Russia invades Georgia

[Matteo Martini]

How bizarre.

I must be deluded. I was pretty sure that all five permanent security council members had veto power. I must be wrong. It must just be the USA.

Or does the USA's veto power grant them more power than China or Russia's veto?

Why three Christian and no Islamic country in the SC?

So now you are changing your argument from GDP to GDP at purchasing power parity. That is moving the goal posts but lets compare this:

China - USD 5,300 (2007)
USA - USD 45,800 (2007)


Does this really help your argument?

This really helps:

Year GDP(yuan) GDP growth Yuan per USD China GDP China+HK/Ma US GDP 2007 24.66 11.9% 7.3 3.38 3.7 13.8 Jul08 26.3 6.85 3.83 4.2 Past GermanyOct08 26.7 6.65 4.0 4.452008 27.3 10.2% 6.35 4.3 4.8 14.0 2009 30.1 9.8% 5.62 5.4 5.9 14.2 Pass Japan2010 33.7 9.5% 5.11 6.6 7.1 14.62011 37.0 9.5% 4.64 8.0 8.5 15.02012 40.6 9.5% 4.26 9.5 10.0 15.42013 44.2 9.0% 3.91 11.3 11.8 15.92014 48.2 9.0% 3.72 13.0 13.5 16.42015 52.0 8.0% 3.54 14.7 15.2 16.92016 56.2 8.0% 3.53 16.7 17.2 17.4 Passing USA2017 60.4 7.5% 3.38 18.8 19.4 17.9 Past USA2018 64.2 7.0% 3.20 20.9 21.5 18.42019 69.2 7.0% 3.09 23.0 23.6 19.0 2020 74.0 7.0% 3.0 25.2 25.8 19.62021 78.4 6.0% 2.9 27.2 27.8 20.22022 83.1 6.0% 2.9 29.4 30.0 20.82023 87.3 5.0% 2.8 31.5 32.2 21.42024 91.7 5.0% 2.8 33.7 34.4 22.02025 96.3 5.0% 2.7 36.1 36.8 22.72026 101.1 5.0% 2.6 38.7 39.4 23.4 2027 106.1 5.0% 2.6 41.4 42.1 24.12028 111.4 5.0% 2.5 44.4 45.1 24.82029 117.0 5.0% 2.5 47.5 48.2 25.52030 122.8 5.0% 2.4 50.9 51.6 26.3 Close to double USA

http://nextbigfuture.com/2008/07/carnegie-endowment-makes-conservative.html

I did, but I also read the sentence you're ignoring, and the previous point which you ignored.

The issue is time, not money. No one is doubting China can afford to buy a bunch of stuff.

The question is "from whom?".

If I have fifty trillion dollars, can I buy 250 Aston Martin N400 roadsters?

No I can't. Because there's only 240. I could probably convince Aston Martin to make me 10 more, but that would take time.

And of course this is assuming the 240 current owners of those N400s are happy to sell.

You do not understand.
China does not build a huge army as they do not NEED one.
They have good relationship with all their neighbours.
They do not pretend to be number one.
They have a modest approach in foreign policy.
In the same time, they are building a huge credit with the US, as they do not spend hundreds of billions of dollars per year in their army.
And they are building up their ecnomony, which grows at 10% rate at a time when the US economy is doing bad.
In 10-15 years, China`s GDP will approach US` and then things will change.
The US will have another big rival that have grown under their feet.
And Americans do not realize what it is happening.

 

[Matteo Martini]

How bizarre.

I must be deluded. I was pretty sure that all five permanent security council members had veto power. I must be wrong. It must just be the USA.

Or does the USA's veto power grant them more power than China or Russia's veto?

Question, what do you think would happen if a resolution was drafted in the security council making Russia's actions in Georgia illegal? Surely the UN, "basically America and the West" would pass it fine yes? Because Russia only has a "little bit" of control?

You're talking drivel.

The USA has precisely as much control of the UN as Russia, France, China, and the UK. No more, no less.

France and UK are pro US
China has a modest approach in foreign policy
Russia do not want to upset the West.
Unless you put missiles right next to their door.
But, most important, THE US CARES OF UN RESOLUTIONS ONLY IF AND WHEN THEY WANT TO CARE

 

[Ziggurat]

Why three Christian and no Islamic country in the SC?

