Taiwan: Would War be viable?

[Velociryx]

Oh...the english language. Silly me.

That would be the same english language containing words like inevitibilty....which in one breath you use to cement your argument, conveniently forgetting that it cuts both ways?

That language?

I say again, nothing we humans seek to do is inevitable.

I have outlined some "if's" that will make it damnably hard for China to even catch up, to say nothing of surpassing.

You have outlined some "if's" that slant it the other direction.

Neither, however, smacks of inevitibility, but a whole lotta maybes.

-=Vel=-

[Velociryx]

Oh, and saying that china has the potential to possibly surpass the us, economically, is not the same thing as saying it's inevitable.

It's that whole bothersome english language thing you mentioned again.



-=Vel=-

[GePap]

Originally posted by Velociryx
Um....actually GePap, that's MY point.

You are the one arguing for inevitibility. I'm arguing on the side of history...that NOTHING we humans seek to do is inevitable.

-=Vel=-

This is getting annoying and boring.

History shows us that no power remains on top. No power keeps their number one place for ever. The Egyptians, Assyrians, Babylonians, Persians, Greeks, Chinese, Romans, Arabs, Turks, French, English, ALL of them have seen their time of power wane and end, to be surpassed by another power, for a variety of reasons.

Today the US is that great power. And the US, like all other powers in history, will see its lead end, its hegemony stopped, its time in the sun eclipsed. I think, due to what we have seen, that China will be the power that will surpass the US. I in fact think various powers will, just as the UK, the greatest power in the world in 1850, saw itself ecliped by Germany and the US.

You are the one arguing that somehow China might not catch up the the US- the other side of that coin Vel is to argue that the US will never see the Sun set on its empire. Are you not able to see that!? To argue that China will not surpass the US is to argue that the US, unlike all the powers on earth before it, will not wane (unless you think and agree then that India will surpass the US).

Again, this is not rocket science.

[Velociryx]

Yes I get it. I see that you are arguing that the US's day in the sun will inevitably end.

And you are doing so by arguing that China will...INEVITABLY be the country that ends it.

I am maintaining that while the US's days are certainly numbered as the premier economic power, it's hardly "inevitable" that China MUST be the one to do the surpassing.

You could just as easily argue that if the EU brings in enough member states (there's that IF word again) it's "inevitable" that it will surpass the US's economic might.

Yes. Possible.

As is China's potential to surpass.

But neither are "inevitable." As you yourself pointed out, there ain't no such thing.

-=Vel=-

[Velociryx]

Sorry Ge....gotta hit the sack. I enjoy the banter, but umm....you're wrong.

-=Vel=-

PS: Framing your argument about the inevitable decline of the US's economic supremacy with the equally inevitable dominance of any one particular group or nation is NOT the way to prove your point, but it goes a long way toward proving mine...thanks!

-V.

[GePap]

Originally posted by Velociryx


Yes I get it. I see that you are arguing that the US's day in the sun will inevitably end.

And you are doing so by arguing that China will...INEVITABLY be the country that ends it.

I am maintaining that while the US's days are certainly numbered as the premier economic power, it's hardly "inevitable" that China MUST be the one to do the surpassing.

You've never on the thread say anything even close to that. The last thing I heard you say about the US economy was that it was roaring like a tiger and would grow to 500 million people anyways.

That does not sound in the slightest like saying you acknowledge that the US's time in the sun is done.

[Tingkai]

Originally posted by Velociryx
US Economists who mapped out a blueprint for Japanese economic success:

Solow, Swan, and Friedman.

To this day, Friedman (who, at age 88, is booked solid for the next ten+ years) frequently offers invaluable advice to the Japanese re: the state of their economy.

Friedman laid out the blueprint for Japanese economic success?



I'm sorry, but that's too friggen funny.

[GePap]

Originally posted by Velociryx
Sorry Ge....gotta hit the sack. I enjoy the banter, but umm....you're wrong.

-=Vel=-

PS: Framing your argument about the inevitable decline of the US's economic supremacy with the equally inevitable dominance of any one particular group or nation is NOT the way to prove your point, but it goes a long way toward proving mine...thanks!

-V.

:rolleye:

What point of yours?

Your never said anything that would even indicate you think the US will decline, while your arguements against China's rise ammount to "nothing in inevitable". Well, you know what? Some things ARE inevitable-not many, but some. You made no argument whatsoever to prove this. If anything, your seeming approval in the end that it is inevitable that the uS will decline ruins your entire point.

Which is more consistent:

Its inevitable the US will at some point nto be power one, its inevitable China will be the replacement.

Nothing in history is inevitable- I agree that its inevitable the US will no longer the the top world power.

