• Quick note - the problem with Youtube videos not embedding on the forum appears to have been fixed, thanks to ZiprHead. If you do still see problems let me know.

China: Next Superpower?

Tony

Penultimate Amazing
Joined
Mar 5, 2003
Messages
15,410
http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/asia-pacific/3763370.stm...full article

Through a combination of economic dynamism, skilful diplomacy and understated threat, it is already regaining much of its old imperial supremacy across Asia.

Filling the void left by the former Soviet Union, it has also emerged as the likeliest challenger to the United States as a global superpower.


Having the Asian bandwagon behind it has greatly strengthened China's claims as a global power, but others should be on their guard, according to Barry Buzan, professor of international relations at the London School of Economics.

"The Chinese want to rise quietly and gently - but whether they will change once they arrive is an open question," he said.

"Hyper-nationalism" was "seething below the surface," he added, and there were "striking comparisons" with the rise of pre-war Germany.

Others say China is now firmly wedded to the same free-market principles as America.


I see no reason why the rise of China should precipitate a hostile confrontation. Unfortunately, idiots in power on both sides will probably end up taking it to that level, ultimately killing us all.
 
IMO any conflict between China and the United States will not be military. Instead I believe it will be economic. At the moment there is a HUGE trade imbalance between the US and China. The only reason that it can be maintained is that the Chinese are not re-patriating their money, instead they're investing it in the US.

At some future point in time, if the US is trying to do something with which the Chinese are not happy, they can threaten to pull out their investments, cause the dollar to crash and turn US government bonds into junk bonds. The effect on the global economy would be profound.

What is more alarming is if the Chinese seek to expand their influence and proactively seek US acquiescence for some terrible policy under threat of economic armageddon.

Either way, the U.S. needs to try to close the trade gap to prevent this state of affairs coming about.
 
The Don said:
At some future point in time, if the US is trying to do something with which the Chinese are not happy, they can threaten to pull out their investments, cause the dollar to crash and turn US government bonds into junk bonds. The effect on the global economy would be profound.
Sounds like economic suicide for a nation dependant on export markets.
 
Michael Redman said:
Sounds like economic suicide for a nation dependant on export markets.
Depends how annoyed the Chinese are how important it is for them to make whatever point it was they were trying to make. After all, during WWI the British were quite happy to put themselves in severe financial difficulties because they felt that the cause was sufficiently important.

It also depends on whether or not it has a major impact on their other export markets.

The scenario could go something like:

- The US, sick of their markets being swamped with cheap imports, puts tariffs in place to protect home markets
- China, annoyed by this, threatens to pull out investment (after all reciprocal tariffs would be pointless)
 
The Don said:
IMO any conflict between China and the United States will not be military. Instead I believe it will be economic. At the moment there is a HUGE trade imbalance between the US and China. The only reason that it can be maintained is that the Chinese are not re-patriating their money, instead they're investing it in the US.

At some future point in time, if the US is trying to do something with which the Chinese are not happy, they can threaten to pull out their investments, cause the dollar to crash and turn US government bonds into junk bonds. The effect on the global economy would be profound.

What is more alarming is if the Chinese seek to expand their influence and proactively seek US acquiescence for some terrible policy under threat of economic armageddon.

Either way, the U.S. needs to try to close the trade gap to prevent this state of affairs coming about.

God save us from armchair economists.:rolleyes:
 
In China Bill Gates is treated like Brittany Spears, in the U.S.

While in the U.S. Bruttany Spears is treated like Brittany Spears. And Bill Gates represents all that is evil. So who do you think will win an economic war?
 
SRW said:
In China Bill Gates is treated like Brittany Spears, in the U.S.

While in the U.S. Bruttany Spears is treated like Brittany Spears. And Bill Gates represents all that is evil. So who do you think will win an economic war?

Brittany Spears could mop the earth with Bill Gates.
 
TragicMonkey said:
Brittany Spears could mop the earth with Bill Gates.


Funny they used to say the same of Madonna, Er Ester, whatever her name is now.
 
SRW said:
In China Bill Gates is treated like Brittany Spears, in the U.S.

While in the U.S. Bruttany Spears is treated like Brittany Spears. And Bill Gates represents all that is evil. So who do you think will win an economic war?
In the US, Bill Gates amasses the world's largest personal fortune as reward for his pioneering innovation and business saavy. In China, those who advocate for the freedom to follow their dreams are run over by tanks.
 
