Do you see china as "the enemy"?

[DaShi]

Originally posted by GePap
And back in 1979 I doubt most people would have thought that by 2000 China's economy would bein the top 5 in terms of constant dollars. The Chinese proved them wrong.

Just goes to show how unpredictable economies can be, but I already said that.

[GePap]

Originally posted by DaShi


One quick one for each: Australia, sports. Austria, frankly don't follow the country, seems like the Canada of Europe in that it somehow falls into obscurity in my mind like that. Switzerland, watches. France, politics. Spain, music. Italy, film. Germany, a lot of sciences (why was your list missing this top 3 country?) It doesn't have to be a great invention (this is something specific you added to try to win a losing argument). Since you're so big on how great China's development has been, I originally picked two countries that fit the role closest as examples. You're requirements don't change the fact that China has a major innovation problem.

Sorry, but you can;t honestly claim that movies and music count as serious examples of R&D. Your claim was that somehow a country, if it isn;t in the cutting edge of technological development can't keep growth up. I am saying that is bunk.

Which has nothing to do with what I said. You're hugging these comments like an old teddy bear to console yourself that you understand China, which you clearly don't.

[Giancarlo]

What great inventions have come out of China in the last century (gun powder was one that came many centuries before). Face it, Gepap, you completely ignore the economic and demographics arguments I put up. China has serious problems with infrastructure (and the lack of it), and underinvestment in areas outside of major cities. Seriously, if you think China's economy is better then that of Japan's or Spain's.. then you are just plain wrong.

Then you talk about RCI. How is China going to do that when they don't have enough resources to do so? And then high oil prices will constrain the Chinese economy.

If you weren't totally blind when it came to long term thinking, maybe you would understand that.

[DaShi]

Originally posted by GePap


Sorry, but you can;t honestly claim that movies and music count as serious examples of R&D. Your claim was that somehow a country, if it isn;t in the cutting edge of technological development can't keep growth up. I am saying that is bunk.

No, I'm not. I'm saying that a country that can't innovate on it's own can only grow so far. Actually, all I did point out is that China's innovation is considerably lacking given its rate of growth. The phenomenon speaks for itself.

I know, I've been pissing people off lately by pointing out their little arguing foibles. I guess I'm just sick of the bs, so I haven't been too polite about it.

[Giancarlo]

I'm sick of BS too. Especially when someone claims China can reach the RCI of South Korea with its population size. Ridiculous, fallacious, arrogant and totally wrong.

Oh, and even with this growth, China's unemployment rate is actually ticking upwards (it is at anywhere from 15-25%).

[DaShi]

Originally posted by Giancarlo
What great inventions have come out of China in the last century (gun powder was one that came many centuries before). Face it, Gepap, you completely ignore the economic and demographics arguments I put up. China has serious problems with infrastructure (and the lack of it), and underinvestment in areas outside of major cities. Seriously, if you think China's economy is better then that of Japan's or Spain's.. then you are just plain wrong.

Then you talk about RCI. How is China going to do that when they don't have enough resources to do so? And then high oil prices will constrain the Chinese economy.

If you weren't totally blind when it came to long term thinking, maybe you would understand that.

There are three schools of thought when it comes to China's rise:

1. Yours, that China will collapse, basically by growing too fast and too much corruption in a society resistant to change. Most of these predictions were made years ago and claimed that China would have collapsed by now. It hasn't, but the arguments have just been pushed ahead, like doomsday prophets.

2. Gepap's, that China's rise is inevitable. These people look at the basic numbers and see them going consistently up and therefore assume that they always will. What they miss are the details behind those numbers. They are unaware of the level of corruption in China. They refuse to acknowledge that behind the shine is a serious mess that I don't envy that the CCP or the Chinese people themselves have to fix.