First off, you're wrong: there are Islamic countries in the security council. The security council consists of more than just the permanent members. As to why there are no Islamic countries among the permanent members, it's because there were no Islamic countries of significant power when the UN was formed, because Islamic countries were pretty much all backwards and underdeveloped (as most of them still are).

You do not understand.
China does not build a huge army as they do not NEED one.

Wow, are you clueless. First you talk about how China could do all this stuff with their military that they clearly cannot, and now you say that they can't because they never wanted to. Well, you're still wrong. China's army is HUGE. What it isn't is very mobile or well-equiped. But they most certainly need a big one, because the army is what keeps the communist party in power.

They have good relationship with all their neighbours.

Uh, no they don't. They swallowed one of their neighbors by force (Tibet), they've been to war with another (India), they have spotty relations with Russia, and a bloody history with Vietnam. And they regularly threaten to invade one of their neighbors (Taiwan), and only haven't because they can't win if they tried. It's quite amusing to see you try to paint a communist dictatorship as being morally superior to us, though. Always good for a laugh.

They do not pretend to be number one.

Yeah, well, when you're NOT number one, that's not exactly impressive.

They have a modest approach in foreign policy.

Commensurate with their "modest" capabilities.

And they are building up their ecnomony, which grows at 10% rate at a time when the US economy is doing bad.

Fast growth is easy when you start so low down.

In 10-15 years, China`s GDP will approach US` and then things will change.

Lots of things will change in 10-15 years. China is also heading towards demographic problems that we don't have.

The US will have another big rival that have grown under their feet.
And Americans do not realize what it is happening.

Many don't. But many do. Once again you amuse inadvertently, by trying to paint other people as clueless.

 

[DC]

China is not Communist :/

 

[Ziggurat]

China is not Communist :/

In the sense that nobody has (or will, or even can) ever achieve "true" communism, sure. But they call themselves communists, and they act politically like every other government which has called itself communist. So I'll take them at their word, so to speak.

 

[BeAChooser]

In 10-15 years, China`s GDP will approach US` and then things will change.

I've heard some whoppers in my time but that's a good one.

The GDP of China was $3.3 trillion dollars.

The GDP of the US in 2007 was $13.8 trillion.

China's GDP grew about 11.4 percent in 2007.

The US' GDP grew about 2.4 percent.

For China's GDP to even approach ours (grow to $16.7 trillion versus $19.7 trillion) in the next 15 years, they'd have to sustain that growth rate. But it is very unlikely they can.

More likely, China's GDP growth will begin to level off ... constrained if nothing else by resources which they have gobbled up to this point with few restrictions and damage to the environment which is growing noticeable. Consumer demand will also begin to play havoc with their ability to allocate the resources needed to sustain double digit industrial growth. So say their average GDP over the period in question is only 3 times ours (7.2%). In that case China's GDP in 15 years would only be $9.36 trillion, less than half ours. And who is to say that our growth will remain at such a low rate. We've had periods with double that growth rate.

China's growth is largely driven by two things ... the movement of workers from rural agriculture into higher productivity jobs and the large investment to GDP ratio. But the first can only happen once. And it brings with it, it's own set of problems. One being growing expectations which make it difficult to sustain the second. China is going to become a consumption economy and when that happens growth rates will drop markedly.

There is also the issue of China's authoritarian government. That government must inherently fear change and restrict freedoms. They can't operate a truly free market without risking loss of their leader's control over the populace. That being the case, I'm highly skeptical that China will be where you think it will be in 15 years. But should China change it's way of government and become more like ours ... then more power to them. I have no problem with China being free, prosperous and tourist friendly. And if they motivate us to do better ... say with their program to land on the moon ... good for them and us.

By the way, we've heard this claim before ... that an asian economy was going to overtake ours. Last time it was Japan. Japan, Japan, Japan is all we heard about for years. But that didn't happen, did it. And Japan has none of the big problems that China has. Like 800 million poverty level farmers. And an authoritarian government.

 

[Darth Rotor]

Nailed.

Matteo, who made the founding of the UN possible, and who funded and endorsed it, and nursed it to adulthood, and established its bona fides (however imperfect) with the UN intervention in Korea?

