It was great, accept it is over America

[Dukasaur]

What about the environmental impacts? I know China is resourcefully rich, but this has to be taking a toll environmentally, not just on say forests and jungles, but also on rivers, lakes, and air.

Without question..as an example consider that I now live in a clean(ish) northern coastal city after nine years in the big bad mad smoke of Changsha. Out and about in Changsha these last few days I have had mild panic attacks dealing with the noise, the smell, the crowds, the smoke and the heat. And then one ducks into an enormous mall and is assaulted by millions of products visually screaming at you.

The physical and mental damage Changsha inflicted upon me over the years broadly reflects the environmental damage the chinese are doing to their own land. But you know China uses me and will spit me out like the insignificance I am eventually and so they treat their environment. But that's won't stop the rearing, snorting juggernaut from taking over (which is the point).

So in some ways success is awful. But wasn't ancient Rome awful? Wasn't London (or other madly developing western european cities) awful? Weren't various american cities awful when they were surging? I think the terribleness of it all is what shows you that a place is winning.

You know now I live in Qingdao and it is quiet, calm and peaceful. Personally, I am much happier there just as most of you would be where you live. But give it twenty years and these Changsha types will be invading your homes with lazer guns and nuclear grenades. The stink is strangely the stink of success.

Very, very eloquent.

[shickingbrits]

Currently on a little tour of 'insanely booming' chinese cities.

A couple of points:

1. Changsha has gone from a sleepy 'town' (had the feel back in the day) that the arriving american would look around and compliment in a vaguely patronising way "Aren't they doing well" to a kind of frightening mega-city that I can but imagine leaves many arriving americans in a state of awe. Frankly it blows my mind again every time I come back. Of course Changsha has been claiming 15%+ growth rates for a decade. Who knows if that is entirely true, but you only have to look around to see what that kind of growth can do. So a decade ago most western european/american cites were far ahead of Changsha. Can you believe that the private car was just getting going in 2003? At this point Changsha is overall ahead (yes really) of most western european/american cities. The crazy thing? How far ahead will Changsha be in another ten years? I don't see this city slowing down for a second over the next decade and the gap that there will be in development between this city and most western european/american cities is probably, honestly hard for most of you reading this to fully appreciate.

2. Is it over for america? In many ways yes. I am not smart enough to fully understand why Changsha is soaring at mega-speed away from 'western cities'. But it is. From my perspective of dividing my time between China and France, what I have seen over the last ten years or so is that France has stood absolutely still during this period, while China for whatever reason has caught up, zoomed past and is now like some ethiopian marathon runner trouncing the plucky brit (again). I used to believe (many years ago) that China was catching up, that its growth rates meant little as it was starting from such a low base. But I was wrong. A fundamental shift in world power is happening around us. Chinese development simply isn't slowing down as I assumed it would by now and the growth figured suggest it is (a bit). It isn't..

3. China is going to leave America in the dust over the next few decades. It is inevitable now I think and while certain places of great ability will hang on to an extent for the west of course has many smart people (New York, London, Berlin) the overall trend is clear. I think these changes have been turbo-charged by the enormous leaps in technology we are witnessing. Just as my own country (the Uk) benefited hugely from developing at the right time, as did America in the 20th century, so will China in the 21st. Good luck for China (who lets be honest are probably due some luck) and bad luck for us...

4. The chinese will be our new overlords. Get your heads around that concept however hard and troubling it may seem to be. Most of the chinese I think can't quite believe it either but the better educated/connected ones know what's coming. America is finished because it simply can't grow like China can and while that mad growth was basically catch up for most of my time here it is going beyond that now, far beyond that and I believe that Changsha's development (which I know so personally and intimately) reflects the overall trend of things so well.

In 2008, during the economic crisis, they began to believe. While a few factories closed, new ones sprang up. Taiwan started calling for closer ties with China, direct currency swaps started taking place, people began questioning US debt held by China and US attempts to get China to float its currency.

Businesses which tried to relocate to Vietnam returned. They found that the infrastructure, complementary industry, efficiency and skilled labour offset the minor savings in labour that Vietnam offered.

The social structure came into play. The city dwellers were not just holding there earnings, they were sending money back to their hometowns, building the skill of the labour pool, the purchasing power of the populace and retaining their traditions. The dream of selling to each person in China was being realized, but not by the West, but by Haier, JVs and China Mobile. China prevented FB, Twitter, and some other social media, driving the development of Chinese social media.

