China's getting nervous

[Willem]

Originally posted by ranskaldan
Wary.

China and India are too preoccupied with their current spheres to bother with each other right now though.

However, since China and India are busy flooding each other's markets, I don't foresee any major concerns.

How about Vietnam? I know you had a border skirmish at one time long ago, shortly after the Vietnam war, have they resolved their differences? And what was that all about anyway?

[Lawrence of Arabia]

the more integrated the economies are the less you have to worry about war. two countries who depend on each other will not go to war. the less you are integrated (aka less trade, more import substitution) the more likely the countries are to go to war.

[ranskaldan]

Originally posted by nationalist


I want a country where someone who didn't go to Grad school has the ability to get a job in which he can support himself and gets insurance, and I want an economy that can produce enough clothing and Steel so we could be self sufficient in case of an emergency.

You're creating a world where each nation is an individual bubble. In this case there would be no reason why nations wouldn't go to war with each other.

(- other than Nuclear Deterrence, which may become obsolete due to technology.)

[nationalist]

What would we have to go to war about?

[Sandman]

They probably know that before the end of the century -and even sooner when the US has more Reagans and Bushes as president- the centre of the world will be restored to its natural postion: the 'Middle Kingdom'.

There's India as well. It should be almost a powerful as China now, on paper, but it's currently lagging behind.

[nationalist]

Originally posted by ranskaldan


You're creating a world where each nation is an individual bubble. In this case there would be no reason why nations wouldn't go to war with each other.

(- other than Nuclear Deterrence, which may become obsolete due to technology.)

No , I'm creating a world where the U.S. is in its individual bubble. The rest of the world can do what it wants.

[ranskaldan]

What would we have to go to war about?

Land, resources, labour.

Currently you can get these things without the messiness and risk of war - and without pissing other countries off and making them want to exact revenge.

[Lawrence of Arabia]

over land, over resources which arnt being traded, over religion and all of these wars will not create shortages at home because the countries are already self sufficient, so they are more likley to go to war because there is less cost to the economy.

[ranskaldan]

Originally posted by nationalist


No , I'm creating a world where the U.S. is in its individual bubble. The rest of the world can do what it wants.

Then the U.S. will quickly and hopelessly lag behind in economic development, technology, and living standards.

You are also providing an enormous incentive for the rest of the world to gang up on America and open it up by force or coercion.

[nationalist]

What terretorial aspirations does the U.S. have? We have plenty of land right now. Religiously, the U.S. has no official religion, China is athiest. We could still trade for needed resources, and we could try to synthesize them as well.

[nationalist]

Originally posted by ranskaldan


Then the U.S. will quickly and hopelessly lag behind in economic development, technology, and living standards.

You are also providing an enormous incentive for the rest of the world to gang up on America and open it up by force or coercion.

Force and coercion won't work. Competetion will still exist inside of the U.S.

[Six Thousand Year Old Man]

Originally posted by nationalist


No, I'm proposing that we bring industries back to the U.S. for American Workers. Then the Chinese can open plants to provide goods for their own coutnry.

Enjoy your new pair of $500 Nikes

('Cause that's what they'll cost if they have to pay US wages to the workers who make 'em )

[Ned]

I have said this before: we cannot do anything in or to N. Korea without Chinese, let alone, South Korea or Japans's consent if not support. I think I have heard Bush actually say this a number of times. If everyone cooperates, NK may comply. If they do not, then the UN will impose sanctions. That is whay I see happening.

It is still amazing to me that the anti-Americans, from the European left to the Islamic right actually believe their own propaganda.

After we settle with Saddam, our short-term goal will be to establish a democratic government there with their own military. As soon as that is done, Bush has stated that we shall withdraw. I believe him.

(Maybe, at the same time, we can get our troops out of Bosnia and Kosovo. Bush tried last year, but the Europeans insisted that we stay!)

[Lawrence of Arabia]

why won't force and coercion work? it worked in china during the 19th century. competition doesnt necessairly make a country advance. you need a lot of it, and sometimes even then, deveoplment doesnt advance.

[nationalist]

Originally posted by Six Thousand Year Old Man

Enjoy your new pair of $500 Nikes

('Cause that's what they'll cost if they have to pay US wages to the workers who make 'em )

Hey, that's almost double what they cost now

I'd put in wage and price ceilings.