Compare that to its forefather, the League of Nations, and you might want to thank the US -- and the Presidents Roosevelt, Truman, and Eisenhower, for propping up the stuffed shirts and self important intellectuals who fill the halls of the UN building, and allowing that global organization to grow.

Prego, they would say to you, if you had that much manners.

DR

 

[CapelDodger]

In the sense that nobody has (or will, or even can) ever achieve "true" communism, sure. But they call themselves communists, and they act politically like every other government which has called itself communist. So I'll take them at their word, so to speak.

There may not yet be a name for the Chinese system. Unlike the Warsaw Pact systems, which went straight from communist to capitalist, the Chinese system has never cracked. It has bent into a new shape, and is no doubt still bending.

As far as I know China has never applied for NATO membership.

 

[CapelDodger]

Did it? Or has it only morphed into something else?

The Evil Empire as meaning the Warsaw Pact countries, that was a major change. The Evil Empire as the USSR, that changed a lot too. What we're left with is Russia. Which is traditionally a Great Power.

Let's remember that Putin is KGB.

Let's remember he doesn't rule Ukraine or Georgia or the 'Stans. That Empire is history.

 

[CapelDodger]

i partially agree, but Israel was accepted by the UNO.

The UN of 1948 was not remotely like the UN we know and mock today. Most of today's members weren't even countries at the time, they were imperial possessions. The Soviets had three votes and were in favour to stick it to the British. The Latin American members were a US payroll vote, the European members asked what the US would like and anyway saw nothing unusual in colonising dusky-folk places. Cuba voted against. China didn't give a toss. The Philippines would have voted against, but were threatened with a cut-off of aid. Allegedly.

The UN of 1948 is not something to argue legitimacy from. Especially since the UN became an Israeli bogey-man as those post-imperial countries joined it. Not surprisingly, they tended to empathise with the colonised dusky-folk.

The UN of today is a running joke in many ways, but NATO is a running joke in every way at the moment.

 

[BeAChooser]

What we're left with is Russia.

Which is controlled by what was once the KGB.

 

[geni]

Hmm in 2007 the UK sold £5.4 million of militry kit to georgia and £55 million to Russia. All in all that suggests that on one level at least we did okey in the conflict.

 

[geni]

By the way, we've heard this claim before ... that an asian economy was going to overtake ours. Last time it was Japan. Japan, Japan, Japan is all we heard about for years. But that didn't happen, did it. And Japan has none of the big problems that China has. Like 800 million poverty level farmers. And an authoritarian government.

800 million povertly level farmers is just 800 million more times you can move people to higher productivity jobs.

 

[geni]

In the sense that nobody has (or will, or even can) ever achieve "true" communism, sure. But they call themselves communists, and they act politically like every other government which has called itself communist. So I'll take them at their word, so to speak.

What they call them selves is irrelivant otherwise North Korea is a democracy.

China is also behaveing nothing like a conventional communist nation with their heavily state run industries and low to zero tollerence for private enterprise. China is probably best viewed as an autocratic/technocratic capitalist state.

 

[Ziggurat]

What they call them selves is irrelivant otherwise North Korea is a democracy.

Except that they don't behave like actual democracies we see in the world. So adjusting the definition to fit one use doesn't make sense in that case. Furthermore, the party in charge in North Korea still calls itself the communist party.

China is also behaveing nothing like a conventional communist nation with their heavily state run industries and low to zero tollerence for private enterprise. China is probably best viewed as an autocratic/technocratic capitalist state.

Which is why I explicitly mentioned politics in reference to their behavior. They've let go of much of the economic insanity of traditional communism, but the firm party control and lack of individual freedom and rights most definitely remains. So as long as they keep doing that, AND keep calling themselves communists, I'll call them communists as well.

 

[Matteo Martini]

First off, you're wrong: there are Islamic countries in the security council. The security council consists of more than just the permanent members. As to why there are no Islamic countries among the permanent members, it's because there were no Islamic countries of significant power when the UN was formed, because Islamic countries were pretty much all backwards and underdeveloped (as most of them still are).

