/sci/ - Science & Math

[Anonymous No.3120527]

Hey econfags, how fucked is America really?

[Anonymous No.3120536]

Driving towards a cliff, hooting and cheering, and not even trying to slow down.

[Anonymous No.3120540]

almost Weimar Germany bad

[Anonymous No.3120552]

well the american economy is still huge and the gdp per capita is still bigger than in most other western countries. the debt is high, but oh well.

also, even if china will surpass america in 2 or 3 decades, america still will control the world economy. because the world economy is not controlled by the greatest gdp, but by the greatest navy. and well the us navy is pretty much the most dominant aspect of american military dominance.

so yeah no worries.

[Anonymous No.3120578]

>>3120552
But what stops China from having a better navy within 20-30 years?

[Anonymous No.3120583]

>>3120536
>and not even trying to slow down.
Ha, fuck that. We took a shot and then sped up.

[Anonymous No.3120599]

>>3120578

well america will.

the british empire declared war on germany, when they started to build up a strong and big navy.

they of course made it look like germany started it.

[Anonymous No.3120611]

>>3120599
Yes and were is the British navy now?, When China's Navy is comparable to the US what will the US do? attack and start a huge war bigger than the second world war and bring both nations to its knees? making the US a poor country just like post WW2 Europe.
As China makes more money they will have the money to replace their ships faster than those of the US, US loses it's Navy... what then?.

[Anonymous No.3120617]

>>3120599
Sometimes I lay awake at night, and I think to myself, "How many world powers already have nuclear weapons installed in every major first world city? Just tucked away in little warehouses and basements, or that were buried in a construction site. Just in case."

[Anonymous No.3120625]

>>3120617
thanks for that

[Anonymous No.3120633]

>>3120611
China will never attack America.

America will never attack China.

[Anonymous No.3120650]

>>3120633
OK you have cleared that for me, what will stop China from building a better navy since they will have a higher GDP they will also be able to build more advanced ships than those of the US and allot faster than the US too since they have a higher work force and higher economy...

[Anonymous No.3120652]

[Anonymous No.3120654]

>>3120633
Yes, they're both joined at the hip.
But seriously, what the fuck is with the americans superiority complex? Any time a nation starts getting good and gets even remotely close to how well america is doing they start shitting bricks and thinking they'll be taken over. Happened with russia, japan, now china.

[Anonymous No.3120658]

>>3120652
Not for long kido

[Anonymous No.3120660]

>>3120652
>HURR I LIKE LIFTING HEAVY THINGS, I CAN BEAT YOU UP THEREFORE I AM BETTER THAN YOU
America: the jock of the world

[Anonymous No.3120662]

>>3120633
This. The Chinese and American economies are inexorably interdependent. Fantasizing about WWIII between them is immature circlejerking - it will never happen.

Chinese power and influence will increase, certainly, and negotiations will be on a more even footing, but there isn't going to be a WWIII with China.

[Anonymous No.3120663]

[Anonymous No.3120665]

>>3120625
Man, these kids ain't boy scouts.

Ever notice how a new President is happy and optimistic as fuck full of all these plans and ideas right after being elected... right up until he gets The Briefing?

You know the one. The "Your job is to keep them alive for four more years. Just concentrate on those four years." one.

[Anonymous No.3120659]

>>3120650
It doesn't really matter whether they build a Navy or not.

[Anonymous No.3120669]

[Anonymous No.3120671]

ITT, two groups:

>China and American can't afford to attack each other. It's not going to happen.

>HURR AMURRICA STRONG

[Anonymous No.3120672]

>>3120659
I know this i was responding to
>>3120552
Who thinks that because the US currently has the best navy that they will always remain the number 1 super power

[Anonymous No.3120675]

>>3120617
LOLno. Missile silos are not IN the large cities.

[Anonymous No.3120677]

[Anonymous No.3120680]

>>3120611

you can say a lot of things about the american governemnt, but they are not stupid. they always have a plan b.

if they get information that china is planning to build a navy, that can compete with the us navy, america will unleash a conflict between taiwan and chinaa. taiwan would blocade the formosa strait and the chinese economy would collapse, and so would the peoples republic.

if that for whatever reason doesnt work, there is still the korean peninsula.

but why would the chinese government want to change anything? everything is going extremely well for them, why would they want to change something?

>>3120617

[Anonymous No.3120685]

>>3120675

[Anonymous No.3120691]

>>3120680
What is to stop China from preventing the USA from doing this? If the Chinese economy is at stake they will throw everything they have at the US to protect their interests

[Anonymous No.3120692]

>>3120680
>if they get information that china is planning to build a navy, that can compete with the us navy, america will unleash a conflict between taiwan and chinaa

No. Such a war is in no one's interest. No one.

[Anonymous No.3120693]

>>3120654

Well, we used to be motivated by competition. Americans were driven to be the best to do what no one else could. Now (this guy is an idiot >>3120652) the US and the rest of the western world are a bunch of cowards who have gotten used to a cushy lifestyle. We know nothing of hardship so have no reason to care that Asia is doing better than us. It will all change soon.

[Anonymous No.3120698]

>>3120691
> If the Chinese economy is at stake they will throw everything they have at the US to protect their interests
America *IS* the Chinese economic interest, dammit!

[Anonymous No.3120704]

>>3120698
So how is the US creating a blockade that would hurt the Chinese economy in the Chinese interest

[Anonymous No.3120705]

>>3120617

that would be extremely dangerous.

lets say such an atomic bomb goes off accidentally in new york, and the cia finds out it was a "just in case" bomb from russia, how would the russian government explain that?

