppet of the US, so that's that and there's nothing you say that will change it.

Isn't it obvious? you invade a country, "free" it, and then it so happens a new democratic goverment raises to aid its people.

let us be honest america has a puppet goverment in Iraq and that statement is not influenced by anti-war opinions.

Here we go with the hideous puppet argument. Puppet this, puppet that.. do you have anything constructive to add? Or are you going to add this anti-war nonsense? Oh believe me it is influenced by anti-war opinions, big time.

Anyways, I just checked out your nation.. this is off topic... but what's with the Schutzstaffel (SP?) image as the flag?

Here we go with the hideous puppet argument. Puppet this, puppet that.. do you have anything constructive to add? Or are you going to add this anti-war nonsense? Oh believe me it is influenced by anti-war opinions, big time.

Anyways, I just checked out your nation.. this is off topic... but what's with the Schutzstaffel (SP?) image as the flag?

well since my grandfather was an officer there, he is a big influence in me, btw my nation sucks i went off on holiday for a month and didn't took decisions or nothing, i have another which is more like me (the republic of Eschenbach)

My grandfather was a soldier in the nationalist Spanish Army.. but I of course do not boast that. Nor did he. I'm not fond of fascism.

1. Do you think the US needs a challenger in the world?
2. Do you think there should be one unified world power?
3. Who do you think could be the next superpower(only one)?
4. Do you think China will be able to challenge the US by 2020?
5. If China became a superpower by 2020, who would you support? (US or China)

1. Yes the US needs a challenger in the world, without a challenger, the US can only harness more and more power and grow more and more corrupt.
2. I would wish that humanity would unite as one, however as of now, I think we are not noble enough for this and any single Earth union would probably be quite corrupt.
3. China I wish, because it is where I live. However my answer to this question would be the European Union which is more realistic. The EU by 2020 might not be as strong politically but I am sure they will be quite strong economically. China with all of its high rises is still a third world nation with a developping economy, and even though the cities might fool some people, China is vast and overpopulated, and most people still live in rural areas as farmers and fishers, so I am not sure.
4. I can only say maybe, I do not think China would be able to challenge the US in the military, even though China spends alot on the miltary and has the largest standing army, it is and most probably won't be able to match American military's strength.
5. China of course, one because I as a Chinese support my own country, two because I disagree with alot of US government's policies and the "world police" attitude.

I know many Americans always ask me about China's stability and future, and they have crazy ideas of China becoming a major superpower or that China will have revolution and totally collapse, those ideas to me are wild, I think you would really have to live here in China to really know about the situation, and I think yoiu will have to live in the country to know any country's real situation. Otherwise to an observer, the view is very misleading. I personally think China is quite stable and it is getting better. The economy, the political situation with Taiwan, and the world, less hard lined communism, the unemployment problem was very bad back in 1997 to 1999, and people from the Northeast often came to cities to find work and when they didn't find it they turn to crime often killing someone just for a few yuan to buy them a day's meal. Now it has become better, although I can still see a few protests once in a while, but big riots I have not seen, not like the ones in Taiwan or South Korea. Also when they are protesting they are protesting for the government to do something about the problem, there are no flag burning and anti-nation issues. I don't think anyone influenced by Chinese culture would protest by burning the flag. A protest I saw from unemployed workers from a tractor factory protested and sang the Internationale along. It is not about changing the government but more about wanting the party to change for the better.
Politically speaking I would like the US to step back from the arrogant "world police" position, and concern more about their economy, citizen's social welfare. China's eastern coast is pretty developped, and their are programmes being followed to develop China's less developped western areas. Politically China is becoming less and less socialistic. Now we look to Japan and the US as models. And frankly I think we are loosing not only the bad parts of socialism but also the good parts. Medical treatment are much better, but it is no longer free, education is at a higher standard but it is no longer affordable to most. Many talk about human rights, I think human rights are getting better in China, of course I have little idea because I have never committed a crime. Again, I think human rights in China, even during imperial times were neither very good. The US and many western nations are China's idealogical enemies, of course there will be alot of bad things said about China, despite any little improvement in China, critics in the west will say something bad about it and blame it on the Communist Party. The same is with Chinese hearing bad things about the US. However, when people think of crazy ideas about China's future, I simply can't withstand their arrogance and ignorance about China and the world. Here are a few points:

The US gets crazy when a small country such as Iraq, Iran, and DPR Korea have/ or the possibility of having nuclear weapons. The truth is the US has the most amount of "Weapons of Mass Destruction" in their possession, and probably those that are the most advanced weapons ever conceived by humans. In this respect the US is the most dangerous nation in the world.

The US is a democracy, people vote, however this could also have bad consequences. How Bush Jr. was re-elected? Afer the 9.11 terrorist attacks, which have been firmly identified with Usama bin Laden and al-Qaida, Bush Jr. waged war in Afghanistan and Iraq, yet with all the satellites in orbit bearing the Stars and Stripes and the most advanced tracking technologies, the border countries Pakistan and Kyrgyzstan being allies of the US in the war on terror, Afghanistan itself having a puppet President placed by the US, after 4 years have not been able to capture Usama bin Laden?? While in the meantime waged a war in Iraq and captured Saddam Hussein, who isn't directly involved with the 9.11 event??

I don't know if people in the west still remember during the Kosovan Conflict, an American F-117 accidentally bomed the Chinese embassy in Belgrade? That was with an advanced stealth fighter that no other nation possess, with fighter pilots having the most air training time and the government spending more on the military than any other nation! If that was truly an accident, then that means we have the worlds most dangerous and advanced technologies in the hands of monkeys! I am sorry for this but I do not understand the logic of having trained 19 year olds flying Mach-2 stealth planes dropping bombs all around the world in order to protect freedom in the US and fight tyranny around the globe? If a Chinese fighter "accidentally" dropped a bomb in an unsuspecting US embassy somewhere what would US's reaction be, but the American "mistakes" continues.

A few years ago a US reconnaissance plane entered Chinese airspace near Hainan island, let's just say it was out of Chinese air space, what else do you think a reconnaissance plane would be doing so far away from home and so near Chinese air space? If a Chinese spy plane were to fly near Florida, how do you think the US would react? Some people have double standards for what the US does and what China does simply because China is communist...

The US finds threats to their American way of life from small distant nations that would otherwise be unknown to American citizens on the other side of the globe all the time. Has China or any other nation done this, this often? Iraq posing an immediate threat to the average US citizen's life and freedom so desperate that a war need to be fought in which many innocent Iraqis would die is as ridiculous as China starting a war with the tiny Pacific nation of Tuvalu!

