[Kosh]

http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/7693580/site/newsweek/?GT1=6542


Discuss.

[Rictor]

The immediate future belongs partly to China, yes. The US will by no means disappear, nor will the EU, or India for that matter. A Latin American economic alliance (something along the lines of the EU) is also not inconcievable. But China, and Asia in general seems to be gunning for a bigger piece of the pie, and they'll probably get it, though not to the exclusion of everyone else.

Of course, how long any of them can maintain unrestricted growth is the real question. They're racing each other, but the race ends in a brick wall, and that wall isn't going to move.

[MatthewPapa]

One would think that they would get fed up with communism sooner or later.

[MatthewPapa]

And you have to take the superior asian work ethic into account also...

[Nuke]

indeed, if china went fully capitalist america would no longer hold the monopoly on cool stuff. it would also allow 3rd world countries to fill the labor vacume caused by the chineese move into the tertiary economic sector. the chineese are learning that the capitolist economy of hong kong is superior to what the chineese have now. capitalisim works because it apeals to the animilistic nature of the human race. surely there is a stage beyond capitolisim but for now its a good thing for the chineese at least. as for us i think weve outgrown it. th last thing i want to see is the world becoming a corprate dictatorship.

[Kosh]

I think that unrestrained capitalism is extremely bad. Can you imagine the effects that a country with 1.3 billion people would have if capitalism was unrestrained?

[Singh]

Don't you already have a smaller example of that in the USA?

[Rictor]

Well, if you ask me, China already is capitalist. They started moving to a market economy quite a while ago, and these days its mostly the big industries that remain state-owned. What the Chinese realize is that there is definite advantage in a strong government presence, at least on the national level. Sure, there might not be quite as many millionares, but the nation as a whole is in a much better position due to the greater state control.

As for the "superior Asian work ethic", well what exactly is superior?  Frankly, I think they're overly comptetiive, both at work and in school, though this is out of necessity. Sure, they can win out of other peoples, but at the cost of any sembelance of a happy life. The purpose of work is to provide means to happiness, it is not an end in itself. To sacrifice happiness for productivity is to starve yourself so you can have more money to buy food.

[EtherShock]

Unrestricted capitalism (at least) = just as bad as communism

Originally posted by MatthewPapa
And you have to take the superior asian work ethic into account also...

That is a stereotype and I'm a bit surprisd it was even brought up. Anyone can be lazy.

I agree with Nuke, we have most certainly outgrown capitalism. There must be a better system than this.

[Flipside]

China gives a massive outward appearance of starting to be capitalist, but, at least inside their borders, there are very very few industries that one or more of the 8 main ruling families do not have their fingers in. Oddly enough, this is not as far from US capitalism as you might think.

[Nuke]

china apears capitalist mainly because of hong kong, which had been under brittish rule until awhile back. the chineese decided that it would be a good idea to maintain that economy, as hong kong is a thriving and very modern city and to change it over to a comunist system would destroy the good points about it. so when you see pictures of a capitalist china, it was most likely taken in hong kong. most of china is still agricultural. so there are still of comune farmers there and state-owned factries.

the word communisim is often misused anyway. most americans think comunisim means dictatorship, but that is not always the case.   there is and you still have money and you still get paid for your job. its just the state makes stuff more organized. here you have too find a job, which is a time consuming and otherwise ineffietient process, in china the state assigns you a job based on your reigon, training and talents. instead of working for a company you work for the state and in theory the lack of competition should allow the whole of the state to thrive by means of shared knoledge and resourses. all the major communist soscieties try to make a dictatorship out of it (thus giving comuinisim a bad name). the word socialisim was kinda used to mean a friendlyer form of comunisim and to compensate for the bad name that capitalisim had aquired. this is where social democracy becomes important.the people are free and working for the betterment of the whole of the society.

[aldo_14]

China... is basically a 'state' country; for all the gigantic industrialisation you see on the TV, there are countless millions more rural peasants living in what is effectively a fuedal life.

I remember talking to a guy who worked as an english teacher in (IIRC) Shanghai about 5 ish years ago; there was then, and is now, still massive building work going on there in the cities.  It's wrong to assume it's 'just' Hong Kong.

[Thrilla]

In April, the Chinese government seemed to encourage anti-Japanese protests over history textbooks, only to find them mushroom into mob demonstrations, riots, stone-throwing at the Japanese Embassy and widespread calls to boycott Japanese goods. Last March it ushered through passage of an "anti-secession law" threatening Taiwan with military force if it dared to anger China in any way. The result, among others, was that the European Union postponed its plan to lift an arms embargo on China in June. Also in March, China warned Australia to rethink its alliance with the United States, which created a backlash among Australian officials. In July 2003, Beijing tried to effect passage of an "anti-subversion" law in Hong Kong, which produced the largest demonstrations in the city's history and created strong anti-Beijing political sentiment in a territory that was always apolitical. All these actions are making China's most powerful neighbors—Japan, Australia, India—pause. It is strengthening those in America who see China as a threat, not an opportunity. Is this so smart?