[Anonymous No.3120708]

The United States has established an incredible amount of influence around the world. Some innocent people have gotten fucked over too.

[Anonymous No.3120715]

>>3120704
It's not.

Tensions are high, sure, but America and China are economically interdependent. Neither of them can afford open conflict. It's not going to happen.

[Anonymous No.3120724]

>>3120540

As in, before Hitler, Germany?

[Anonymous No.3120732]

>>3120715
Yes but China will want a Navy worthy of the biggest economy on the planet there is nothing the US can do, this was my argument

[Anonymous No.3120735]

>>3120705
>how would the russian government explain that?
I believe they would start with, "We're terribly sorry about this unfortunate incident..." and end with, "...but you don't want us to set off the REST, do you?"

[Anonymous No.3120736]

>>3120724
That's the reference, yeah. I'm not that guy though.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Weimar_Republic

[Anonymous No.3120743]

>>3120617
Woah, wait, WHAT? You think major cities contain hidden nuclear bombs from OTHER nations?

LOLno.

[Anonymous No.3120748]

>>3120692

controlling the seas is the absolute priority in americas national security policy. they will never let someone else rule the seas, as long as they can do anything to not let that happen.

[Anonymous No.3120752]

>>3120735
If this were to occur, it could easily mean the end of whatever regime is in power. It probably wouldn't produce a nuclear exchange.

But the premise is silly.

[Anonymous No.3120758]

>>3120552

Cool story bro. Guess who used to have the best navy?

"Rule Britannia, Britannia rules the waves."

Now look at the state of our navy

[Anonymous No.3120759]

>>3120748
yes so there are two possible scenarios because China WILL as I mentioned before will want a navy that is worthy of the highest economy on the planet.

Scenario a) the US does nothing
Scenario b) the US starts a war and shit hits the fan yo

[Anonymous No.3120760]

>>3120748
Overt action against China is not economically acceptable to anyone involved. The US enjoys overwhelming power over sea lanes, yes, and China's power is going to grow, but this is not going to result in miliitary blockades or hot wars.

[Anonymous No.3120761]

>>3120748
so in a choice between a war that would cause their annihilation and letting others control the seas, america would choose annihilation?

pretty fucking rational

[Anonymous No.3120766]

>>3120760
>>3120759
>>3120758
it will be a cold war

and cold wars are won by economics

china will win

[Anonymous No.3120767]

>>3120759
It'll be a, because b is pants-on-head retarded for everyone involved.

[Anonymous No.3120768]

>>3120758
Fucking Lelouch.

[Anonymous No.3120773]

>>3120766
Depends on what you mean by "win". Cold wars don't HAVE to end with someone in ruins.

[Anonymous No.3120776]

Can we just once end a cold war with a good clean snowball fight?

[Anonymous No.3120781]

The War Business is thriving.

[Anonymous No.3120782]

>>3120766
This seems the most logical. but it will be a different cold war than the last because the two economies are intertwined. US will start inhibiting Chinese interest one way or another and China will keep a cool face and regretfully pull all ties (over time) with the US actually both sides will pretend to be completely oblivious to each others actions. None of this outright war thing wont happen but small scale conflict with other nations that would harm the opposing side.

[Anonymous No.3120785]

You know i hope china starts flexing its muscles and gets the lazy ass americans into a real competition, so long as its shit like the space race.

[Anonymous No.3120790]

>>3120766
There will never be a war between China or America.

[Anonymous No.3120800]

>>3120782
There might be a small but hot proxy war. I doubt it. The US-China relation is fundamentally different from what the US-USSR relationship was, or even what the US-China relation used to be.

We're symbiotic now, whether we like it or not.

[Anonymous No.3120802]

>>3120790
>thinks a cold war is a war

[Anonymous No.3120808]

>>3120790
Not a hot one, no. And I agree that a cold war wouldn't get near as bad as the one between the US and Russia. But tensions might be high as China rises in power. It will all come down to the fact that we can't hurt each other without hurting ourselves.

[Anonymous No.3120809]

>>3120758

britain had to agree in american dominance, because they were the only ones who were able to save them from the germans. britain had the choice between germany and america and they choosed usa.

>>3120761
>>3120760
>>3120759

you seem to misunderstand. a direct, big war will be not necessary.

you know, the british empire wanted to colonize the chinese empire. but they were pretty strong, britain was not able to conquer china. instead, they blockaded the sea and china collapsed soon.

britain and usa wanted the japanese market to open. but japan was pretty strong, so instead the blockaded japan an it collapsed.

china today is so fragile that just a few weeks of blockade would destroy them completely. this not even enough time to start any real military maneuver.

[Anonymous No.3120819]

>>3120809
>china today is so fragile that just a few weeks of blockade would destroy them completely.
hahaha oh wow.

The era of trying to strong-arm the Chinese militarily ended after it eventually failed for the British. It will never happen again in the foreseeable future.

[Anonymous No.3120831]

>>3120819
(cont)
>The era of trying to strong-arm the Chinese militarily ended after it eventually failed for the British
That is, from the Western perspective at least. Japan gave it a go in WWII shortly afterwards, and ultimately failed. That era is over.

[Anonymous No.3120832]

>>3120652
http://www.usni.org/news-and-features/chinese-kill-weapon China already has a ballistic weapon capable of destroying carriers. They're far more economical than our carriers are, and so in any actual naval blockade which results in fighting, they'll be able to win.(As long as it's defensively)

>>3120809
China also has Russia to transport and sell all of their goods in. They have an act in place to work together against any sort of American aggression. Specifically American, since both countries have tons of contingencies at the point that the USA tries to strong-arm either of them.