Finally, I would like to remind to all who have kindly read my long and boring post that the US, at least in my opinion, is the most dangerous nation at this time. President Bush Jr. who can't even pronounce "nuclear" correctly and lectures to leaders of distant nations about weapons of mass destruction. He is the most powerful idiot at the moment, sorry if I offend people with this. But it simply doesn't make any logic to me. What doesn't make logic to me more is that he was re-elected which means the Americans like him and his policies? To those of us who inhabit the "rest of the world", if Bush Jr. wants to attack Iran tomorrow, he can go attack Iran tomorrow. There might be technicalities with the UN and the Capitol, but truly who can stop him? I don't think any nation will stand up and defend Iran. If he wants to attack Libya, he can and many Americans will cheer him and sent their 19 year old sons to their graves gladly so the world will have one less tyrant as Bush Jr. will say. Who else in the world has this power? Ok, sorry for the long and off-topic post, and sorry for my English mistakes, I try my best, and this website is not blocked in China by the way. Also sorry if I offended anyone with my comments but I hope you will understand my opinions that I expressed. I never liked politics anyways...


My nation is the Community of Espes, come visit us sometime! :p

My grandfather was a soldier in the nationalist Spanish Army.. but I of course do not boast that. Nor did he. I'm not fond of fascism.

You should be proud of you family past.

For seventeen years have i been enduring the jews pointing (some exceptions) at me like a killer, the world looks to my country as a threat, eventhough we're peace-loving people but also courageous.

We are still being occupied by americans and every so often the world checks at us to see we're not trying to re-arm, for we are resentfull and some if we may we will march to glory again.

I know spanish quite well, i lived in mexico some time ago.

China must be destroyed before it's too late.

That country must be overrun by good western armies i don't care if they are americans, mexicans, germans, british. I seriously don't care, i've been saying this for years I WILL NOT ALLOW TO SEE OUR WESTERN CULTURE WHICH HAS RULED THE WORLD FOR CENTURIES BEING OVERTHROWN BY A LESSER CHINESE CULTURE, THEY EAT THEIR OWN KIDS, AND EVEN DOGS FOR GOD'S SAKE.

I tell you now, if the chinese threat isn't destroyed now it may be too late for us to supress it, China must be ocupied and dismembered into many tiny countries so it would never become a threat again.

AND IF THE MODERATORS THINK THIS WAS RACIST (FOR THEY CLAIM ALL MY POSTS TO BE) KEEP IN MIND THAT I ALSO CARE FOR YOU. VILLAIN YOU CAN CALL ME, BUT WHO IS MORE VILLAIN, ME OR THOSE WHO OPRESS PEOPLE AND KILL CHILDREN BECAUSE THEY HAVE A LOT OF POPULATION?

We don't eat our own children, given I don't have any children TO eat. But last time I checked my mother wasn't ripping off my arm for a nibble. And no, this doesn't happen in the poorer regions of China.

Yes, some people eat dog. But people eat cow, don't they? They eat, sheep, don't they? What's the big deal? If there's a massive food shortage, but there were a whole bunch of stray dogs around, I'm sure some people in other countries would resort to eating them. Though that may not be the point, eating dog is considered a delicacey among some, yes. But if eating dog is wrong, then so is eating other animals.

*ahem*

You should be proud of you family past.

For seventeen years have i been enduring the jews pointing (some exceptions) at me like a killer, the world looks to my country as a threat, eventhough we're peace-loving people but also courageous.

We are still being occupied by americans and every so often the world checks at us to see we're not trying to re-arm, for we are resentfull and some if we may we will march to glory again.

I know spanish quite well, i lived in mexico some time ago.

I am Spanish. But I'm not proud of what Franco did. He's better then the communists sure.. but he did a lot of horrid things.

Your nationalism scares me.

Not even my grandfather was proud of serving in the spanish nationalist army during the time of the civil war.

We don't eat our own children, given I don't have any children TO eat. But last time I checked my mother wasn't ripping off my arm for a nibble. And no, this doesn't happen in the poorer regions of China.

Yes, some people eat dog. But people eat cow, don't they? They eat, sheep, don't they? What's the big deal? If there's a massive food shortage, but there were a whole bunch of stray dogs around, I'm sure some people in other countries would resort to eating them. Though that may not be the point, eating dog is considered a delicacey among some, yes. But if eating dog is wrong, then so is eating other animals.

*ahem*

For god's sake!! can't you people realize that i don't hate chinese people? I hate chinese goverment (and some customs as well).

I don't like chinese invading our countries, stealing our jobs. I accept it there are some chinese that are good people, but i won't allow western civilization to fail.

I am Spanish. But I'm not proud of what Franco did. He's better then the communists sure.. but he did a lot of horrid things.

Your nationalism scares me.

Not even my grandfather was proud of serving in the spanish nationalist army during the time of the civil war.

You are not what franco did, as i am not what hitler did, your grandfather didn't serve in a nationalist army, he served for his homeland (unless of course he was mailed in)

I've been in spain several times, they nationalist and of course are proud of their history (there are exceptions as always.)

For god's sake!! can't you people realize that i don't hate chinese people? I hate chinese goverment (and some customs as well).

I don't like chinese invading our countries, stealing our jobs. I accept it there are some chinese that are good people, but i won't allow western civilization to fail.

We don't STEAL jobs. We get them because we're willing to work more, for less.

1. Do you think the US needs a challenger in the world?
2. Do you think there should be one unified world power?
3. Who do you think could be the next superpower(only one)?
4. Do you think China will be able to challenge the US by 2020?
5. If China became a superpower by 2020, who would you support? (US or China)

1. Yes the US needs a challenger in the world, without a challenger, the US can only harness more and more power and grow more and more corrupt.
2. I would wish that humanity would unite as one, however as of now, I think we are not noble enough for this and any single Earth union would probably be quite corrupt.
3. China I wish, because it is where I live. However my answer to this question would be the European Union which is more realistic. The EU by 2020 might not be as strong politically but I am sure they will be quite strong economically. China with all of its high rises is still a third world nation with a developping economy, and even though the cities might fool some people, China is vast and overpopulated, and most people still live in rural areas as farmers and fishers, so I am not sure.
4. I can only say maybe, I do not think China would be able to challenge the US in the military, even though China spends alot on the miltary and has the largest standing army, it is and most probably won't be able to match American military's strength.
5. China of course, one because I as a Chinese support my own country, two because I disagree with alot of US government's policies and the "world police" attitude.

Politically speaking I would like the US to step back from the arrogant "world police" position, and concern more about their economy, citizen's social welfare. China's eastern coast is pretty developped, and their are programmes being followed to develop China's less developped western areas. Politically China is becoming less and less socialistic. Now we look to Japan and the US as models. And frankly I think we are loosing not only the bad parts of socialism but also the good parts. Medical treatment are much better, but it is no longer free, education is at a higher standard but it is no longer affordable to most. Many talk about human rights, I think human rights are getting better in China, of course I have little idea because I have never committed a crime. Again, I think human rights in China, even during imperial times were neither very good. The US and many western nations are China's idealogical enemies, of course there will be alot of bad things said about China, despite any little improvement in China, critics in the west will say something bad about it and blame it on the Communist Party. The same is with Chinese hearing bad things about the US. However, when people think of crazy ideas about China's future, I simply can't withstand their arrogance and ignorance about China and the world. Here are a few points:

The US gets crazy when a small country such as Iraq, Iran, and DPR Korea have/ or the possibility of having nuclear weapons. The truth is the US has the most amount of "Weapons of Mass Destruction" in their possession, and probably those that are the most advanced weapons ever conceived by humans. In this respect the US is the most dangerous nation in the world.

