The consequences of a wealthy China

[Almighty Colin]

I don't often post entire articles but this one is worth posting in it's entirety.

From CNN.COM:


SYDNEY, Australia (Reuters) -- China's ambitious economic growth plans are environmentally unachievable because the world does not have enough resources to allow its 1.3 billion people to become Western-style consumers, a U.N. official said on Wednesday.

Klaus Toepfer, head of the U.N. Environment Program, said China's aim of quadrupling its economy by 2020 can only occur if developed nations radically change their consumption habits to free up scarce resources for the world's poor.

"Quadrupling the GDP of a country of 1.3 billion, can you imagine what are the consequences if you go in the same structure as was done in the so-called developed countries?" Toepfer told reporters during a visit to Sydney.

He said that if China had the same density of private cars as, for example Germany, it would have to produce 650 million vehicles -- a target that environmentalists say the world's supply of metal and oil would be unable to sustain.

"It's not a question whether you are devoted to nature or whether this is an emotional topic. This is the rationality of economics," Toepfer said.

China's gross domestic product, or GDP, grew eight percent last year and the government expects it to expand another seven percent in 2003.

Toepfer was in Australia to attend a conference of young environmentalists from Asia, discussing ways of changing consumer habits so that precious resources such as water are conserved.

He said the world's approach to resource use was going through a significant phase with slow economic growth persuading governments in Europe and North America to aggressively try to stimulate consumption.

While senior Chinese officials appeared to be fully aware of the constraints the environment placed on their economic plans, Toepfer said more work needed to be done in developed nations to make environmentally friendly products "trendy" and mainstream.

[Mike AI]

China is going to be a long term competator for the USA.... next 20-50 years.

[Winetalk.com]

Originally posted by Mike AI@Jul 16 2003, 06:06 PM
China is going to be a long term competator for the USA.... next 20-50 years.
good,
I have Chinese bonds too
;-)))

[Vick]

WTF is a UN Official to tell any country they can not achieve their goals - just another example of the worthlessness of the UN

Given their present course and without any unforeseen obstacles, challenges or changes eventually China will be the world power surpassing the USA in the next 20-40 years

China doesn't have the internal challenges and BS that the USA does and is more committed to achieving their goals

[PornoDoggy]

Originally posted by Vick@Jul 16 2003, 07:41 PM
WTF is a UN Official to tell any country they can not achieve their goals - just another example of the worthlessness of the UN

Given their present course and without any unforeseen obstacles, challenges or changes eventually China will be the world power surpassing the USA in the next 20-40 years

China doesn't have the internal challenges and BS that the USA does and is more committed to achieving their goals
What kind of "internal challenges and BS" do you think the U.S. has that China doesn't?

I doubt very seriously that China will ever threaten the U.S. so long at they maintain the current form of government, nor do I doubt for a moment the ability of the U.S. to meet whatever challenge the Chinese can mount.

[Vick]

"internal challenges and BS" do you think the U.S. has that China doesn't?

Race Relations
Illicit Drug Use on a massive scale
Pat Robertson
Farrakhan (or however his name is spelled)
Immigration challenges
World perception
Hosting the UN
Huge Budget Deficits

that's 8 in under 30 seconds, there's a lot more

PD - I really hope you're right and I'm wrong

[PornoDoggy]

To quote one of the greatest television shows ever*, sounds to me like you are singin' a chorus of "Gloom, despair, and agony on me ... "

Some of the things you mention are in fact problems; there's only one of them I think is complete hogwash.

But look at a little history. Race relations have improved vastly in the last 40 years, and will continue to improve - no country confronts it head on like the United States does. The drug problem? Read about the drunkenness problems from Colonial times into the 1880s. Read about the Know-Nothings, who lamented the unmanagable horde of immigrants in the 1840s (+/-). Budgets can be balanced; world perception can be changed (and if the world perception of the U.S. is so bad, why in the fuck does everybody want to come here?).

China has it's own share of minorities and ethnic tensions; it's even got a couple of provinces with Islamic majorities and borders some Islamic Republics, if I'm not mistaken. And they happen to have a Communist government, which will prevent them from ever realizing their potential.

Nope - don't see it the way you do.

Hee-Haw

[carbon]

all that matters for us in the near future is for china to become as wired as the US...

uh... sorry, but the first thought this article brought to my mind is the vast numbers of potential porn consumers...

carbon

[Vick]

PD - sounds like you have a magic wand there to wave :P

But the issues really go deeper than what you addressed

"Race relations have improved vastly in the last 40 years"
To some extend yes, but as long as you have Farrakhan on one side and David Duke on the other spewing venomous hate and they have followers, race relations still have a long way to go

"The drug problem?" -while Alcohol is a very strong drug no one in Colonial times had a crack pipe. Currently Heroin use is probably at it's highest point at any time in the history of the US

Combine those two and add Alcohol abuse and we have a nation of people with serious challenges. Which makes it more challenging for everyone to reach their full potential, not to even mention the resources that are lost

