Help - Search - Members - Calendar
Full Version: China wants the USA to realize THAT
Political Topics And Discussion > All Things Political > Asia Political Topics
Razin
I'm not sure about how much objective the Pravda's statement is about them being against USA, but some facts are facts nevertheless - that China and Uzbekistan (Karimov) shaked hands and made big plans.

China and Uzbekistan join forces against the USA

QUOTE
Like China, the USA is gradually establishing relations with Uzbekistan. However, Washington's and Beijing's attitudes to events in Andijan are completely different. The USA insists on holding an independent investigation and even threatens to suspend the help to Uzbekistan in case the latter does not meet the requirement. It is noteworthy that China is good at building relations with those countries, which Washington tends to punish. Beijing does not want to show any pressure on North Korea, despite persistent appeals from the White House. China is developing economic ties with Iran, in spite of the Tehran's notorious nuclear program. China enjoys quite good relations with Myanmar, Sudan, Nepal and Zimbabwe. China tries to use any opportunity to emphasize its independence and disobedience "to the only superpower that has been left in the world." China is becoming a superpower too.
John L
Looks like a misstranslation from Pravda. I see nothing to show where the two are joining forces Against the US. Only that China has plans to be a world power also. The article is much about nothing. wink.gif
Ben-T
China lacks the military might, mobalization capabilities, and world influence to become a superpower just yet.
sea_of_red
World Power yes, superpower, no. When the USSR faltered, the USA kept going. The bar to superpower status has been lifted. The Soviets could make the claim because of their military strength. China isn't in the top 5 in military power, It's economy is a shadow of the USA's, and it contributes nothing to modern world culture. Other then an enormous number of humans, a number that soon will be surpassed by India, China is just another 3rd world nation. That won't change until the Chinese political system changes.
bob
Yes and as long as they retain that political structure their economic power will be unstable because the people making money there have little confidence in their own system. Capitol is flying out of that country as fast as people are making it. If foreign investment slows dramaticaly they will suffer and significant economic "correction".
But similarly Saudi capitol is propping up the US economy. That's why America is so soft on them.
sea_of_red
http://www.mtholyoke.edu/acad/intrel/pol116/hegemony.htm

That's nonsense about the Saudi's proping up the American economy. What they are proping up is the current administration. Economies are relative. To maintain the American hegemony, our economy has to be larger than anyone else's. If the Saudi's stop pumping, it will increase the US economic advantage. OIL is fungable, it doesn't have a serial number and is bought, sold and traded by volumn. That is what America does best. Buy sell and trade. It would hurt losing the KSA production, but It would hurt China and Japan more then the USA. China especially.
bob
Interesting article. I doubt the Saudi will stop pumping oil. But the may stop pumping their oil money into the US. If that stopped suddenly unintended consequences could result. Much as I would like to see the Saudis' spanked.
expat
QUOTE
The missile is believed to be able to carry a nuclear warhead for 6,000 miles, far greater than any sub-launched missile in China's inventory. The successful test does not necessarily mean China can deploy the missile yet, but it brings the Chinese a step closer, the official said.


QUOTE
It was widely known that China was building the new class of nuclear-missile submarine, called the "Type 094," but the launch was far ahead of what U.S. intelligence expected, one official said.


http://news.yahoo.com/news?tmpl=story&cid=...s_china_missile
Nomad
And now the Reds are trying to buy Unocal. Don't underestimate these devious devils. There are going to be BIG problems with them sooner rather then later. 014.gif 037.gif 004.gif
Ben-T
We have nothing to fear from China. They are rapidly integrating into globalization. Their communist government loses less and less of it's direct control every day. They have shown no attempt to build a blue-water navy.

China is a future ally, not a future enemy.
president
Imperial USA and EU' fear the rapid growth of China, India and the middle East world, let me remind you it was the west who stepped onto their doorstep and started the whole chaos...
It’s only fair now; tit for tat; that you guys get the same 'treatment'...

if you think that China is no more than corrupted communist state, you put yourself into a big trap... they have the biggest organization in the world, a military of 200,000,000 soldiers, now are developing and exchanging nuclear technology, solidifying the ties with, Russia, Iran and India, and having a friendly relations with the rest of the world... I mean guys you need to open the daily news and read more, even though 1/4 of what is written is pure ###### but you can speculate from the rest...

now EU did a very wrong step, they again opened a wrong page, or jumped to pg. 100 skipping the others... its rapid unification has created tensions and instability, economical disaster and zero tolerance, some elites form UK, France, Germany, and Italy had imagined that Europe can be united and can be concurrent to the next biggest rivals Russia, Usa, China, India and the middle east... but they did not realize that under the sky of Europe 60 years ago Auschwitz was a killing factory where millions left their lives, EU MAIN PRIORITY WAS TO SOLIDIFY THE TIES BETWEEN THE MEMBER STATES AND NOT TO RIDE BOLDLY AGAINST THE REST... EU is still unstable and is technologically dependent...

Anyway, the Chinese Diaspora is also crucial in their tactics for concurring, in almost every country you have what is called -Chinese town- they are forming minorities that will grow to majorities, and all I can add here is... Chinese are playing with the right cards and they deserve it... popcorn.gif
Su Guo
QUOTE (Nomad @ Jun 25 2005, 02:19 PM)
And now the Reds are trying to buy Unocal. Don't underestimate these devious devils.  There are going to be BIG problems with them sooner rather then later.  014.gif  037.gif  004.gif
*


So what? American are consuming 40% world resource annually, American have moved their most of dirty industries to China and the other developing countries, do you mean Chinese should prepare the cheap and bloody products for you without consuming any oil? I really do not understand how you can think by that way, why should USA be the center of this world?