The US is a democracy, people vote, however this could also have bad consequences. How Bush Jr. was re-elected? Afer the 9.11 terrorist attacks, which have been firmly identified with Usama bin Laden and al-Qaida, Bush Jr. waged war in Afghanistan and Iraq, yet with all the satellites in orbit bearing the Stars and Stripes and the most advanced tracking technologies, the border countries Pakistan and Kyrgyzstan being allies of the US in the war on terror, Afghanistan itself having a puppet President placed by the US, after 4 years have not been able to capture Usama bin Laden?? While in the meantime waged a war in Iraq and captured Saddam Hussein, who isn't directly involved with the 9.11 event??

I don't know if people in the west still remember during the Kosovan Conflict, an American F-117 accidentally bomed the Chinese embassy in Belgrade? That was with an advanced stealth fighter that no other nation possess, with fighter pilots having the most air training time and the government spending more on the military than any other nation! If that was truly an accident, then that means we have the worlds most dangerous and advanced technologies in the hands of monkeys! I am sorry for this but I do not understand the logic of having trained 19 year olds flying Mach-2 stealth planes dropping bombs all around the world in order to protect freedom in the US and fight tyranny around the globe? If a Chinese fighter "accidentally" dropped a bomb in an unsuspecting US embassy somewhere what would US's reaction be, but the American "mistakes" continues.

A few years ago a US reconnaissance plane entered Chinese airspace near Hainan island, let's just say it was out of Chinese air space, what else do you think a reconnaissance plane would be doing so far away from home and so near Chinese air space? If a Chinese spy plane were to fly near Florida, how do you think the US would react? Some people have double standards for what the US does and what China does simply because China is communist...

The US finds threats to their American way of life from small distant nations that would otherwise be unknown to American citizens on the other side of the globe all the time. Has China or any other nation done this, this often? Iraq posing an immediate threat to the average US citizen's life and freedom so desperate that a war need to be fought in which many innocent Iraqis would die is as ridiculous as China starting a war with the tiny Pacific nation of Tuvalu!

Finally, I would like to remind to all who have kindly read my long and boring post that the US, at least in my opinion, is the most dangerous nation at this time. President Bush Jr. who can't even pronounce "nuclear" correctly and lectures to leaders of distant nations about weapons of mass destruction. He is the most powerful idiot at the moment, sorry if I offend people with this. But it simply doesn't make any logic to me. What doesn't make logic to me more is that he was re-elected which means the Americans like him and his policies? To those of us who inhabit the "rest of the world", if Bush Jr. wants to attack Iran tomorrow, he can go attack Iran tomorrow. There might be technicalities with the UN and the Capitol, but truly who can stop him? I don't think any nation will stand up and defend Iran. If he wants to attack Libya, he can and many Americans will cheer him and sent their 19 year old sons to their graves gladly so the world will have one less tyrant as Bush Jr. will say. Who else in the world has this power? Ok, sorry for the long and off-topic post, and sorry for my English mistakes, I try my best, and this website is not blocked in China by the way. Also sorry if I offended anyone with my comments but I hope you will understand my opinions that I expressed. I never liked politics anyways...


My nation is the Community of Espes, come visit us sometime! :p



i dont agree with alot of thing you said but...............



WE HAVE A WINNER!!!!!!!!!! some one is a great with names Usama bin Laden is the right way to spell the name,we spell it wrong with a O

The US will not be rivaled by 2020. The US's only Rival in the next 50 years will be itself. No country can catch up, they just have to have a steady pace, and while the US hits natural obstacles (any country of the US's size and Power has also been plagued by the inefficiency of being the best.) and slowly decays.

Infact, the US will be a world player for at least the next 200 years. A world player that has considerable say and power, and will be feared.
The soonest a country will rival the US is 50 years. The soonest a country can overtake the US is 75.

Believe it or not, the US could easily mobilize itself to grow faster than it is now. But in the long term, spurts of growth can damage a country. Plus the US has to sort out its overlooming political crisis before it resumes powergrowth. The political crisis I mention is the bipartisan nature of the US, which is going to have to evolve slowly into a more dynamic system that better represents individual group interests.

We don't STEAL jobs. We get them because we're willing to work more, for less.

good point, well made.

But then why do you emigrate to other countries if you like you own homeland? and even change nationality if you can.

good point, well made.

But then why do you emigrate to other countries if you like you own homeland? and even change nationality if you can.

I love the fact that I was born in China. I love living here. It's great. But I still want to go to the UK to study.

Currently, China can't offer me what I want.

But, it's not just Asians who immigrate, Hong Kong is full of Westerners who have moved to China for the jobs. Just like how there are Chinese who immigrate to America, for the jobs.

Don't forget China's bizzare demographic problems. With the one child policy, parents are going for boys, and willing to do anything to have their child be a boy. As such...by 2020 there will be a very large young, male population, unattached, and of the possible things that would occur, either rampant crime, mass gang activities and Chinese military adventurism (the classic release for an excess of young men!) will occur.

Beyond that, China faces a major aging problem, with the potential to have nearly 300 million people old enough to leave the work force, that's another big time problem to face.

I'd do more if I weren't so tired. I'd also cite sources.

Currently, China can't offer me what I want

.

Your homeland can always offer you what you want if you fight for it (unless you live in africa or in a third world country)

My country is always offering its citizens what they want and need (eventhough there are some bastards that are ungrateful).

btw what do you want?

Well Morvonia tell me what you don't disagree, I am pretty open minded to politics, because I see it as nothing more than what this website is, a game...

Besides I came on here to learn, and how can one learn without an open mind.

Also Usama bin Ladin is the technically correct way according to how it is spelt in Arabic, in Arabic there are only a, i, u.however when you pronounce it U is pronounce more like an O, and i more like e. You could also write Osama ben Laden.

My nation is the Community of Espes come visit us sometime! :p

You are not what franco did, as i am not what hitler did, your grandfather didn't serve in a nationalist army, he served for his homeland (unless of course he was mailed in)

I've been in spain several times, they nationalist and of course are proud of their history (there are exceptions as always.)

I'm very much Spanish, and my grandfather was Spanish. He was just a farmer.

The problem with the rest of the world is they are not as dynamic as the US. Europe is not. Europe is facing huge aging problems, across the board. Spain is the least affected.. there is still positive population growth. The rest..

"Beyond that, China faces a major aging problem, with the potential to have nearly 300 million people old enough to leave the work force, that's another big time problem to face. "

Definitely. And they don't have the social infrastructure to even try to support all those people.

Your homeland can always offer you what you want if you fight for it (unless you live in africa or in a third world country)

My country is always offering its citizens what they want and need (eventhough there are some bastards that are ungrateful).

btw what do you want?

