I think that China is already more powerful than even USA in many respects. Financially USA is right now at the mercy of China. If China pulls the lifeline, USA will be brought to its knees. Also USA is totally stretched in terms of number of soldiers it can deploy, whereas China has unlimited supply of soldiers. USA's capacity to digest body bags is even smaller, whereas China has no problem with body bags. Imagine, if China was in Iraq or Afghanistan, it would have filled these two countries with millions of soldiers and would have created peace there many years ago.
China has a long way to go
- Thread starter Champa-Chameli
- Start date
lhuang
FULL MEMBER
- Joined
- Mar 8, 2010
- Messages
- 820
- Reaction score
- 0
Numerical superiority vis a vis soldiers is nothing if our aircraft are unable to provide COAS, if our navy is not able to protect against coastal bombardment.
However the US isn't stupid enough to invade the mainland, we aren't stupid enough to invade theirs.
gambit
PROFESSIONAL
- Joined
- Apr 28, 2009
- Messages
- 28,569
- Reaction score
- 148
- Country
- Location
This has been debunked many times over...
The U.S.-China Economic Relationship: Separating Facts from Myths - Council on Foreign Relations
Advice: Google is your friend. Even though it is an American invention.
Where is Faithfulguy......he was saying India's economy is like African countries and Indian trillion dollar is because of its billion people
...
and Iam thinking about China now...
India & Africa
A trillion dollar economy with a trillion ppl
1ppl = $1
China
5 trillion dollar economy with a trillion ppl
1ppl = $5
In all aspects, India and Africa are almost identical
Dash
SENIOR MEMBER
- Joined
- Sep 9, 2009
- Messages
- 6,652
- Reaction score
- -14
- Country
- Location
Thank you for your informative post. Africa needs some program on Birth de-control. They will surpass our economy and your economy in 5 years
...Good article. Thanks! However dont you believe that US is bleeding to oil, China, and Iraq/Afghanistan. Do you think US will be able to sustain this situation for long, unless it opens its doors wide open to immigrants.
Japan's economy has been stagnant in the last couple of decades.
Their population is rapidly ageing and decreasing.
They have very little land - and only 20%-30% is suitable for agricultural, industrial or residential use.
Very few natural resources.
The last 3 points (land, population and resources) are why I believe Japan will never become a superpower.
noksss
SENIOR MEMBER
- Joined
- Apr 17, 2010
- Messages
- 2,950
- Reaction score
- -15
- Country
- Location
Let india can be compared with africa but china can never be compared with U.S
the reason is China is still a poor country. Although average incomes have risen very rapidly in recent decades, they still stand at between one-seventh and one-eighth the levels in the US - lower than in Turkey or Colombia and not much higher than in El Salvador or Egypt And one more main difference b/w china and any developed country is No developed country will send an army tank to crush the students who are asking for a democratic goverment expect the chinese cowards
topjumper
FULL MEMBER
- Joined
- Feb 18, 2010
- Messages
- 383
- Reaction score
- 0
Of course china has a long way to go, that's why it's called a developing country. Asserting US will never be surpassed is just a rhetoric motivated more by someone's self-insecurity than anything else.
China needs to continue its urbanization and promote a domestic consumption driven economy, now for the 1st time in history China has more people living in urban than rural areas. Also there's huge income inequality in China, as someone posted in an article few days ago indicated, those live in affluent coastal part of China like the yangtze river delta, home to more than 80 million people, earn way higher wages than the remote inland regions. The per capital income in those areas is between $15k - $17k, which is about the same level as south korea/taiwan, while the national average is only $3.6k, now that to me is an indication of how "communist" China truly is, i.e. more capitalist than many western capitalist countries.
China needs to continue its urbanization and promote a domestic consumption driven economy, now for the 1st time in history China has more people living in urban than rural areas. Also there's huge income inequality in China, as someone posted in an article few days ago indicated, those live in affluent coastal part of China like the yangtze river delta, home to more than 80 million people, earn way higher wages than the remote inland regions. The per capital income in those areas is between $15k - $17k, which is about the same level as south korea/taiwan, while the national average is only $3.6k, now that to me is an indication of how "communist" China truly is, i.e. more capitalist than many western capitalist countries.