--English is my third language, not good enough.
ustrader





T HA T
IS
A LL!
Thaiquila
QUOTE (Su Guo @ Jul 7 2005, 12:18 PM)
So what? American are consuming 40% world resource annually, American have moved their most of dirty industries to China and the other developing countries, do you mean Chinese should prepare the cheap and bloody products for you without consuming any oil? I really do not understand how you can think by that way, why should USA be the center of this world?
--English is my third language, not good enough.
*

Good question, Comrade Su.
The situation is this.
The rich countries, especially the U S A have screwed the developing world and third world countries for a very long time.
Some of those poorer countries are catching up and catching up fast, and many of the people in the rich countries are now lazy, decadent, and aging.
The key is fear.
The white South Africans were afraid when they lost power, the black majority would murder them. They were correct to be afraid as many of them were murdered.
Same thing here.
The rich world is afraid that majority poor world will turn the tables and treat them very badly when they have the power.
So, naturally, being human, they will do everything in their power to stop this power shift from happening. Even if it means war.
So, in the long run, it probably means war.
Boxcar Muzzdogg
Nice title for the thread but it should have read "China wants the USA to realize that its an opressive and evil superpower thats getting away with everything and they're planning to conquer the world too."
Nomad
QUOTE (Su Guo @ Jul 7 2005, 05:18 AM)
I really do not understand how you can think by that way, why should USA be the center of this world?
--English is my third language, not good enough.
*


It's real simple Soo Goo. We are. If it were not for the USA protecting the freedoms of others in this world you most likely would never have been born to grow up into the ignorance which you seem to hold so dear.
002.gif 004.gif ph34r.gif ph34r.gif
Ben-T
QUOTE (Thaiquila @ Jul 7 2005, 06:54 PM)
Good question, Comrade Su.
The situation is this.
The rich countries, especially the U S A have screwed the developing world and third world countries for a very long time.
Some of those poorer countries are catching up and catching up fast, and many of the people in the rich countries are now lazy, decadent, and aging.
The key is fear.
The white South Africans were afraid when they lost power, the black majority would murder them. They were correct to be afraid as many of them were murdered.
Same thing here.
The rich world is afraid that majority poor world will turn the tables and treat them very badly when they have the power.
So, naturally, being human, they will do everything in their power to stop this power shift from happening. Even if it means war.
So, in the long run, it probably means war.
*


Class warfare on a global scale.

Why am I not surprised?
adjan jb
[quote=Nomad,Jul 8 2005, 11:54 AM]
It's real simple Soo Goo. We are. If it were not for the USA protecting the freedoms of others in this world you most likely would never have been born to grow up into the ignorance which you seem to hold so dear.






Such a disdain towards a new (non american) poster is unbearable.
ustrader





T HA T
IS
A LL!
Su Guo
QUOTE (ustrader @ Jul 8 2005, 01:48 PM)
First of all, you obviously have not been to the United States and gone through the vast number of consumer retail outlets available and read the overwhelming number of consumer items labeled Made in China. Second had you dione that you would realize that few are Dirty Industy type as you would so describe as the US shifting to  a relucant and unccoperative China against its will.

---Yes, you are right, I have never been to USA, but I have been to Canada, Australia and New Zealand, there are floody made-in-China products on the shelves of those multinational superstore chains, just as you described the situation in USA. Of course those final products look clean because you have never seen how those cheap workers ($2 per day) work in such a horrible environment, for instance, poisonous and deadly industrial glue. China needs these industries, also the other developing countries also need them, such as Indonesia, Vietnam, Mexico……, that is why I wrote “China and the other developing countries”, I see a whole picture, not just about China---developed Western world versus developing world. If Chinese manufacturers try to improve the working condition and labour welfare, and build OSH system, the cost will increase sharply, then those greedy multinational countries will move their production to the other developing countries, so I say those dirty industries are not against Chinese will, the developing countries fear to say that.

If China’s industries are dirty, it is the centralized authoritarian government of China’s issue not the United States as it is this 161 billion a year surplus in trade and job creatiuon that is much of the fuel of China's ambitions.

---About 161 billion a year surplus, so what? China has scarified the welfare of the labour, overpaid its environmental costs, pre-used the resource of the descendants, and the most important point is that China as well as the other developing countries only earns very limited profit, most of profits have flown into those multinational companies, so many cheap products labelled Made in China are de facto branded by Western companies. Just like American does not extract your own petroleum in Alaska, but buy from the other countries. Also, the 161 billion a year surplus is not very important, the real profit and profit do matter, those products made in China have very limited profits, but those products/services imported from USA have much higher profit rate, 161 billion surplus do not mean China has earn more money, for example, Nike pays $10 or less to “outsource” its production to China, China then “exports” the finished shoes to USA, Nike “sells” them in American, European or Australian markets by the retailing price of about $100, it is obvious who earns much more profit. If China wants to buy a Boeing plane, China has to export about 100 million skirts, even the price of a Boring plane is less than the sales income of 100 million skirts, the profit is much higher than 100 million skirts, so you can see trade surplus is not the key, the key is profit. If I could get some fund, I would like to do some research related to these issues.

