US losing economic war and Asia loves it.

[East Asia United]

This was published in the American Journal of Human Genetics if you haven't noticed. You have anything to refute this scientific study?



If Humans from India spread 35000 years ago they can surely be the ancestors . Is it not accepted that Africans are ancestors of all?

No, I haven't noticed. Now link the study so I can read it in it's entirety, while scrupulously analyzing it for even the tiniest of errors.

 

[Indianpatriot1]

No, I haven't noticed. Now link the study so I can read it in it's entirety, while scrupulously analyzing it for even the tiniest of errors.

But before doing that, I should be asking you for proof. After all, you are the one who insists that Ukrainians came and settled India.

Anyway Im giving the link.

Shared and Unique Components of Human Population Structure and Genome-Wide Signals of Positive Selection in South Asia


Relevant extracts

If the k5 light green ancestry component (Figure 2B) originated from a recent gene flow event (for example by a demic diffusion model) with a single center of dispersal where the underlying alleles emerged, then one would expect different levels of associated haplotypic diversity to suggest the point of origin of the migration. To assess diversity within the ancestry components revealed by the ADMIXTURE analyses at K = 8, we counted the number of unique haplotypes in genomic windows surrounding SNPs in strong positive association with this ancestry component. Because recombination on autosomal chromosomes will over time erase the signal and thus limit the utility of this approach, we used simulations to explore how deep in time one can go to trace directionality of migration (Figure S7). Our simulations show that differences in haplotype diversity between source and recipient populations can be detected even for migration events that occurred 500 generations ago (∼12,500 years ago assuming one generation to be 25 years). For alleles associated with k5, haplotype diversity is comparable among all studied populations across West Eurasia and the Indus basin (Figure S8). However, we found that haplotypic diversity of this ancestry component is much greater than that of those dominating in Europe (k4, depicted in dark blue) and the Near East (k3, depicted in light blue), thus pointing to an older age of the component and/or long-term higher effective population size (Figure S8). Haplotype diversity flanking Asian alleles (k7) is twice greater than that of European alleles—this is probably because the k7 ancestry component is a composite of two Asian components (see Figure S4, K > 10).

In contrast to widespread light green ancestry, the dark green ancestry component, k6 is primarily restricted to the Indian subcontinent with modest presence in Central Asia and Iran. Haplotype diversity associated with dark green ancestry is greatest in the south of the Indian subcontinent, indicating that the alleles underlying it most likely arose there and spread northwards. It is notable that this ancestry component also exhibits greater haplotype diversity than European or Near Eastern components despite the fact that the Illumina genotyped markers were principally ascertained in a sample of European individuals. This observation shows again that haplotype based measures of diversity can be relatively robust to ascertainment bias.43

 

[East Asia United]

But before doing that, I should be asking you for proof. After all, you are the one who insists that Ukrainians came and settled India.

Anyway Im giving the link.

Shared and Unique Components of Human Population Structure and Genome-Wide Signals of Positive Selection in South Asia


Relevant extracts

I'll read it now.

And for the last time, I never said Ukrainians populated South Asia. You continue to be disingenuous. Go read my comments again. People who originated from what is modern-day Ukraine/South Russia... Key word is MODERN-DAY

Also, read the response to the theory.

Nanda (2003) argues that the pseudoscience at the core of Hindu nationalism was unwittingly helped into being in the 1980s by the postmodernism embraced by Indian leftist "postcolonial theories" like Ashis Nandy and Vandana Shiva who rejected the universality of "Western" science and called for the "indigenous science" (Sokal 2006, p. 32). Nanda (2003, p. 72) explains how this relativization of "science" was employed by Hindutva ideologues during the 1998 to 2004 reign of the Bharatiya Janata Party:

"any traditional Hindu idea or practice, however obscure and irrational it might have been through its history, gets the honoric of "science" if it bears any resemblance at all, however remote, to an idea that is valued (even for the wrong reasons) in the West."

