Is it bad for the U.S. when China Becomes the #1 world Economy?

1. 81

   GA Andersonposted 10 years ago

   OK, Junko, here we go.
   
   
   
   
   
   Why is China's economic growth, and likely supplanting of the U.S. economy as the world's largest a conspiracy?
   
   Yes, sometimes forum exchanges do amount to a game, sometimes a relevant one and sometimes a waste of time. But we still have the choice to be players or spectators.
   
   And other times these exchanges can be enjoyable discussions of competing views - and even, in rare cases - an education for idiots and thoughtful folk alike.
   
   GA

   replyreport
   1. 76

      junkoposted 10 years agoin reply to this

      What is your motivation to create this forum and invite me. Do you feel that We or I is worthy of Top Billing on prediction of world economic leadership of the future? Are we ego-tripping? What up?

      replyreport
      1. 82

         Kathryn L Hillposted 10 years agoin reply to this

         Martini hour. You should be flattered, junko! You have been invited! I hope you have some green olives there! (If they are imported from China, even better.)

         replyreport
         1. 81

            GA Andersonposted 10 years agoin reply to this

            Help me out here Kathryn, was that a light-hearted ha, ha response - with no underlying criticism? Or have my "martini hour" participations  become obnoxious or condescending, or something else? None of which are intended or desired by me.
            
            With sincerity, I ask, "Help a buddy out will ya?" Have I unknowing morphed into a non-enjoyable  forum persona?
            
            GA

            replyreport
            1. 82

               Kathryn L Hillposted 10 years agoin reply to this

               Oh, I enjoy it immensely! I was just joining in with your spirit of joviality. I think it is sad that others are not in the mood!
               Really!
               I enjoy finding the loopholes in your discussions.
               That is why I post. Otherwise, if I agreed, I would not bother. Which is mostly true for all, I think. The naysayers are the majority, as far as what I experience. For instance, I really think you need to own up that you were wrong as far as the spirit of the law vs. the letter of the law. (The letter of the law is based on the spirit of the law and the the two are one.) Adams would not have agreed with individuals interpreting the law according to their own understanding...
               That is an example of what I like to respond to. If I let you or any one else get away with being wrong we would all be wrong! Yes, I have that much ego. Oh well.  However,  I love to be PROVED wrong.

               replyreport
               1. 81

                  GA Andersonposted 10 years agoin reply to this

                  Whew! Thanks for the clarification. I feel better, (safer?).
                  
                  As for "owning up," re. the "spirit of the law"... I am not saying I am right. I believe... oops, I will continue this back in that topic.
                  
                  But thanks again for soothing my conscience.
                  
                  Ps. I hate being wrong, so I can't say I "LOVE" being proved wrong - but I do appreciate the "proved wrong" experience because it educates me.
                  
                  GA

                  replyreport
                  1. 82

                     Kathryn L Hillposted 10 years agoin reply to this

                     Well, good! Forum discussions give us the opportunity to become objective, rather than subjective.
                     TWISI

                     replyreport
                     1. 81

                        GA Andersonposted 10 years agoin reply to this

                        OK, I will ask you instead instead of Google, because I think you deserve the first shot...
                        
                        What is TWISI?
                        
                        GA

                        replyreport
                        1. 82

                           Kathryn L Hillposted 10 years agoin reply to this

                           Oh, good intuition. It is not in google, as it is my own.
                           The Way I See It.
                           I got into the habit of ending with that in the religious forums where one  should only give one's own point of view and not try to sway others to one's way of believing. Sometimes swaying others is a no no.
                           Swaying as a verb:
                           3 influence, affect, bias, persuade, win over; manipulate, bend, mold.
                           4 rule, govern, dominate, control, guide. Wikipedia.

                           replyreport
                           1. 81

                              GA Andersonposted 10 years agoin reply to this

                              Oh Gawd... stop with the definitions. I hope you aren't offended if I offer my own TWISI... This too frequently seen Webster's or whoever's  "official" definitions postings, are tedious and off-putting offerings that, for me, are less than impressive, or effective.
                              
                              But, thanks for the explanation, I like it, And I will probably steal and use it. But I will give you author's credit.
                              