Second, the issue is not that a Chinese company should not be able to buy an American oil Company. As if a China were a democratic country where the rule of law on property rights, investment and intellectual rights were enforced and protected, few would blink an eye in a far unsubsidized World Trade Organization type of transaction.

---Does democracy really matter? If China was a democratic country, the USA politicians will support the Unocol proposal? I don’t think so, 30 years ago, democratic Japan wanted to export their cars to USA, they faced the same situation, I like democracy, but I don’t think it is to do with democracy. If China is a democratic country, there will be more educated people, more competent and ambitious private companies, they are real competitors.

It is that the government of China owns and controls that company and another 150,000 just like it that is the problem. That it, the country of China, is control by a centralized authoritarian governmentand what goes on there is not freely transparent comparitively to most WTO countries.

---Have you ever been to China, although vicious and stupid Chinese government still adopts vicious socialism system, China’s economy is more market-oriented than many European countries, but still not enough I think. Many democratic countries still have government-owned corporate, for example, in New Zealand, Air NZ is government-owned corporate, South Korean conglomerates such as Samsung have gotten huge financial and political support from government.

I know that if the US government created a company to buy say the International and Commercial Bank of China, the largest Chinese state-owned bank, who is loaning $6 to $10 billion alone for the oil company bid, it would go over in China like lead ballon. Thump on the ground.

---It depends on both sides, if the International and Commercial Bank of China wants to do that, if the US Company wants to buy it, they can negotiate each other. Actually “American Bank” has bought 9% share from Chinese government-owned “China Construction Bank”, in next five years; the share will increase to 19.9%.

I appreciate your point of view. However few yanks themselves see this mythological image many of those outside of The United States of America see  as they see themsleves as the center of the universe.

P.S the United States of America is only a part of the Americas. It is not America.

---I make such a conclusion in terms of what American is doing.

I mention that as I know how funny it was, as my wife speaks a little mandarin, to see and hear, hard charging, purposeful minded Chinese oil business men complaining about the Latin lunch work ethic in Mexico not long ago. They were most bewildered by the Latin point of view in doing business indeed.

I believe you need to revisit your statistic on how much the United States consumes and as well compare that to how much of the total exports, visa various countries income and jobs it this American consumption impacts including Asia and China in particularly. 

---I would suggest you to think about if USA has become poorer or wealthier, do not be bothered by those statistics, we had better see a bigger picture, and also this is not a formal forum,  I really do want to check those statistics figures, so boring, sorry.

Thank you for your detailed reply.
ustrader





T HA T
IS
A LL!
Su Guo
QUOTE (ustrader @ Jul 9 2005, 07:12 PM)
Thank you for your reply, you are really knowledgable.

But on the other hand, a man with a job of some means is better than a man without a job and no means multiplied by tens of millions even as we speak. 

---Vicious Chinese government has a similar viewpoint; it said “eating right” is more important that human right, we call “eating right” as “pig right”.

This competitiveness has cost many jobs the world over its not exclusively the province of Asia or China.  The US and europe have lost industies and jobs due to cheaper producers that is way fair and even trade is most important politically.

I am afraid you are wrong there my friend, profit are, in a democracy a microeconomic issue of private enterprises and are not a political issue per se.

But international trade is a macroeconomic and political issue where surplus and deficits impact on a nations wealth and health. Where jobs are lost and or created, and industrial abilities are lost and gained.


---It is try the US and Europe have lost many industries and jobs, but at the same time, US and Europe have gotten many new and more profitable industries and jobs, for example, IT, biochemistry…., US and Europe even have to import so many high skilled and intellects from China, India and the other developing countries, for example, in China, about 75% graduates from the best universities Tsinghua and Bejing Universty(s) in China have been working for USA. You have lost some, but you have gotten much more. You can compare your current unemployment rates with past, higher or lower? I don’t know but just suggest you a way to think about these issues.

The rationale of market’s emergence is social division of labour (industry); likewise, global market is the result of national division of labour (industry). In this global market, a single country cannot do excellently on all the industries, you cannot have sustainable competitive advantages on all the industries, Porter suggested three generic competitive strategies—low cost, differentiation, focus; these three strategies suggest how corporate position their product/service. In terms of Porter’s theory, it is very costly to adopt both low cost and differentiation and often inefficient. In like manner, countries should decide their positioning strategy based on their competitive advantages and core competences. With regard to USA and China, you’d better consider if USA has competitive advantages over China on those labour-intensified industries such as textile, clothing and toy industries etc, of course not, your competitive advantages are on high tech, IT, entertainment, movie, biochemistry industries etc.

You might say USA has a super huge domestic market and demand; we do not need to rely on the other countries. But the concepts of free market and global market came from Western countries. China does not have power to globalize the world, China is globalized. 150 years ago, Western countries including USA forced China to open its domestic markets by your advanced military weapons. I am not saying globalization is not good, I do believe one day human being will unite altogether, trade is an important factor.

If a country wants to open its door to the world, it has to face competition. Otherwise, it had better to close its door as China did 150 years ago. I remember when Western cheap products tidily flooded into China after Opium War, so many Chinese factories, workshop and companies went to bankruptcy, so many workers lost their jobs. Although China was forced to open the door, I think it was necessary. In terms of systems theory, a living system has to exchange energy and information with outside; otherwise the system will become a dead system. But when exchange with outside, you has to face competitors, there must be has winner and loser, I am not Darwinist, but I do think co-petition and harmony start with competition. Closing door or setting higher barrier is not good solution; the key is to learn how to co-petition on an equal stance and standard.


