George Soros Announces China Must Lead The New World Order

[Shotgunner51]

true. but I may add China territorial expansion is not only conquest but assimilation, integrating sinic and non-sinic folks into a country what we know as China today

Well said!

 

[Bussard Ramjet]

Well said!

Yes, that is what I have always been saying. That China has historically been a great mixing pot of cultures. That should be the case today as well. You should be open to immigration from countries in ASEAN, and actively work to assimilate neighboring countries like Burma etc.

This is entirely expected. One thing history teaches is great powers come and go. Ancient Egypt is just ruins now, Ancient Rome went, Ancient Pakistan (Indus Valley) gone, Ancient Persia gone. They all are just footnotes in history books today. In recent times it was said that the sun never set on the British Empire. Then USA came along and became numer uno. America in historical terms is newbie to the world and gained ascendancy post 1940s.

My point being, history teaches us nothing is constant. Well we have a contender waiting on the flannks to take over from USA. This is not to say USA will become zero and China will take over tommorow. No. This is a process. This is not a rupture. That process is in the making now.

All power follows from economics. Right now Chinese economy is probably same size of USA. Because USA enjoys incumbency factor which has been built up over preceding 7 decades - things like military power, soft power, political relationships, trading linkages America will contine to be force to be reckoned with for decades. However America is past high noon and is somewhere in the evening - slowly the light is fading and another fresh day will usher a new power.

Think about this. Just 2 decades ago China was nothing. Right now China is almost equal to USA. It has not even tapped 20% of it's potential. Over the next decades the Chinese will (slowly or fast) continue to grow until they are 2 times USA, then 3 times USA. The question is not if but how fast?

I have had discussions about this subject in other Western forums - the defining moment of our times when I have called China a hyper power in the making. However this has not gone down to well. First I think most people can't look beyond the incumbent power, simply because that has always been a constant in their lifetime but there is another factor.

Over the last 5 centuries all progress, all power has been sourced from the Western/European continient. Man of course having very short memory has given most Western people a sense of superiority which has been invested in racism. All white countries are source of progress. All white countries are powerful. Thus white mean superiority.

This ingrained sense of racism which of course overlooked that over the 8,000 years of recorded history most of Europe was non player and peripheral to history. Nile - Egypt, Tigris/Euphrates - Iraq, Indus - Pakistan, Yellow River - China was where all the action was. Rest were eating bananas or trying to light a fire to keep warm. This was overlooked in narrative that described Europe as centre of the world. USA is just extention of that order.

Now that ingrained sense of superiority is coming under challange and thus the refusal to accept the inevitable. I live in the West and am pro West as many members know but I look forward to the new multipolar world. A unipolar world is dangerous as it allows some to run rampent around the world. Unipolarity democratizes power to a extent.

And that is not such a bad thing.

I agree that economics is perhaps the biggest thing determining power. But you are wrong in stating that China is almost the same size as the US. China is a 11 trillion dollar economy, while US is a 19 trillion dollar economy. Also, China is facing many headwinds, among them being an ageing population, labor force decline, and broad institutional and political features.

It is extremely hard to foresee China being twice or thrice the size of US economy simply because the fundamentals aren't that great, and that the workforce is already decreasing.

 

[Abba_Dabba_Jabba]

China is a 11 trillion dollar economy, while US is a 19 trillion dollar economy. Also, China is facing many headwinds, among them being an ageing population, labor force decline, and broad institutional and political features.

Let see economy as a car,

It's not about 11 trillion or 19 trrillion, it is all about the shock and pressure a economy can handle. China's economy is a Limousin cruising on a highway, USA economy is also a Limousin on a highway but with no fuel and India' economy is a Tata Nano in a typical chaotic street.

All this type of economy has its advantage and disadvantage, While China will grow/cruise at whatever speed they can but there is always a fear of end of the highway, USA's economy can already see the end of their highway and India is still lost in the street.

But India is always prepared for when to apply brakes, when to accelerate and when to stop and can even run on a single lane road, China and USA can't afford it, they have a Limousin and they need a proper road for them.

All this was explained by an economist from Sweden in Sweden, so he was in no pressure to please anybody.

 

[Shotgunner51]

All this was explained by an economist from Sweden in Sweden, so he was in no pressure to please anybody.

Interesting, do you have a link to that article? Please share.

 

[nang2]

China has a good chance to lead the new world order if she continues on the effort of opening up. It means reducing its bureaucratic control over economy and letting the market force and competition to drive the production. However, I am pessimistic since all governments are extremely reluctant to give up the power it has. China only did that in 1978 when her economy was at the brink of collapsing. Now she is on the way of reversing the trend with more taxation, more regulations, etc. People may be wiser in desperate situation but often dumber when life is good.

 

[Shotgunner51]

Yes, that is what I have always been saying. That China has historically been a great mixing pot of cultures. That should be the case today as well. You should be open to immigration from countries in ASEAN, and actively work to assimilate neighboring countries like Burma etc.

I don't disagree, it's a complicated issue, let discuss in another thread.

economy

Every economy has an "economy", but could be entirely different in its makeup. Simply put, consumption-heavy vs production-oriented, surplus vs deficit, etc.

 

[nang2]

consumption-oriented vs production-oriented

It is a misconception. All products are meant for consumption. When products are produced without consumption, they are not called products. They are wastes.

 

[Abba_Dabba_Jabba]

Interesting, do you have a link to that article? Please share.

I attended a lecture. Out of 250 attendees there were hardly 10 Indians.

 

[Shotgunner51]

It is a misconception. All products are meant for consumption. When products are produced without consumption, they are not called products. They are wastes.

