Doombreed
Junior Member
It wouldn't be mind boggling. It would be entirely unsustainable. 1.4 billion Americans...Jesus!
Chinese Economics Thread
- Thread starter Norfolk
- Start date
It wouldn't be mind boggling. It would be entirely unsustainable. 1.4 billion Americans...Jesus!
That's a bigger question the world will have to face, not only China; it'll be entirely unsustainable for everyone to consume and live with the standards of what we consider the first world. Something will have to give.
broadsword
Brigadier
Recycling and a sustainable economy will be ever more necessary with that huge consumption. Banning sharks' fins is the right move.
broadsword
Brigadier
Equation
Lieutenant General
Says who and what expert? China has the right to reach achieve the furthest well being for it's own people. American exception view is more unsustainable.
Equation
Lieutenant General
Standards will always change due to cost of living.
I've just read that above article last night and I think it's a very good one.
Today many Westerners like to use the example of Germany in the 1930-1940s, the former USSR throughout the cold war, and Japan in the late 1970-1980s to compare with China. They like to say that because all three has failed, China is doomed to fail as well and could never overtake the US in terms of GDP, but they overlook very important details.
There's little to none similarity between China and any of the above mentioned countries, perhaps except for the rapid economic growth.
China has the industrial might of Germany, the vast land territory and nuclear might and determined National Will of the USSR, and the wisdom and work ethics (hardwork) of the Japanese. We're also fundamentally larger, has more people, and in short, greater potential. It's never accurate to simply extrapolate from historical data.
For one, China has already achieved many things the above three countries never achieved. China now consumes more energy and generates more electricity than the US, China now accounts for greater percentage of global trade, China now is the world's largest manufacturer of goods.
All of these did not happen with either one of the three nations.
Furthermore, China takes a completely different approach from the above three countries in challenging American hegemony status. China does not take the world by force unlike Germany did with the two world wars; China does not isolate herself from world trade and engage little with the US and her allies unlike the USSR——in fact China engages the world and participates in globalisation almost more than anybody else; China also doesn't challenge the US purely economically or is controlled by the US unlike Japan. We're a completely independent country with nuclear abilities and one of the five permanent members of the UNSC, this is something Japan only dreamt of but never had.
Today many Westerners like to use the example of Germany in the 1930-1940s, the former USSR throughout the cold war, and Japan in the late 1970-1980s to compare with China. They like to say that because all three has failed, China is doomed to fail as well and could never overtake the US in terms of GDP, but they overlook very important details.
There's little to none similarity between China and any of the above mentioned countries, perhaps except for the rapid economic growth.
China has the industrial might of Germany, the vast land territory and nuclear might and determined National Will of the USSR, and the wisdom and work ethics (hardwork) of the Japanese. We're also fundamentally larger, has more people, and in short, greater potential. It's never accurate to simply extrapolate from historical data.
For one, China has already achieved many things the above three countries never achieved. China now consumes more energy and generates more electricity than the US, China now accounts for greater percentage of global trade, China now is the world's largest manufacturer of goods.
All of these did not happen with either one of the three nations.
Furthermore, China takes a completely different approach from the above three countries in challenging American hegemony status. China does not take the world by force unlike Germany did with the two world wars; China does not isolate herself from world trade and engage little with the US and her allies unlike the USSR——in fact China engages the world and participates in globalisation almost more than anybody else; China also doesn't challenge the US purely economically or is controlled by the US unlike Japan. We're a completely independent country with nuclear abilities and one of the five permanent members of the UNSC, this is something Japan only dreamt of but never had.
antiterror13
Brigadier
you are wrong about that ... the same thing people said in 15 to 19th century ..... but the truth is the quality of life keep increasing for more and more people.
Do you know what the KEY is TECHNOLOGY and INNOVATION .. with those everything is possible
imagine when fusion power plant become reality and common in 2040s
No one is saying it's going to fail. I would rather say that every system has it's limits and once you get there there's nothing you can do to improve. Chinese system will get the biggest inertion in the history (it's population) as well so changes to that scheme will be even harder to implement. Everything's going smooth so far but what if real problems will come along the road? That's what it is. And blind fanboyism won't change that fact.
I think the sensible middle ground should be that while continued growth is not assured for any country, it is just as ridiculous to argue that any country will necessarily follow the path of others (whether it is growth or decline) simply based on a few superficial similarities. Each nation should have its circumstances judged for its merit alone rather than dumbing it down to shoehorn into supposed historical parallels -- of course that makes it easier for absent minded readers to digest. Historical comparisons are useful in some regards of course, in terms of serious consideration of particular policies, demographics, and industries that in turn influence other domains, but I don't think xiabonan was talking about those kind of individuals.
Regarding the whole overtake US thing, I think it has become too much of a benchmark for many observers and economists. Overtaking the US GDP one day will not magically change China or the world or the global balance of power compared to if China were a few billion below US GDP. It is seen as important because of the symbolism behind such a achievement, when in reality overtaking US GDP is not an finish line, it is only an abstract number in a long endurance single man race.
Eventually everyone slows down. The problem is everyone is so bent on whether China slows down before or after it overtakes the US.