As to the Japanese car industry inroads into the US, they were not hindered 30 years ago, they were just new comers to a place dominated by domestic carsey had to competitively learn their eay and have done so.

---When Japan-made car entered into US market, because of its cheapness and good quality, American car manufacturers and trade unions united together to lobbying government to stop importing Japan-made cars, today, same or similar attitude is happening to China, the excuses is the same plus democracy.

Chinese regulations limit foreign investment in a domestic financial institution to 25%, with the maximum stake for a single investor at 20%.

---I think it is necessary for a developing country to adopt this kind of regulation at the beginning, without these regulations, US companies, banks as well as the other developed countries can easily buy all the Chinese banks. Give you an example; Coca Cola and Pepsi have almost destroyed most of Chinese local cola manufactories by merging or acquisition, you cannot ask an infant fights with an adult.

You compare Unocal where it would be 100% owned by an authoritarian centrally elitist controlled government where its shareholders can not see in a transparent way the actions of the controlling bodies to a maximum 20% stake in a Chinese company where there is no control and no say so. It an apples to peanuts comparison.

---CNOOC Ltd is a Hong Kong-incorporated public company and is listed on the Hong Kong and New York Stock Exchanges. Although it has a strong Chinese government background, but it has to follow Hong Kong’s law as well as USA, if it is not a transparent company, how could it be listed on New York Stock Exchange? Of course, being listed on NYSE does not mean transparent, at least it is monitored by both Hong Kong and US authorities. But according to your opinion, just because CNOOC is owned by an authoritarian government and an authoritarian government-owned company must be untransparent, I don’s see it is a good reason. There are many authoritarian governments too, some are friends of US.

Subsidizing is not controlling.

The air New Zealand issue was one of failure and necessity no one would buy it from its wholly-owned Australian parent that it was a subsidiary. In 2001 it was offered for ale for $1 USD and no one would buy it. So the government bailed it out and took a 80% stake in it out of desperation not free market choice. In the US it would have failed in bankruptcy.

As to Samsung, the issue maybe Government subsidies but not government ownership. See for yourself.

---Subsidizing is not controlling, but for some extent it still means unequally competition for its competitors. I used Air NZ as an example to suggest that being owned by government is not just a phenomenon of authoritarian country.

The key here is China needs oil, no matter whether it is an authoritarian or democratic country.
Blackwater
Buying products from developing nations is such a bad thing. We should stop sending in capital so they can never develop. I mean, the industrialized world just waved a magic want... and POOF... we had anything. No back breaking labor, no horrible conditions, nothing.

Oh noes, CHILD LABOR! Child prostitution is a much better way for their families to feed themselves.




P.S. for everyone, does Ustrider do anything but those pictures?
Gunnen4u
QUOTE (Blackwater @ Jul 28 2005, 04:28 PM)
P.S. for everyone, does Ustrider do anything but those pictures?
*


US Trader the lombaster?! OOHHH Yes!!

He could take the simplest things and produce this massive post on it. It was really amusing and very imfortmative in the same post!

I think he just got sick of explaining his point to that one long winded guy.
sea_of_red
History shows that the Chinese are above all else, rational. The Chinese problem is that rational isn't always the best way to go. China is not an immediate problem to the USA. You see a lot of pet media types hyping for the MIC (Miltary-Industrial Complex). That is because there isn't much of a profit in guerrilla fiughting, which will be the American military challenge for the next several decades. You don't need Fighter bombers at 250 million per copy to fight guerrillas. What is needed are better boots and better rifles. Nobody is going to pay 250 million for a pair of boots or a rifle. New boots and new rifles with massive amounts of ammo won't cost as much as 1 F-22. While F-22's ARE needed, at 200 million per, a dozen or so is enough. Store the Jigs, then if there is a major war, we can tool up the factories and start cranking them out like toaster ovens. No, the challenge from China will come after 2075. By then China will be a mature democracy and in a position to experiment with improved government forms. I think that the International Coporate State will be the next form of government. Corporate states with stockholders will replace Democracies with voters. Just as Nationalism replaced Tribalism, Globalization ( the Corporate state) will replace Nationalism. America will no longer be a hegemonic power, which will be a good thing for the USA. If China wants the Job, a China that cherishes human rights, the rule of Law and the sancity of life is welcome to it.
America can colonize the astroide belt and create a new golden age for the human race. That is America's destiny.
SK-(90)
Let's get the facts straight, China has about 2.5 million soldiers, not 200,000,000.
India does not have an able military(as they don't use full automatic AK series rifles) the use a semiautomatic weapon called an L1a1 rifle, modeled after the FN Fal. And China uses a far more superior assault rifle to any other country, it is called a QBZ-95, Try searching for an image at SINODEFENCE.com. And thirdly, although china has a third world economy, their economy will be the largest in the world in ten years. And as some of you might ask, Why does china not want to raise it's money? It is because they depend on foreign corporations to outsorce to china. Without us they are nothing.
SK-(90)
One more thing, China has a large supply of oil in an area called XINJIANG
Ben-T
The Chinest standard issue rifle is not the QBZ-95, it is a Chinese made AK-47 clone. The best assault rifle in the world is the U.S XM8 assault rifle, though it is currently only in limited use even by the special forces.

