Balance of power will shift to China and India (1 Viewer)

[fish fingers]

What's a hurricane gonna do? China was hit by hurricane Talim around the same time as America was kit by Katrina, except they handled it heaps better by evacuating 600,000 residents before the huricane hit

For all those who would like more information on this typhoon in relation to hurricane Katrina and Rita visit Wikipedia, or other assorted sites. Hurricane Katrina and Rita were category five storms, compared to talim, which was category two when it hit the land. Both Katrina and Rita hit populated, urban areas and caused approximately $200 billion dollars damage, where as Talim caused a measely $1.5 Billion damage, as it hit mainly rural farmlands etc.

It also will enlighten people as to the evacuation methods for both hurricanes and the typhoon, which are far different, in numbers, to those mentioned here.

 

[fish fingers]

LOL you have nfi! You got proof that imports from China are of lower quality than Australia other than your blind prejudice?

That's bullshit again, you have look at the market niche, if a product is designed as a cheap low end throw away such as a Mcdonalds happy meal toy then of course it was never designed to be high quality. You can't compare products designed as low end to high end ones.

However if you take look at high end products such brandname clothes ie. Country Road, Ralph Lauren etc are all high quality, high price products manufactured in China. Same with electronics, look at the back of your LCD monitor, TV, Ipod, Hifi, computer speakers, digital camera, refrigerator, kitchen appliances, fax machine regardless of brand be it Sony, Apple, Canon or whatever, they are all high end products made in China.

And also about Nazi economics that's keynesian economics of huge government investment to stimulate a weak economy. However over the longer term, that leads to problems of its own with government borrowing 'crowding out' private investment and leads to simultaneous economic stagnation and high inflation. All mainstream contemporary economists follow the traditions of neo-classical economics in order to achieve maximum growth and the most efficient allocation of resources.

Your opening lines are once again evidence of Ad Hominem, and are rendered invalid.

We can do without the swearing thanks. Did I compare low end products with high end products? I compared clothing and meat, never mentioned plastic toys etc. and hence your statement would be use of the straw man.

Once again higher quality products are made in the West by nations for themselves. I have shown why in theory, however merely look at the quality of meat that Australian farmers produce compared to much of what we import(when they're not culling them due to disease of course). National products are better in practice as well. However your list does serve a useful purpose as it shows the immense contribution American and western companies make to the Chinese economy. Once again if those are withdrawn, goodbye Chinese economy.

Once again the Nazi's are living proof of the fact that all products can be made by one nation without importing them. Its not stimulating a weak economy, as imports are gone, thus there only is the national market and its very strong as evident through the Nazi's and Galbraith admired them for it. it leads to economic growth etc. as I have explained, as it results in higher employment and thus more spending, taxing and saving, which leads to increased investment. Actually many contemporary economists disagree with Adam Smith etc. and their views and believe that a free market creates too many problems, hence mixed economy.

 

[supercharged]

Your opening lines are once again evidence of Ad Hominem, and are rendered invalid.

We can do without the swearing thanks. Did I compare low end products with high end products? I compared clothing and meat, never mentioned plastic toys etc. and hence your statement would be use of the straw man.

Once again higher quality products are made in the West by nations for themselves. I have shown why in theory, however merely look at the quality of meat that Australian farmers produce compared to much of what we import(when they're not culling them due to disease of course). National products are better in practice as well. However your list does serve a useful purpose as it shows the immense contribution American and western companies make to the Chinese economy. Once again if those are withdrawn, goodbye Chinese economy.

Once again the Nazi's are living proof of the fact that all products can be made by one nation without importing them. Its not stimulating a weak economy, as imports are gone, thus there only is the national market and its very strong as evident through the Nazi's and Galbraith admired them for it. it leads to economic growth etc. as I have explained, as it results in higher employment and thus more spending, taxing and saving, which leads to increased investment. Actually many contemporary economists disagree with Adam Smith etc. and their views and believe that a free market creates too many problems, hence mixed economy.

You should stop smoking crack cocaine while reading Mein Kampf, it's very bad for your rational thinking....

