China to catch up with US economy

[Cheetah786]

WASHINGTON (AFP) - China is on course to catch up with the United States and join the front ranks of world economic powers, but that is little cause for concern even among Americans, a global survey said Monday. But the same poll showed there is generally as much distrust of the United States as there is of China to "act responsibly" in world affairs.

Most respondents in 13 countries agreed it was "likely that someday China's economy will grow to be as large as the US economy," according to the opinion poll by the Chicago Council on Global Affairs and WorldPublicOpinion.org.

"What is particularly striking is that despite the tectonic significance of China catching up with the US, overall the world public's response is low key -- almost philosophical," said Steven Kull, editor of WorldPublicOpinion.org.

In no country was there a majority who felt that China's economic rise would be mostly negative, but that was not because China is particularly trusted, the pollsters said.

Majorities in 10 out of 15 countries said they did not trust China "to act responsibly in the world." But the same number also said they distrusted the United States.

"Though people are not threatened by the rise of China, they do not appear to be assuming that it will be a new benign world leader," Kull said.

"They seem to have a clear-eyed view that China is largely acting on its own interests."

The Chinese themselves are among the more skeptical populations, with only half saying that their economy will catch up with the United States'. Among Americans, the percentage was 60 percent.

Only in India and the Philippines did a plurality of respondents say the United States would always remain a bigger economy than China .

The highest level of concern about the implications of China's economic march was in the United States, where one in three is worried.

But 54 percent of Americans said that its rise would be "neither positive nor negative" while one in 10 said it would be mostly positive.

Only in Iran did a majority -- 60 percent -- say that it would be "mostly positive for China to catch up."

"Their favorable outlook may stem in part from heavy Chinese investment in Iranian oil as well as Iranian desires to have a counterweight to American power," the pollsters said.

The survey included 18 countries: Australia, Argentina, Armenia, China, France, India, Iran, Israel, Mexico, Peru, the Philippines, Poland, Russia, South Korea, Thailand, Ukraine, and the United States, plus the Palestinian territories.

Not every question of the poll was asked in each country, so that the results for some questions covered less than 18 countries.

http://news.yahoo.com/s/afp/20070528/ts_alt_afp/uschinaeconomypoll_070528205219

 

[onion105]

Everything is possible.at least we should have another 30 years more.
Don't forget that Chinese population are six times than American.

 

[ChineseBoy]

Everything is possible.at least we should have another 30 years more.
Don't forget that Chinese people are six times than American.

Too large a population should be seen as a disadvantage,and half the present may be most fit for us.Only with unity our success we determine.

 

[EagleEyes]

Too large a population should be seen as a disadvantage,and half the present may be most fit for us.Only with unity our success we determine.

Shouldn't large population help the cause of the nation instead. For example more tax funds.. more industry..cheap labor.. etc!

 

[Cheetah786]

Too large a population should be seen as a disadvantage,and half the present may be most fit for us.Only with unity our success we determine.

Biggest advantage Americans have that makes there economy move is consumer spending.

biggest example of that Europe is joining hands=European union. one of the biggest reason was to counter USA advantage of buying power.

Only with unity our success we determine

couldn't have said it any better.

 

[ChineseBoy]

Biggest advantage Americans have that makes there economy move is consumer spending.

biggest example of that Europe is joining hands=European union. one of the biggest reason was to counter USA advantage of buying power.

Imagine China without 1-child policy?And it may take half the Asia continent to rise several billions of chinese...
6~8 hundred million is best----the present European population----to our size of land.

couldn't have said it any better.

Thanks very much.

 

[Bushroda]

Shouldn't large popular help the cause of the nation instead. For example more tax funds.. more industry..cheap labor.. etc!

It doesn't necessarily work that way. Depends on what kind of tax structure is followed. eg. A person with $200000 could pay 33% of his annual income in tax whereas a person with $75000 might pay only 12%.

 

[overseer]

NO. China's one child policy was correct. Without it, China would never be able to catch up. Remember, as you have more people, you have more liabilities too. It means you need to spent MORE to feed them, clothe them, and give them education. All those cost add up.

It's easiest to understand it this way. 2 sets of parents, both with moderate income.
1st set of parents have only 2 children. They use the money wisely, the kids grow up and the parents have enough money gave them both college education. The kids graduate and gets a professional job with solid income. These kids went on to have 2 more kids each, and each is able to save up and work on higher value jobs and have comfortable lifestyle and sent their own 2 kids to college.

2nd set of parents have 4 children. They spent most of their money feeding the kids. The kids grows up and the parents have only save up enough to send half of their kids to college, or none at all since it would be unfair to the other 2 kids. The kids gets a low tech labour jobs, and can barely save up enough, and they each have 4 more kids. Each of them with their low paying job cannot afford to sent any kids to college at all (now it is not even an option) and their kids grow up and not getting any education either...and the vicious cycle continues....

As you can see, the more people you have, the more liability there is going to be, and it is a downward spiral as government cannot afford to put money to build infrastructures vertically (continuous technological upgrades - eg more fundings for universities, space programs, industries) but instead, it has to spread the money horizontally for low tech basic necessities (eg. more dams, more power stations, more housings, more police, more teachers and schools). That creates a vicious cycle of more poorly educated people who gave birth to even more liabilities (please excuse my harsh languages).

So, now coming back, as we can see, as China's economy improves, more parents earn moderate incomes and can save up enough to sent their ONLY CHILD to college, or even oversea for doctorate studies. The child will be able to graduate and get a high value job and bring good incomes to the whole family, and most critically, eventually, he may decide to come back and contribute his knowledge in his own home country and build up the local expertise.