Criticism of the irrationality of such "Vedic science" is brushed aside by the notion that "The idea of 'contradiction' is an imported one from the West in recent times by the Western-educated, since ‘Modern Science’ arbitrarily imagines that it only has the true knowledge and its methods are the only methods to gain knowledge, smacking of Semitic dogmatism in religion."(Mukhyananda 1997, pp. 94)

Witzel (2006, p. 204) traces the "indigenous Aryan" idea to the writings of Golwalkar and Savarkar. Golwalkar (1939) denied any immigration of "Aryans" to the subcontinent, stressing that all Hindus have always been "children of the soil", a notion Witzel compares to the blood and soil mysticism of Golwalkar's Nazi contemporaries. Since these ideas emerged on the brink of the internationalist and socially oriented Nehru-Gandhi government, they lay dormant for several decades, and only rose to prominence in the 1980s in conjunction with the relativist revisionism, most of the revisionist literature being published by the firms Voice of Dharma and Aditya Prakasha.

Bergunder (2004) likewise identifies Golwalkar as the originator of the "Indigenous Aryans" notion, and Goel's Voice of India as the instrument of its rise to notability:

The Aryan migration theory at first played no particular argumentative role in Hindu nationalism. [...] This impression of indifference changed, however, with Madhev Sadashiv Golwalkar (1906–1973), who from 1940 until his death was leader of the extremist paramilitary organization the Rashtriya Svayamsevak Sangh (RSS). [...] In contrast to many other of their openly offensive teachings, the Hindu nationalists did not seek to keep the question of the Aryan migration out of public discourses or to modify it; rather, efforts were made to help the theory of the indigenousness of the Hindus achieve public recognition. For this the initiative of the publisher Sita Ram Goel (b. 1921) was decisive. Goel may be considered one of the most radical, but at the same time also one of the most intellectual, of the Hindu nationalist ideologues. [...] Since 1981 Goel has run a publishing house named ‘Voice of India’ that is one of the few which publishes Hindu nationalist literature in English which at the same time makes a 'scientific' claim. Although no official connections exist, the books of 'Voice of India' — which are of outstanding typographical quality and are sold at a subsidized price — are widespread among the ranks of the leaders of the Sangh Parivar. [...] The increasing political influence of Hindu nationalism in the 1990s resulted in attempts to revise the Aryan migration theory also becoming known to the academic public.

 

[Indianpatriot1]

I'll read it now.

And for the last time, I never said Ukrainians populated South Asia. You continue to be disingenuous. Go read my comments again. People who originated from what is modern-day Ukraine/South Russia... Key word is MODERN-DAY

Also, read the response to the theory.

Nanda (2003) argues that the pseudoscience at the core of Hindu nationalism was unwittingly helped into being in the 1980s by the postmodernism embraced by Indian leftist "postcolonial theories" like Ashis Nandy and Vandana Shiva who rejected the universality of "Western" science and called for the "indigenous science" (Sokal 2006, p. 32). Nanda (2003, p. 72) explains how this relativization of "science" was employed by Hindutva ideologues during the 1998 to 2004 reign of the Bharatiya Janata Party:

"any traditional Hindu idea or practice, however obscure and irrational it might have been through its history, gets the honoric of "science" if it bears any resemblance at all, however remote, to an idea that is valued (even for the wrong reasons) in the West."

Criticism of the irrationality of such "Vedic science" is brushed aside by the notion that "The idea of 'contradiction' is an imported one from the West in recent times by the Western-educated, since ‘Modern Science’ arbitrarily imagines that it only has the true knowledge and its methods are the only methods to gain knowledge, smacking of Semitic dogmatism in religion."(Mukhyananda 1997, pp. 94)

Witzel (2006, p. 204) traces the "indigenous Aryan" idea to the writings of Golwalkar and Savarkar. Golwalkar (1939) denied any immigration of "Aryans" to the subcontinent, stressing that all Hindus have always been "children of the soil", a notion Witzel compares to the blood and soil mysticism of Golwalkar's Nazi contemporaries. Since these ideas emerged on the brink of the internationalist and socially oriented Nehru-Gandhi government, they lay dormant for several decades, and only rose to prominence in the 1980s in conjunction with the relativist revisionism, most of the revisionist literature being published by the firms Voice of Dharma and Aditya Prakasha.