You are right.
I did not specify I was speaking about permanent members

Wow, are you clueless. First you talk about how China could do all this stuff with their military that they clearly cannot, and now you say that they can't because they never wanted to. Well, you're still wrong. China's army is HUGE. What it isn't is very mobile or well-equiped. But they most certainly need a big one, because the army is what keeps the communist party in power.

China spends lots less than America on the military

Uh, no they don't. They swallowed one of their neighbors by force (Tibet),

70 years ago

they've been to war with another (India),

Not really

they have spotty relations with Russia,

Not now

and a bloody history with Vietnam.

Not even close to what the US has

And they regularly threaten to invade one of their neighbors (Taiwan),

But they did not

and only haven't because they can't win if they tried.

Keep dreaming

It's quite amusing to see you try to paint a communist dictatorship as being morally superior to us, though. Always good for a laugh.

Putting words in my mouth

Yeah, well, when you're NOT number one, that's not exactly impressive.

We will talk back in few years

Commensurate with their "modest" capabilities.

And their "modest" economic growth

Fast growth is easy when you start so low down.

They have passed Germany this year.
And they will pass Japan in 2-3 years

Lots of things will change in 10-15 years. China is also heading towards demographic problems that we don't have.

China average age is very low

Many don't. But many do. Once again you amuse inadvertently, by trying to paint other people as clueless.

Yawn..

 

[Matteo Martini]

I've heard some whoppers in my time but that's a good one.

The GDP of China was $3.3 trillion dollars.

The GDP of the US in 2007 was $13.8 trillion.

China's GDP grew about 11.4 percent in 2007.

The US' GDP grew about 2.4 percent.

For China's GDP to even approach ours (grow to $16.7 trillion versus $19.7 trillion) in the next 15 years, they'd have to sustain that growth rate. But it is very unlikely they can.

Very likely that they can.
They have 1 T USD in their banks of US dollars in their banks
They have a currency undervalued 30% or more

More likely, China's GDP growth will begin to level off ... constrained if nothing else by resources which they have gobbled up to this point with few restrictions and damage to the environment which is growing noticeable. Consumer demand will also begin to play havoc with their ability to allocate the resources needed to sustain double digit industrial growth. So say their average GDP over the period in question is only 3 times ours (7.2%). In that case China's GDP in 15 years would only be $9.36 trillion, less than half ours. And who is to say that our growth will remain at such a low rate. We've had periods with double that growth rate.

Yes, LOOONG time ago

China's growth is largely driven by two things ... the movement of workers from rural agriculture into higher productivity jobs and the large investment to GDP ratio. But the first can only happen once. And it brings with it, it's own set of problems. One being growing expectations which make it difficult to sustain the second. China is going to become a consumption economy and when that happens growth rates will drop markedly.

No.
Growth rate will be the same, but it will be driven by internal demand and not external

There is also the issue of China's authoritarian government. That government must inherently fear change and restrict freedoms. They can't operate a truly free market without risking loss of their leader's control over the populace. That being the case, I'm highly skeptical that China will be where you think it will be in 15 years. But should China change it's way of government and become more like ours ... then more power to them. I have no problem with China being free, prosperous and tourist friendly. And if they motivate us to do better ... say with their program to land on the moon ... good for them and us.

You will not be able to invede other countries..
I agree that may be a good thing

By the way, we've heard this claim before ... that an asian economy was going to overtake ours. Last time it was Japan. Japan, Japan, Japan is all we heard about for years. But that didn't happen, did it. And Japan has none of the big problems that China has. Like 800 million poverty level farmers. And an authoritarian government.

Are you so stupid, or pretend to be so?
Look at the population of China

 

[Matteo Martini]

Matteo, who made the founding of the UN possible, and who funded and endorsed it, and nursed it to adulthood, and established its bona fides (however imperfect) with the UN intervention in Korea?

Bona fides..
WHAT?

 

[geni]

Lots of things will change in 10-15 years. China is also heading towards demographic problems that we don't have.

Western nations do have them but to a lesser extent.

 

[geni]

70 years ago

Have they left?

Not really

Yes really. There is a reason India's nuclear abilities point at more than pakistan.

Not now

they still don't exactly get on.

But they did not

Haven't so far would be closer.

China average age is very low

Doesn't matter. That one child policy while justifiable still creates a demographic mess.