Okay, you do have a point.

I want to live in the English countryside. I want a law degree, obtained in the UK. I want the experiance of living in another country.

While what I want is unobtainable here in China, I'd like to say that China is getting better at giving the people what they want.

While what I want is unobtainable here in China, I'd like to say that China is getting better at giving the people what they want.

Like more unemployment... :rolleyes:

Like more unemployment... :rolleyes:

China's unemployment rate is declining.

China's unemployment rate is declining.

Yep.

http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/business/1881153.stm

Not.

"The modernisation of China's economy and the opening of its markets have brought wealth, but at the cost of unemployment for many.
Over the past decade more than a million people have lost their jobs in Shanghai, as an increasingly competitive market-place and government-planned economic restructuring have sounded the death knell for many of the city's old core industries."

And they are doing so much for their own people... :rolleyes:

http://www.buzzle.com/editorials/3-17-2002-14825.asp

Edit: Here is a more up-to-date article:

http://www.rand.org/commentary/070704AWSJ.html

Yep.

http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/business/1881153.stm

Not.

"The modernisation of China's economy and the opening of its markets have brought wealth, but at the cost of unemployment for many.
Over the past decade more than a million people have lost their jobs in Shanghai, as an increasingly competitive market-place and government-planned economic restructuring have sounded the death knell for many of the city's old core industries."

And they are doing so much for their own people... :rolleyes:

http://www.buzzle.com/editorials/3-17-2002-14825.asp

Both articles were written in 2002, thank you very much.

Both articles were written in 2002, thank you very much.

Read the 2004 article I put up. And things can not improve that much since 2002.. they are actually worsening..

"Thus, while China's economy was growing at the highest annual growth rate, 7.8%, of any of the world's principal economies, its increase in employment was only 1% annually."

"These numbers are only the tip of the unemployment iceberg. Research by RAND indicates that when proper allowance is made for "disguised" rural unemployment as well as "unregistered" urban unemployment, China's actual unemployment rate soars to an estimated 23% of the total labor force."

---

Since employment is only increasing 1% annually, this is inadequate. This means unemployment will continue to rise.

1. Do you think the US needs a challenger in the world?

Not really, because increasing globalization ensures that economies will be ever more interdependent. There won't really be any "challengers", just as the U.S. will not stay "dominant" forever. I highly doubt the U.S. and China will ever get into an armed conflict, because it is certain to mean massive economic problems for both nations, neither can "conquer" the other, and there really is nothing to gain out of it.

Nations don't go to war unless they have something to gain because of it.

Militarily, I don't think that any nation will ever rival the U.S. in military terms. They might become regional powers, but unless the U.S. collapses from within (highly unlikely), nobody will ever be able to project force worldwide to the degree that the U.S. can. I think this is mostly a good thing. I don't always agree with my nations foreign policy, but two military superpowers can only mean increased likelihood of nuclear war...something nobody wants.

In terms of social/cultural influence, I would love to see another nation rise up and challenge the U.S. Our culture, while having worldwide influence, is pretty stupid. One need only look at Hollywood and MTV to see that.

2. Do you think there should be one unified world power?

Goodness, no. Worldwide civil war does not appeal to me.

3. Who do you think could be the next superpower(only one)?

Well if we combine economic, military and social influence, I would say Brazil. The U.S. could use an ally that powerful, and will help Brazil immensly if they continue on their current path of social and economic growth. If Brazil and the U.S. work together, they could help to transform the rest of Latin America into 1st world powers, an entire hemisphere, largely economically and socially integrated, working together for the benefit of each nation...

...that actually kind of leads into question #2 :eek:

4. Do you think China will be able to challenge the US by 2020?

Nope. Three reasons

1. The aging crisis, due to the One-Child policy, is going to strain their administrative abilities to the breaking point. Unless they get more efficient in almost every aspect of their economy, and quickly, they are going to have a massively depleted labor force by then, and the economy will stagnate.

2. Pollution. China is the world's most polluted country, and desertification is already a growing problem. Considering nearly half the labor force is involved in agriculture, and yet China still relys on food imports to feed its people, a growing problem with pollution will cause severe social strain.

3. India. I honestly think India has a better shot than China...they're less corrupt, and have fewer underlying social issues to deal with. There's the whold Pakistan issue, but I think cooler heads will prevail there.

5. If China became a superpower by 2020, who would you support? (US or China)

...do you really have to ask? ;)

Any other RELATED opinions.

Nah...I think I covered 'em all. :p

Delator, I for the most part agree with you...

[B]
3. India. I honestly think India has a better shot than China...they're less corrupt, and have fewer underlying social issues to deal with. There's the whold Pakistan issue, but I think cooler heads will prevail there.


Actually India has an issue with a growing population and increasing amounts of violence. Insufficient power systems and threats of many typhoons and storms also hinder economic growth. Insufficient power stations can hinder economic growth totally. There is also an issue with a grossly inadequate education system.. which is totally underfunded and completely neglected by the Indian government.

The biggest problem for India is insufficient megawatt output from power plants.

Read the 2004 article I put up. And things can not improve that much since 2002.. they are actually worsening..

"Thus, while China's economy was growing at the highest annual growth rate, 7.8%, of any of the world's principal economies, its increase in employment was only 1% annually."

"These numbers are only the tip of the unemployment iceberg. Research by RAND indicates that when proper allowance is made for "disguised" rural unemployment as well as "unregistered" urban unemployment, China's actual unemployment rate soars to an estimated 23% of the total labor force."

---

Since employment is only increasing 1% annually, this is inadequate. This means unemployment will continue to rise.

I stand corrected.

Delator, I for the most part agree with you...

Actually India has an issue with a growing population and increasing amounts of violence. Insufficient power systems and threats of many typhoons and storms also hinder economic growth. Insufficient power stations can hinder economic growth totally. There is also an issue with a grossly inadequate education system.. which is totally underfunded and completely neglected by the Indian government.

The biggest problem for India is insufficient megawatt output from power plants.

I wasn't aware of that, though it makes sense that the monsoons cause such problems. I thought their post-secondary education system wasn't bad, although I can imagine that elementary and secondary education can't be all that good if the government isn't helping.

That's why I think Brazil will actually come out on top. 90% of their electricity is generated by hyrdopower.

Well Morvonia tell me what you don't disagree, I am pretty open minded to politics, because I see it as nothing more than what this website is, a game...

Besides I came on here to learn, and how can one learn without an open mind.

Also Usama bin Ladin is the technically correct way according to how it is spelt in Arabic, in Arabic there are only a, i, u.however when you pronounce it U is pronounce more like an O, and i more like e. You could also write Osama ben Laden.

My nation is the Community of Espes come visit us sometime! :p



alright calm down i know it is a game and i was just voicing my opinion about what you said

I wasn't aware of that, though it makes sense that the monsoons cause such problems. I thought their post-secondary education system wasn't bad, although I can imagine that elementary and secondary education can't be all that good if the government isn't helping.