Bergunder (2004) likewise identifies Golwalkar as the originator of the "Indigenous Aryans" notion, and Goel's Voice of India as the instrument of its rise to notability:

The Aryan migration theory at first played no particular argumentative role in Hindu nationalism. [...] This impression of indifference changed, however, with Madhev Sadashiv Golwalkar (1906–1973), who from 1940 until his death was leader of the extremist paramilitary organization the Rashtriya Svayamsevak Sangh (RSS). [...] In contrast to many other of their openly offensive teachings, the Hindu nationalists did not seek to keep the question of the Aryan migration out of public discourses or to modify it; rather, efforts were made to help the theory of the indigenousness of the Hindus achieve public recognition. For this the initiative of the publisher Sita Ram Goel (b. 1921) was decisive. Goel may be considered one of the most radical, but at the same time also one of the most intellectual, of the Hindu nationalist ideologues. [...] Since 1981 Goel has run a publishing house named ‘Voice of India’ that is one of the few which publishes Hindu nationalist literature in English which at the same time makes a 'scientific' claim. Although no official connections exist, the books of 'Voice of India' — which are of outstanding typographical quality and are sold at a subsidized price — are widespread among the ranks of the leaders of the Sangh Parivar. [...] The increasing political influence of Hindu nationalism in the 1990s resulted in attempts to revise the Aryan migration theory also becoming known to the academic public.

And who are all these people who have the Competence to give a certificate to Indians about their origins. Read my earlier posts, I have already mentioned Witzel - a self proclaimed high priest of AIT and thoroughly discredited now. Obviously he has a vested interest in upholding AIT because his tenure in Harvard depends on it. The guy cant even read Sanskrit properly, leave alone interpret the Vedas.

Neeru Nanda is a known communist, pro islamist, Hindu baiter. Of course, we need to defer to her opinion, she being a biologist from a polytechic!

Obviously Hindus will oppose AIT. They know in their bones that it is false. There is no mention of foreign locales in our scriptures and the furthest west we find there is Afghanistan(panchala), which was a part of the subcontinent. The Vedas are not dead books like some Egyptian hieroglyphics which need foreign experts to decipher. We use them every day for rituals and know what they contain.

 

[Wright]

I'm sorry to say, but your people were really stupid to open the door to these Muslims. WHY? All they do is attempt to rape your daughter, screw your goat, and drink your dogs **** (and this is while they're not blowing you up, converting you to Islam, or collecting their weekly welfare check).

You need to become nationalist again. I think the people ate Stormfront are douche-bags, but they are 100% correct about the Mo slime. You need to deport them back to their homelands, lest they burden you with their violence and inferior intelligence.

East Asia will never accept Muslims in our communities. I think in the next 10 years, White countries will be the same.

I live next to a Turkish mosque and Pizza place. They tend to be kind and not to in your face people from my experience. I actually have a lot of friends from middle eastern backgrounds from university- I personally find the people poorer Muslim countries cause a lot more issues. I really have no quarrels with Central Asian muslim, and even those from the Levant. Even (on this forum) here you will fine most of them to be nationalistic and putting religion secondary.

I learnt that its actually pretty hard to immigrate to Canada, so a lot that do come here are pretty well educated etc. But the taking in of refugees is what kinda offsets any benefits gained from that. I believe the UN gives monetary incentives to take in refugees.


I agree though, nationalism needs to be revived to a degree. Too much guilt in the media. I tend not to visit Stormfront.

 

[Arya Desa]

ITT a tard believes correlation is causation.

 

[East Asia United]

And who are all these people who have the Competence to give a certificate to Indians about their origins. Read my earlier posts, I have already mentioned Witzel - a self proclaimed high priest of AIT and thoroughly discredited now. Obviously he has a vested interest in upholding AIT because his tenure in Harvard depends on it. The guy cant even read Sanskrit properly, leave alone interpret the Vedas.

Neeru Nanda is a known communist, pro islamist, Hindu baiter. Of course, we need to defer to her opinion, she being a biologist from a polytechic!

Obviously Hindus will oppose AIT. They know in their bones that it is false. There is no mention of foreign locales in our scriptures and the furthest west we find there is Afghanistan(panchala), which was a part of the subcontinent. The Vedas are not dead books like some Egyptian hieroglyphics which need foreign experts to decipher. We use them every day for rituals and know what they contain.

So then, as you said, how did Indo-European culture spread to South Asia only by culture?

You implied yourself that it can't happen without concurrent physical migration.... are you in fact positing that EVEN the Indo-European culture itself did not come out of Eastern Europe to displace the proto-Dravidian et. al. cultures?

Do you understand that almost no serious scientist of the world today would take such an insanely dumb theory seriously? The four theories that hold credibility today all posit that the Proto-Indo-European cultures displaced those of the South Asian one's of the time.

Anyone who denies this is denying the facts.