[Anonymous No.3120835]

>>3120819
>except when japan tried

herp

[Anonymous No.3120841]

>>3120831
failed because of america, and to a lesser extent the commonwealth, not because of its own abilities

[Anonymous No.3120843]

>>3120832
Carriers are for slapping a bitch, not a stand-up fight against a nuclear power.

Basically, any fight where China would sink a carrier is going to be a nuclear war where carriers don't count for shit.

[Anonymous No.3120850]

>>3120809
You know almost nothing of China but PR or things dating back to the Nixon administration. Things have gone full circle since Mao Zedong died and a massive change in the way the infrastructure works from the 90s to 00s.

They're in multiple economic groups and military pacts with all of the countries in Central Asia and with Russia.

Economically speaking, China and Russia are both working on trans-siberian oil pipelines too, among other ways to increase production and partnership between the two of them so they don't have to rely on the USA as much. It's the same with the Euro-Asia railway being developed.

[Anonymous No.3120851]

>>3120835
You're right, I caught that too. I was thinking of Western influence at the time. The point stands as amended.
>>3120831

[Anonymous No.3120855]

>>3120843
Any war where the USA would actually attack China directly with carriers would probably end in a nuclear war anyway. Russia also has stronger ties with China than the USA, so they'd probably try to help their major trading, military and economic partner too.

[Anonymous No.3120857]

>>3120841
A decent point, but the Japanese failure still marked the end of an era. No one is ever going to blockade, invade or "colonize" China for quite some time to come.

We're in a fundamentally different age of the world now. Amazing to think that WWII was hardly more than half a century ago.

[Anonymous No.3120866]

>>3120855
>Any war where the USA would actually attack China directly with carriers would probably end in a nuclear war anyway.
Yeah, that's the other side of it.

>Russia also has stronger ties with China than the USA, so they'd probably try to help their major trading, military and economic partner too.
No way. Anyone who has a hope of staying out of a nuclear war is going to stay neutral if one comes up.

No amount of affecting the outcome either way is worth losing your own cities.

[Anonymous No.3120881]

>>3120866
IMO nuclear exchange between major powers is very unlikely anyway. A nuclear attack by a rogue faction might be possible, but a full nuclear exchange between two countries? I doubt it. MAD has served us well so far.

Pakistan/India unfortunately might be an exception.

[Anonymous No.3120897]

>>3120850

china is developing because of sea-based economy and sea-based ressource-transport system.

and believe it or not, but china is very fragile. the chinese governemnt shat its pants than on the other side of the world some arab dictators were toppled.

just some more or less minor interference on their sea-based economy and they are gone.

i am not saying that america has an interest in destroying china, they can grow as much as they want as long as they dont touch the american hegemony over the seas.

[Anonymous No.3120922]

>>3120866
I suppose that's right. Russia would probably stay neutral, especially in a nuclear war. It's not too important though, since both the USA and China have more than enough nuclear weapons to make any war like that a terrible scenario for both countries.


I doubt a nuclear weapon would ever be used if China were to increase their own naval presence, though. Even saying the USA would feel threatened and try to blockade China would be a stretch. They could say that, but even the USA pretends Taiwan isn't a country to keep China happy, the same with most of the world.

The whole world would be pissed at the USA if they blockaded China, since most of the world gets their things from there. If the EU is counted as a single entity, they're technically China's biggest trade partner and need them to stay competitive. Without China, Japan and Taiwan's economies wouldn't even function due to not getting any of the raw materials that are the only thing keeping them in the first world.

[Anonymous No.3120938]

Guise, is China REALLY doing all that well?
I ask because of this video I just found not too long ago:

China's Ghost Cities and Malls
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=rPILhiTJv7E

And here's a Wikipedia page on it:
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Chinese_property_bubble

It seems that China is striving to maintain economic growth by simply building these huge fucking cities that just go uninhabited.

What's the deal yo?

[Anonymous No.3120939]

>>3120897
>and believe it or not, but china is very fragile. the chinese governemnt shat its pants than on the other side of the world some arab dictators were toppled.
>just some more or less minor interference on their sea-based economy and they are gone.

The Chinese have been very active in suppressing dissent for decades now. Recent events are nothing compared to Tiananmen Square.

It seems you have this inherent idea that China is going to collapse in the next light breeze. Protip: It's not. My what mechanism would such collapse take place, anyway? It seems that you've taken it as a given with no real justification.

[Anonymous No.3120948]

>>3120897
China's government is fragile and worried about those Arab dictators being toppled? Do you have any sources for this? I've been over to China and the people there are full of nationalistic fervor over the government and how good life is getting for everyone there.

Most people I talk to about that just whine about freedom and Democracy, but having been there and know multiple Chinese people living there, it's not as big an issue as the USA makes it out to be.

[Anonymous No.3120953]

>>3120938
China's problems are acknowledged. They're undergoing an incredibly rapid development phase, and it's going to be bumpy.

But they are and will continue to be a major world power, and they will have greater power 20 years from now than they do today.

[Anonymous No.3120957]

>>3120948
This. The Chinese have amazing support for their government, despite the human rights abuses. It's an entirely different culture, for one thing. And this is coming from multiple Chinese nationals I've talked with, in private, inside the United States. They support their government, by and large.

You might argue they don't let the dissenters leave the country, and there's truth to that, but it is still the case that the Chinese government is in no danger of being overthrown.