Yes, a consumer goods produced by someone, say a $500 cellphone, sure will be consumed by someone. The question is, are these two persons in same nation? Or different nation? Similarly, a capital goods produced by someone, say a 300000 tonne LNG Ship, sure will be invested (not consumed) by someone.

Yes, someone produce, someone consume, someone invest, that's all very normal.

But when some nation produce, some nation consume, some nation invest, that seems to be problem.

Why is it a problem? Simple, one must pay (eventually), same for a nation. For the time being, paying an IOU is fine, megatons of IOU also OK, but sooner or later the producer need to materialize these IOU, right?. The bigger problem is, you don't even see this problem by looking at one-liner "economy".

 

[nang2]

When some nation produce, some nation consume, some nation invest, that's problem.

It doesn't exist. Market is the power of equalization. No country can only produce, or consume, or invest for long. It is usually the tariff, migration control, government regulation, etc, that maintains such an imbalance. I hope China will be one day becoming a champion of free trade and free market. Maybe I am dreaming but at least my dreaming doesn't hurt anyone.

Let see economy as a car,

It's not about 11 trillion or 19 trrillion, it is all about the shock and pressure a economy can handle. China's economy is a Limousin cruising on a highway, USA economy is also a Limousin on a highway but with no fuel and India' economy is a Tata Nano in a typical chaotic street.

All this type of economy has its advantage and disadvantage, While China will grow/cruise at whatever speed they can but there is always a fear of end of the highway, USA's economy can already see the end of their highway and India is still lost in the street.

But India is always prepared for when to apply brakes, when to accelerate and when to stop and can even run on a single lane road, China and USA can't afford it, they have a Limousin and they need a proper road for them.

All this was explained by an economist from Sweden in Sweden, so he was in no pressure to please anybody.

I don't see much difference between USA, China and India. All these countries have a government that exerts huge impact in their own economy.

 

[Indus Pakistan]

It is extremely hard to foresee China being twice or thriceof US

I heard that in school when Mao died when China was 1/20 of US. I heard that in 1990s when it was 1/5 of US. Now that it is almosat 1/1 I am still hearing it. Yes, of course we know god has chosen USA and nothing can come close let alone overtake USA.

 

[Shotgunner51]

It doesn't exist. Market is the power of equalization. No country can only produce, or consume, or invest for long. It is usually the tariff, migration control, government regulation, etc, that maintains such an imbalance. I hope China will be one day becoming a champion of free trade and free market. Maybe I am dreaming but at least my dreaming doesn't hurt anyone.

Oh that's absolutely noble to wish for that my friend, I share your dream!

http://www.tradingeconomics.com/china/balance-of-trade
http://www.tradingeconomics.com/united-states/balance-of-trade
https://defence.pk/threads/from-mad...companies-at-record-pace.448900/#post-8678146
https://defence.pk/threads/new-pivo...eign-welfare-funds.455072/page-2#post-8930388
https://defence.pk/threads/us-singl...s-for-special-monitoring.457610/#post-8843931
https://defence.pk/threads/whos-worlds-4th-largest-creditor-nation.455610/

 

[nang2]

Oh that's absolutely noble to wish for that my friend, I share your dream!

http://www.tradingeconomics.com/china/balance-of-trade
http://www.tradingeconomics.com/united-states/balance-of-trade
https://defence.pk/threads/from-mad...companies-at-record-pace.448900/#post-8678146
https://defence.pk/threads/new-pivo...eign-welfare-funds.455072/page-2#post-8930388
https://defence.pk/threads/us-singl...s-for-special-monitoring.457610/#post-8843931
https://defence.pk/threads/whos-worlds-4th-largest-creditor-nation.455610/

Actually the balance of trade shouldn't be the goal. It is a typical mercantile mentality that has been refuted hundreds of years ago. Countries point fingers at each other when they see the imbalance of trade but what they really should do is to check themselves.

 

[Shotgunner51]

Countries point fingers at each other when they see the imbalance of trade but what they really should do is to check themselves.

Excellent conclusion!

Actually the balance of trade shouldn't be the goal. It is a typical mercantile mentality that has been refuted hundreds of years ago.

Very true, balance is hard, and it's not necessary. As an example I can't see how oil-rich Qatar can balance their trade in the near term. Result? They keep getting paid.

It's interesting to see China, and US. Apparently, China also get "paid", and US is "paying", but with what? Yes, US currency.

So month after month, year after year, US Fed has to print stacks of currency and send to China. The cycle will just go on, and on, and on, ... perhaps till eternity?

People don't tell you this in one-liner "economy".

 

[ohmrlobalobayeh]

Yes, that is what I have always been saying. That China has historically been a great mixing pot of cultures. That should be the case today as well. You should be open to immigration from countries in ASEAN, and actively work to assimilate neighboring countries like Burma etc.




I agree that economics is perhaps the biggest thing determining power. But you are wrong in stating that China is almost the same size as the US. China is a 11 trillion dollar economy, while US is a 19 trillion dollar economy. Also, China is facing many headwinds, among them being an ageing population, labor force decline, and broad institutional and political features.

It is extremely hard to foresee China being twice or thrice the size of US economy simply because the fundamentals aren't that great, and that the workforce is already decreasing.

I choked on the chicken rice i was eating when i read this.

US has 330million plus citizens. China has 1.4 billion plus.

So i guess the US and other developed nations who arent reproducing without taking life quality/resources planning into consideration are turning into pauper countries soon, and that india, who has its people making high quality babies like wild rabbits- will turn into a hyper economy soon

Thanks i had a good 1.