There are four competing basic models (with variations) that have academic credibility (Mallory (1997:106)):

1. the Kurgan hypothesis (Pontic-Caspian area): Chalcolithic (5th to 4th millennia BCE)

2. the Anatolian hypothesis (Anatolia in Asia Minor): Early Neolithic (7th to 5th millennia BCE)

3. the Baltic hypothesis: Mesolithic to Neolithic (Ertebølle to Corded Ware horizon, 6th to 3rd millennia BCE)

4. the Balkan hypothesis, excluding the Anatolian languages (a variant of the Anatolian hypothesis): Neolithic (5th millennium BCE)

As mentioned above, the Kurgan hypothesis is currently dominant in Indo-European studies. The Anatolian hypothesis is the primary competitor. This hypothesis is primarily associated with Colin Renfrew, although it has also been supported by Russell Gray and Quentin Atkinson, based on Bayesian analysis studies.

A number of fringe hypotheses also exist, e.g.:

the Armenian hypothesis (proposed in the context of Glottalic theory), with a homeland in Armenia in the 4th millennium BCE (excluding the Anatolian branch);

a 6th millennium BCE or later origin in Northern Europe, according to Lothar Kilian's and, especially, Marek Zvelebil's[3] models of a broader homeland;

Koenraad Elst's Out of India theory (often championed by Hindu nationalists), with a homeland in India in the 6th millennium BCE;

The Paleolithic Continuity Theory, with an origin before the 10th millennium BCE.

ITT a tard believes correlation is causation.

Do you just repeat statements you hear on the internet, without a thought as to the relevancy?

Correlation has nothing to do with anything we are talking about. Illiterate.

 

[Arya Desa]

Do you just repeat statements you hear on the internet, without a thought as to the relevancy?

Correlation has nothing to do with anything we are talking about. Illiterate.

>Northern countries are more developed in the modern world
>Northern countries are colder

Therefore, people from cold areas are intellectually superior.

What a frustrated tool.

 

[Wholegrain]

I'm sorry to say, but your people were really stupid to open the door to these Muslims. WHY? All they do is attempt to rape your daughter, screw your goat, and drink your dogs **** (and this is while they're not blowing you up, converting you to Islam, or collecting their weekly welfare check).

You need to become nationalist again. I think the people ate Stormfront are douche-bags, but they are 100% correct about the Mo slime. You need to deport them back to their homelands, lest they burden you with their violence and inferior intelligence.

East Asia will never accept Muslims in our communities. I think in the next 10 years, White countries will be the same.

You stupid idiot, the problem in Europe is integration of immigrants and not religion. Islam is a religion, not a race. A muslim can be east asian.

The Muslims in China are not immigrants and have been there for over 1,000 years and they are east asian. My parent's friends never tried to convert them or talked to them about religion and there is almost no religion based crime in China or Taiwan.

You are a stupid troll.

 

[East Asia United]

>Northern countries are more developed in the modern world
>Northern countries are colder

Therefore, people from cold areas are intellectually superior.

What a frustrated tool.

What a low-IQ delinquent.

People from cold areas have higher IQ. People from cold areas had to use their intelligence to survive in much colder temperatures. Natural selection and genetic data gather this to be possibly true; IQ tests also prove the correlation.

Get it, "Canadian"

You stupid idiot, the problem in Europe is integration of immigrants and not religion. Islam is a religion, not a race. A muslim can be east asian.

The Muslims in China are not immigrants and have been there for over 1,000 years and they are east asian. My parent's friends never tried to convert them or talked to them about religion and there is almost no religion based crime in China or Taiwan.

You are a stupid troll.

Like I said, you're not from East Asia. Just by the way you speak I realize this.

I am a stupid troll, and you are a Muslim who would never be considered East Asian, not form Koreans or Mongolians, or Yamato or Manchu, or Han or Zhuang.

 

[Wholegrain]

What a low-IQ delinquent.

People from cold areas have higher IQ. People from cold areas had to use their intelligence to survive in much colder temperatures. Natural selection and genetic data gather this to be possibly true; IQ tests also prove the correlation.

Get it, "Canadian"



Like I said, you're not from East Asia. Just by the way you speak I realize this.

I am a stupid troll, and you are a Muslim who would never be considered East Asian, not form Koreans or Mongolians, or Yamato or Manchu, or Han or Zhuang.

You are not east asian. No east asian believes in east asian unity. Go tell Chinese, Koreans and Japanese if they want to unite with each other. Nationalism is very strong, I know my own people and other asians. You are a false flagging troll. The only people who I heard supporting asian unity are pathetic asians with an inferiority complex to the west, who were born in western countries and have no connection to their homelands and know nothing about their own culture.