                              GA

                              replyreport
                              1. 82

                                 Kathryn L Hillposted 10 years agoin reply to this

                                 ...and you knew exactly what I meant by "sway?" I think it is rather interesting to know the established definitions!
                                 
                                 Most people just say IMO or IMHO…
                                 but, help yourself.

                                 replyreport
      2. 81

         GA Andersonposted 10 years agoin reply to this

         It looks like one of us might be doing some kind "tripping."
         
         My purpose was to have a discussion about the topic - which you brought up in a thread for an unrelated topic. I just thought it was a courtesy to take the topic to a related thread instead of hijacking the OP's topic thread. Hmm... I think I am right.
         
         No ego, no "top billing" worthiness, (at least on my part), and the "invite" was because you originated the thought, and I assumed, (damned Assumptions again!), you might have more to say about it.
         
         I am not ego tripping. I do not know a lot about the possible consequences, (if any); military, economic, or any other aspect, of this happening.
         
         And I welcome any type of conversation or information that would help me form a more informed opinion on the topic.
         
         That is "what's up" with me. But I am confused by the tone of your response - so I don't know "what's up" with you.
         
         GA

         replyreport
         1. 76

            junkoposted 10 years agoin reply to this

            I just wondered why this question couldn't be ask in the forum I posted and you are relating to, but your answer answered my question. To answer your question, lets change the word conspiracy to intentions or business plans. America is still now the world economic leader, but Asia and China in perticular is making it bad for the US (Citizens). After Katrina took all of my material goods I had to replace my American made Thomasville furniture. I choose Ashley furniture it looks good but I don't think it is as good or better then what I had in Thomasville. Ashley is an American brand but, I was surprised to find out that my Ashley was made in Viet-nam. America is a first and new world country. China and Asia are and were third world countries. For better and worst third world countries are doing better economically, thanks to the spread of First world Capitalism. For every action there is an equal and opposite reaction, The third world is moving toward the second world and so is the US moving toward the second world, good for third world citizens but not so good for US (citizens). China has a very high trade status with the US and it seems everything is made in China or Asia, not good for US (citizens). China has become so economically powertful that they were able to loan the US the money to run our government during the two wars while Americans enjoyed the Bush tax cuts. When the US is unseated economically its not good for the American people.

            replyreport
            1. 81

               GA Andersonposted 10 years agoin reply to this

               *It's Sunday, Martini hour starts at nine..
               
               OK, so it was just a rough start... your change in wording greatly enhances the validity of your points.
               
               I agree with the reasoning of most of your comment, but I don't feel any of that answers the question posed - Why is it bad for the U.S.?
               
               If we were talking about  Russia - in its apparent quest of reconstituting a new Soviet Union, then the rising economic power of becoming the #1 largest economy in the world would pose serious concerns, as their past proxy behaviors are more than evident.
               
               But China, on the surface, has exhibited none of these aspirations. It appears that China's recent steps, (as in the past decade),  to open a formerly closed society have played a huge part in this almost unprecedented economic growth.
               
               So, as I stated at the beginning, I am not "up to speed" on most levels of the implications of this development. And from a layman's perspective, the loss of bragging rights is the only downside I can see. It is my hope to learn more through discussion of the topic.
               
               One more but... I hope to clear up your misconception that China "loaned" the U.S. any money. They did not. They bought U.S. Bonds and Treasuries, thus providing the monies the U.S. needed to meet its legal financial mandates. Those Bonds and Treasury Notes have fixed maturity dates - so demand for immediate repayment is not an option, as many right wing pundits will lead you to believe. China's Bond and Treasury holdings cannot bankrupt the U.S., or even influence policy. A completed sale is a done deal.
               
               Those monies could also have been attained by sales to other buyers, including the U.S. government itself. Yes, technically, our government can buy its own bond and treasury issues.
               
               And you final sentence again, begs the question, beyond the gut reaction, why is it bad for the U.S.?
               
               ps. Sorry to hear you were a Katrina victim. I would be interested in hearing more, and discussing the government's actions regarding the event - from an affected person's perspective, if you wanted to start such a thread.
               