Power and infrastructure issues:

http://inhome.rediff.com/money/2004/mar/11snp.htm

"International rating agency Standard & Poor's on Thursday lauded India's competitiveness in information technology, business process outsourcing and telecom sectors but warned that inadequate infrastructure continued to hamper sustained high economic growth.

"Infrastructure has proven to be a key constraint. The higher cost and lower quality and reliability of electricity, road transport, rail transport, ports and water supply continue to hamper sustained high economic growth in India," S&P director (Asia-Pacific), Sharad Jain, said in a statement from Singapore.

Frustrating labour laws, continued reliance on timely rainfalls for a large part of the economy are some of the other impediments affecting the Indian industry, he said.

The S&P warning assumes importance in the background of a recent projection by ICRA, which said 8.0 per cent GDP growth was not sustainable and would come down to 6.4 per cent in the next fiscal.

S&P, which had assigned a foreign currency rating of "BB" with "stable" outlook and a local currency rating of "BB+", also cautioned investors against getting "carried away" by the current enthusiasm in the country."

http://www.financialexpress.com/fe_full_story.php?content_id=78986

"The education pyramid in India looks even more dismal with only 6% of the children who enter primary schools going up to college level, and barely 2% joining the vocational or professional workforce."

Not looking very good.

That's why I think Brazil will actually come out on top. 90% of their electricity is generated by hyrdopower.

Well Brazil first must get over the extreme violence in their cities. Their cities are some of the most violent in the world and hindering some moderate economioc growth.

http://inhome.rediff.com/money/2004/mar/11snp.htm

http://www.financialexpress.com/fe_full_story.php?content_id=78986

I'll have to take a longer look at that when I have more time.

Well Brazil first must get over the extreme violence in their cities. Their cities are some of the most violent in the world and hindering some moderate economioc growth.

Very true, but that is becoming more largely confined to the very poor districts of the large cities. Still a large problem, but nowhere near as bad as it was even ten years ago.

They are getting some damn fine policemen because of it, that's for sure...the ones that live anyways. :(

Very true, but that is becoming more largely confined to the very poor districts of the large cities. Still a large problem, but nowhere near as bad as it was even ten years ago.

They are getting some damn fine policemen because of it, that's for sure...the ones that live anyways. :(

Unfortunately, the favelas (slums) far outnumber the rich districts. The divide between the rich and poor is some of the largest in Latin America and violence often overflows into richer areas.

There policemen are especially brutal.... I was in Sao Paolo about four years ago... maybe it has improved since then, but I'm not sure.

Unfortunately, the favelas (slums) far outnumber the rich districts. The divide between the rich and poor is some of the largest in Latin America and violence often overflows into richer areas.

Very true.

There policemen are especially brutal.... I was in Sao Paolo about four years ago... maybe it has improved since then, but I'm not sure.

I hadn't heard anything exceptionally bad about the police forces there, but I have no firsthand knowedge, so you'd know better than I would.

Very true.



I hadn't heard anything exceptionally bad about the police forces there, but I have no firsthand knowedge, so you'd know better than I would.

some improvement.. but still..

http://hrw.org/english/docs/2005/01/13/brazil9845.htm

Both civil and military police forces are frequently responsible for serious abuses, including torture, extrajudicial executions, “disappearances,” and acts of racism. In the first six months of the year, the state police ombudsman for São Paulo reported 109 homicides by police. Although high, the figure represented a 73 percent decrease from that of the previous year, when police killings reached an eleven-year high. In Rio de Janeiro, the only state to publish such data monthly, police killed 593 people during the first eight months of 2004, representing a 25 percent decline from the previous year’s figure. Despite these decreases, unofficial estimates have placed the total number of police killings in Brazil at around 3,000 annually. Indeed, the death toll may be even higher as many states do not record such figures correctly and some do not record them at all.

The U.S. may verry well be a prosporus nation but they are doing so in a verry corrupt and illigal way, just like every other materilistic powerhouse in the world they get what they want no matter what the reprocution.

now most americans have it prety good they get thier 9-5 jobs, a suburban home, wife kids and a dog, they read the news and they only hear whatever the government wants them to know, wich isent 1\2 of whats realy terrible in the world, so they stay safe and happy in thier own little world.

they dont realy get that in forin countrys thier borthers, sisters, fathers ect.. are invading another someoneelses home, and killing off thier dads and brothers demolishing thier houses, limiting thier electrisity and water,

if anyone came into my town and started taking things over i would fight to the death to keep my home and my father and my brothers safe and not in war... nomatter how bad the government was befor,

we should look at the other side of the story not just our free white biast side of things, thoush people, the bombers and the hijackers there are someones family too, what are they fighting for?? maybe you should look at that

P.S. i'm a white feamale living in canada and if i can get it what cant any one else!!!!

The U.S. may verry well be a prosporus nation but they are doing so in a verry corrupt and illigal way, just like every other materilistic powerhouse in the world they get what they want no matter what the reprocution.

now most americans have it prety good they get thier 9-5 jobs, a suburban home, wife kids and a dog, they read the news and they only hear whatever the government wants them to know, wich isent 1\2 of whats realy terrible in the world, so they stay safe and happy in thier own little world.

they dont realy get that in forin countrys thier borthers, sisters, fathers ect.. are invading another someoneelses home, and killing off thier dads and brothers demolishing thier houses, limiting thier electrisity and water,

if anyone came into my town and started taking things over i would fight to the death to keep my home and my father and my brothers safe and not in war... nomatter how bad the government was befor,

we should look at the other side of the story not just our free white biast side of things, thoush people, the bombers and the hijackers there are someones family too, what are they fighting for?? maybe you should look at that

P.S. i'm a white feamale living in canada and if i can get it what cant any one else!!!!

:rolleyes:

i'm wondering... you are living in Canada. Why don't we listen to people who actually live in the US? Like myself? Most people in the US have a pretty good income, and the income has gone up in the past years steadily. Yes people are shielded from the outside.. but in this world of increasing information on the internet that shielded life is now disappearing.

How is the US growing in a very corrupt and illegal way? I'm wondering.. I'm kind of stumped.. people work for a living. There is nothing corrupt and illegal about that.

Before you denigrate America really understand what you are talking about.

:rolleyes: ...doesn't even begin to cover it.

The U.S. may verry well be a prosporus nation but they are doing so in a verry corrupt and illigal way, just like every other materilistic powerhouse in the world they get what they want no matter what the reprocution.

I'm sorry, since when has working for a living been corrupt and illegal? Maybe our government isn't always "ethical" in how it goes about things, but you can find corruption in any government you choose. Sometimes it's right on the surface...sometimes you have to dig a little deeper.

We're dealing with reprocussions of our actions right now. Our soldiers are dying and our nation is going further and further into debt. We're doing the best we can, the best we know how, to help protect Western Civlization from those who would see it destroyed.

I don't always agree with the methods, but at least we're doing something, which is more than you can say for most nations.

now most americans have it prety good they get thier 9-5 jobs, a suburban home, wife kids and a dog, they read the news and they only hear whatever the government wants them to know, wich isent 1\2 of whats realy terrible in the world, so they stay safe and happy in thier own little world.