 

[East Asia United]

You are not east asian. No east asian believes in east asian unity. Go tell Chinese, Koreans and Japanese if they want to unite with each other. Nationalism is very strong, I know my own people and other asians. You are a false flagging troll. The only people who I heard supporting asian unity are pathetic asians with an inferiority complex to the west, who were born in western countries and have no connection to their homelands and know nothing about their own culture.

I recognize this, yet I'm still a believer in East Asians becoming allies, and there are many people who would want this as well.

Who the hell would I be a false-flagger for? Are you dumb? Look at my post history... now tell me, who am I really?

You are brain-dead. From a mile away I could spot that you are a Muslim, and therefore culturally not East Asian. Also, people who are so obsessed with protecting and supporting Islam, especially being from China, are NOT East Asian. How can you even consider this after all the Uyghurs have done? LOL, you are full of it.

 

[Chinese-Dragon]

You are brain-dead. From a mile away I could spot that you are a Muslim, and therefore culturally not East Asian. Also, people who are so obsessed with protecting and supporting Islam, especially being from China, are NOT East Asian. How can you even consider this after all the Uyghurs have done? LOL, you are full of it.

Wholegrain is a Muslim?

That explains why he mocked native Chinese culture and Ancestor worship, while obsessively defending Muslims in remote corners of the world who have nothing to do with China.

Uyghurs are Chinese though. It's only the terrorists/extremists that we want to kill.

 

[Algeria]

Recognizing the End of the Chinese Economic Miracle


By George Friedman

Major shifts underway in the Chinese economy that Stratfor has forecast and discussed for years have now drawn the attention of the mainstream media. Many have asked when China would find itself in an economic crisis, to which we have answered that China has been there for awhile -- something not widely recognized outside China, and particularly not in the United States. A crisis can exist before it is recognized. The admission that a crisis exists is a critical moment, because this is when most others start to change their behavior in reaction to the crisis. The question we had been asking was when the Chinese economic crisis would finally become an accepted fact, thus changing the global dynamic.

Last week, the crisis was announced with a flourish. First, The New York Times columnist and Nobel Prize-recipient Paul Krugman penned a piece titled "Hitting China's Wall." He wrote, "The signs are now unmistakable: China is in big trouble. We're not talking about some minor setback along the way, but something more fundamental. The country's whole way of doing business, the economic system that has driven three decades of incredible growth, has reached its limits. You could say that the Chinese model is about to hit its Great Wall, and the only question now is just how bad the crash will be."

Later in the week, Ben Levisohn authored a column in Barron's called "Smoke Signals from China." He wrote, "In the classic disaster flick 'The Towering Inferno' partygoers ignored a fire in a storage room because they assumed it has been contained. Are investors making the same mistake with China?" He goes on to answer his question, saying, "Unlike three months ago, when investors were placing big bets that China's policymakers would pump cash into the economy to spur growth, the markets seem to have accepted the fact that sluggish growth for the world's second largest economy is its new normal."

Meanwhile, Goldman Sachs -- where in November 2001 Jim O'Neil coined the term BRICs and forecast that China might surpass the United States economically by 2028 -- cut its forecast of Chinese growth to 7.4 percent.

The New York Times, Barron's and Goldman Sachs are all both a seismograph of the conventional wisdom and the creators of the conventional wisdom. Therefore, when all three announce within a few weeks that China's economic condition ranges from disappointing to verging on a crash, it transforms the way people think of China. Now the conversation is moving from forecasts of how quickly China will overtake the United States to considerations of what the consequences of a Chinese crash would be.

Doubting China

Suddenly finding Stratfor amid the conventional wisdom regarding China does feel odd, I must admit. Having first noted the underlying contradictions in China's economic growth years ago, when most viewed China as the miracle Japan wasn't, and having been scorned for not understanding the shift in global power underway, it is gratifying to now have a lot of company. Over the past couple of years, the ranks of the China doubters had grown. But the past few months have seen a sea change. We have gone from China the omnipotent, the belief that there was nothing the Chinese couldn't work out, to the realization that China no longer works.