" lamented the unmanagable horde of immigrants in the 1840s"
The immigrants that came to America in the 1840 (and through 1950's) are different than the total of immigrants that come to the USA today
While I would like to believe everyone comes to the US for the land of opportunity and to better their way of life, sometimes the means don't fit the ends
We have a serious problem with some immigrants coming into the USA looking for a hand out and not a hand up
From 1840 to 1964 welfare didn't exist, now how many immigrants end up on our welfare and or some type of public assistance?
Even if it's a very small % of the total immigrant population every year it drains our resources and we get no return

Many immigrants came to this country and took the most menial jobs, worked hard and long to have a better way of life for their families and themselves.
That's the American Dream, with hard work and determination anything positive can be accomplished

"Budgets can be balanced"
Well get your ass to Washington and get on it :D
We were very fortunate to lose the deficit we had and actually have the first budget surplus since Nixon was President (yes and I am fully aware that the surplus came when Clinton was President and we are now back in a serious deficit with Bush as President)

"world perception can be changed"
I hope so

"why in the fuck does everybody want to come here?"
See better standard of living and millions don't want to come here

and yes the UN should get the fuck out of the USA and vise versa

[slavdogg]

Originally posted by carbon@Jul 16 2003, 10:05 PM
uh... sorry, but the first thought this article brought to my mind is the vast numbers of potential porn consumers...

great, we'll now be paid with chinease food and chop sticks

[Timon]

Originally posted by Vick@Jul 16 2003, 08:03 PM
"internal challenges and BS" do you think the U.S. has that China doesn't?

Race Relations
Illicit Drug Use on a massive scale
Pat Robertson
Farrakhan (or however his name is spelled)
Immigration challenges
World perception
Hosting the UN
Huge Budget Deficits

that's 8 in under 30 seconds, there's a lot more

PD - I really hope you're right and I'm wrong
Damn what planet are you from?

NO budget deficit in China??
http://www.bizasia.com/economy_planning_/z...deficit_set.htm (http://www.bizasia.com/economy_planning_/zk95w/chinas_budget_deficit_set.htm)

NO mass scale illicit drug use??
http://www.aegis.com/news/re/2001/RE011206.html

NOT concerned about world perception??
http://english.peopledaily.com.cn/200207/0...703_99028.shtml (http://english.peopledaily.com.cn/200207/03/eng20020703_99028.shtml)

NO ethnic minorities??
http://www.tibet.ca/wtnarchive/1999/9/27_1.html

You must be talking about a different China than I know :-)

[PornoDoggy]

Timon, that's just gawddamn wrong.

AS A PATRIOTIC AMERICAN I BITTERLY RESENT ANY ATTEMPT TO PORTRAY CHINA'S PROBLEMS AS EQUAL TO THOSE OF THE UNITED STATES!!! BY GAWDAMITEY, WE GOT IT MUCH WORSE HERE!!!!

Gloom, despair, and agony on me.
Deep dark depression, excessive misery.
If it weren't fer bad luck
I'd have no luck at all
Gloom, despair, and agony on me!

[Vick]

Timon - thanks for the info, you know more about it than I do

But some of the articles you posted are 2-3 years old

and the USA has a whole different set of problems than China

The world perception article is about getting the Olympics there, not about people burning their flag or about flying planes into buildings


Edit - just for PD - now you're skirting the issues :P and lambasting with rhetoric :unsure: - who did you learn that debate tactic from? :P



Last edited by Vick at Jul 16 2003, 10:54 PM

[PornoDoggy]

I dunno... :blink:

Seriously, I grew up when Stokely Carmichael and H. Rap Brown were running around trying to keep up with the Black Panthers, and bigots like David Duke were still acceptable mainstream politicians in large areas of the country. So you will forgive me if I don't find the irrelevancies of David Duke and Louis Farakahn very threatening.

The knownothings thought that the wave of immigrants coming in back then would destroy the U.S. The wave of immigration from Southern Europe from the 1880s-1920s also was predicted to destroy America.

Now, I may get defrocked as a liberal for saying this, but I think the U.S. will survive just fine even if Bush gets reelected to four more years. The United States has faced challenges before. I just don't share your pessimism.

[Vick]

Well Timon schooled me on the Chinese deficit and drug problem

and I'd like to think it is more concern than pessimism, but that could be an optimistic spin on my pessimism

Will the US be ok long term, fuck if any of us really knows

Will China emerge as a World Power, looks that way but again fuck if any of us really knows

With that I bid you all good night

[Timon]

Vick,

My knowledge isn't based on those articles, those are just articles I quickly pulled up from a search engine...

NONE of the mentioned problems go away in a matter of 2 or 3 years so the age of those articles is irrelevant.

World perception? In a communist country like China world perception is the ONLY thing that matters when it comes to foreign policy. Their government was built on propaganda and providing a false perception.

What do you think the link is between world perception of China's human rights policy and their entry into WTO?

[Timon]

Originally posted by Vick@Jul 16 2003, 11:12 PM
Will China emerge as a World Power, looks that way but again fuck if any of us really knows

IMHO it's unlikely China will catch up with US military technology in the next 100+ years...