China still operates on debit. People spend within their capacity, receive good return on investments and can weather economic storms much better. While the West was crumbling in an economic tsunami, the Chinese realized that they were operating from a sheltered harbour and were able to use their intact ships to salvage the wreckage.

[BigBallinStalin]

Currently on a little tour of 'insanely booming' chinese cities.

A couple of points:

1. Changsha has gone from a sleepy 'town' (had the feel back in the day) that the arriving american would look around and compliment in a vaguely patronising way "Aren't they doing well" to a kind of frightening mega-city that I can but imagine leaves many arriving americans in a state of awe. Frankly it blows my mind again every time I come back. Of course Changsha has been claiming 15%+ growth rates for a decade. Who knows if that is entirely true, but you only have to look around to see what that kind of growth can do. So a decade ago most western european/american cites were far ahead of Changsha. Can you believe that the private car was just getting going in 2003? At this point Changsha is overall ahead (yes really) of most western european/american cities. The crazy thing? How far ahead will Changsha be in another ten years? I don't see this city slowing down for a second over the next decade and the gap that there will be in development between this city and most western european/american cities is probably, honestly hard for most of you reading this to fully appreciate.

2. Is it over for america? In many ways yes. I am not smart enough to fully understand why Changsha is soaring at mega-speed away from 'western cities'. But it is. From my perspective of dividing my time between China and France, what I have seen over the last ten years or so is that France has stood absolutely still during this period, while China for whatever reason has caught up, zoomed past and is now like some ethiopian marathon runner trouncing the plucky brit (again). I used to believe (many years ago) that China was catching up, that its growth rates meant little as it was starting from such a low base. But I was wrong. A fundamental shift in world power is happening around us. Chinese development simply isn't slowing down as I assumed it would by now and the growth figured suggest it is (a bit). It isn't..

3. China is going to leave America in the dust over the next few decades. It is inevitable now I think and while certain places of great ability will hang on to an extent for the west of course has many smart people (New York, London, Berlin) the overall trend is clear. I think these changes have been turbo-charged by the enormous leaps in technology we are witnessing. Just as my own country (the Uk) benefited hugely from developing at the right time, as did America in the 20th century, so will China in the 21st. Good luck for China (who lets be honest are probably due some luck) and bad luck for us...

4. The chinese will be our new overlords. Get your heads around that concept however hard and troubling it may seem to be. Most of the chinese I think can't quite believe it either but the better educated/connected ones know what's coming. America is finished because it simply can't grow like China can and while that mad growth was basically catch up for most of my time here it is going beyond that now, far beyond that and I believe that Changsha's development (which I know so personally and intimately) reflects the overall trend of things so well.

How is this a bad thing for the US? It's not like the economic pie shrinks when a country grows. (Of course, a country's economic policies like subsidies, regulations, and so on can really make it difficult for its own people to adjust to changes in international trade). As long as the Chinese government isn't dropping bombs over US soil, I'm totes cool with them providing better stuff to the world.

[Mr Changsha]

Currently on a little tour of 'insanely booming' chinese cities.

A couple of points:

1. Changsha has gone from a sleepy 'town' (had the feel back in the day) that the arriving american would look around and compliment in a vaguely patronising way "Aren't they doing well" to a kind of frightening mega-city that I can but imagine leaves many arriving americans in a state of awe. Frankly it blows my mind again every time I come back. Of course Changsha has been claiming 15%+ growth rates for a decade. Who knows if that is entirely true, but you only have to look around to see what that kind of growth can do. So a decade ago most western european/american cites were far ahead of Changsha. Can you believe that the private car was just getting going in 2003? At this point Changsha is overall ahead (yes really) of most western european/american cities. The crazy thing? How far ahead will Changsha be in another ten years? I don't see this city slowing down for a second over the next decade and the gap that there will be in development between this city and most western european/american cities is probably, honestly hard for most of you reading this to fully appreciate.