3. mindeye's, that China could go anywhere. These are usually people who have spent serious time in China and seen the good and the bad. They see a horribly corrupt system, but they also see a lot people in China who want to fix it. They realize that while China is growing constantly, its doing so because it has to. The slightest change could tear it all down. They also realize that the Chinese government is aware of this and doing all they can to mitigate any damages such changes can cause while, albiet sometimes reluctantly, realizing that there are some changes they can't avoid.

[GePap]

Originally posted by DaShi


No, I'm not. I'm saying that a country that can't innovate on it's own can only grow so far. Actually, all I did point out is that China's innovation is considerably lacking given its rate of growth. The phenomenon speaks for itself.

China's rise is unprecendented, and I don't think previous examples are all that valid. After all, China is in a fundamentally different position form certainly the US in the 1830's and 40's, and Japan in the 1880's and 90's, which is the time in which Japan became an industrial state. China is surrounded by far more developed economies, and it can jump so far so fast because it doesn;t have to break new ground, but integrate already existing technologies.

I know, I've been pissing people off lately by pointing out their little arguing foibles. I guess I'm just sick of the bs, so I haven't been too polite about it.

Your statement bored me. That smiley was whole appropriate. There was nothing even interesting in it.

[GePap]

Originally posted by DaShi


There are three schools of thought when it comes to China's rise:

1. Yours, that China will collapse, basically by growing too fast and too much corruption in a society resistant to change. Most of these predictions were made years ago and claimed that China would have collapsed by now. It hasn't, but the arguments have just been pushed ahead, like doomsday prophets.

2. Gepap's, that China's rise is inevitable. These people look at the basic numbers and see them going consistently up and therefore assume that they always will. What they miss are the details behind those numbers. They are unaware of the level of corruption in China. They refuse to acknowledge that behind the shine is a serious mess that I don't envy that the CCP or the Chinese people themselves have to fix.

3. mindeye's, that China could go anywhere. These are usually people who have spent serious time in China and seen the good and the bad. They see a horribly corrupt system, but they also see a lot people in China who want to fix it. They realize that while China is growing constantly, its doing so because it has to. The slightest change could tear it all down. They also realize that the Chinese government is aware of this and doing all they can to mitigate any damages such changes can cause while, albiet sometimes reluctantly, realizing that there are some changes they can't avoid.

Any downturn in China would be temporary. The US in 1940 was still a rich country, even after the Great Depression. Widespread eocnomic ollapse in China is a deeply unrealisitc scenerio. Political chaos of the like seen after the collpase of the Empire in the 10's and 20's is also far less likely given the existance of far more powerful instruments of state to wield, meaning whomever contriols them can prevent some collapse of the whole thing.

I am sorry, but when i hear theories that somehow China will collapse either from corruption or pollution, I have to laugh. I laugh because there is a difference between the fall of the Party and the fall of China.
You and mindseye seem to equate a fall of the party and serious political upheavals to some coming end of the conmic growth. I don't. Some grand universal radical revolution in China is highly unlikely, as is the breakdown of the country. The Chinese are much better situated for the collapse of one party rule than the Soviet Union in 1989, because Chinese economic reforms worked, unlike Soviet reforms.

And as for pollution..come on. Pollution hampers economic growth, but it certainly does not end it. Look at Harbin-yes, the City is without running water for who knows how long. Is the city abandoned? No. In a few weeks, the water is back, and breakneck industrialization continues. UNspeakable pollution did not end industrialization elsewhere.

[DaShi]

Originally posted by GePap


China's rise is unprecendented, and I don't think previous examples are all that valid. After all, China is in a fundamentally different position form certainly the US in the 1830's and 40's, and Japan in the 1880's and 90's, which is the time in which Japan became an industrial state. China is surrounded by far more developed economies, and it can jump so far so fast because it doesn;t have to break new ground, but integrate already existing technologies.

But you're ignoring America in the 1950s, Japan and Germany in the 1980s. These countries today are still the leaders in innovation. China hasn't even shown the slightest sign of catching up in this respect. However, they have shown a remarkable ability to copy.