What examples? How are products made in the West 'somehow' superior to their equalivalents made in the East or elsewhere? There is no proof to what you say other than your self-imagined ideas of 'western superiority', yeah rite products are automatically better quality because western workers built them

Now you're trying to change to farming....a mango grown in Queensland is the same as a mango grown in Thailand. Coffee grown in Colombia is just as good as coffee grown in Australia. The geographical location of farms doesnt make any difference aslong as the climate is suitable. How are farm products 'better' just because they are from Australia or a western country? Unless you are trying to compare against clearly dangerous products such as BSE infected British beef there is no difference. LOL deadly western beef....

MUAHAHAHA Nazi's are an example of how closed economies are successful? Why don't you ask yourself why Germany doesn't run this kind of economy anymore? In fact NO country does except for leftover communist states under embargoes such as Nth Korea or Cuba. Why isn't this so called total self production 'model of success' used anywhere including America if its so good as you claim?

You clearly have NO idea at all fallacy of speaking out of one's arse....pfft, go and get an education!

 

[Not-That-Bright]

What examples? How are products made in the West 'somehow' superior to their equalivalents made in the East or elsewhere? There is no proof to what you say other than your self-imagined ideas of 'western superiority', yeah rite products are automatically better quality because western workers built them

Factories in the west have traditionally been more advanced than those in China, however there have been significant shifts.

Nazi's are an example of how closed economies are successful? Why don't you ask yourself why Germany doesn't run this kind of economy anymore? In fact NO country does except for leftover communist states under embargoes such as Nth Korea or Cuba. Why isn't this so called self production 'model of success' used anywhere including America if its so good as you claim?

Why wouldn't India run a closed economy? Like once they have alot of debts... or China? I mean... at the moment, China/India can take advantage of the market economy and make alot of money by selling things to the west, however once this isn't viable who is to say they won't just close off their markets?

The reason why the West favours capitalism is because they invisioned a Western-centric capitalist world that favoured their nations. However, as this is changing who is to say that they will continue down this path?

 

[supercharged]

Factories in the west have traditionally been more advanced than those in China, however there have been significant shifts.

Why wouldn't India run a closed economy? Like once they have alot of debts... or China? I mean... at the moment, China/India can take advantage of the market economy and make alot of money by selling things to the west, however once this isn't viable who is to say they won't just close off their markets?

The reason why the West favours capitalism is because they invisioned a Western-centric capitalist world that favoured their nations. However, as this is changing who is to say that they will continue down this path?

FFS saying "Factories in the west have traditionally been more advanced than those in China, however there have been significant shifts" is as relevant as saying 200 years ago Australia's production consisted of spears and boomerangs. In today's day and age, advanced factories can be built anywhere in the world except for warzones.

Yeah right, India and China are going to junk integration into the market economy and go back to soviet style closed economies so they can return to pre-reform poverty levels. Very likely.........just pure anal posting

 

[Iron]

I think China holds roughly 42% of American debt. This makes it hard for the US to critisise Chinese policy, but >80% of Chinese companies are still foreign owned.

 

[Not-That-Bright]

FFS saying "Factories in the west have traditionally been more advanced than those in China, however there have been significant shifts" is as relevant as saying 200 years ago Australia's production consisted of spears and boomerangs. In today's day and age, advanced factories can be built anywhere in the world except for warzones.

Yeah right, India and China are going to junk integration into the market economy and go back to soviet style closed economies so they can return to pre-reform poverty levels. Very likely.........just pure anal posting

What I was saying is that they will utilise the 'global economy' while it benefits them, and when it doesn't they will not use it. I think you're being a little fast to dismiss my posts and most of the points i make.

 

[supercharged]

How bout you back your 'looney tunes economics' statements with some real life examples?

Name a country which currently pursues a 'closed economy' away from the global capitalist market system and is rich? .......None.

Geez countries under UN sanctions must be the richest in the world! They can trade their own products amongst themselves without any importing or exporting

 

[MajinR]

What I was saying is that they will utilise the 'global economy' while it benefits them, and when it doesn't they will not use it. I think you're being a little fast to dismiss my posts and most of the points i make.