[Anonymous No.3120958]

>>3120939

well my main reason is historiy continuity.

china always was fragile. the 60 years the people's republic is existing is actually an extraordinary long time for a chinese government.

it will collapse again, china always collapses.

[Anonymous No.3120961]

>>3120938
China has a surplus of money and wants to keep their coastal cities from becoming too overpopulated. They build cities with infrastructure and some of these cities don't actually have any major viable sources of income so nobody moves there.

Most of those cities are also keeping China's construction workers and engineers employed, but it's still a waste of money when they build cities like this. They're getting better at placing them, but there are still about a dozen of ghost towns/cities in central China.

Also Chinese businessmen tend to flock to special economic zones.

China's government body is something around over half engineers and people from science colleges. They are getting better at placing cities in the last few years though. Most of the ones on those links are years old.

[Anonymous No.3120964]

OP's question
>Hey econfags, how fucked is America really?

Result: People arguing about wars with China and silly stuff like that

[Anonymous No.3120967]

>>3120958
If you're talking about possible regime changes, that's one thing, though I'd argue that the modern era is fundamentally different from past eras due to technology and globalization. But even in the event of a large shift in policy, or even a total regime change, China itself is not going to "collapse".

[Anonymous No.3120972]

>>3120957

yes, they also always loved their emperor, but still china collapsed over and over again.

[ႼЋïŁႣƧტƿḩЄƦṥ !Scone2booQ No.3120973]

>>3120957
That's the whole point of having a repressive government. If you don't allow anyone to criticize the government, and you put out pro-government propaganda, the people mostly buy it and thing the government is good. It's not necessarily a bad thing. I'm not sure if that approach is any worse than democracy, or if they're equally ugly.

[Anonymous No.3120983]

>>3120972
And yet, China remains, and is stronger than ever.

That's all I'm saying.

[Anonymous No.3120985]

>>3120958
Seriously though? Is that the whole reason you think that?

I could just as easily say the United States is going to collapse like the United Kingdom and become less important, because I pinpoint similar trends happening today.


China has almost no open or private dissent that I've seen. It's insane being over there and talking to average people in private. Almost everyone is hyped up about China being so powerful and how good everything is going. They'll believe anything the government tells them essentially.

In 60 years China went from a mostly agrarian society to an industrialized power in those 60 years. Poverty went from something like 40-60% to something below 10%. Even India hasn't been able to change in the way China has and people in China all think it's because of the party.

[Anonymous No.3120987]

i think a lot of people here should first read The Influence of Sea Power upon History by mahan to get a basis about the coherence between navy, economy and politics.

[Anonymous No.3121009]

>>3120985
You can't argue with results. I wouldn't even claim the popular approval is just a result of propaganda. China is being transformed, and in a good way for its people.

[Anonymous No.3121013]

>>3120527
well america is not fucked right now, but if the dollar won't be accepted as a currency someday ( because of the debts america is in) then america will be really fucked, but as long that doesn't happen you may chill out

[Anonymous No.3121017]

>>3120972
>>3120973
Hell, even Tibet went from 90% illiteracy to 10% since they've become a part of China. They also moved a bunch of Chinese people there and have modernized it. Right now, any hopes of Tibet ever being broken off of China are essentially null.

The Chinese oppressive government is probably the only reason that it's doing so much better than India, actually. If China became a democracy there would be fighting along so many party lines that the entire government would dissolve in a few years and China would cannibalize itself.

I don't think the PRC is as bad as the USA when it comes to propaganda, but in the last few years they've been "dealing" with corruption pretty well. There's a hotline to call up on corrupt bosses or people stealing from the government or vice versa(at least by Chinese law) and paying people for ratting each other out. Lots of officials have been ending up imprisoned for that sort of thing. I admire that kind of cold efficiency.

[Anonymous No.3121020]

>>3120985

i think you wouldnt have believed someone telling you that the lybian, egyptian and tunesian people would overthrow their dictator.

fun fact: chinese economy and maintenance of ressources is fragile and can go downhill very fast, and so would the public opinion about the party.

[Anonymous No.3121029]

>>3120987
That was written in 1890. Certain principles of human organization and behavior are timeless (as in Sun Tzu's The Art of War), but this book still must be taken with a grain of salt. Mercantilism is dead, and colonialism is quickly following. Naval might is going to be overthrown by globalization, when a naval blockade hurts you as much as your target.

That said, I'm sure the book has excellent points, and is worth reading.

[Anonymous No.3121031]

America isn't fucked, but a lot of the world is.

[Liberty !!nQrIRh+JHbs No.3121039]

>>3120527

Fairly fucked.

[Anonymous No.3121040]

>>3121020
That fragility seems to be your axiom, as it has gone completely unsupported.

Any regime that can survive the disastrous reign of Mao is going to survive a real estate bubble. We've got Deng Xiaoping to thank for the success of the Chinese after Mao's pants-on-head retarded rule. Capitalism ho!

[Anonymous No.3121041]

Depends how true this
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ZPWH5TlbloU

[Anonymous No.3121068]

>>3121041
>Tad Lumpkin
>banks and loans are the devil
Sure. This sounds reasonable.

[Anonymous No.3121088]

>>3121068
It's hyperbolic and simplistic, but it's probably better to hear this than for many Americans to go on being as debt-happy as they are.