2. Is it over for america? In many ways yes. I am not smart enough to fully understand why Changsha is soaring at mega-speed away from 'western cities'. But it is. From my perspective of dividing my time between China and France, what I have seen over the last ten years or so is that France has stood absolutely still during this period, while China for whatever reason has caught up, zoomed past and is now like some ethiopian marathon runner trouncing the plucky brit (again). I used to believe (many years ago) that China was catching up, that its growth rates meant little as it was starting from such a low base. But I was wrong. A fundamental shift in world power is happening around us. Chinese development simply isn't slowing down as I assumed it would by now and the growth figured suggest it is (a bit). It isn't..

3. China is going to leave America in the dust over the next few decades. It is inevitable now I think and while certain places of great ability will hang on to an extent for the west of course has many smart people (New York, London, Berlin) the overall trend is clear. I think these changes have been turbo-charged by the enormous leaps in technology we are witnessing. Just as my own country (the Uk) benefited hugely from developing at the right time, as did America in the 20th century, so will China in the 21st. Good luck for China (who lets be honest are probably due some luck) and bad luck for us...

4. The chinese will be our new overlords. Get your heads around that concept however hard and troubling it may seem to be. Most of the chinese I think can't quite believe it either but the better educated/connected ones know what's coming. America is finished because it simply can't grow like China can and while that mad growth was basically catch up for most of my time here it is going beyond that now, far beyond that and I believe that Changsha's development (which I know so personally and intimately) reflects the overall trend of things so well.

How is this a bad thing for the US? It's not like the economic pie shrinks when a country grows. (Of course, a country's economic policies like subsidies, regulations, and so on can really make it difficult for its own people to adjust to changes in international trade). As long as the Chinese government isn't dropping bombs over US soil, I'm totes cool with them providing better stuff to the world.

Well, I suppose my response is a little out of my 'area' (not that I really have one beyond writing shag about Risk)...

I wonder if with a loss of global power/economic domination comes a real loss of wealth for the individual american?

I see that as the chinese GDP rises, a certain percentage of the chinese people get much, much richer which reflects I suppose the booming growth rate. Now not all the chinese are getting rich, wealthy or even just comfortably-off - and who would want such a thing - but enough are and it seems a direct consequence of China becoming more dominant globally. So from my own direct experience I have seen China become more powerful and a percentage of the chinese become richer. I believe with potentially powerful countries that these two things are linked.

I can see that as my country lost power through the 20th century (and continues to in the 21st..what a miserable thing it is if one was to care) the british people have also become poorer relative to their rivals. Americans are richer, germans, japanese, various small european nations locked in with Germany..I guess the bloody south koreans are richer than the british now. Britain is globally ranked 6th or 7th on the GDP lists..I would guess the people are around the top 20 of average wealth. What a drop in a century!

So what of America? I feel that as a country loses power it becomes less effective at making the kinds of deals that can maximise its income relative to its rivals, in fact if another country is more powerful than it (a concept americans must find difficult to comprehend) then that country will be actively working against America.

A couple of recent historical examples..

1. America's determination to impoverish the British Empire before, during and after WW2. There has been a huge amount written about this policy and I think it is a pertinent example of a new rising power deliberately chopping the testicles off of the old one.

2. (and one that should make America shudder a touch) American diplomatic efforts to isolate China after 1949 in favour of Taiwan, a policy that wasn't reversed until the early 70's I believe.

In both cases we see the new power (America) deliberately and probably correctly (with regards to its own self-interest) hammering two older powers that it would no doubt prefer to keep down. Those actions not only weakend Britain and China as powers but also directly affected the living standards of those peoples.

So you see, if America loses its status as the dominant power in the world to China is it really likely that China won't do its level best to reduce America's status rather like America reduced Britain's?

Of course finally ("Mercifully! say all... ) one wonders - in fact I often do wonder about this - if America will just accept the economic inevitabilities and slink off into medium-power status. The window off opportunity is closing for active intervention..ten years at most?

[muy_thaiguy]

Militarily though (and still economically, since much of China's economy is wrapped up with the US's), the US is by and far ahead of pretty much everyone else. Spending alone is far and away the most of any nation on the planet. Naval wise, there are about 20 aircraft carriers in active duty right now throughout the world, and 10 of those are owned by the US, with more on the way. Outside of that? Some of the most advanced weapons technology in the world. Being able to protect your vested interests is quite important for a world power too.

[shickingbrits]

Did you think that cuz the US was giving the military-industrial complex so much money, that it belongs to the US?