Im curious to know as to what you mean by utilise the global economy?

but as for the overall result:
i really dont know about this one...the whole of china won't ever have the living standard of developed western economies at present simply because its not environmentally sustainable unless you have rapid changes in technology and such. However i dont think the US can stay in power forever either...maybe these special economic zones established in shanghai, hong kong and others will thrive over the US somehow....

oh and with the argument on the quality of china's products are lower etc etc, yes that is essentially true, but look at the laws of supply and demand and your answer lies before you...

I also believe that capitalism will stay for a long time before perhaps a better system is introduced but i'm doubtful itll happen in my lifetime...

i also agree with what Damage Inc said on the subject....

 

[supercharged]

oh and with the argument on the quality of china's products are lower etc etc, yes that is essentially true, but look at the laws of supply and demand and your answer lies before you...

The laws of supply and demand set the MARKET PRICE for products NOT QUALITY.

The quality of products on the other hand is mostly determined by market niche. A high end product is going to be better quality than a low end product otherwise no-one would buy it (unless advertising was particularly successful lol).

High end/ high tech products made in modern mainland China factories such as expensive consumer electronics or clothing is the same quality as high end products made in any other part of the world.

The vast majority of consumer products you find in Myer, Harvey Norman or David Jones is made in China regardless of the foreign brands and labels attached to it. There's basically nothing which can't be built in China nowdays. Heck even Toyota is building a new factory for the petrol electric hybrid Prius in China.

 

[Comrade nathan]

Name a country which currently pursues a 'closed economy' away from the global capitalist market system and is rich? .......None.

The overall quality of life in the closed ecnomies is higher then that of China. In the DPRK it could be higher, but due to higher spending on Military, and the environmental disasters.

Though with the new nuclear power the DPRK is interested in, they will experince more efficiency.

I don't know why you support China so much, there is a huge gap in living standard between rural population and the small middle class and capitalist class. Even though many countries are investing in China, it doesn't make it rich, or a new economic super power.

Basically as i have had it explain is that there is a small percentage of China's population that is making a buck out of the investment, the real winners are the Western countries. China will never become a superpower under its current economy. Compariing the economy of China with that of the west, doing the sum of the interest and the strength of its yuan, it doesn't match up to China.

Im sorry but China wont be running all over the world like the US just yet.

 

[MajinR]

The laws of supply and demand set the MARKET PRICE for products NOT QUALITY.

The quality of products on the other hand is mostly determined by market niche. A high end product is going to be better quality than a low end product otherwise no-one would buy it (unless advertising was particularly successful lol).

High end/ high tech products made in modern mainland China factories such as expensive consumer electronics or clothing is the same quality as high end products made in any other part of the world.

The vast majority of consumer products you find in Myer, Harvey Norman or David Jones is made in China regardless of the foreign brands and labels attached to it. There's basically nothing which can't be built in China nowdays. Heck even Toyota is building a new factory for the petrol electric hybrid Prius in China.

i would think that low quality products would have a lower price...therefore we can indirectly determine the quality of a good or service by its price...thus supply and demand isnt irrelevant here...

 

[supercharged]

i would think that low quality products would have a lower price...therefore we can indirectly determine the quality of a good or service by its price...thus supply and demand isnt irrelevant here...

NO, your economic knowledge is an utter disgrace, and you are attempting to corrupt the price setting mechanism of the supply and demand curves by saying it relates to quality which it doesn't....why?

Because products compete in their own niche, luxury goods do NOT compete with economy items. A rolex watch does not compete with a lorus watch. Someone out to buy a ferrari does not buy a hyundai instead because it is cheaper. A person after a big mansion in Rose Bay does not buy a cheap fibro home in Liverpool instead. High end items compete with high end, low with low. If what you were saying was true, no-one would buy luxury goods, only cheap products.

Also you're saying products which are cheaper would usually have a lower quality (i'm not disputing this, usually true) BUT this has NOTHING to do with the laws of supply and demand. The laws of supply and demand demonstate that price is a function of demand relative to supply. If there's alot of demand but supply is limited then market price will be high. If supply is plentiful but demand is limited, market price will be low. The supply and demand curves simply plot the price point in which equalibrium will be reached between buyers and sellers ie (market price) and the market will be cleared with no left over goods or unsatisfied buyers.

It is however is NOT an indication of quality because it assumes all sellers are selling the same product, all buyers are after the same product and hence perfect competition.