[Anonymous No.3121090]

>>3121040

haha oh wow.

every surpressive regime is fragile, you should know that by now. and if this is combined with ethnic conflicts, inner-economic tendencies (rich coast, poor inner lands), and a complete dependance from sea without having a strong navy the ingredients for a collapse are all there.

also, there are actually two governments who claim to be the chinese governement, hong kong and macau are de facto independent and singapore is also a de facto chinese state. so there are 5 de facto han-chinese states, so in fact china has already kind of collapsed, why is it so unlikely that this continues?

[Anonymous No.3121101]

>>3121090

tendencies=tensions

[Anonymous No.3121125]

Let's start pushing cheap opium into China again. It worked so well last time.

[Anonymous No.3121145]

>>3121068
>12:30-ish
>supporting the gold standard
>portraying fiat currency as a primal evil
lol

[Anonymous No.3121184]

They're fine. Want to know why? Because even though they're in debt pretty bad, their assets are worth so much in comparison that it hardly matters.

[Anonymous No.3121185]

>>3121090
Time will tell.

[Anonymous No.3121194]

>>3121041
I'm watching this, but it's very hard to take anything so incredibly biased and simplistic seriously. It's insulting. It's like Fox News, but with a different agenda.

[Anonymous No.3121196]

>>3121090
Are you serious? Be honest with your statements. Those countries were never part of communist China. Taiwan is close, but the other four were always colonies, mostly formed in the 1800s. Macau was Portugeuse, Hong Kong and Singapore were British.

Most of the world doesn't recognize Taiwan as a country, not even the United States, their biggest ally.

Also Macau and Hong Kong are both parts of PRC. They were not the only special economic zones in China that do not have to follow standard PRC economic practices. Everyone in those countries has citizenship from the PRC and are now policed by China and has their military nearby.


The ONLY country you mentioned that split from China is Taiwan, and that was when the PRC formed. Taiwan has always had strong Japanese ties too and prior to WWII was a part of Imperial Japan. So you don't even need to count that. China has only gained territory since forming.

[Anonymous No.3121205]

>>3121196

i just tried to make the point, that there is not such a strong will beneath the chinese people to live in one common state.

[Anonymous No.3121213]

>>3121090
>>3121196
Also many important Hong Kong residents are pro-PRC. Hell, Jackie Chan got in trouble for saying a lot of pro-PRC things while in Taiwan and abroad. Macau is basically the same way with regards to China. They're loyal to the party(though that is most likely due to the economics involved).

Singapore has too high of an obvious religious population to be of interest to China itself and is hundreds of miles away. Singapore also has no political interests in liberating China from the PRC, as long as they're able to stay independent.

[Anonymous No.3121225]

>>3121041
>22:30
>pretending homes now are like homes in the 50s
>you are no richer than you were in 1955
>24:30
>implying JFK was killed for defying the Fed
Full retard. Oh my god.

There are issues with the Fed, but this film is not constructive in the least.

[Anonymous No.3121240]

>>3121205
>there is not such a strong will beneath the chinese people to live in one common state.
Now you're just arguing from ignorance. Mainland China is overwhelmingly devoted to remaining one nation. It's deeply engrained in the culture, regardless of the political regime.

[Anonymous No.3121246]

>>3121213

China' stability is completely depended by its economy.

And well, China is a capitalist country, and capitalist countries tend to have recessions from time to time.

I dont think the chinese state would survive an economic crisis like the one we are having in the USA.

[Anonymous No.3121248]

>>3121240

laughinggirls.jpg

[ႼЋïŁႣƧტƿḩЄƦṥ !Scone2booQ No.3121258]

>>3121145
That's should be your cue to stop the video.

[ႼЋïŁႣƧტƿḩЄƦṥ !Scone2booQ No.3121268]

>>3121246
We're having a crisis right now? Why did no one tell me?

[Anonymous No.3121270]

>>3121205
And I disagree. This is basically the same thing as Northern Ireland and the Republic of Ireland with regard to them becoming a part of Ireland. Only replace the Irish republic with China. There are people in Taiwan who want to join the PRC, and the communist party almost came close to winning an election in the past, but it probably won't happen. Only due to cultural reasons though. Singaporeans consider themselves Singaporeans instead of Chinese, for the most part.

The Han Chinese population is the largest population in China, but of all the minorities, none of them show any major dissent or pushes for breaking apart the country, outside of the muslim minorities in the Southwestern provinces.

Do you know of any major attempts to split China apart?

[Anonymous No.3121274]

>>3120958

Are you fucking retarded?
No other country has such a long continuous history of being one nation than China!

[Anonymous No.3121287]

>>3121258
I went too far. The animations are amusing, but their use is revolting when you realize they are serious.

>>3121248
>>3121246
Wow. You guys just need to look up your Chinese history. This regime survived Mao's Great Leap Forward. If you don't know what that means, I don't have a reason to keep talking to you. And after that, the regime has changed drastically, and for the better for its people.

If Mao couldn't kill the PRC, neither will a housing bubble. You have to realize where the Chinese are coming from, and how drastically their situation has improved over the past decades. Not to mention the cultural aspect - which is the most crucial of all. It's WHY the regime survived Mao's idiocy.

[Anonymous No.3121288]

>>3121248
You can't prove his point then? I'd assume you're talking about some tiny group like the Tibetans, but that country is populated by large numbers of Chinese now, and so has little hope of ever splintering away even if China would let them.

>>3121246
It seems unlikely for something like that to happen in the way the government controls their economy, but if that did happen the current political party in China would probably be kicked out and a third one would come in to fix things. The first generation of Chinese communism almost destroyed the country but the second one saved it. People have faith in that sort of thing.

[Anonymous No.3121297]

>>3121274

5000 years of chinese history:

collapsing, struggling to build up, collapsing, mongols, collapsing, more mongols, europeans.

yeah thats it.