[GoranZ]

Be careful what you wish from your father generation to today,The U.S. is war weary, defending the freedom of others who will not defend their freedom themselves.

After failing to find WMD in Iraq you guys switched to bringing freedom there... I can see what kind of freedom did you guys brought there

As I look into my crystal ball I see a future were china decides to expand into South east Asia and Russia decides to expand into Macedonia.

If you cant understand what your crystal ball is telling you why do you look at it? China is not very expansionist country(compared to western "democraties"), and Russian solder never set foot on my country's soil, probably never will... When it comes to which one has more friendly mood towards Macedonia I will only say that both US and Russia are the same... they both literally dont care a lot

The U.S. Response will be one of."you know what screw it let them have it we learned from ww2,Korean war that they did not appreciate what we did for them,They are on there own"...

Dont bring your freedom to us, we are safe, and Russians wont bother with us

its a truth that today when ever anyone is threaten weather it be persecution war natural disaster.

Hmmm why are you mixing natural disaster with war? They have nothing in common...

Those threatened say "when are the Americans going to help us" and help we will in some way.

Help from whom? From ISIS like organizations? Well when it comes to them you should have let those that knew how to handle them to handle them... you are incapable of handling them

The U.S. gave back what it conquered in the wars,accept the cematarys for our dead. I am not a unique American in saying one grandfather,three uncles,three cousins one brother and myself being a member of the armed services at some pt. Like I said be careful what you wish.but hey maybe Australia and New Zealand could defend themselves for more than a couple days before they are defeated but I doubt it.

You plan to defend my country from Russians? Don't put your fingers in a place they dont belong. We can manage just fine without your help against the Russians

Militarily though (and still economically, since much of China's economy is wrapped up with the US's), the US is by and far ahead of pretty much everyone else. Spending alone is far and away the most of any nation on the planet. Naval wise, there are about 20 aircraft carriers in active duty right now throughout the world, and 10 of those are owned by the US, with more on the way. Outside of that? Some of the most advanced weapons technology in the world. Being able to protect your vested interests is quite important for a world power too.

And all that military might is pointless in Afghanistan, Iraq, Libya or against organizations like Al-Qaeda... Go on with your military spending
P.S. US sucks in adapting to the new threats after the cold war

[tzor]

After failing to find WMD in Iraq ...

Yea, we couldn't find them. But a decade later ISIS did. Oh the IRONY.


ISIS In Iraq Have Saddam Hussein’s WMD, Was George W. Bush Right To Fear Terrorist Attack In America?

Setting the Iraq Record Straight

[BigBallinStalin]

After failing to find WMD in Iraq ...

Yea, we couldn't find them. But a decade later ISIS did. Oh the IRONY.


ISIS In Iraq Have Saddam Hussein’s WMD, Was George W. Bush Right To Fear Terrorist Attack In America?

Setting the Iraq Record Straight

http://www.inquisitr.com/1309825/isis-i ... was-right/

Also, chemical weapons have a shelf-life that isn't decades long. Amazingly, chemical weapons accounted for about 2% of the battlefield casaulties during WW1--and they were dumping that shit on soldiers who were staying in trenches that helped accumulate the gases. Basically, the fear of chemical weapons is overblown. See Stewart's Overblown book.

That inquisitr.com's author writes and reasons like a child, so I wouldn't trust the conclusions. Just sayin'.

[tzor]

Amazingly, chemical weapons accounted for about 2% of the battlefield casaulties during WW1--and they were dumping that shit on soldiers who were staying in trenches that helped accumulate the gases.

Yes, but we are not talking about the types of chemical weapons used in WWI are we?

[shickingbrits]

For real?

Not only could the UN not find any, the US couldn't find any. Saddam didn't use any. Now not only have ISIS found them, but the media just happened to know of it.

It's at times like this that I wonder why should I bother. Have you completely lost the ability to question and reason?

[GoranZ]

After failing to find WMD in Iraq ...

Yea, we couldn't find them. But a decade later ISIS did. Oh the IRONY.


ISIS In Iraq Have Saddam Hussein’s WMD, Was George W. Bush Right To Fear Terrorist Attack In America?

Setting the Iraq Record Straight

Do you honestly believe that ISIS has WMD?

