Should Europe Go To War With America?

[PLATO]

Without Russian co-operation Europe looses everytime in the end. Europe simply doesn't have the oil to compete. The US has quite a bit of oil and has a vast strategic oilfield complex in the Western US. Natural resources in the US generally dwarf those of Europe in most basic resorces. Things like Titanium from Southern Africa could be immediately secured with US initial logistical superiority. That would be the end of European competitive air power. Initial US advantage in long range bombers and in-air refueling would allow them to get a large jump on European manufacturing ramp up. US ramp up could keep Europe from being able to compete in war material manufacture. Europe just can't win.

[Theben]

On second thought I'll opt out of the nuclear exchange bit. With our pres it'd take too long for his staff to figure out newkular=nuclear we'd be radioactive dust by the time we retaliate.

[yavoon]

Originally posted by el freako




That's a classic - someone accusing me of abusing statistics!
You will notice that the vast majority of my posts are to point out when people have either misunderstood or misinterpreted statistics.



True, just as the US has no desire or politucal will to make an enemy of europe.

I never claimed it did. for the second time stop impaling urself on the thread title. its really embarassing.

and lets look at ur statistic.

me:china is dependant on american consumerisn so they wont like europe attacking the US
u:china has added more to the economy over the last 5 years[therefore u r wrong and china is not dependant on US consumerism]

now how many sane ppl need to examine this? I mean **** dawg. china pegs its currency just so it makes sure it has an export viable economy!

u r really sad.

[GePap]

Originally posted by PLATO
Without Russian co-operation Europe looses everytime in the end. Europe simply doesn't have the oil to compete. The US has quite a bit of oil and has a vast strategic oilfield complex in the Western US. Natural resources in the US generally dwarf those of Europe in most basic resorces. Things like Titanium from Southern Africa could be immediately secured with US initial logistical superiority. That would be the end of European competitive air power. Initial US advantage in long range bombers and in-air refueling would allow them to get a large jump on European manufacturing ramp up. US ramp up could keep Europe from being able to compete in war material manufacture. Europe just can't win.

Or they just nuke us, and we are all dead.

[GePap]

Originally posted by yavoon


I never claimed it did. for the second time stop impaling urself on the thread title. its really embarassing.

and lets look at ur statistic.

me:china is dependant on american consumerisn so they wont like europe attacking the US
u:china has added more to the economy over the last 5 years[therefore u r wrong and china is not dependant on US consumerism]

now how many sane ppl need to examine this? I mean **** dawg. china pegs its currency just so it makes sure it has an export viable economy!

u r really sad.

If I had to choose who has a better grasp of economics, you or el freako, sorry, but el freako wins 100 times out of 100.

[PLATO]

Originally posted by GePap


Or they just nuke us, and we are all dead.

There is that of course

[yavoon]

Originally posted by GePap


If I had to choose who has a better grasp of economics, you or el freako, sorry, but el freako wins 100 times out of 100.

so china is not dependant on US consumerism?

or are we just buddying up? if its one thing I dislike its a ********ing hangon

[PLATO]

Chinas economic model is expananding off of US consumerism. The government controlled economy (yes it really is still controlled by the government) could manage the loss of US dollars far easier than we would like to think. That argument boils down to what your definition of "dependent" is

[GePap]

Originally posted by yavoon


so china is not dependant on US consumerism?

or are we just buddying up? if its one thing I dislike its a ********ing hangon

From my experience on this forum, from seeing people participate on dozens of economic threads, I know a few people here know more than others, Adam Smith, DanS, and el freako. You, on the other hand, are way behind.

China's economy has been growing 8-9% for a decade- such growth could never have been sustained simply by US consumers. China has consumers world wide- it is now the biggest traiding partner with SK- it has a growing internal market (most important). Would loosing US markets slow down China significantly? Yes, but China would still continue to grow if it traded with the rest of the world, given that the rest of the world makes up 75% of the world economy and China would retain its edge in various fields vs. Europe and Japan, also big customers.

[joncha]

Originally posted by yavoon


so china is not dependant on US consumerism?

or are we just buddying up? if its one thing I dislike its a ********ing hangon

So you prefer your partner doesn't hold on to you during fellatio. What does this have to do with the thread?

jon.

[yavoon]

Originally posted by GePap


From my experience on this forum, from seeing people participate on dozens of economic threads, I know a few people here know more than others, Adam Smith, DanS, and el freako. You, on the other hand, are way behind.

China's economy has been growing 8-9% for a decade- such growth could never have been sustained simply by US consumers. China has consumers world wide- it is now the biggest traiding partner with SK- it has a growing internal market (most important). Would loosing US markets slow down China significantly? Yes, but China would still continue to grow if it traded with the rest of the world, given that the rest of the world makes up 75% of the world economy and China would retain its edge in various fields vs. Europe and Japan, also big customers.

china has a 52 billion dollar trade surplus w/ US last year. china is in trade deficit to south korea.

unfortunately tho ********ing hangons are always the farthest behind.

[PLATO]

Yes GePap that's all true, but a lot of the economic growth is spurred by internal consumption increasing at such a rapid clip. It is the rate of internal expansion that is driving the ability to sustain these numbers. Without that, the Chinese economic engine slows significantly. Again...this comes down to a matter of degree. Is China's economy dependent on US consumerism? Yes...to a degree. Would China experience economic colla[pse without it? Not a chance.

[GePap]

Originally posted by yavoon


china has a 52 billion dollar trade surplus w/ US last year. china is in trade deficit to south korea.

unfortunately tho ********ing hangons are always the farthest behind.

Compare your drivel to PLATO's responses. The only one who looks like an ass is you.

China has a 1 trillion dollar economy (or 5 trillion according to PPP numbers, which I have never liked)- according to you the loss of trade with the US would cripple them? Yeah, you certainly are a big economist!

[yavoon]

Originally posted by GePap




Compare your drivel to PLATO's responses. The only one who looks like an ass is you.

China has a 1 trillion dollar economy (or 5 trillion according to PPP numbers, which I have never liked)- according to you the loss of trade with the US would cripple them? Yeah, you certainly are a big economist!

thats the SURPLUS not the total trade.

omg u should be fired from life.

[PLATO]

China's foreign trade in the first quarter of this year was up 15.9 percent year-on-year to 113. 81 billion U.S. dollars, according to newly released statistics from the General Administration of Customs.

http://fpeng.peopledaily.com.cn/200104/14/eng20010414_67689.html

That annuallized is approx $450 billion with the entire world in a year. A $52 billion dollar trade surplus speaks volumes to how much of that is one way trade. The fact is that they recieve little from the US. That coupled with the fact that most Chinese manufacturing is labor and not capital intensive then the impact would be minimal compared to a comparable western economy.