               GA

               replyreport
               1. 82

                  Kathryn L Hillposted 10 years agoin reply to this

                  So, there is no harm in letting them buy up our land or businesses is there? Whee! There is no harm in buying all their products!
                  Guess not, since we are buying their products and have been for years!
                  However, I, for one, choose not to wear rose colored glasses, GA.
                  Sorry about the blatant gut reaction.

                  replyreport
                  1. 81

                     GA Andersonposted 10 years agoin reply to this

                     Oh my, where to start....
                     
                     "...no harm in letting them buy up our land or businesses..."
                     
                     Are you against foriegn ownership of U.S. assets, or just Chinese ownership? And I don't see how A is related to B in this topic. Of course Chinese economic advances/improvements gives them the discretionary income to do what you state - but how is that related to one economy being rated over the other?
                     
                     Do you consider why we buy their products? And are we really buying their products, or are we buying products made by their labor?
                     
                     Don't be offended if I wonder if you remember when it was Japanese plastics that enjoyed the moniker of "inferior made" products? It was when plastic was first coming into everyone's everyday life. From cheap transistor radios to cheap plastic gadgets. The science of plastics was in its early stages, and most plastics were inferior to expectations. Hence the common denigrating expression of "Made in Japan." China's productions are well past that stage.
                     
                     Nothing wrong with gut reactions, as long as they are not never-changing facts-be-damned reactions. That is how we all learn and evolve.
                     
                     As for the rose colored glasses, I don't think I have ever in my life succumbed to that malady. As a matter of fact, as I see it, it is a trait I am most likely to criticize.
                     
                     Just sayin'
                     
                     GA

                     replyreport
                     1. 82

                        Kathryn L Hillposted 10 years agoin reply to this

                        I am assuming you consider that China will never be a threat to us or that we do not need to be concerned about their increasing economic might and that we can go ahead and add to it. I think they will be a threat. Just like Russia would like to have more power, so does China. Why Not? Power is a great goal. What is to stop their quest for power and conquest? It is a problem as old as the hills.
                        I do not think another country's government-owned businesses should be allowed to buy our land. If the businesses are privately owned, I guess that's okay. I hope you can enlighten me about all this. I think with very simple reasoning.

                        replyreport
                        1. 81

                           GA Andersonposted 10 years agoin reply to this

                           Personally I try to make as few assumptions as possible - they usually get me into trouble.
                           
                           Yes I do think it is possible for China to become a threat in the future. I might even venture that it is probable. And yes, I do think we need to be concerned about their increasing economic might.
                           
                           As for the U.S. adding to it - which of our "addings" do you think are being most helpful? Using their labor to make our products? Buying their products? Trading with them in general? I think all of those are almost insurmountable consumer issues. The world, not just the U.S., wants the most bang for the buck, and if China's production provides that, then the patriotic motivation of past "War Bonds" programs pale in comparison to what would be needed to get consumers to change their ways.
                           
                           As for using their labor - short of placing them in a league with N. Korea, the constitutionality of restricting private enterprise would be seem to nip that effort in the bud.
                           
                           I may be naive on this topic, but recent history, (say the last 200 years), hasn't shown China to be as territorially  aggressive as the likes of Russia. So while I agree they may be as desirous of power as Russia, I see their goals to be a different kind of power. which may be even more of a threat than if they did follow Russia's example.
                           
                           I also agree with your view against foriegn governments owning U.S. assets.
                           
                           But even agreeing with all that - the same threats are there due to China's expanding economy and economic power, regardless of whether it replaces the U.S. as the #1 largest economy.
                           
                           What if they become #1 by only a few trillion dollars, (or renminbi), a few percentage points? The question still stands - would they profit by more than bragging rights?
                           
                           ps. of course if they bump us off the top by a huge margin, say two to one, or more, then my question is silly, as the ramifications would be obvious in their control of the global economy.
                           
                           GA

                           replyreport
                           1. 70

                              rhamsonposted 10 years agoin reply to this

                              "I may be naive on this topic, but recent history, (say the last 200 years), hasn't shown China to be as territorially  aggressive as the likes of Russia. So while I agree they may be as desirous of power as Russia, I see their goals to be a different kind of power. which may be even more of a threat than if they did follow Russia's example."
                              
                              China has been racking up some sloppy international relations for quite awhile. Korea, Viet Nam, Tibet just to name a few. There is recent territorial disputes which includes Japan. So I would not say China does not have aspirations such as Russia but perhaps a different tact is more their style.