Yes, China doesn't have to break new ground...now.

Your statement bored me. That smiley was whole appropriate. There was nothing even interesting in it.

That's how I felt about the post of yours I was refering to. It had no other value other than as the tripe I categorized it as. You just didn't like that I did that.

[GePap]

Originally posted by DaShi


But you're ignoring America in the 1950s, Japan and Germany in the 1980s. These countries today are still the leaders in innovation. China hasn't even shown the slightest sign of catching up in this respect. However, they have shown a remarkable ability to copy.

Yes, China doesn't have to break new ground...now.

And America in the 1950's and Germany and Japan in the 1980's were both VASTLY ahead of China in terms of economic growth. neither were even close to 30% of the population still involved in agriculture (and as you know, the figure in China today is higher)

How could you possibly compare China today to the US in 1950 (A time in which the US accounted for close to HALF of GLOBAL GNP) or to Germany or Japan in the 1980's,m when both were undisputably first world states???

If by the time China has a GNP of say 3000 a person (or three times what it is today), and when it has less than say 15% of the population directly involved in agriculture, and it still is not innovative, then fine. But to expect China at its current level of development to be like Japan in 1980 is a bit absurd.

That's how I felt about the post of yours I was refering to. It had no other value other than as the tripe I categorized it as. You just didn't like that I did that.

Yada Yada Yada.

[DaShi]

Originally posted by GePap


Any downturn in China would be temporary. The US in 1940 was still a rich country, even after the Great Depression. Widespread eocnomic ollapse in China is a deeply unrealisitc scenerio. Political chaos of the like seen after the collpase of the Empire in the 10's and 20's is also far less likely given the existance of far more powerful instruments of state to wield, meaning whomever contriols them can prevent some collapse of the whole thing.

I am sorry, but when i hear theories that somehow China will collapse either from corruption or pollution, I have to laugh. I laugh because there is a difference between the fall of the Party and the fall of China.
You and mindseye seem to equate a fall of the party and serious political upheavals to some coming end of the conmic growth. I don't. Some grand universal radical revolution in China is highly unlikely, as is the breakdown of the country. The Chinese are much better situated for the collapse of one party rule than the Soviet Union in 1989, because Chinese economic reforms worked, unlike Soviet reforms.

Hit it right on the head, didn't I? You really don't understand the role the Party plays in China. You are only looking at economics that's why every post is laced with it, and every paragraph tagged with it. You can't see beyond it. That's why you think it is inevitable, but as you said, China surprised the world after '79. Nothing is inevitable, and it's a serious logical flaw to make that argument.

And as for pollution..come on. Pollution hampers economic growth, but it certainly does not end it. Look at Harbin-yes, the City is without running water for who knows how long. Is the city abandoned? No. In a few weeks, the water is back, and breakneck industrialization continues. UNspeakable pollution did not end industrialization elsewhere.

That's the worrying part that you ignore. Nothing has changed, and you don't see the problem with that. Oh well, can't explain Monet to the blind. Anyway, I don't think anyone has said the pollution will end China's economic growth, just that it will cause serious harm to China and the world if it continues unchecked. This is twice in this thread that I've had to correct you for twisting other people's statements.

[DaShi]

Originally posted by GePap


And America in the 1950's and Germany and Japan in the 1980's were both VASTLY ahead of China in terms of economic growth. neither were even close to 30% of the population still involved in agriculture (and as you know, the figure in China today is higher)

How could you possibly compare China today to the US in 1950 (A time in which the US accounted for close to HALF of GLOBAL GNP) or to Germany or Japan in the 1980's,m when both were undisputably first world states???

If by the time China has a GNP of say 3000 a person (or three times what it is today), and when it has less than say 15% of the population directly involved in agriculture, and it still is not innovative, then fine. But to expect China at its current level of development to be like Japan in 1980 is a bit absurd.

Still very little innovation in China.

GNP, %, economy, yada, yada, yada.