I'm sorry, I don't need the government to spoon-feed me my news. I'm quite capable of keeping up on world events, including the bad things happening all over the globe, without Big Brother's help. Thanks.

Also, a lot of Americans have it pretty shitty as well. Don't believe everything you hear, the government is only telling you what they want you to know. :rolleyes:

they dont realy get that in forin countrys thier borthers, sisters, fathers ect.. are invading another someoneelses home, and killing off thier dads and brothers demolishing thier houses, limiting thier electrisity and water

This is really incoherent. I don't pretend to know everything that goes on in Iraq of Afghanistan, but we're "invading" homes that harbor terrorists and insurgents. We're killing people who would be blowing themselves up in public places, killing plenty of dads and brothers. We're limiting electricity and water because the insurgents do whatever they can to sabotage and destroy this infastructure.

Would you prefer that we just left? I'm sure the terrorists would make sure all of the killing stopped. :rolleyes:

if anyone came into my town and started taking things over i would fight to the death to keep my home and my father and my brothers safe and not in war... nomatter how bad the government was before

That almost makes sense, but what if the old governemt had killed your father and brothers?

we should look at the other side of the story not just our free white biast side of things, thoush people, the bombers and the hijackers there are someones family too, what are they fighting for?? maybe you should look at that

Some of the bombers and hijackers might actually have real cause to hate America, or at least what American armed forces have done to their family and friends. I feel sympathy for their motives, if not their methods.

A lot more of them are foreign militants, bent on making sure that Iraqis everywhere continue to suffer, as they have been suffering for a long time.

Maybe you should look at just how much things have improved over there since the beginning of the war. Nothing's perfect yet, nor will it be soon, but we're doing our damned best to leave things better off that when we first arrived there.

These terrorists sure as hell won't be doing anything of the sort.

P.S. i'm a white feamale living in canada and if i can get it what cant any one else!!!!

I don't think you "get it".
Not in the slightest.

China is a concern they have their tentacles as far as Tonga and are try9ing to look friendly to us and Oz.
I dont trust them.
Bloody fools backing up Mugabe.

A few months before the US attacked Irak, the Iraqi government decided to trade their oil in Euros.

And selling oil to which countries?

Considering that Irak has the second largest proven oil reserve in the world that would have been a blow to US possibilities to cover their deficit by printing money, specially if other oil exporters countries imitated Irak.

If we print more money, inflation will go up. Not something I would like to see happen since prices are high enough as it is.

After the US occupied Irak, the put an American in charge of the Iraqi oil and one of his first decisions (if not his first) was to trade the Iraqi oil back in USD.
Just for info.

For your information, we don't control Iraq (and that is how its spelled) oil reserve.

And the new Iraqi goverment is a puppet of the US, so that's that and there's nothing you say that will change it.

The Iraqi government isn't a puppet government Kuehenberg. Why do people still believe this utter nonsense?

Isn't it obvious? you invade a country, "free" it, and then it so happens a new democratic goverment raises to aid its people.

No its not obvious for the simple reason that it is false that Iraq is a puppet government when it isn't.

let us be honest america has a puppet goverment in Iraq and that statement is not influenced by anti-war opinions.

Same false statements, different day.

To say that China is engaging in a counter-hegemonic bid with the US would seem to make sense, but I don't believe that is the scenario. The PRC does not have the global reach required by a hegemon, and the construction of such a force would not only garner massive international attention, but devour large portions of the PRC's economy. Also their actions are rather conciliatory at times to the US.

This is why I would think that China is trying to become a regional hegemon, rather than a global one. But even this somewhat more subtle goal has it's issues, their names are Japan, the ROK, the ROC, Vietnam and India. Each and every single one of them has a big-time beef with the PRC. We all know the history between Japan and China, as well as the history between the ROC and the PRC, the ROK doesn't like China because, well, China tried to help the NKs knock over the ROK, doesn't get 'em on their good side. Besides a more recent nasty border war, Vietnam and China have centuries of hatred to go off of, so no friendship will be foud there, and India just doesn't like China. And they're a big nuclear power as well.

So, it would seem that even disregarding US possessions in the area, the Chinese attempt at a regional hegemonic bid is a really tough row to hoe, and if you toss in the ever class US aircraft carrier battlegroups, Saipan, Guam and the Phillipines (coming along for the ride) it's a double tough game for the PRC to play.

well since my grandfather was an officer there, he is a big influence in me

My father is an officer in the USAF and is in theater at the moment. I hear more good news about Iraq through him than I do through the media.

And no, the USA does not suck. It's you that suck because you wear our pants.

90% of all underwear ownded in Britain is made by M&S


use our phones.

Nokia, Seemains, Sony, Motoroloa. Of course they are American companies

Ah look. It's another "I hate America" thread that is typical on general.

The U.S. may verry well be a prosporus nation but they are doing so in a verry corrupt and illigal way, just like every other materilistic powerhouse in the world they get what they want no matter what the reprocution.

Illegal way? HAHAHAHAHAHAHA! Oh brother!

now most americans have it prety good they get thier 9-5 jobs, a suburban home, wife kids and a dog, they read the news and they only hear whatever the government wants them to know, wich isent 1\2 of whats realy terrible in the world, so they stay safe and happy in thier own little world.

Actually, my family has a Cat and I don't get my news from the Government. I get my news from many different sources. As for staying safe, no place is safe because anything can happen to you no matter what you do.

they dont realy get that in forin countrys thier borthers, sisters, fathers ect.. are invading another someoneelses home, and killing off thier dads and brothers demolishing thier houses, limiting thier electrisity and water,

As opposed to terrorists who have killed far more people through beheadings, suicide bombers, Road side bombs? Those kill brothers, fathers, sisters, brothers as well.

if anyone came into my town and started taking things over i would fight to the death to keep my home and my father and my brothers safe and not in war... nomatter how bad the government was befor,

Hate to break this to ya but if you have to fight to keep your town free, that is a technically a war. Anyone tries to take my country over will have one big fight on their hands.

we should look at the other side of the story not just our free white biast side of things, thoush people, the bombers and the hijackers there are someones family too, what are they fighting for?? maybe you should look at that

They are fighting for tyranny and oppression. Terrorists hate the freedoms we have and they want to bring the world under one great big extremist world government. Sorry. Not going to happen.

P.S. i'm a white feamale living in canada and if i can get it what cant any one else!!!!

There's your problem. Ever tried traveling outside of Canada? Ever tried to see what the real world is like? I have and I know people that have lost loved ones to keep my nation and all nations free from tyranny. I have relatives fighting right now that are keeping us free. Do you know how much freedom actually costs?

The mainstream news media in the US, CNN, FOX, NBC all have very limited coverage compared with the news in the "rest of the world". The news in the "rest of the world" usually start with a domestic section followed by an international section, giving people a heads up on events happening around the globe. While news in the US are very limited in this way. Compare an evening edition of the BBC with the news on FOX.