It has not been working for some time. One of the things masking China's weakening has been Chinese statistics, which Krugman referred to as "even more fictional than most." China is a vast country in territory and population. Gathering information on how it is doing would be a daunting task, even were China inclined to do so. Instead, China understands that in the West, there is an assumption that government statistics bear at least a limited relationship to truth. Beijing accordingly uses its numbers to shape perceptions inside and outside China of how it is doing. The Chinese release their annual gross domestic product numbers in the third week of January (and only revise them the following year). They can't possibly know how they did that fast, and they don't. But they do know what they want the world to believe about their growth, and the world has believed them -- hence, the fantastic tales of economic growth.

China in fact has had an extraordinary period of growth. The last 30 years have been remarkable, marred only by the fact that the Chinese started at such a low point due to the policies of the Maoist period. Growth at first was relatively easy; it was hard for China to do worse. But make no mistake: China surged. Still, basing economic performance on consumption, Krugman notes that China is barely larger economically than Japan. Given the compounding effects of China's guesses at GDP, we would guess it remains behind Japan, but how can you tell? We can say without a doubt that China's economy has grown dramatically in the past 30 years but that it is no longer growing nearly as quickly as it once did.

China's growth surge was built on a very unglamorous fact: Chinese wages were far below Western wages, and therefore the Chinese were able to produce a certain class of products at lower cost than possible in the West. The Chinese built businesses around this, and Western companies built factories in China to take advantage of the differential. Since Chinese workers were unable to purchase many of the products they produced given their wages, China built its growth on exports.

For this to continue, China had to maintain its wage differential indefinitely. But China had another essential policy: Beijing was terrified of unemployment and the social consequences that flow from it. This was a rational fear, but one that contradicted China's main strength, its wage advantage. Because the Chinese feared unemployment, Chinese policy, manifested in bank lending policies, stressed preventing unemployment by keeping businesses going even when they were inefficient. China also used bank lending to build massive infrastructure and commercial and residential property. Over time, this policy created huge inefficiencies in the Chinese economy. Without recessions, inefficiencies develop. Growing the economy is possible, but not growing profitability. Eventually, the economy will be dragged down by its inefficiency.

Inflation vs. Unemployment

As businesses become inefficient, production costs rise. And that leads to inflation. As money is lent to keep inefficient businesses going, inflation increases even more markedly. The increase in inefficiency is compounded by the growth of the money supply prompted by aggressive lending to keep the economy going. As this persisted over many years, the inefficiencies built into the Chinese economy have become staggering.

The second thing to bear in mind is the overwhelming poverty of China, where 900 million people have an annual per capita income around the same level as Guatemala, Georgia, Indonesia or Mongolia ($3,000-$3,500 a year), while around 500 million of those have an annual per capita income around the same level as India, Nicaragua, Ghana, Uzbekistan or Nigeria ($1,500-$1,700). China's overall per capita GDP is around the same level as the Dominican Republic, Serbia, Thailand or Jamaica. Stimulating an economy where more than a billion people live in deep poverty is impossible. Economic stimulus makes sense when products can be sold to the public. But the vast majority of Chinese cannot afford the products produced in China, and therefore, stimulus will not increase consumption of those products. As important, stimulating demand so that inefficient factories can sell products is not only inflationary, it is suicidal. The task is to increase consumption, not to subsidize inefficiency.

The Chinese are thus in a trap. If they continue aggressive lending to failing businesses, they get inflation. That increases costs and makes the Chinese less competitive in exports, which are also falling due to the recession in Europe and weakness in the United States. Allowing businesses to fail brings unemployment, a massive social and political problem. The Chinese have zigzagged from cracking down on lending by regulating informal lending and raising interbank rates to loosening restrictions on lending by removing the floor on the benchmark lending rate and by increasing lending to small- and medium-sized businesses. Both policies are problematic.

The Chinese have maintained a strategy of depending on exports without taking into account the operation of the business cycle in the West, which means that periodic and substantial contractions of demand will occur. China's industrial plant is geared to Western demand. When Western demand contracted, the result was the mess you see now.

The Chinese economy could perhaps be growing at 7.4 percent, but I doubt the number is anywhere near that. Some estimates place growth at closer to 5 percent. Regardless of growth, the ability to maintain profit margins is rarely considered. Producing and selling at or even below cost will boost GDP numbers but undermines the financial system. This happened to Japan in the early 1990s. And it is happening in China now.