                              replyreport
               2. 76

                  junkoposted 10 years agoin reply to this

                  Anderson your understanding is simular and liker like republican and democrats. Your reading and comprehenion is like that of wilderness and you also tend to be disagreeable. I get in trouble in forums because some people only want defend their idealogies on the downlow. Dialog with such people is a waste of time. I'd rather talk at them sometimes mostly read the mail. I am glad you find me interested enough you want to be my pen pal. Why don't you read my hub (An underclass look at Katrina) There you will have your innerview of junko. Don't ask me questions that you know you won't and can't agree with in public. Your disagreement of my comment was petty. If noticewhere I reference the US the word citizens was in quotes. The US is a place or thing not a person the pain that is felt is by US citizens not the economy yet. IF the Us is forced to except bond purchases from China rather than a loan that only served to give you another reason to disagree. Now thats all I will have to say on this forum. Thanks for the invite.

                  replyreport
                  1. 81

                     GA Andersonposted 10 years agoin reply to this

                     In accordance with your response... then by all means retreat to calmer waters where you don't have to be concerned with defending your allegations or opinions.
                     
                     To my mind, all I did was engage you in a conversation, on a topic you instigated.
                     
                     If you view me as disagreeable, could that be because you are speaking emotionally instead of rationally? And anyone that does not share your emotional perspective is disagreeable?
                     
                     Ha! I have never been accused of hiding my opinions and perspectives on the "downlow" before. This is a first for me.
                     
                     Penn pal?  I was thinking more of a conversation participant. I don't think we have enough in common to be pen pals.
                     
                     And you are welcome for the "invite."
                     
                     ps, I will go directly from here to your "underclass look at Katrina" hub to see if I my perspective of the "inner Junko" is really that far off-base.
                     
                     GA

                     replyreport
                     1. 81

                        GA Andersonposted 10 years agoin reply to this

                        I read your referenced hub. And I again offer my sympathies for your plight. But, all I read were cries of despair that the Federal government was not not providing you with money you needed in a timely manner.
                        
                        What did Junko do to help Junko? Why is it the government's responsibility to make Junko whole again?
                        .
                        However, my reading did confirm your observation that we have too little in common for a reasonable conversation and that your "that's all I have to say in this forum" is probably the best tact to take.
                        
                        GA

                        replyreport
2. 82

   Kathryn L Hillposted 10 years ago

   Junko, define "bad".

   replyreport
   1. 76

      junkoposted 10 years agoin reply to this

      "Kathryn".

      replyreport
      1. 82

         Kathryn L Hillposted 10 years agoin reply to this

         sorry.

         replyreport
3. 82

   Kathryn L Hillposted 10 years ago

   Question for anyone:  How is China's supplanting America's economic status "bad?"
   Bad for who? "Bad" for what?
   Badness is in the eye of the beholder.  China becoming the No. 1 economy is bad for America: How and why?
   For the world: How and why?
   Answering these questions would be the first step in addressing the OP's topic.
   
   Finally, how do we determine whether it is a conspiracy or not?

   replyreport
   1. 82

      Kathryn L Hillposted 10 years agoin reply to this

      Oh, here it is from other forum: "As their GDP grows, so does their citizen's Per Capita Income Is there a danger as China's citizen's escape their previous impoverished existence? Could this lead to more consumer demand for imported products, thus a boon to exporting nations - of which we are one? Could this possible enhanced "buying power" make China more influential on the world stage?'
      Good questions, GA
      Here is one answer. They are a Godless nation. Without respect for God and Life, They could very well operate from the position of tyranny without regard for the well-being of all.
      The conspiracy is that they could invade our soil in some manner and try to take us over.
      So, in that instance, it would be "bad."
      ...unless you are all for tyranny, socialism, communism, dictatorships, a One World Government or a New World Order…
      

      replyreport
      1. 82

         Kathryn L Hillposted 10 years agoin reply to this

         My prediction for sometime in the distant future is that Russia and China will unify and try to take over the US and others. Yes, WWIII. I happen to know that we will come out on top, but it will be a incredibly tough war. Most of us may not be around, though. Thank goodness.

         replyreport
4. 82

   Kathryn L Hillposted 10 years ago

   Can we buy land in China?

   replyreport