I know there are many other ways to get your news, but it is the mainstream media that is the most important and most influential to a nation's citizens. Most people will get their news and therefore their world view from the mainstream evening news or the daily newspapers, which has a very limited international coverage, while an escaped elephant from the zoo gets to be on the front page.

Since when did killing became the right thing to do? Even if you are killing "insurgents", "terrorists", and "fundamentalists". Not all Afghans and Iraqis are terrorists, not all Muslims are terrorists. If you invade a country there is bound to be innocent people that gets killed. Also, anything in any part of the world could in theory be connected to al-Qaida in some random way. Are you going to kill them off too? The "bad guys" (terrorists, fundamentalists, "people who want an evil new world order"), are a small percentage of people, in Afghanistan and in Iraq, is it correct to invade them and kill off many innocents because a small percentage's atrocities?

Pre 9.11, did Afghanistan and Iraq had anything to do with any average American's way of life? Most people probably didn't even know there was a country called Afghanistan! Name one instance when an Iraqi national violated your average Joe's American way of life. During previous wars, for example World War II, the Germans when invading their homes and killing the Jews off, so if they didn't fight back they would die. That is what I would say a need for a war. The Korean war and Vietnam war were fought because two neighbouring countries (North communist and South democratic) were to fend each other. Now the Iraq War, compared with the previous wars I've listed, does it even compare to the necessity of having a war? A giant prosperous superpower mostly English speaking on the western hemisphere fighting a much smaller Arabic speaking Old World nation in the desert. Most Americans don't even know a single Iraqi, much less making an Iraqi enemy!
* Iraq is spelt Irak in some other languages (French for example), not all people on this forum have English as their mother tongue.

The immediate threat after 9.11 was the al-Qaida organisation, with its leader Usama bin Laden, where is he now? Why didn't they make a deck of cards showing the faces on important al-Qaida cell leaders rather than a deck of cards of Iraqi Ba'ath party leaders? Usama bin Laden is still on the loose, that means he could still organise another 9.11! Meanwhile Americans are happy that Iraqis are now free. Where is the logic here, have Americans forgotten who the real threat behind 9.11 is?

Freeing Iraq as suggested by the name "Operation: Iraqi Freedom", taking the dictator out that is very nice of the US. But then, if Iraq's dictator was taken out because Bush Jr. promised to fight world tyranny, then why hasn't he attacked the rest of the world's dictators? In my opinion about half of the Presidents in Africa would be considered dictators by Bush Jr., then why didn't he attack Libya or Sudan or Somalia or Zimbabwe, or the Ivory Coast, in which genocides happen probably even more massive than Iraq's genocide? Or maybe is it because there is no oil in those African countries or incentives to turn the American economy for the better? In the end what the US considers dictators and oppressive governments, that is the view of those in power in the US, what the US is doing is trying to tell other countries that the only correct way to live is the American way. Put it simply, no one does anything simply based on "freeing people from world tyranny", that would simply be cheesy. They always do it because of some kind of incentive. Yet so many Americans today truely believe in Bush Jr.'s words "freeing people from world tyranny"? It astonishes me. It is not about hating America, after all America in its 200 year life has given the world probably more than any other nation, entity or culture. Bringing the human frontiere to the moon, radio, television, internet, Pollack, the Simpsons... But it is the policies of the US government and the policies of many big American corporations that the "rest of the world" hates.

The US calls China oppressive which could be, but for the average Chinese, I think it is a bit ridiculous. If the US ever think of invading my country in some future time calling it "Operation: China Freedom", I swear not only I would fight back, but the 1.3 billion Chinese including the unemployed factory workers and rural farmers would fight back.



-the Community of Espes-

I agree Espes. I would do anything protect China, even if it would cost me my life. Call me a jingoist, but I call it faith.

I agree Espes. I would do anything protect China, even if it would cost me my life. Call me a jingoist, but I call it faith.
You would? I wouldn't. Live to fight another day.

You would? I wouldn't. Live to fight another day.


To each his/her own. :rolleyes:

if china is on the verge of going bust then why has the goverment there just commisioned 300 coal power stations building up it's neuclear stockpile would a country going budt do this. I also think that the european union should be closer to china than america afterall china dont ask us to fight their wars

The US sucks, blah blah blah blah.. is that all you have to say? China is on the verge of bust... it's economy has already shown signs of overheating and it will face serious problems. 9% is an overestimated amount.. and is totally overblown. China suffers massive unemployment (some estimates put it at 20-25%, and underemployment. If you want to talk about corrupt, look at the Chinese government.

Additionally, the social situation in China is becoming a powder-keg. There have been increasing amounts of riots where protesters have stormed police buildings and police have been completely outnumbered.

sounds like someone can not admit that somewhare in the world a country just might begining to gain ground on America

if china is on the verge of going bust then why has the goverment there just commisioned 300 coal power stations building up it's neuclear stockpile would a country going budt do this. I also think that the european union should be closer to china than america afterall china dont ask us to fight their wars

AGREED :)

sounds like someone can not admit that somewhare in the world a country just might begining to gain ground on America

No, unlike you I actually look at the facts and the superficial nature of China's economic boom. China isn't gaining ground. In fact I'm concerned that economic mismanagement will begin to show its ugly face soon.

In fact I'm concerned that economic mismanagement will begin to show its ugly face soon.

You and me both! If Chinese economy goes down, it'll have world wide implications. *begins to save money*

You and me both! If Chinese economy goes down, it'll have world wide implications. *begins to save money*

In my opinion it'll be a more of a gradual thing and China's economy will eventually grind to a halt. Capital flight will occur and businesses will find elsewhere.

The Korean war and Vietnam war were fought because two neighbouring countries (North communist and South democratic) were to fend each other.

Democratic? The reason why the US and the west supported South Korea and South Vietnam is because they were Anti-Communist, not democratic. Both were just as bad as the communist governments to the north. Fortunately for South Korea there government granted it people more and more rights until there was democracy. This took about 40 years. If South Vietnam had not been invaded would it be like South Korea today? Who knows.

China and Vietnam could very well follow the same path now that they are taking the capitalist road( And I hope it does)

Democratic? The reason why the US and the west supported South Korea and South Vietnam is because they were Anti-Communist, not democratic. Both were just as bad as the communist governments to the north. Fortunately for South Korea there government granted it people more and more rights until there was democracy. This took about 40 years. If South Vietnam had not been invaded would it be like South Korea today? Who knows.

China and Vietnam could very well follow the same path now that they are taking the capitalist road( And I hope it does)

Anti-communist is a lot more democratic then pro-communist in my opinion. I have a low opinion of South Vietnam, but I think South Korea was just fine. Again that was the transititon period, to prevent a slide to communism. If south vietnam was still around.. their economy would be better off.

Anti-communist is a lot more democratic then pro-communist in my opinion. I have a low opinion of South Vietnam, but I think South Korea was just fine. Again that was the transititon period, to prevent a slide to communism. If south vietnam was still around.. their economy would be better off.