Nevermind the biggest economy in the world, if China's Communist Party has even managed to maintain it's grip on power in ten years it will be lucky.
Monsieur Le Tonk
The following leader from The Economist makes interesting reading.

How China runs the world economy

Global wages, profits, prices and interest rates are increasingly being influenced by events in China


"If you want one year of prosperity, grow grain. If you want ten years of prosperity, grow trees. If you want 100 years of prosperity, grow people." This old Chinese proverb crudely sums up how the entry of China's massive labour force into the global economy may prove to be the most profound change for 50, and perhaps even for 100, years.

China, along with the other emerging giants, India, Brazil and the former Soviet Union, has effectively doubled the global labour force, hugely boosting the world's potential output and hence its future prosperity. China's growth rate is not exceptional compared with previous or current emerging economies in Asia, but China is having a more dramatic effect on the world economy because of two factors: not only does it have a huge, cheap workforce, but its economy is also unusually open to trade. As a result, China's development is not just a powerful driver of global growth; its impact on other economies is also far more pervasive.

Beijing's new influence was clear from the shockwaves in global currency, bond and commodity markets last week after it announced that the yuan will no longer be pegged to the dollar. Until a couple of years ago nobody cared much that the Chinese yuan was pegged to the dollar. Recently, though, this link has become one of the hottest issues in international politics, widely blamed in America for its huge trade deficit.

Last week's 2.1% revaluation of the yuan is trivial and unlikely to dent America's trade deficit. More important is the breaking of the yuan's formal link to the dollar and the shift to a so-called "managed float" against a basket of currencies. In theory, this allows considerable scope for a further rise in the yuan against the dollar, though it is unclear by how much the Chinese authorities will allow the yuan to climb.

Even if last week's adjustment was timid, it could mark an important turning point. It is certainly a step in the right direction for China itself, as greater currency flexibility will give it more room to use monetary policy to steer the economy. More interesting are the implications for the world economy. This might be the beginning of the end of what has been dubbed a revived Bretton Woods system of fixed exchange rates between China (and other Asian economies) and America.

The dragon's breath

Under this arrangement, China has provided cheap finance to America's consumers and its government by buying Treasury bonds. If the switch to a currency basket causes China to reduce its new purchases of dollar assets, then American bond yields could rise. America's China bashers, who demand a further revaluation of 25% or more, should therefore be careful. Such a large-scale revaluation would surely push bond yields higher and badly hurt America's economy. Indeed, if the yuan's adjustment has any real impact on America's trade deficit, it will not be through the revaluation itself, but because higher bond yields squeeze domestic demand.
America's trade deficit is due mainly to excessive spending and inadequate saving, not to unfair Chinese competition. If China has contributed to America's deficit it is not through its undervalued exchange rate, but by holding down bond yields and so fuelling excessive household borrowing and spending. From this point of view, global monetary policy is now made in Beijing, not Washington.

Puzzle key

The popular focus on the yuan, America's trade deficit and jobs as China's main impact on the rest of the world misses the point. China's growing influence stretches much deeper than its exports of cheap goods: it is revolutionising the relative prices of labour, capital, goods and assets in a way that has never happened so quickly before. A recognition of China's profound and widespread impact on the world economy explains various current economic puzzles.

Take, for instance, the oil price. Since the beginning of last year, oil prices have doubled, yet in contrast to previous oil shocks, inflation rates remain low and global growth robust. The answer to this riddle is China. To the extent that oil prices are driven up by strong Chinese demand rather than, as in the past, an interruption of supply, they are less likely to hurt global growth. And the impact of higher oil prices on inflation has been offset by falling prices of all sorts of goods from cameras and computers to microwaves and bicycles-thanks to China. In addition, competition from China and the threat that firms in developed countries might shift offshore also helps to keep a lid on wages and hence inflation.

Another oddity is that, while the prices of most goods are falling, house prices are soaring in many countries. Again, enter the dragon. Cheaper goods from China have made it easier for central banks to achieve their inflation goals without needing to push real interest rates sharply higher. This has encouraged a borrowing binge. The resulting excess liquidity has flowed into the prices of assets, such as homes, rather than into traditional inflation. And, last but not least, there is the conundrum which has puzzled Alan Greenspan, head of America's central bank: why are American bond yields so low despite robust growth and hefty government borrowing? Part of the answer lies, once again, with China, which has bought large quantities of Treasury bonds to hold down its currency.

Over the coming years, developed countries' inflation and interest rates, wages, profits, oil and even house prices could increasingly be "made in China". How should the world's policymakers respond to China's growing economic clout? Trying to halt China's growth through protectionist measures, as many American congressmen would like to do, would be a disaster, for it would close off a powerful source of future global prosperity.

A better way to deal with China's growing power would be to give the country a bigger stake in global economic stability. China should be a full member of international economic policy forums, such as the G7 and the OECD. Western policymakers would be wise to remember another Chinese proverb: "What you cannot avoid, welcome." ?

Source: The Economist July 30th 2005
kidan
Do not to be so pessimistic.The Chinese push the world into prosperity.
But I think the communist can keep it power of government much longer that u expected and estimated.If China come to chaos,most of u will suffered it ----it not a intimidation to u.


-------------------------------------------------
China is really more powerful than before.

And it will to be more powerful then.

But it won't to be hegemonism.

If it so hegemonistic that intrude other country.

Overturn the government with us.