[Anonymous No.3121298]

>>3121274

I must qualify that by stating however, that, though the rulers may have changed, the institutions and bureaucracy have remained together, and that is essentially what the state is..

[Anonymous No.3121308]

>>3121297
When was the last time mainland China was not a united nation?

[Anonymous No.3121309]

China has never come apart from the inside once it was originally unified. They've all been one country despite all the regimes toppling, for centuries longer than any other country.

The country itself has survived Mao, the British and massive civil wars where over a hundred million people killed each other. And you're all talking about a housing bubble causing the country to fracture?

[Anonymous No.3121316]

>>3121297

But 500 years of English history, or French history, or American history (haha)? Not existing, not existing, not existing, not existing... Ooh, existing!

[Anonymous No.3121318]

>>3121297
They've remained one country through all of that though, you know. The only thing that ever splintered Taiwan off of China was a Japanese invasion. It's an exception to the rest of China because of their roots as a Japanese colony.

[Anonymous No.3121324]

ITT: Ignorant Ameritards who are terrified of China express fantasies that it will collapse and splinter soon, while others facepalm.

[Anonymous No.3121336]

Why do people think China must collapse?

Just after a decade without a concurrent, America started declining. Maybe thats what America needs, a good economic and military concurrent. I think China can be that.

But everything without the almost-atomic war feeling we had in the 20th century.

Except that, they build our shit so cheap, we have more billionaires and millionaires than ever before. And if America would be just a littel more socialist, the people would actually benefit from the enormous wealth America is gaining from chinese labour.

[Anonymous No.3121356]

>>3121324
Hey he might not be Americ- alright he probably is.

I don't know why the country produces such AMERICAN STRONG people who ignore data and facts and just come up with whatever small loophole or chance there is for the USA to triumph, but then I look at countries like Russia and just assume all world powers produce people like that.

[Liberty !!nQrIRh+JHbs No.3121419]

This thread reminds me of the hope that commies had that Soviet Russia would overtake the U.S. in GDP.

> if china finally matches us gdp
> realize they have 4 times the population
> nothing was gained

[Anonymous No.3121484]

>mfw america spent waaaaay more money than they had, because of this they had to print off more and more money, sending the country in a never ending pithole of debt and devaluing their own dollar.
>mfw im american

[Anonymous No.3121501]

>>3121484
>mfw this will allow them to steal some jobs back from china as well as everyone else
>mfw I have no face

[Anonymous No.3121505]

>>3121484
introduce new currency
???
profit

[Anonymous No.3121525]

>>3121505
amero? lol...

[m1ckey !dkJI/P7Y32 No.3121540]

>>3121484
Fun Fact: China's government is printing money as well.

Polite sage for dumb thread, filled with crass hyperbole and idiotic nationalism. I hope you guys are trolling.

[Liberty !!nQrIRh+JHbs No.3121552]

>>3121540

They do that to stay relevant.

[m1ckey !dkJI/P7Y32 No.3121585]

BTW devaluation of the dollar would actually be favorable to America in this case, as it increases demand for domestic products discourages imports. If you're concerned about the trade deficit, that is.

[Liberty !!nQrIRh+JHbs No.3121611]

>>3121585

No.

The strengthening of the dollar would be better. But why? Because services garner more profit than products. And we are a service based economy, and only growing more so as time goes on. Decreasing the cost of products we buy since we are a service economy would be the most logical thing to do.

[m1ckey !dkJI/P7Y32 No.3121616]

>>3121552
Who? The Chinese government? Or the 5 mao party members in this thread?

[Liberty !!nQrIRh+JHbs No.3121639]

>>3121616

China.

[m1ckey !dkJI/P7Y32 No.3121654]

>>3121611
As I said, if you're concerned about the trade deficit. And competition from cheap Chinese products is one reason why unemployment in some industrial sectors in the US is so high.

[m1ckey !dkJI/P7Y32 No.3121682]

>>3121639
I think they've been selling some of the Treasuries they've been holding - not enough to affect exchange rates though.

[Anonymous No.3121688]

>>3121611
how exactly is strong dollar supposed to help americans? What good can it possibly do except make import cheaper?

[m1ckey !dkJI/P7Y32 No.3121701]

Sigh, gotta go. Can't be running late today.

[Anonymous No.3121719]

America is one of the least fucked economies in the world, it's idea of a recession is when people aren't getting richer faster enough.

[Liberty !!nQrIRh+JHbs No.3121738]

>>3121654

I am concerned only with the devaluing of labor. They emotionally think they can compete with China for products. If they had any intelligence they would switch focus away from underselling China in production.

>>3121688

> implying exporting production is needed in a legit economy based heavily on services
> implying the drastic reduction in products is not good for EVERY SINGLE AMERICAN
> implying holding onto the want for manual labor to be the most important part o your country is not hilarious and silly

[Anonymous No.3121786]

>>3121738
>Implying everyone can work in services
>Implying there would be demand for all of them even if they could
>Implying strong currency doesn't bring inflation
>Implying that parasiting on other countries' approach to slave labour while preaching human rights and liberties is alright (although that's a different discussion)

[Liberty !!nQrIRh+JHbs No.3121809]

>>3121786

> implying they can't, and that some production would not stay
> implying demand would not determine what is needed in the eyes of the buyer
> implying the inflation could go outside the money supply if it is backed
> implying the purchasing of products is parasitism
> implying it is our fault that china hates Liberty
> implying actual rights (if they existed) are positive rights

[Anonymous No.3121840]

>>3121809

do you feel it's alright if you buy a stolen car, right after you seen the seller break into it on the parking lot?

oh yeah, liberty is a great thing, as long as I don't have to sacrifice my well being for it.

saged for off topic.