[GePap]

Originally posted by DaShi


Hit it right on the head, didn't I? You really don't understand the role the Party plays in China. You are only looking at economics that's why every post is laced with it, and every paragraph tagged with it. You can't see beyond it. That's why you think it is inevitable, but as you said, China surprised the world after '79. Nothing is inevitable, and it's a serious logical flaw to make that argument.

You say that my head is stuck in economics? Me, the Political Scientist?

The Party might keep a tight reign on China, but the fact is that the Party of today is a far more complex animal than the Party in the USSR in the early 80's. The problem of corruption also brought down the Party in the USSR. But China's economic reforms give the whole system more leverage than there was in the USSR when that party came down. Also, China does not have even close to the same problem with various nationalist tendencies that the USSR had to deal with- nationalist group are relatively small, and certainly weak. NO provinces are going to break off China if the party totters to the ground. I find it hard to believe anyone thinking that if the Party in China collesped a replay of the chaos post 1912 is even imaginable, and even if we take the USSR as an example, 20 years after the party feel, things would be coming back. So where is the permanent fall??

That's the worrying part that you ignore. Nothing has changed, and you don't see the problem with that. Oh well, can't explain Monet to the blind. Anyway, I don't think anyone has said the pollution will end China's economic growth, just that it will cause serious harm to China and the world if it continues unchecked. This is twice in this thread that I've had to correct you for twisting other people's statements.

Pollution always slow growth- but why should China be expected to be greener at its stage of development than any of the western states were at their same level?

[DaShi]

Originally posted by GePap


You say that my head is stuck in economics? Me, the Political Scientist?

It's a duck!

The Party might keep a tight reign on China, but the fact is that the Party of today is a far more complex animal than the Party in the USSR in the early 80's. The problem of corruption also brought down the Party in the USSR. But China's economic reforms give the whole system more leverage than there was in the USSR when that party came down.

Ok, but you said that the fall of the Party won't put a stopper on economic growth. Now you closely link the party to the economy. It's seems that you are abandoning your previous position for a new one: the CCP won't collapse.

Also, China does not have even close to the same problem with various nationalist tendencies that the USSR had to deal with- nationalist group are relatively small, and certainly weak. NO provinces are going to break off China if the party totters to the ground. I find it hard to believe anyone thinking that if the Party in China collesped a replay of the chaos post 1912 is even imaginable, and even if we take the USSR as an example, 20 years after the party feel, things would be coming back. So where is the permanent fall??

First, I don't think anyone but school 1 people are preaching permanent fall. In fact, no one has said anything about permanent flaw that I've noticed. Sure you aren't just making an assumption here? As for provinces breaking off: Taiwan, depending on your view of it. Tibet would if it could. Xinjiang also. If the collapse was big enough, they would break off and Xinjiang would be a terrorist concern if the Chinese tried to resist the split while weakened. Even Chengdu may decide to split without the party controlling it, but that's less likely. Deep down China is a lot more divided that it seems. The CCP is the one constant.

Pollution always slow growth- but why should China be expected to be greener at its stage of development than any of the western states were at their same level?

Wow! What does that have to do with the price of tea in China?

[Giancarlo]

Originally posted by DaShi


There are three schools of thought when it comes to China's rise:

1. Yours, that China will collapse, basically by growing too fast and too much corruption in a society resistant to change. Most of these predictions were made years ago and claimed that China would have collapsed by now. It hasn't, but the arguments have just been pushed ahead, like doomsday prophets.

You are shoving too many words into my mouth. I never said China will collapse. I said growth will slow, and China will be pretty stagnant. It will gradually rise, but as problems get greater there will be more recessions and more problems.

This argument has nothing to do with doomsday prophets or collapse. It has to do with the fact that I posted evidence to back myself up especially with population demographics, and the weak banking sector. You choose not to accept this, therefore making you ignorant. It will make China more prone to problems in the future. Lower productivity, and lower economic growth is one of them.