 

[supercharged]

The overall quality of life in the closed ecnomies is higher then that of China. In the DPRK it could be higher, but due to higher spending on Military, and the environmental disasters.

Though with the new nuclear power the DPRK is interested in, they will experince more efficiency.

I don't know why you support China so much, there is a huge gap in living standard between rural population and the small middle class and capitalist class. Even though many countries are investing in China, it doesn't make it rich, or a new economic super power.

Basically as i have had it explain is that there is a small percentage of China's population that is making a buck out of the investment, the real winners are the Western countries. China will never become a superpower under its current economy. Compariing the economy of China with that of the west, doing the sum of the interest and the strength of its yuan, it doesn't match up to China.

Im sorry but China wont be running all over the world like the US just yet.

ummm yeah closed economies have a higher standard of living than open ones? Care to provide a non-imaginary example?

Oh yes North Korea 'could' have a higher standard of living than China....that's like saying Bangladesh 'could' have a higher standard of living than Germany if it didn't have any floods

The fact of the matter is NO country can get rich by closing its doors and relying on self production. Only economic retards would propose a closed door non trade development path. Why else do you think all these countries around the world want to join trading blocs such as the WTO, EU, ASEAN and NAFTA? Just for the fun of it? Why do countries sign up FTA's with their trading partners? Because they have nothing better to do? Why aren't countries under UN embargoes the richest in the world since they are forced to produce everything themselves?

You're right that there is a big rich/poor divide in China, but so what? The rural poor in China are actually alot better off than poor people in India for example. China doesn't receive any food aid from the UN or NGO's because no-one is so poor that they can't afford to eat. The rural poor will remain poor until inland infrastructure improves to a point which allows economic development in those areas. Probably take atleast another 15 years or so until that starts to happen.

However the middle class is fast expanding and it has been predicted by the OECD that 40% of its population will be middle class by 2020. And yes western countries are making a buck by investing in China but its all mutual since China benefits as well (trade and investment is mutually benefitial otherwise no-one would take part). You can simply look at China's current GDP with the one twenty years ago to see the benefits.

 

[Not-That-Bright]

The fact of the matter is NO country can get rich by closing its doors and relying on self production. Only economic retards would propose a closed door non trade development path. Why else do you think all these countries around the world want to join trading blocs such as the WTO, EU, ASEAN and NAFTA? Just for the fun of it? Why do countries sign up FTA's with their trading partners? Because they have nothing better to do? Why aren't countries under UN embargoes the richest in the world since they are forced to produce everything themselves?

Alot of nations have been pillaged of their self-reliance, and would love to not have to make these deals but they are forced into them. The others benefit from them.

 

[supercharged]

Fuck, the mentally retarded have really come out of their caves.....

"Alot of nations"? which nations may I ask?

No country gets "pillaged of their self-reliance" rather they specialise in the fields in which they are most competitive at. Self-reliance? The ONLY countries which are 'self reliant' are outcast countries under international trade embargoes. My aren't they rich! We should be like them!

And no country joins trade blocs or FTA's by force. What, you must join my trade bloc now or else I'll bomb you with my B-52s? Yeah bullshit. They do it because it will benefit their economy.

In real life, countries practically beg to join trade blocs in which their membership isn't obvious. Eg. Australia has been trying to join ASEAN for past 10 years despite not really being considered in Asia as an 'asian' country, and Turkey has been trying to join the EU despite not really being considered 'european' by the European countries. Countries are hardly being forced into trade blocs against their will....

 

[Comrade nathan]

Care to provide a non-imaginary example?

Um...Cuba.

It's is widely known that Cuba has the best medical services in the 3rd world. A world health organisation (can't remember which one, i would have to look my lecture notes) rank in medical serices of Cuba above the US in relation to distribution.

So regardless of the wealth of a nation, a place like Cuba can more widely distribute services.

In China still while there is wealth, more then Cuba for sure, but it is only generated in the small middle class and the even smaller capitalist class, the rest earn low wages. The top classes in China are bascially leaches off a world trade system that expliots low wages, low safety requirements and cheap resources. China never grew into a awesome economy, it just whored itself to the rest of the world.