I must admit I like the idea Republicans to lead US... they are much more predictable then Democrats, they like only oil, and dont care about anything else

[tzor]

Do you honestly believe that ISIS has WMD?

Yes, but whether they can effectively use these old munitions now is another matter.

[Gillipig]

After failing to find WMD in Iraq ...

Yea, we couldn't find them. But a decade later ISIS did. Oh the IRONY.


ISIS In Iraq Have Saddam Hussein’s WMD, Was George W. Bush Right To Fear Terrorist Attack In America?

Setting the Iraq Record Straight

http://www.inquisitr.com/1309825/isis-i ... was-right/

Also, chemical weapons have a shelf-life that isn't decades long. Amazingly, chemical weapons accounted for about 2% of the battlefield casaulties during WW1--and they were dumping that shit on soldiers who were staying in trenches that helped accumulate the gases. Basically, the fear of chemical weapons is overblown. See Stewart's Overblown book.

That inquisitr.com's author writes and reasons like a child, so I wouldn't trust the conclusions. Just sayin'.

Oh so children can't be trusted to provide accurate information? Is that what you're saying? You're so judgemental, using stereotypes against children is just wrong, you're a childist!! Don't judge whole groups of people like that.



Is this the new thing? I'm calling it, watch it unfold.

[BigBallinStalin]

After failing to find WMD in Iraq ...

Yea, we couldn't find them. But a decade later ISIS did. Oh the IRONY.


ISIS In Iraq Have Saddam Hussein’s WMD, Was George W. Bush Right To Fear Terrorist Attack In America?

Setting the Iraq Record Straight

http://www.inquisitr.com/1309825/isis-i ... was-right/

Also, chemical weapons have a shelf-life that isn't decades long. Amazingly, chemical weapons accounted for about 2% of the battlefield casaulties during WW1--and they were dumping that shit on soldiers who were staying in trenches that helped accumulate the gases. Basically, the fear of chemical weapons is overblown. See Stewart's Overblown book.

That inquisitr.com's author writes and reasons like a child, so I wouldn't trust the conclusions. Just sayin'.

Oh so children can't be trusted to provide accurate information? Is that what you're saying? You're so judgemental, using stereotypes against children is just wrong, you're a childist!! Don't judge whole groups of people like that.



Is this the new thing? I'm calling it, watch it unfold.

WOODRUFF!!!

[Phatscotty]

Militarily though (and still economically, since much of China's economy is wrapped up with the US's), the US is by and far ahead of pretty much everyone else. Spending alone is far and away the most of any nation on the planet. Naval wise, there are about 20 aircraft carriers in active duty right now throughout the world, and 10 of those are owned by the US, with more on the way. Outside of that? Some of the most advanced weapons technology in the world. Being able to protect your vested interests is quite important for a world power too.

culturally and scientifically as well

[Mr Changsha]

Militarily though (and still economically, since much of China's economy is wrapped up with the US's), the US is by and far ahead of pretty much everyone else. Spending alone is far and away the most of any nation on the planet. Naval wise, there are about 20 aircraft carriers in active duty right now throughout the world, and 10 of those are owned by the US, with more on the way. Outside of that? Some of the most advanced weapons technology in the world. Being able to protect your vested interests is quite important for a world power too.

culturally and scientifically as well

You know, I would guess many british people looked at the state of things in the 1920's compared to America and had a similar over-confidence. Yes America is ahead scientifically, militarily and (possibly) culturally - for such things are more subjective - but the trouble is that economically they are shooting past you.

I can imagine many british people believing that the nation was superior culturally, scientifically and militarily to America in the 1920's and it was on balance true at that time. But shoot forward to the 1950's and America wasn't just 'nudging ahead' of Britain, it had absolutely eclipsed it in every way.

Economic might can develop military strength in a decade (if like China the military is already reasonably developed). Again, with economic strength comes huge amount of funding and skilled immigration which leads to scientific excellence. In that regard, it is interesting to consider that America attracted huge amounts of academic talent from the UK by simply offering a better environment and more cash. Is it far-fetched to believe that China could attract talent from around the world just as America did from the 1940's?

I think there are parallels between the fall of the british empire and what will be the fall of the american empire. In both cases the empires falls not because of horrendous mismanagement, but because of stark economic realities. You simply have to consider that there are at least 1.4 billion of them and they are hungry.