[Liberty !!nQrIRh+JHbs No.3121851]

>>3121840

That is anti-Liberty. Hence.

> implying Liberty takes your well being
> implying others owe you products and services that have costs because you want them

[Anonymous No.3121872]

>>3121851

So if person X is violating person Y's liberties, and you support person X by doing business with them which benefits primarily YOU and person X, it's wrong? Just asking.

[Anonymous No.3121917]

whiners bitch about debt, when Germany, Britain, France, and Japan have higher public debt by gdp.

Just raise the taxes on the top 10% of income brackets by 5% and the top 2% of income brackets by 17%. Drop corporate taxes by 0.5% to encourage actual business investment. The debt will be paid off in ten years and I will remove money from circulation that is just used for short term speculative investing rather than material investment in businesses.

And no, China will not supercede the US or EU GDPs. It will plateau at around 20 trillion 2001USD compared the US and EU 14 trillion. They can't grow at their current rate indefinitely. They will plateau like the US did in the early 60s or Japan did in the late 80s. Growth only continues until markets become saturated for the goods being produced, then growth slows to 1-5% annual.

[Anonymous No.3121947]

>>3121654
>unemployment in some industrial sectors in the US is so high

They US has 3 times the industrial output of China. And Germany has nearly twice that of China. The reason for low employment in industry other than resource extraction is because there is so much automation. The trade deficit is caused by exporting component parts and having the assembled by cheap labor, which is the one place where labor is still preferable to automation.

China gets preferential tariffs and can set its currency on a peg to others because of lax regulations due to its "developing nation" status which it holds unto like grim death even though it is pretty much fully developed.

[Liberty !!nQrIRh+JHbs No.3121956]

>>3121872

> implying I would support it

[noko No.3122000]

>>3120527
back on subject...
Certain bits of America are fucked. the blue collars are irreversibly fucked. There is nothing we can do for them, now. White collars will do okay and their living standard will gradually rise, slowly to very slowly. The middle class will almost certainly shrink without socialist policies present in other European countries. But above all, America certainly isn't going anywhere, even if the debt is about 100% gdp (that's not that bad, really, guys. look at japan.). The world's intelligensia is fundamentally American, and international economic policies are there to make sure America and China never tangle.

[Anonymous No.3122034]

>>3120540
>>3120724
>>3120736
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=rUgwlecZ3RU

[Anonymous No.3122247]

i don't see why the Chinese working class can't eventually be moved into units in buildings that don't sell (keep 20% of all new residential development for cost-adjusted living)... it's all state money anyway - give the worst units in each development to a working class that then works as the janitors, shop keepers, etc.

Also, factories can be brought to cities like this - the corporation buys entire buildings (with steep government discounts of course) to house their workers. Workers are garnished 50% of wages for these nice living quarters and the rest of the wages can be spent on food / healthcare / discretionary spending in the mall to drive the micro-economy in the city. The factories get cheap labor, overall standard of living goes up, China is seen as treating the common man well & is praised for reforming on the human rights front, the cities actually are self-sustaining and create "quality" gdp/gnp like the aussie youtube video talks about.

This is just one solution out of many for China. I'd say this "bubble" isn't a big deal at all.

[Anonymous No.3122344]

>>3121947
China gets developing nation status because the vast majority of it is still rural.

Assuming economic ties = no war is naive. If the cost of not going to war outweighs going to war, it will be done. Interlinked economies didn't prevent WWI from breaking out.

Many in this thread greatly overstate political instability in China. The Communist Party receives popular support because they've genuinely done a good job raising the living standards of its citizens.

I highly doubt China is going to be building an Navy that can contest the sealanes anytime soon. Such projects have long lead times and they haven't shown any interest at all.

[Anonymous No.3122370]

>>3120654
best propaganda too

[Anonymous No.3122374]

>>3122344
>The Communist Party receives popular support because they've genuinely done a good job raising the living standards of its citizens.
...from a horrible low you'd have to WORK AT to get so bad.

[Anonymous No.3122382]

>>3122374
(...and you know, they did work at, to make so bad)

[Anonymous No.3122398]

>>3122344
> If the cost of not going to war outweighs going to war, it will be done.
Globalization makes this point very unlikely to be reached.

[Anonymous No.3122402]

Hey guys OP here. What the hell happened to this thread? And I guess for those actually on topic I guess I would ask as a follow up:

As a 20 year old male I am finding it almost impossible to find a good job. I have a bad knee and I can't afford even the slightest iota of healthcare. School is also out of the question because I can barely afford to stay alive. If you are in the average joe category of America, are things really gonna get worse? I can't even look at the option of getting my own place and I legitimately just don't know how to improve my situation. And I am not the only one I know in the same boat. Is this generation of middle class kids fucked?

[Anonymous No.3122420]

well maybe if your parents had left you some money you'd be alright. amirite?

[Anonymous No.3122424]

>>3122402
>Is this generation of middle class kids fucked?

Yes. Why do you think 4chan has so many users? Our entire generation is on 4chan, and that's just terrible.

[Anonymous No.3122427]

>>3122402
No. Stop relying on society.