I agree if your refering to Soviet Socialism or Maoism, which is pretty much fascism. Communism should not have been attempted in asia or Russia for that matter.

Anyway: Back to the topic at hand.

China becoming a superpower. Despite the problems it faces today(like all developing nations) i believe the future is fairly bright for them. Perhaps by 2040-2050 the will be an economic superpower. That is a long way off and anything could happen.

China becoming a superpower. Despite the problems it faces today(like all developing nations) i believe the future is fairly bright for them. Perhaps by 2040-2050 the will be an economic superpower. That is a long way off and anything could happen.

WEEE! That'll be the day. :)

I agree if your refering to Soviet Socialism or Maoism, which is pretty much fascism. Communism should not have been attempted in asia or Russia for that matter.

You don't know what I'm referring to.


China becoming a superpower. Despite the problems it faces today(like all developing nations) i believe the future is fairly bright for them. Perhaps by 2040-2050 the will be an economic superpower. That is a long way off and anything could happen.

The future is not bright. In fact they'll have a huge population of elderly they'll have to care for. Something like 28% of the population in a few decades.. so tell me.. how will it happen when they don't have the social infrastructure? They need to experience a population decline before they can be a superpower. They aren't becoming one.

You don't know what I'm referring to.



The future is not bright. In fact they'll have a huge population of elderly they'll have to care for. Something like 28% of the population in a few decades.. so tell me.. how will it happen when they don't have the social infrastructure? They need to experience a population decline before they can be a superpower. They aren't becoming one.

This is why they need to develop economically ASAP. Social infrastructure can only be developed with an economy, they will no doubt will develop social infrastructure if their economy contunues to grow. They must, a developed society cannot prosper without it.

You don't know what I'm referring to. Ok. What are you refering too?

This is why they need to develop economically ASAP. Social infrastructure can only be developed with an economy, they will no doubt will develop social infrastructure if their economy contunues to grow. They must, a developed society cannot prosper without it.

Social infrastructure to support 300 million over the age of 60? I don't think it is feesible. China's problems will only continue to grow. Especially when the economy enters its final stage of overheating. After that there will be a recession.

Ok. What are you refering too?[/QUOTE]

If that happens, which won't because the life expectancy in some parts are unbelievably low, then China still have them working for their money. The major public won't be bothered with maintaining them. You're also forgetting that we're not playing the stock market; we're playing business economics. IF say, China does overheat in it's production, and creates more than needed, then it would make sense that they would not produce any more to the general public. My rambling might be faulty somewhere, but i'll explain later, cause I'm eating.

If that happens, which won't because the life expectancy in some parts are unbelievably low, then China still have them working for their money. The major public won't be bothered with maintaining them. You're also forgetting that we're not playing the stock market; we're playing business economics. IF say, China does overheat in it's production, and creates more than needed, then it would make sense that they would not produce any more to the general public. My rambling might be faulty somewhere, but i'll explain later, cause I'm eating.

Ignorance is bliss.

http://www.columbia.edu/~bcp26/web-graphics/ch_all2.gif

http://www.columbia.edu/~bcp26/web-pages/problems.html

"By 2050, there will be many more retired people to support than there will be people to work and support them. Additionally, Gabe T. Wang emphasizes that “While in developed countries aging occurs after their economy is already highly developed, China’s aging will take place before the economy has become well developed” (Wang 194). This means that the economic infrastructure necessary to care for the growing aging population has not yet been implemented.

Based on United Nations statistics and data provided by the Chinese government, it was estimated in 1987 that in 2000, the population over 60 years old (the retirement age is 60 in urban areas) would number 127 million, or 10.1 percent of the total population. The projection for 2025 was 234 million elderly, or 16.4 percent. According to one Western analyst, projections based on the 1982 census show that if the one-child policy were maintained to the year 2000, 25 percent of China's population would be age 65 or older by the year 2040."

---

Your rambling is faulty everywhere. If Chinese overproduces that causes inflation, and eventually hyper-inflation which would cause civil unrest. Civil unrest leads to capital flight. You don't know much about business economics really. I presented plenty of sources.

Check the bolded section of the text I provided. That's going to be one hell of a problem.

There have been many well thought out and informative posts in this thread.

There have also been many pointless ones.

China is now a major player in the world, this is a fact as otherwise we wouldn't even be debating this right now.

The question's are;

1) Whether China will ever reach the economic and military strength neccasary to challenge America,

Maybe someday is the general consensus amongst most economists, China has a helluva a lot of Problems,

The encroaching desert, the energy security problem, mass unemployment, corruption, bureaucracy, Civil Liberties, the ageing population, tensions with Taiwan, an approaching Aids epidemic, declining water table and much more. but these problems aren't insurmountable. They can be met and overcome, and on some of them the government seems to be doing a good job. On others not so good.

So thats why China's ultimate future is still in doubt, but it does have the opportunity to become a superpower. No one knows whether it will.

And 2) Whether this is a good thing.

This is even vaguer then my first answer.

I support the idea of having no single dominant power in the world, which is why I would support a competitor to the USA, HOWEVER I would not like that competitor to be an undemocratic nation with no respect for peoples rights or peoples lives. This applies to their own citizens as well as foreigners.

However the economies of China and the USA are so interlinked right now that it's hard to imagine them declaring war on each other. However that's easier to do when you don't have an electorate to appease.

In addition I'm liking China's foreign policies even less then I like America's right now, war in Tibet, opportunistically seizing part of Kashmir, arming Tibetan rebels, fighting with Russia and Japan over islands with oil reserves, supporting dictators in Africa in order to get preferential treatment over oil supplies.

Remind you of anyone?

What makes anybody think that if China was the sole superpower they'd behave any better then the US? I think they'd be a great deal worse.

All the other questions are kinda pointless and are just clouding up the debate.

But for my money someone claimed India is less corrupt then China :eek:

... You've never been there have you? :)

You think a country with a relatively underdeveloped economy.. and that has little social structure.. can deal with 300+ million people over the age of 60 by 2040? China's troubles are more then what you want to admit.

You think a country with a relatively underdeveloped economy.. and that has little social structure.. can deal with 300+ million people over the age of 60 by 2040? China's troubles are more then what you want to admit.

Perhaps the rise of China troubles you more then you like to admit? :P

Perhaps the rise of China troubles you more then you like to admit? :P

It doesn't frighten me at all though their economy collapsing scares me.

I don't think their economy will collapse. The aging crisis will put heavy strain on their economy... the one child policy did lower birthrates, but also set up this crisis.

even if china's economy colapses there economy in the 1980's was a 40th of what it is now they have built it up this much now and they will build it up again also china is not blind if they see that the one baby policy is halting there economy they will lift the ban

even if china's economy colapses there economy in the 1980's was a 40th of what it is now they have built it up this much now and they will build it up again also china is not blind if they see that the one baby policy is halting there economy they will lift the ban

Use some periods. I don't undrestand what you are trying to say.