The Chinese can prevent the kind of crash that struck East Asia in 1997. Their currency isn't convertible, so there can't be a run on it. They continue to have a command economy; they are still communist, after all. But they cannot avoid the consequences of their economic reality, and the longer they put off the day of reckoning, the harder it will become to recover from it. They have already postponed the reckoning far longer than they should have. They would postpone it further if they could by continuing to support failing businesses with loans. They can do that for a very long time -- provided they are prepared to emulate the Soviet model's demise. The Chinese don't want that, but what they do want is a miraculous resolution to their problem. There are no solutions that don't involve agony, so they put off the day of reckoning and slowly decline.

China's Transformation

The Chinese are not going to completely collapse economically any more than the Japanese or South Koreans did. What will happen is that China will behave differently than before. With no choices that don't frighten them, the Chinese will focus on containing the social and political fallout, both by trying to target benefits to politically sensitive groups and by using their excellent security apparatus to suppress and deter unrest. The Chinese economic performance will degrade, but crisis will be avoided and political interests protected. Since much of China never benefited from the boom, there is a massive force that has felt marginalized and victimized by coastal elites. That is not a bad foundation for the Communist Party to rely on.

The key is understanding that if China cannot solve its problems without unacceptable political consequences, it will try to stretch out the decline. Japan had a lost decade only in the minds of Western investors, who implicitly value aggregate GDP growth over other measures of success such as per capita GDP growth or full employment. China could very well face an extended period of intense inwardness and low economic performance. The past 30 years is a tough act to follow.

The obvious economic impact on the rest of the world will fall on the producers of industrial commodities such as iron ore. The extravagant expectations for Chinese growth will not be met, and therefore expectations for commodity prices won't be met. Since the Chinese economic failure has been underway for quite awhile, the degradation in prices has already happened. Australia in particular has been badly hit by the Chinese situation, just as it was by the Japanese situation a generation ago.

The Chinese are, of course, keeping a great deal of money in U.S. government instruments and other markets. Contrary to fears, that money will not be withdrawn. The Chinese problem isn't a lack of capital, and repatriating that money would simply increase inflation. Had the Chinese been able to put that money to good use, it would have never been invested in the United States in the first place. The outflow of money from China was a symptom of the disease: Lacking the structure to invest in China, the government and private funds went overseas. In so doing, Beijing sought to limit destabilization in China, while private Chinese funds looked for a haven against the storm that was already blowing.

Rather than the feared repatriation of funds, the United States will continue to be the target of major Chinese cash inflows. In a world where Europe is still reeling, only the United States is both secure and large enough to contain Chinese appetites for safety. Just as Japanese investment in the 1990s represented capital flight rather than a healthy investment appetite, so the behavior we have seen from Chinese investors in recent years is capital flight: money searching for secure havens regardless of return. This money has underpinned American markets; it is not going away, and in fact more is on the way.

The major shift in the international order will be the decline of China's role in the region. China's ability to project military power in Asia has been substantially overestimated. Its geography limits its ability to project power in Eurasia, an endeavor that would require logistics far beyond China's capacity. Its naval capacity is still limited compared with the United States. The idea that it will compensate for internal economic problems by genuine (as opposed to rhetorical) military action is therefore unlikely. China has a genuine internal security problem that will suck the military, which remains a domestic security force, into actions of little value. In our view, the most important shift will be the re-emergence of Japan as the dominant economic and political power in East Asia in a slow process neither will really want.

China will continue to be a major power, and it will continue to matter a great deal economically. Being troubled is not the same as ceasing to exist. China will always exist. It will, however, no longer be the low-wage, high-growth center of the world. Like Japan before it, it will play a different role.

In the global system, there are always low-wage, high-growth countries because the advanced industrial powers' consumers want to absorb goods at low wages. Becoming a supplier of those goods is a major opportunity for, and disruptor to, those countries. No one country can replace China, but China will be replaced. The next step in this process is identifying China's successors.

 

[Wholegrain]

I recognize this, yet I'm still a believer in East Asians becoming allies, and there are many people who would want this as well.

Who the hell would I be a false-flagger for? Are you dumb? Look at my post history... now tell me, who am I really?

You are brain-dead. From a mile away I could spot that you are a Muslim, and therefore culturally not East Asian. Also, people who are so obsessed with protecting and supporting Islam, especially being from China, are NOT East Asian. How can you even consider this after all the Uyghurs have done? LOL, you are full of it.

You are a false flagger because you were not born in any asian country. If you are in Seoul, you just recently moved there. You can't spot the truth an inch away from your retina. Oh and how can we support Buddhism after what Tibetan rioters did in 2008?