[Anonymous No.3122492]

>>3122427
I'm not sure if you are aware but society is a big part of living in a society. How am I supposed to get a job if I can't make any more than minimum wage because I am competing with out of work 40 year olds with Masters degrees and 10 years of work experience. I thought this was an exaggeration but its happened to me about a dozen times now. How am I supposed to better my life and go to school when the price of school is prohibitive and it is literally IMPOSSIBLE for me to afford it. I could work two jobs sure, but then school becomes impossible for the obvious reasons and it took me forever just to get the one I have now. I don't ask for anything to be handed to me, I bust my ass working minimum wage and doing everything on the side to make money (donating blood plasma, odd jobs from craigslist, constantly job hunting, even drug dealing when times were really tight). I don't have a problem when improving my standard of living is hard, I expected it to be. But as things are right now I am finding them to be insurmountable. And with the state of the economy the idea of being laid off would completely shatter my world.

[Anonymous No.3122533]

>>3122492
You need to get training for a job that doesn't require being on your feet. Unfortunately, many vocational jobs don't fit that description. Is college out of the question? And not just any degree, but a bachelors that would actually go towards a specific and useful field.

[Anonymous No.3122536]

>>3122398
You keep using that word, but I don't think you know what it means. Look at the volume of trade prior to WWI and how all parties involved were economically dependent on it.

Nobody really likes fighting wars (Nobody rational anyways), but they occur nonetheless. Sometimes things just spiral out of control (Again, see, WWI)

[Anonymous No.3122567]

>>3122533
I have three bills I pay: Rent, cell phone, and groceries. I haven't bought any new clothes in over a year and when I do I shop at goodwill. I don't buy fast food, I don't drink or smoke, I literally barely scrape by with just the little amount I make. I even had to cancel my Netflix subscription ( $8 measly dollars a month). College is completely out of the question. I live in LA if that helps clarify my situation.

[Anonymous No.3122592]

I'm not an economist.

But I've read a book or two.

Americans at their core are isolationists. They only support force abroad when they believe their cause is just.

Their government is different, in that it has always had imperialist neo-con dreams, and is great at fooling the public.

However, when their government runs out of credit to fund their wars they will have no choice but to stay closer to home.

Things will improve for them economically, as their positive population growth, massive amount of natural resources, top universities, and innovation are all stable and always positive. Their life expectancy is continually improving, crime in many states has been the lowest that it's been in 40 years, americans are better educated today than they have ever been (even though test scores are lagging), and the USA has a solid political political structure. The chances of a revolution in the USA are next to zero because even though there are crazy people like the tea party, the vast majority of the citizenry supports a strong central government.

The USA also has a very large manufacturing capability, which can be called upon if need be.

This, with the fact that they have a friendly Canada full of natural resources, and a Mexico which poses no military threat and itself continues to improve economically, leads me to believe that although the USA will be over shadowed by China, it will still be above nations like Germany and Japan in international influence.

And it wouldn't surprise me if the USA held on to their role as world police. They only spend 4% of their GDP on defence, and their GDP is projected by almost all economist to maintain growth.

So even if they reduce it to 2.5 or 3% (which was the historical average pre 9/11) , they will still have enough reach to bomb the hell out of any third world nation.

[Anonymous No.3122614]

>>3122592

[Anonymous No.3122618]

>>3122427
lolno

You are a product of, and therefore irrevocably a part of, society.

What are you, 5?

[Anonymous No.3122629]

The difference between the EU countries and the US is that the US owes its debts to China and Japan.

Not that it matters. China will never in a thousand years call in those debts in one lump sum. I can't think of any nation that has done that since the dark ages. Doing so would essentially be an act of war.

And China wants no war, it knows that it America would drag the EU, Canada, Japan, and Australia into it and I don't give a fuck how many Chinese there are, there is no way they could survive that onslaught.

[Anonymous No.3122645]

>>3122567
>I live in LA
Well fuck OP, this could have been an entirely laughinggirls.jpg thread had you specified that initially.

Stop complaining about not finding work. Move to a different state, one whose state economy isn't completely fucked up like California's. You're just pissing on your own leg by making excuses and worst of all, CHOOSING TO LIVE IN FUCKING LOS ANGELES. You neanderthal.

[Anonymous No.3122660]

>china pisses america off
>america black incoming food to china
problem solved

now lets get back on topic and realize silly sailors are not going to save as

as for is america going down? Yes, but it sure as hell is the best ship out there.

[Anonymous No.3122661]

>>3122645
How the hell am I supposed to move with no money to fund a moving project genius. Just find the state with the lowest unemployment and be a homeless vagrant until things hopefully look up?

[Anonymous No.3122680]

>>3122592
>americans are better educated today than they have ever been (even though test scores are lagging)
Which I'd say suggests degree inflation rather than an improving education.

>, and the USA has a solid political political structure
If by "solid political structure" you mean two deadlocked parties that can't get any meaningful reform done, public dialogue devoid of actual facts and logic, and a political system that is literally designed to prevent things from getting done.

If America loses its status as a superpower, it'll be because of internal problems, not outside threats.

[Anonymous No.3122693]

>>3122680
>Which I'd say suggests degree inflation rather than an improving education.
Not necessarily. Correcting for demography in the US leads to interesting results.

[Anonymous No.3122695]

>>3122618
Humans are not a product of society. Suckers believing being a who in a who's whoville are the result of society.

[Anonymous No.3122708]

>>3122492
Stop pretending societ...

Do you know how they train elephants to be docile while traveling in a circus?

[Anonymous No.3122717]

>>3122693
So basically "If we exclude the educated immigrants for everybody else and exclude our poor minorities." we're not doing too bad? I see no reason to accept this "correction" as a better measure of the educational system's quality.