ZeEa5KPul
SENIOR MEMBER
- Joined
- Jul 13, 2017
- Messages
- 2,871
- Reaction score
- -16
- Country
- Location
@Mk-313, getting into it with the likes of @KAL-EL and @F-22Raptor is at least somewhat amusing because they are intelligent enough not to bring up any numbers - because they know the numbers are not in their favour. Learn from them.
To use a physical analogy, GDP measures the wattage of a light bulb, it doesn't tell you how much of that power produces light vs. heat.
not the 003 carrier, the gigantic LNG carrier beside it. You were saying something about China building "small a*s ships"? Since you're so proud of American shipbuilding (such as it is), say a thank you to the Chinese company ZMPC that provides the cranes that allow you to put together anything larger than a rowboat.
Obama was so embarrassed he had to put your flag over the company name. Take a good look at that, that's where your "industrial policy" money is going: right into China's pockets.
And before I forget, the 750,000 tons isn't China's naval tonnage, it was the naval tonnage China launched over a four year period. It's current naval tonnage is over 2 million tons, and growing at that terrifying rate.
PPP matters quite a lot, I assure you. Because most people are too ignorant to use it validly isn't my problem, it's theirs. When we're talking about the productive capacities of countries, PPP is the measure to use. Even then it understates China's industrial might because China cranking out gigantic ships (civilian and military) like sausages from the world's largest and most advanced shipyards counts as "GDP" exactly the same way as the legions of American lawyers engaged in frivolous lawsuits counts as "GDP."
To use a physical analogy, GDP measures the wattage of a light bulb, it doesn't tell you how much of that power produces light vs. heat.
Take a look at this picture
not the 003 carrier, the gigantic LNG carrier beside it. You were saying something about China building "small a*s ships"? Since you're so proud of American shipbuilding (such as it is), say a thank you to the Chinese company ZMPC that provides the cranes that allow you to put together anything larger than a rowboat.
Obama was so embarrassed he had to put your flag over the company name. Take a good look at that, that's where your "industrial policy" money is going: right into China's pockets.And before I forget, the 750,000 tons isn't China's naval tonnage, it was the naval tonnage China launched over a four year period. It's current naval tonnage is over 2 million tons, and growing at that terrifying rate.
That has nothing to do with "soft power", that's China's economic expansion. Even the "vaccine diplomacy" is more about supplying an infusion of capital into China's biotech sector and expanding markets abroad for future pharmaceutical products. If you want to call that "soft power", fine, but understand that you've just conceded that China has plenty of it and is building plenty more.
I will admit that this is quite a dilemma. Ultimately, we all know the dollar is going to inflate significantly and be worth a lot less as China's economy advances, but China still uses it heavily in international transactions. The best that can be done is to exit the dollar in an orderly fashion and build up the RMB's internationalization, while also accepting that some loss is inevitable. The worst thing one can do in a burning building is panic - one must head for the exits in a brisk yet orderly fashion and accept that one can't carry absolutely everything out before the building collapses.