Michael Redman said:
In the US, Bill Gates amasses the world's largest personal fortune as reward for his pioneering innovation and business saavy. In China, those who advocate for the freedom to follow their dreams are run over by tanks.


Don't be silly! The Chinese are Most Favored:

"Trade is a force for change in China, exposing China to our ideas and our ideals, and integrating China into the global economy," Clinton said.

http://www.cnn.com/ALLPOLITICS/1998/06/03/china.trade/

Surely both a Democratic president and a Republican Speaker of the House wouldn't unite in bipartisan support of China if China were in any way naughty, would they?
 
The Don said:
At some future point in time, if the US is trying to do something with which the Chinese are not happy, they can threaten to pull out their investments, cause the dollar to crash and turn US government bonds into junk bonds. The effect on the global economy would be profound.
Well, there are several problems with that analysis. First, for the Chinese to "pull out their investments", they would have to find buyers for their investments. With the exception of investments with put options, there would not be a decrease in the investment in the US. This may cause a decrease in future investment in the US, but not a decrease in current investment. Secondly, a "junk bond" is one in which the guarantor has a high probability of defaulting. While the Chinese dumping US bonds would probably lower the price, it would have no direct effect on whether US bonds are junk. Furthermore, unless Chinese investment is articficially inflating the price, other investors would snap up the bonds, reducing the price drop. And any price drop that does occur will hit China most directly, since it be taking a loss on the bonds. Finally, it is rather difficult to "quarantine" money in today's economy. If the Chinese pull out of the US, where are they going to put their money? If they invest it in another country, that country is just going to invest it in the US, and take a middleman profit.

And I find it odd that people talk of a "trade-imbalance" between the US and China, as if such a thing were possible. For instance, when you use the term, you are excluding investments in the US from the trade equation. If you were to include all the purchases made by both sides, there would be no trade imbalance.


What is more alarming is if the Chinese seek to expand their influence and proactively seek US acquiescence for some terrible policy under threat of economic armageddon.

Either way, the U.S. needs to try to close the trade gap to prevent this state of affairs coming about. [/B][/QUOTE]
 
Michael Redman said:
In the US, Bill Gates amasses the world's largest personal fortune as reward for his pioneering innovation and business saavy. In China, those who advocate for the freedom to follow their dreams are run over by tanks.

It will be and intresting few years, if your worried about it I suggest you do what I am doing and learn Chinese. You may make a few buck out of it all.

http://www.suntimes.com/output/otherviews/cst-edt-ref09.html

China's Ministry of Commerce has reported that U.S. firms have invested more than $40 billion in more than 40,000 projects in China. As international businessman George F. Gilroy noted recently in Foreign Affairs, China's economic dependence on foreign direct investment gives the United States powerful negotiating tools on trade and related issues.

The opening of the Chinese economy has been very different from our experience in Japan, Korea and other Asian countries and has cleared the way for the United States to tap into China's huge labor pool and domestic market.

Before China can become an effective competitor to the United States, it must first overcome its Maoist legacy of corruption, inadequate infrastructure, weak financial institutions and the political rigidities of a one-party state.
 
SRW said:
China's Ministry of Commerce has reported that U.S. firms have invested more than $40 billion in more than 40,000 projects in China. As international businessman George F. Gilroy noted recently in Foreign Affairs, China's economic dependence on foreign direct investment gives the United States powerful negotiating tools on trade and related issues.
I genuinely don't know, what size is the trade imbalance with China ?
 
SRW said:
It will be and intresting few years, if your worried about it I suggest you do what I am doing and learn Chinese. You may make a few buck out of it all.


FWIW the university I attend started offering "Chinese for Economists" classes this semester...
 
The Don said:
I genuinely don't know, what size is the trade imbalance with China ?

64,034,904,232 give or take a few yen.
 
Michael Redman said:
In the US, Bill Gates amasses the world's largest personal fortune as reward for his pioneering innovation and business saavy. In China, those who advocate for the freedom to follow their dreams are run over by tanks.


That was the old China..in the New China, the party approved slogan is 'It is glorious to be wealthy'...and they aren't planning on have a country with millions of independent capitalists either...they just want to Borg the global economy.
 

Back
Top Bottom