America (like britain before it) has lost its 'will to rule' and all that. Yes the people have become lazy and decadent (and all that too). But really it is about competing with 1.4 billion people in a unified, stable state who man for man want it more than you. This is the stark economic reality.

[muy_thaiguy]

Militarily though (and still economically, since much of China's economy is wrapped up with the US's), the US is by and far ahead of pretty much everyone else. Spending alone is far and away the most of any nation on the planet. Naval wise, there are about 20 aircraft carriers in active duty right now throughout the world, and 10 of those are owned by the US, with more on the way. Outside of that? Some of the most advanced weapons technology in the world. Being able to protect your vested interests is quite important for a world power too.

culturally and scientifically as well

You know, I would guess many british people looked at the state of things in the 1920's compared to America and had a similar over-confidence. Yes America is ahead scientifically, militarily and (possibly) culturally - for such things are more subjective - but the trouble is that economically they are shooting past you.

I can imagine many british people believing that the nation was superior culturally, scientifically and militarily to America in the 1920's and it was on balance true at that time. But shoot forward to the 1950's and America wasn't just 'nudging ahead' of Britain, it had absolutely eclipsed it in every way.

Economic might can develop military strength in a decade (if like China the military is already reasonably developed). Again, with economic strength comes huge amount of funding and skilled immigration which leads to scientific excellence. In that regard, it is interesting to consider that America attracted huge amounts of academic talent from the UK by simply offering a better environment and more cash. Is it far-fetched to believe that China could attract talent from around the world just as America did from the 1940's?

I think there are parallels between the fall of the british empire and what will be the fall of the american empire. In both cases the empires falls not because of horrendous mismanagement, but because of stark economic realities. You simply have to consider that there are at least 1.4 billion of them and they are hungry.

America (like britain before it) has lost its 'will to rule' and all that. Yes the people have become lazy and decadent (and all that too). But really it is about competing with 1.4 billion people in a unified, stable state who man for man want it more than you. This is the stark economic reality.

Still, I wonder if China's ecosystem can take it though. Heavy and dense smog clouds are common over major cities (when residents are warned not to leave their homes or required to wear masks, you know there are major issues), entire rivers have turned various colors of the rainbow (not a good thing, also means that it killed it off the Chinese River Dolphin), and environmental issues that make the US look like a pristine and natural nature preserve.

http://www.weather.com/news/science/env ... d-20140728
http://www.cnn.com/2014/02/24/world/asi ... solutions/

[mrswdk]

Well, China is still developing. Pollution issues didn't last forever in countries like the UK, US or Japan, so it's reasonable to imagine that China will be able to deal with its environmental problems too.

And in the mean time, who gives a fuck about dolphins anyway?

[tzor]

America (like britain before it) has lost its 'will to rule' and all that. Yes the people have become lazy and decadent (and all that too). But really it is about competing with 1.4 billion people in a unified, stable state who man for man want it more than you. This is the stark economic reality.

To be honest, we never really had a "will to rule." We did have a "will to expand" aka "manifest destiny" but that was not shared by all the political parties.

America turned to isolationism after several wars, we rejected the League of Nations even though it was originally proposed by our own President. We refused to get into WWII until we were directly attacked. If it were not for the Cold War against the Soviet Union we would have probably returned to the isolationist mode after WWII.

On the other hand, I totally agree with the notion of "lazy and decadent."

I will, however disagree with the notion of "unified, stable state." In the United States we have a term "fly over states" ... places with a population that is mostly disconnected from the central government. I am pretty certain this also exists in China, but it's been a while since I have been reading news reports on this. I think the more interesting competition is going to be that between China and India. If the later really does get their political acts together and starts working efficiently, this might become very interesting.

[warmonger1981]

I hear China and Russia made a deal to not use US dollar in trading anymore. How long until dollar collapses or will the US let that happen?

[mrswdk]

The Bank of China and some Russian bank signed a deal like that recently, but there isn't a 'China-Russia' deal that I'm aware of.

[shickingbrits]

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Internatio ... e_renminbi

[tzor]

I hear China and Russia made a deal to not use US dollar in trading anymore. How long until dollar collapses or will the US let that happen?

I thought the biggest key was still the linking of international oil to the US dollar. The BRICS pose only a modest threat to the dollar and the IMF (but they still pose a threat).