I would personally prefer to try and get as close relations to China as I could, but when stuff like this happens.  China could end up getting slapped in the face rather quickly.  Threatening western protectorates like Taiwan, Japan, and Australia is something they shouldn't be doing if they want a peaceful transition.

[Clave]

Works is good! Holidays are counter-revolutionary!

[EtherShock]

Great, that's all we need is a war with China. Then all the idiots here will be anti-Chinese.

Originally posted by Nuke
the word communisim is often misused anyway. most americans think comunisim means dictatorship, but that is not always the case.   there is and you still have money and you still get paid for your job. its just the state makes stuff more organized. here you have too find a job, which is a time consuming and otherwise ineffietient process, in china the state assigns you a job based on your reigon, training and talents. instead of working for a company you work for the state and in theory the lack of competition should allow the whole of the state to thrive by means of shared knoledge and resourses. all the major communist soscieties try to make a dictatorship out of it (thus giving comuinisim a bad name). the word socialisim was kinda used to mean a friendlyer form of comunisim and to compensate for the bad name that capitalisim had aquired. this is where social democracy becomes important.the people are free and working for the betterment of the whole of the society.

In theory it sounds good, but in practice, it hasn't worked, because society doesn't work for the betterment of the people. They're not fulfilling their part of the deal. People have to put a great deal of trust in the government, and I doubt they would in such a direct manner at least.

[Unknown Target]

Communism in it's purest form has never, and will never exist, at least for a government. In a small community, it might work, but the simple fact is that it has no checks or balances, and in a large system, it's impossible to function efficiently.


And you know what? In response to Flipside: it is different. Sure, the major corporations are all over the place, but the difference between America and China is that any American can start a business if he has enough money, and a Chinese person can't.

God, even the stuff America does right it gets bashed for.

EDIT: And please don't turn this into a flame war because of that last sentence.

[aldo_14]

Originally posted by Unknown Target
Communism in it's purest form has never, and will never exist, at least for a government. In a small community, it might work, but the simple fact is that it has no checks or balances, and in a large system, it's impossible to function efficiently.


And you know what? In response to Flipside: it is different. Sure, the major corporations are all over the place, but the difference between America and China is that any American can start a business if he has enough money, and a Chinese person can't.

God, even the stuff America does right it gets bashed for.

EDIT: And please don't turn this into a flame war because of that last sentence.

I think Flipsides point is that the nature of US capitalism - i.e that money required - is that it helps preclude the 'lesser man' from being able to challenge.  And that the supercorps are so powerful the economy (and government if you factor in campaign contributors..) is effectively controlled by a small cabal of boardrooms.

[Nuke]

Originally posted by aldo_14
China... is basically a 'state' country; for all the gigantic industrialisation you see on the TV, there are countless millions more rural peasants living in what is effectively a fuedal life.

I remember talking to a guy who worked as an english teacher in (IIRC) Shanghai about 5 ish years ago; there was then, and is now, still massive building work going on there in the cities.  It's wrong to assume it's 'just' Hong Kong.

indeed but perhaps the buildup of those cities is based on the chineese anallasis of hong kong's economy.

Originally posted by EtherShock
Great, that's all we need is a war with China. Then all the idiots here will be anti-Chinese.


In theory it sounds good, but in practice, it hasn't worked, because society doesn't work for the betterment of the people. They're not fulfilling their part of the deal. People have to put a great deal of trust in the government, and I doubt they would in such a direct manner at least.

the point of a democracy is to make the people the government. the people should be able to trust eachother. the swiss are a good example of a functional social democracy. not entirely sure how there system works, but there neutrality and anti-war policy is certainly a good thing.

Originally posted by aldo_14


I think Flipsides point is that the nature of US capitalism - i.e that money required - is that it helps preclude the 'lesser man' from being able to challenge.  And that the supercorps are so powerful the economy (and government if you factor in campaign contributors..) is effectively controlled by a small cabal of boardrooms.

indeed. this is why i worry about big corporations. they have more power and only a few people at the top in control of that power. large corporations are like reble factions in unstable countries. theese companys could go out and buy there own country if they wanted to. its amazing that there has yet to be a corprate govenrment in existance today (microsoftistan). aside from that the power they have over a govenrment is huge. especially in the us system . with mere campaign contributions they can easily influence elections. free enterprise has got to go.

[Flipside]

God, even the stuff America does right it gets bashed for.

EDIT: And please don't turn this into a flame war because of that last sentence. [/B]

Actually I wasn't bashing America You'll find that this is the case in almost every country in the world that a few large groups are influencing most of the countries actions. I made absolutely no comment as to whether that was good or bad, simply because I said 'America' doesn't mean I'm bashing it Please try to not be so defensive.

[Shrike]

Originally posted by Nuke
free enterprise has got to go.

And what are you going to replace it with?  Communism?