--A chinese
John L
QUOTE ("Kidan")
Do not to be so pessimistic.The Chinese push the world into prosperity.
But I think the communist can keep it power of government much longer that u expected and estimated.If China come to chaos,most of u will suffered it ----it not a intimidation to u.


Even Chinese know the all important word: Hubris*.


*Hubris-(sometimes spelled Hybris): The Greek term hubris is difficult to translate directly into English. It is a negative term implying both arrogant, excessive self-pride or self-confidence, and also a hamartia (see above), a lack of some important perception or insight due to pride in one's abilities. ...
kidan
Even Yankee know the all important word:science
Economics is a kind of science,can be measured by number.
Now look at the number.
John L
QUOTE (kidan @ Nov 9 2005, 10:31 AM)
Even Yankee know the all important word:science
Economics is a kind of science,can be measured by number.
Now look at the number.
*


Yes, I am looking, and I see problems ahead for the "Peace Loving" People's Republic of China. It is called "Banking scandal", and it is going to drag down the "so called" Dragon of Spring. If China makes it to the 2008 Olympiad, I will be surprised. Definately, after the rush of euphoria is past, look for things to go into the toilet.

The "Familial" system of oriental relationships with business do not work, and Japan had to learn this the hard way, followed by Korea. China has not learned by these mistakes, and they too will pay the price.

Banks are in business to make a profit, not make loans to their alliances only for the sake of furthering the alliance alone. The aliance system is a purely oriental system that is feudal in nature, and it is not conducive to Free Enterprise. And this modified form of "Croney Capitalism" is nothing but Fascism. And like any form of Collectivist application, it cannot keep up with systems that are closer to pure Free Enterprise.

With the present system, the PRC will NEVER catch up. It is like facing a wall from the middle of the room. If you go half way each time, the initial steps appear to be huge. But later ones will not be accomplished without major changes, and the wall is forever a goal that is not reached.

How about that one for enlightnment?
kidan
HAHA..

U would be more surprise when the Games become success,anyway welcome to China 2008 and make a journey to have a taste the differences between China and other Far East country.Hmmm..

It is sure that there are great bankrupts and corruptions in China ,ont only in bank system,but also all other parts of China.But China isn't US.
US official leader alway a millionaire,they never mind their living level,but every one in the government in CHINA including the Chairman,they have to earn their wage(not more than 1500$ per month,most of them only have 250$ per month) to rise their child.They are not capitalist.
However ,u turn me to another topics:the atitudes of US towards corruption.Now,there a lot of crime exile to US for "Political Protection".Most of them already get the protection of US,only because they possess some kinds of useful information to US(As work in head of some part of China).Now US become the world's top corruption sinner settlement.

Now the things were changing,the FBI have open a department in BeiJIng,and promise more correlation with China.I am very optimistic to see more the sinners go to the jail and no more corruption.

Anyway,the corruption could not be compared with the development.It is very little to the whole country.
Yohan
QUOTE (John L @ Nov 9 2005, 03:56 PM)
With the present system, the PRC will NEVER catch up.  It is like facing a wall from the middle of the room......
*

True, very true.
PRC has many very serious problems. Let me tell you only about 2 of them.

1-
The present political system is the major problem: The own people are afraid of its government, and the Chinese government is afraid of its own people.

Censorship and restrictions are everywhere, even a farmer is not allowed to move to a town without prior permission.

Tibet, North Korea, and even Falungong:
I think, Mr/Mrs Kidan is not allowed to comment over the internet, should he/she really posting from China.

The Chinese Communist government wants to control all and everything.
On the other side, China has no other choice, as it would break up in several countries, similar to former Sowjet-Union.

2-
The Chinese government is doing its best, but Chinas population with over 1400 million people is growing and growing...this alone might cause a major breakdown in the near future.
Do you really invest your US dollars into Chinese Yuan? Your private money? I do not think so....but 1000s of Chinese are lining up every day, for a visa to USA or Japan with the hope of a better paid job.

-----

The present success of this very backwarded country (except the coastline) is only, because the Chinese Communist government is very good in separating the actual issues.

Tourists are bringing money, so China takes Japanese investments to preserve its history, then takes Japanese investments to construct hotels...in return, JAPAN (yes, JAPAN!) is one of the very few countries in this world, where its citizens are taking their passports and are entering China for tourism and for business....no visa!

A huge population is a headache, so China invites US and EU companies for investment making production sites. All is sooooooo cheap, as salaries are over 70 times lower in China than in the USA.
Not so few companies accept that offer, dismissing the workers in the West, and are producing in China.
While jobless rate in Europe is high, jobless rate in China is low...

Let me say, without overseas investment, China would be back to the stone age...

Politically, China is a smiling communist - it looks like a modern liberal society, but you have to look a bit deeper to see China's problems.
SoloNav
And, now they are being aided and abetted by Google. I think I'll go on strike against this unfriendly giant. No More Google~!
John L
QUOTE (SoloNav @ Feb 6 2006, 01:32 PM)
And, now they are being aided and abetted by Google.  I think I'll go on strike against this unfriendly giant.  No More Google~!
*


I may do the same thing as well.
S.J.LongPants
QUOTE (Yohan @ Feb 6 2006, 05:42 AM) *
True, very true.
PRC has many very serious problems. Let me tell you only about 2 of them.

1-
The present political system is the major problem: The own people are afraid of its government, and the Chinese government is afraid of its own people.