 

[kvLin]

We're not Sparta who used to throw the incompetents into death valley. so it's all about territorial resources and education, the two decide what population is a proper fit, if not the best.

China has less plowland than India does, much less in fertile soil %, but it has to yield more crops to feed the world's biggest population, which has been,like a blessing in disguise, hastening the growth of agricultural technique.

Short-commons could be settled down by international trade, if not taking consideration of poor nations like in Africa. Actually the biggest problem caused by overpopulation is in environmental capacity and infrastructure. image what if China catches up to be a nation on wheel.

 

[overseer]

We're not Sparta who used to throw the incompetents into death valley. so it's all about territorial resources and education, the two decide what population is a proper fit, if not the best.

China has less plowland than India does, much less in fertile soil %, but it has to yield more crops to feed the world's biggest population, which has been,like a blessing in disguise, hastening the growth of agricultural technique.

Short-commons could be settled down by international trade, if not taking consideration of poor nations like in Africa. Actually the biggest problem caused by overpopulation is in environmental capacity and infrastructure. image what if China catches up to be a nation on wheel.

Well, first....Nobody complaint about America being the biggest resource hog on planet earth, consuming 10 times of the world's average. And before that, it was the British, the Spainish, the list goes on.


But I do agree that if China is to follow American style transport infrastructures (each family owns 3 cars..) it *could* *possibly* be environmentally disasterous. But then again, it could not be. It all depends on the environmental protection policy that country enforced.

For example; look at Japan and Singapore, even South Korea. These countries rank top of the world as the most densely populated countries, and yet, they have little environmental issues.

Japan in particular, follows a more american style "car economy", as they are not only the biggest producer of cars, they are also user. And yet they have little issue associated with such. So I would not think having a large population of car owners would be a problem. The problem is always how you manage them.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_countries_by_population_density

 

[kvLin]

it's morelikely a traffic disasterous.

guess how many vehicles are running in BJ? 3 million,along with a yearly increase of 10%. half are private owned. and the number of taxi is limited by 80 thousand. plus 900+ lines of city bus and 3 lines of metro. streets in BJ might be among the widest in the world, BJ is joked as city of traffic jam,especially for the two bottle necks: Zhongguancun and Xizhimen.

In GZ, there are 2.4 million vehicles running every day, 80% are private owned. annual rate of increase at 17.3%. I have one, my next door neighbor has 3,including a gas swallower Landrover. 10km takes me 45 minutes in average daytime.

the vehicle inventory in Newyork is over 8 million but daily running no more than 2 million.

 

[overseer]

it's morelikely a traffic disasterous.

guess how many vehicles are running in BJ? 3 million,along with a yearly increase of 10%. half are private owned. and the number of taxi is limited by 80 thousand. plus 900+ lines of city bus and 3 lines of metro. streets in BJ might be among the widest in the world, BJ is joked as city of traffic jam,especially for the two bottle necks: Zhongguancun and Xizhimen.

In GZ, there are 2.4 million vehicles running every day, 80% are private owned. annual rate of increase at 17.3%. I have one, my next door neighbor has 3,including a gas swallower Landrover. 10km takes me 45 minutes in average daytime.

the vehicle inventory in Newyork is over 8 million but daily running no more than 2 million.

Maybe you should consider running I used to run 7 km to college under 45 mins, and 10 km probably will take 1 hour, which isn't that much ... and if you use bike could probably get there in less than half the time (20 mins probably).

 

[kvLin]

believe I'm a fast lane fan.

no way for a bike riding China is no longer a kingdom of bicycle.

bike lane has been cancelled in major cities in China. I do have a bicycle but only ride to the badminton club inside my housing estate.

 

[overseer]

To be honest, even though I think China can probably sustain an American style car-centric urban planning, I don't really believe it's a wise choice. Even with the most stringent control, due to the sheer number of people, it would still be a significant pollution. Even if that aspect is solve with technological advance (eg. zero-pollution electric cars), it will not solve other critical issue..

For example, the most fundamental problem of owning the car : PARKING!!

If 1/4 of people in China owns a car (assuming able body working people) that would mean 300 million cars!! Now, where does China find space for those ppl to PARK THEIR CARS???

If you built multi-storey car parks, let's say a 20 stories (which is the norm in western world) car park, it can probably on average park 600 cars in total (30 cars per level). Even if we raise that to 100 stories (WOW!!! That is definitely not going to happen...no structure can support that) that would mean 3000 cars.. it is still a drop in the bucket when compare to how much cars there is going to be. You would need to construct 100,000 of these 100 stories super car parks to house all of China's 300 million cars!! The amount of cement and steel requires to construct those monster buildings would be enormous, adding to the overall economic cost of having this kind of infrastructure. It also increase the distance and size of city unnecessarily.

And it will still not ease the parking problem, because people would still goto places where there are no car parks..eg, what if people wants to goto City's Botanic Garden?? No matter how you look at it, parking will be the central problem China will face for decades to come.

This is not to mention traffic congestions problem. The root cause of all these problems is a problem of SPACE...A car simply takes up too much space by itself and there is simply not enough space in the urban area. So that's why I think it is wiser for China's central planning agencies to adopt more decentralised planning scheme, making self-sustain city centers all around, shorten the distance to travel to necessities by foot or by biking. It should create and increase bike-only lanes, and encourages bike use. It is definitely win-win solution. Not to mention, there wont' be a problem of parking! You can put 4-5 bikes in your own house easily with no problem... it doesn't take up any space at all !! And last not the least, there is no cleaner transportation than biking.. zero-emission and totally environmentally friendly. It also decrease China's dependency of oil dramatically, solving the energy problem, while increasing the general health of population (regular daily exercise!!)