Speeder 2
SENIOR MEMBER
- Joined
- Mar 24, 2010
- Messages
- 2,391
- Reaction score
- -10
- Country
- Location
Stop pretending with "our" and "we", as your IQ keeps failing you whenver you open the mouth. That's pretty pathetic, doesn't it? Eveyone and his dog know that you are an indian faking under a Chinese flag.
...unless you meant your India.
lhuang
FULL MEMBER
- Joined
- Mar 8, 2010
- Messages
- 820
- Reaction score
- 0
Eveyone and his dog know that you are an indian faking under a Chinese flag.
...unless you meant your India.
Ehhh, I'm an Australian citizen anyway, should stop saying our.
I'm in no way Indian though.
Eh, China has a long way to go, for sure, but the author of the first article is clearly manipulating statistics from different times to prove a point. For one, China's rural areas are not without growth, and secondly, about half of the population now reside in Urban areas, not 1/3. There is indeed a widening gap between the rich and the poor, but the author's suggestion of it being widened at a pace of 33% vs. 0% per year(or even 15% vs. 0% assuming a 5% growth rate) is simply ludicrous.
i agree, is there ever an end?
the name of the game is sustained progress so hard work is never over!
dragonbane
FULL MEMBER
New Recruit
- Joined
- May 15, 2010
- Messages
- 14
- Reaction score
- 0
sry to burst ur bubble, but becoming the number 1 trading partner or whatever to countries run by dictators and tyrants isn't a very big accomplishment. i'm too lazy to look up sanctions against the African countries or who they're run by but I can guarantee that a majority are run by dictators and tyrants. as for the middle eastern countries... we all know the situation there, and influence in Africa is nothing compared to influence in Europe, Asia, South America, etc... which America has and china does not have. if china truly did have influence then Russia would not have stopped the sale of those rd-93 engines fearing competition in egypt.
satellite killers may be used in war, but using bm's in a war is a big no no due to the fact that they could be thought of as a 1st strike initiating a full response. anti carrier bms are basically a show off technology, which will NEVER be used.
also about china's global aspirations for its navy, china will NEVER be the dominant power in any ocean, the only ocean it may have power in will be the pacific and that too will be challenged by US, Russia, Japan, Korea, Taiwan, Australia, etc... in the Indian ocean it will be challenged by India which is an unsinkable aircraft carrier along with the US and its CBG's. As for the Atlantic... china is too far away to have any real impact. The reason the USA and USSR were global naval powers were because they were bordered by 2 oceans or had easy access to the 2 oceans. geographically however china doesn't have this advantage.
and i think you should at least listen to what this guy has to say, he's backing it up with some solid data, maybe someone with the time could look up all the data on electricity and stuff from back in the day and conclude if the guy is right.
He is from MIT, and being hired there means ur pretty damn smart, they have the #1 engineering program in the world, and Engineers are some of the smartest people in the world, however this guy is an economics professor, idk how good MIT is in economics but given they have the #1 engineering program in the world, their economics program must not be that behind, meaning this guy must be pretty smart.
Smart perhaps, but agenda-free? Perhaps not. Besides, plenty of smart of people disagree with each other. In fact, there are many Harvard, Yale, MIT, etc. professors who would argue the opposite.
As for your use of the word "never", well, never say never! Besides, where the heck did you get the "easy access to 2 oceans" thing for Russia? That's been a problem plaguing them for centuries, which is why they've never even come close to the U.S. in terms of naval power except with submarines.
As for your use of the word "never", well, never say never! Besides, where the heck did you get the "easy access to 2 oceans" thing for Russia? That's been a problem plaguing them for centuries, which is why they've never even come close to the U.S. in terms of naval power except with submarines.