Censorship and restrictions are everywhere, even a farmer is not allowed to move to a town without prior permission.

Tibet, North Korea, and even Falungong:
I think, Mr/Mrs Kidan is not allowed to comment over the internet, should he/she really posting from China.

The Chinese Communist government wants to control all and everything.
On the other side, China has no other choice, as it would break up in several countries, similar to former Sowjet-Union.

2-
The Chinese government is doing its best, but Chinas population with over 1400 million people is growing and growing...this alone might cause a major breakdown in the near future.
Do you really invest your US dollars into Chinese Yuan? Your private money? I do not think so....but 1000s of Chinese are lining up every day, for a visa to USA or Japan with the hope of a better paid job.

-----

The present success of this very backwarded country (except the coastline) is only, because the Chinese Communist government is very good in separating the actual issues.

Tourists are bringing money, so China takes Japanese investments to preserve its history, then takes Japanese investments to construct hotels...in return, JAPAN (yes, JAPAN!) is one of the very few countries in this world, where its citizens are taking their passports and are entering China for tourism and for business....no visa!

A huge population is a headache, so China invites US and EU companies for investment making production sites. All is sooooooo cheap, as salaries are over 70 times lower in China than in the USA.
Not so few companies accept that offer, dismissing the workers in the West, and are producing in China.
While jobless rate in Europe is high, jobless rate in China is low...

Let me say, without overseas investment, China would be back to the stone age...

Politically, China is a smiling communist - it looks like a modern liberal society, but you have to look a bit deeper to see China's problems.

I've just read this VERY interesting thread about our countries socioeconomic paradoxes. I've lived half my life and been doing business with both Taiwan, China, and the USA. I speak ALL the languages fluently as well as have lived the historys of all. I've read a lot of untrue statements that some have impressed adamintly their view and believe it to be fact.

Some of you I feel IMO would be better off to plead ignorance of the other side's cultural phenomona. We all are different in culture, and should be less cynical of the others intent (Governmental or Private.). blink.gif
Why would I say such a thing? well, I believe we are products of our environment and the difference between American and Chinese is culture limits us to what we've lived. I've lived both, and I believe it's amazing how we have managed to get as far as we have.....together. Bottom line? we are both (Chinese & Americans) human with the same goals; success, stability, security, and pride in our culture, history, peoples and nations.

A question was answered as it was given: "Would you invest your American Dollars in the Yuan?" I have, I will and until I see China weeken, I still will.

Further on a statement was made about their '08 Olympics; that statement was sooo far left it ain't RIGHT. China has and will continue to invest billions of yuan into it. Money isn't the consideration. I watch TV when I'm there, I FEEL the national pride behind them having their first and I'll promise you this: If no foriegner came other than the Olympiads, it wouldn't phase them; national/cultural pride, and Chun Jio Gan (A great feeling of accomplishment.) would be satisfactory. But, money is always a plus too!!!!!

P.S. Who are we to preech about corruption. Let he without sin cast the first stone.....




popcorn.gif
Fit2BThaied
Good post, SJLongPants. I'm typing this at Pudong Airport, after my second one-week visit to Shanghai in two years. From just that short exposure, it appears to me that Shanghai resembles any international city in the West, in any capitalist country. My good friend Yun asked me repeatedly, "Does this look like a Communist country?" Absolutely not. Of course, this is the showcase of China, and the provinces are probably just the opposite. Some portions of Marxist ideology or style must be present, such as the TV screens going black when the lady heckled President Hu in Washington. If one wishes to do political protest or open an evangelical church, they might get killed. But rampant capitalism appears to be as prevalent in Shanghai as Chinese food is....if you can walk past McDonald's, KFC, and Burger-King. smile.gif

And my best friend Yun, a native of Shanghai and an American citizen, now has well over half of his net worth invested in yuan. He just bought shares in a mutual fund!
John L
QUOTE (Fit2BThaied @ Apr 24 2006, 12:24 AM) *
Good post, SJLongPants. I'm typing this at Pudong Airport, after my second one-week visit to Shanghai in two years. From just that short exposure, it appears to me that Shanghai resembles any international city in the West, in any capitalist country. My good friend Yun asked me repeatedly, "Does this look like a Communist country?" Absolutely not. Of course, this is the showcase of China, and the provinces are probably just the opposite. Some portions of Marxist ideology or style must be present, such as the TV screens going black when the lady heckled President Hu in Washington. If one wishes to do political protest or open an evangelical church, they might get killed. But rampant capitalism appears to be as prevalent in Shanghai as Chinese food is....if you can walk past McDonald's, KFC, and Burger-King. smile.gif

And my best friend Yun, a native of Shanghai and an American citizen, now has well over half of his net worth invested in yuan. He just bought shares in a mutual fund!


I hope he has enough sense to either get out before the Olympics, or at least be prepared to weather the storm that is surely going to strike the PRC from a severe economic turndown.

QUOTE
From Stratfor

Annual Forecast 2006: The Year of Great and Near-Great Powers -- Part I
January 16, 2006 21 06 GMT


East Asia: Buying Time

The 2005 annual forecast says of Asia: "China -- and particularly its precarious economy -- will be Asia's geopolitical epicenter in 2005. Changing global trends will cause the Chinese economy to begin faltering. When the Chinese economy suffers, economic pains throughout Asia are sure to follow. Moreover, a faltering Chinese economy could cause the Communist Party to struggle to maintain control."