 

[supercharged]

Chalk up another anal post....

Yep Cuba is the country to beat! How come Cuba is still a developing country then? Cuba has run its closed economy for decades now, why hasn't this 'success' translated into first world wealth?

How come NO first world country in the world has a closed market system? All of them are capitalist. You can stick your head into the sand in denial, but this is the fact that capitalism works better than communist economics.

The fact that Cuba has a better public healthcare system than the US is meaningless. The US has a minimal system of public healthcare, theirs is based upon the user pays system. If the US wanted to pursue a more generous public healthcare system at the expense of something else, there would be nothing to stop them.

Wtf, whoring itself to the world? So foreign investment should be discouraged like in Cuba then? How about you take a look at China's relative GDP against other countries 20 years ago compared with now? Has foreign investment somehow made the economy go backwards? And the middle class in China is growing rapidly, which why China is both a huge manufacturing centre and fast becoming a massive consumer market. China has the most mobile phones in the world and has over 130 million internet connections. The majority of the poor people which you speak of, are those still living in rural areas. Wait another 20-25 years and many of the current poor rural farmers will have been urbanised.

And cheap wages and low safety standards? Sure they aren't as high as 1st world countries but if it cheap wages and safety standards were the biggest attraction then shouldn't the world's multinational investments be pouring into African countries? People there would work for food! Safety standards? What safety standards? exploit at will!

All rich countries in the world are capitalist, you rave all you want about the benefits of closed markets and self production, but at the end of the day it doesn't work. Plenty of former communist countries are embracing capitalism, but no capitalist countries are turning themselves into marxist states.

 

[Not-That-Bright]

All rich countries in the world are capitalist

They've all always been rich, many poorer nations who have taken on-board capitalist policies have failed.

 

[fish fingers]

Um...Cuba.

It's is widely known that Cuba has the best medical services in the 3rd world. A world health organisation (can't remember which one, i would have to look my lecture notes) rank in medical serices of Cuba above the US in relation to distribution.

So regardless of the wealth of a nation, a place like Cuba can more widely distribute services.

In China still while there is wealth, more then Cuba for sure, but it is only generated in the small middle class and the even smaller capitalist class, the rest earn low wages. The top classes in China are bascially leaches off a world trade system that expliots low wages, low safety requirements and cheap resources. China never grew into a awesome economy, it just whored itself to the rest of the world.

Exaclty right!!! China is just a prostitute to the Western world, it has bastardised itself and achieved some initial benifits, but these wont continue. As happens with all prostitutes, they are replaced when they cease to serve any benifit to the user.
Economics with China, is like "trading gold for bronze", thanks Plato, and as soon as a new prostitute is found, China will be left in the dust with its poverty.

By the way, supercharged, all your predictions for the future, are using the current statistics etc. for your ASSUMPTIONS! Germany in 1900, thought that in twenty years they would be incredibly rich, going off their comparison with 1880, what happened then, an outside event, that was not predicted, the same with Britain, Russia and America etc. etc. Do not expect the last twenty years to be repeated again and the same growth to thus recipricate. Could you also reduce your use of logical fallacies, particularly appealing to tradition, which is what you use to justify many of your baseless claims such as model economies and capitalism etc, and Ad hominem, and Economics is a means to an end, not an end in itself, hence when analysing a state's power, one can not focus on economics, we must look at the entire state.

I cant be bothered to disect his comment as it was made a while ago and was quite long, but Damage inc. tried to argue against my argument, accept he forgot to bring substantiation to the table. His claims were baseless, and subjective, and they in no way succeeded in shaking my argument, however one person later said they agreed with him, which was worrying due to the nature of the argument, hence this comment. As for what does America owe us?! Do you live in Australia? If you do, then you may realsie that they greatly contributed to our safety during WW2. We have since concluded many alliances with them, such as ANZUS, to protect us. Then we may look at their cultural influence, Hollywood is obvious, but let us look deeper, they invented the Plane, and the car, the lightbulb, and much more from Edison alone. They invented the scyscraper, they pioneered the construction of large bridges, they invented the submarine, the steel ship, many advancements in war, and so on. We owe much to America, so perhaps you should not be so insolent from now on.