It's more likely that China's economy will become so dependant on exports of manufactured goods to the USA and the EU that they'll take good care to stay as friendly as possible with those governments.

[JR]

i have contacted Chinese officials to let them know that most of their woes and questions about ethnic issues, future economic growth strategies and budget issues were solved on a porn messageboard called oprano.com .

they read it all and send their warmest "thanks"
:ph34r:

[cj]

Originally posted by JR@Jul 17 2003, 01:43 AM
i have contacted Chinese officials to let them know that most of their woes and questions about ethnic issues, future economic growth strategies and budget issues were solved on a porn messageboard called oprano.com .

they read it all and send their warmest "thanks"
:ph34r:
LMAO :biglaugh:

I think we could do a better job than most governments ... or at least not much worse.

These are the 2 most thought-provoking paragraphs i've read in a long time ...

He said that if China had the same density of private cars as, for example Germany, it would have to produce 650 million vehicles -- a target that environmentalists say the world's supply of metal and oil would be unable to sustain.

"It's not a question whether you are devoted to nature or whether this is an emotional topic. This is the rationality of economics," Toepfer said.

[Almighty Colin]

Originally posted by Vick@Jul 16 2003, 07:41 PM
Given their present course and without any unforeseen obstacles, challenges or changes eventually China will be the world power surpassing the USA in the next 20-40 years
China themselves have predicted they would become number two in GDP in 50 years. Number two. Still behind the US. Economic power is still the root of all other power.

[Almighty Colin]

Holy shit, PD. They're going to take away your liberal card for sure!

[cj]

Originally posted by Colin@Jul 17 2003, 04:08 AM
China themselves have predicted they would become number two in GDP in 50 years. Number two. Still behind the US. Economic power is still the root of all other power.
sounds like a smart strategy to me ... if they said they were aiming for number 1, the US would blow them up before they have a chance to get going.

:P

[Almighty Colin]

Originally posted by cj+Jul 17 2003, 05:42 AM--></span><table border='0' align='center' width='95%' cellpadding='3' cellspacing='1'><tr><td>QUOTE (cj @ Jul 17 2003, 05:42 AM)</td></tr><tr><td id='QUOTE'><!--QuoteBegin--Colin@Jul 17 2003, 04:08 AM
China themselves have predicted they would become number two in GDP in 50 years. Number two. Still behind the US. Economic power is still the root of all other power.
sounds like a smart strategy to me ... if they said they were aiming for number 1, the US would blow them up before they have a chance to get going.

:P[/b][/quote]
Maybe so but I think the numbers make sense.

Using Financial Review 2002 GDP numbers.

United States. $10.2 trillion
China: $1.159 trillion

China aims for a 7% near-term growth rate. The US average the past 20 years is about 3% per year. At those rates China would pass the US in 2060. However, it is the case that GDP growth rates decrease as the economy gets larger. It's a lot easier to grow a $1 trillion economy than a $10 trillion economy. The US economy was about $1 trillion in 1970. The growth numbers for the US were about over 10% per year on average from 1970-1980, even higher than China's at the same stage.

[cj]

those future projections are based on the US continuing with the current or average growth rate ... at what point does the US stop growing? and at what rate does the US have to continue growing to remain the economic super-power?

taking into account the differences between the democracy of the United States, where everyone is entitled to free money (welfare) and a pretty decent minimum quality of life at the expense of the entire country, and the structure of China where 'poor' means that eating rice is a special treat and the rest of the world contributes money ... don't issues such as this, ie the cost of keeping the population alive, contribute to the growth/decline of GDP?

[Almighty Colin]

Originally posted by cj@Jul 17 2003, 07:18 AM
those future projections are based on the US continuing with the current or average growth rate ... at what point does the US stop growing? and at what rate does the US have to continue growing to remain the economic super-power?

I agree with you in that those projections assume that both China's and the US growth rates remain stable. The official Chinese estimate probably assumes that China's growth rate will taper off faster than the US growth rate which makes sense. Maintaining 7% growth is more difficult than maintaining 3%.

The question is whether growth levels off as economies become (relatively) exceptionally large or continue to decrease in growth rate.
One would think that progress (technology, information, managerial techniques) would provide some minimum level of long-term growth. Is that 2% or 3%?

If the US economy absolutely stopped growing and China continued at 7% per year, China would be number in 2035. Neither of those is very probable though.

An important question is why the US is the world's largest economy. I think most of the answer is the large population and the fact that it is highly industrialized. China and India have larger populations but are very far behind in GDP per capita. Japan is the number two economy. The US economy is about 2.5x the size of Japan's. Japan's growth rate and industrial techniques are about the same as the US' but their population is less than half of the US. To catch the US Japan needs a massive population explosion and/or much bettre manufacturing techniques.

Germany, UK and France round out the top 5 economies. Their populations are relatively small though. The US has almost 5x as many people as France. France would have to have a GDP per capita 5x that of the US to match the size of it's economy. The US per capita GDP is actually higher though.