The year 2005 saw significant problems inside the Chinese economy, as the government revealed -- intentionally or otherwise -- the depths of inefficiencies, the growing rural-urban gap, the bad loan problems and, perhaps most troubling, the rising social backlash. Though China has managed the growing crises, it has not eliminated them. We overestimated the speed and degree of the Chinese meltdown, while underestimating Asians' ability to continue to pursue non-solutions and trick foreigners into believing all is well and good; but the general trend remains as we predicted.

China has postponed its debt crisis by spinning off bad debts to asset-management firms and giving foreign banks a vested interest in improving the viability of the major Chinese financial institutions. China has restated its gross domestic product (GDP) figures to make the country sixth-ranked in the world in terms of GDP -- and soon to be fourth. But growth does not equal health, particularly in a country where rapid growth remains necessary just to keep in place, and even the 9 percent growth rate is barely keeping up with the population's employment needs. China is running as fast as it can just to avoid slipping backward.

The fate of the Chinese economy, and the government's means and ability to maintain control, will remain front-and-center in 2006. China continues to struggle with massive bad debts racked up over years of running businesses for social stability rather than profit. In addition, several years of decentralization of economic priorities have compounded inefficiencies and redundancies even as China moves toward a market economy (albeit with Chinese characteristics). The social backlash to these local initiatives -- which have been tinged with corruption, if not thickly painted with it -- is now showing. Protests are growing larger and more violent -- with a recent clash in Shanwei, in southern Guangdong province, ending in local security forces opening fire at protesters.

In 2006, China will have to face this situation squarely. The government recognizes the problems; it just does not have a clear solution. The new five-year plan, set to be approved by the National People's Congress in March, sets as a goal the rectification of the rich-poor, urban-rural and geographical gaps. There is no clear plan for accomplishing this, but the government has let it be known that those who already have benefited from China's economic opening will be asked to "sacrifice" in order to bring up the rest of the country -- only "the rest" is some 900 million individuals.

The Chinese government has also sent another message, this one to those who are growing bolder in their protests. The government's reaction to the Shanwei incident sends a clear signal that social disturbances are about to be treated more seriously -- and deadly force could again be employed. At the same time, Beijing is not only attacking the demonstrators, it also is going after the corrupt local and regional officials and holding the bureaucracy responsible for social dissatisfaction. This is setting up a dangerous combination, but Beijing is betting that the threats will lead to another period of calm, instead of setting off the powder keg.

In an effort to keep things on track, Beijing will pump more money into central and western transportation infrastructure -- trying to bring the jobs to the people, rather than have the people move to where the jobs are. The government, in an attempt to slow the growth of inefficient and redundant industries -- including steel, copper and some construction sectors -- also is launching an initiative to "encourage" investments in certain industries while discouraging others. Finally, Beijing will continue to stir patriotism -- fanning nationalist sentiments against Japan while playing up the positive accomplishments of a China that instead of being isolated is now engaging, and being engaged by, major world powers.

Beijing will continue to seek an accommodating dialogue with the United States, staying just out of trouble and thus having a freer hand to deal with internal strife. In addition, the government will continue to pursue a path of providing economic rewards to opposition parties in Taiwan in order to further weaken the ruling pro-independence Democratic Progressive Party. China will expand its energy cooperation with its neighbors, from former competitors in the South China Sea to ally North Korea to western neighbors India and Kazakhstan. And Beijing will continue to try to create a unifying sense of "Chineseness" through the space program, changes in global GDP ranking, anti-Japanese nationalism and preparations for the 2008 Olympics.
S.J.LongPants
Thanks for your response Fit 2bThaied. The other provincial airports are much the same, just smaller. Capitalist society? Of course, but by different principles then ours, and similar ideology.



QUOTE (John L @ Apr 24 2006, 07:22 AM) *
I hope he has enough sense to either get out before the Olympics, or at least be prepared to weather the storm that is surely going to strike the PRC from a severe economic turndown.

Appreciate the concern John, I'll take it under advisement.

Ah yes, the great Western illusion: "Without us - they are nothing."[/b] Well, they've been around for thousands of years with a strong social 'oneness' "Chineseness" as called above. They will always Adapt, and overcomeregardless.

The Olympics are not going to make or break their country or economy, I'm sure all has been anticipated if not conservatively (As far as numbers are concerned).

One of the most commonly overlooked fact is that China itself is becoming it's own market. Regardless of external demands, the Chinese KNOW how to handle economic hardship; they wrote the book. If they closed off their exports entirely, [think this through people] could they survive? I think factory workers would leave the big cities and go back to mom & pop in the country and re-evaluate their strategy, and knowing them would probobly have some excetric working solution for the people......

QUOTE
Quote" The government recognizes the problems; it just does not have a clear solution."
Ha! Sounds like my governor Arnold schwarzenneger! Really.

I rather enjoyed reading Stratfor's article; he covered his topics sufficiently. However, he fails to recognize the fact that he is analyzing it with his Western synthetic knowledge based experience. His outlook on their situation is based not with their forcast but his. Their economic strategy is working well -- the Chinese way, not his way.....

popcorn.gif

I wouldn't consider Strtfors' opinion unbiased too....

Respectfully giving my opinion,

Me. blink.gif
This is a "lo-fi" version of our main content. To view the full version with more information, formatting and images, please click here.
Invision Power Board © 2001-2009 Invision Power Services, Inc.