[PLATO]

Vel

God, I'm glad your back.


GePap, is it hard living in the world of ultimate pessimism about the US?

[GePap]

Originally posted by PLATO
Vel

God, I'm glad your back.

Why, no one making faulty arguements you liked?

GePap, is it hard living in the world of ultimate pessimism about the US?

Pessimism?

The fact that China and India will one day be bigger eocnomies than the US and suplant it as the great powers is not pessimistic. People in the UK are rich, and happy, even 100 years after their state was eclipsed as the greatest world power.

Your view is far more pssimistic than mine. You are the one thinking war. That;s not what one would call optimism.

[PLATO]

Originally posted by GePap


Pessimism?

Yes, you continually find ways to denegrate and predict doom for the country you have chosen to live in. Your view of your country is pessimistic.

There is just as good a chance that the US will be the world's dominant economy in 50 years as not. I don't believe that you can really say that about China. So many things have to fall into place for them. That being said, the US must manage its own house as well to remain where they are.

Vel's argument is well founded in that he evokes the principle of uncertainty...which must be used in any future economic projection.

Your argument fails in that it evokes inevitability...a premise that cannot be supported in any prediction.

A simple argument of absolute versus fluidity. Surely you must acknowledge that the future is still fluid?

The best we can do is make a prediction based on current trends. Today's prediction is drastically different than 10 years ago due to differing current trends...as 10 years from now is likely to be drastically different from today's.

This is the principle that Vel was really trying to communicate...and you fell squarely into his snare.

[GePap]

Originally posted by PLATO


Yes, you continually find ways to denegrate and predict doom for the country you have chosen to live in. Your view of your country is pessimistic.

Since when is not being on top "doom"? That is a very strange view. I had a grand time in Austria, a place that has not been on top in 300 years. Somehow people survive.

Vel's argument is well founded in that he evokes the principle of uncertainty...which must be used in any future economic projection.

Your argument fails in that it evokes inevitability...a premise that cannot be supported in any prediction.

Vel makes contradictory claims. As for predictions, I am not going o predictions, I am going on extrapolating current trends forward. I would also say its inevitable that the world's population will be greater in 2050 than it is today. Absent an act of God, that will happen. You know, just like people say it's inevitable that Social Security will run a shortfall. Heck, we don;t know, maybe in 2030 there will be a massive plague that will kill everyone over 70- that sure would make SS viable for many decades to come.

If I were a betting man, that is not a bet I would make, thought.

A simple argument of absolute versus fluidity. Surely you must acknowledge that the future is still fluid?

Its fluid, just as the water is a river is fluid. That stream of water thought has an inevitable end.

The best we can do is make a prediction based on current trends. Today's prediction is drastically different than 10 years ago due to differing current trends...as 10 years from now is likely to be drastically different from today's.

DRastically different? Not really. The world today is NOT drasticlaly different from 1995. People may hee and haw and claim so, but the life of the average person had NOT changed dramitically. Some things that were new in 1995 are more common today, but in the end, trends that were ongoing then continue.

This is the principle that Vel was really trying to communicate...and you fell squarely into his snare.

His "snare"? That's a funny way of reading the debate. Its hard to see what kind of snare can be made by someone who claims there is nothing inevitable, except of course the inevitability of the US not being on top.... you know, there is a basic fundamental logic problem there.

[Velociryx]

Mmmmmkay!

Since GePap obviously has problems with that same "English Language" he scolded me with earlier, let me take another stab:

Two statements:

1) It is inevitable that Microsoft will lose marketshare.

2) It is inevitable that Apple will eclipse Microsoft.

One of these statements is true. One is not. COULD be true, yes, but that's not the same thing.

The first statement is true because Microsoft (like the USA...cool analogy, no?) IS in fact, at the top of the heap. They have nowhere to go but down.

However, the nations of the world do not play musical chairs, and each take their turn sitting at the top of the pile, thus, singling out any one nation and saying that it is "inevitable" that they will surpass the us is patently absurd.

Grandted, China has a much better chance than, say, Zaire, but admitting to that is not the same thing as tauting its inevitability.

Or...is it, in your universe?

-=Vel=-

[Velociryx]

Ting: Actually, not for and to the Japanese specifically, but yes. And again (this time specifically FOR Japan) in ~1998?.

But don't let facts get in your way either. Seems to be a trend on this debate.

Hiyas Plato! And thanks! Had to duck in and see what was going on! Some things never change, do they?

-=Vel=-

[Velociryx]

"China and India will inevitably surpass the US"

"Nothing in history is inevitable - I agree...."

Tell me...who's making contradictory statements again?



-=Vel=-