What's new

Why China might be a better superpower

SUPERPOWER???:omghaha: Physician, heal thyself! :laughcry:Look at their stock market. It's crashing. Just search on Google on Chinese economy's current state. It's pathetic. Can post dozons of post on every collapsing sector of China.
SUPERPOWER:rofl:
China Loses Control of Its Frankenstein Economy
By William Pesek Jun 25, 2013 3:30 AM GMT+0530

The world has grown used to the idea that China’s leaders are masterful stewards of their gargantuan economy. They steered brilliantly around the iceberg of the 2008 financial crisis, maintaining growth of near-double-digit rates. So when People’s Bank of China chief Zhou Xiaochuan began clamping down on excessive liquidity last week, some observers viewed him as a Chinese Paul Volcker. Now that the worst was over, Zhou seemed to indicate, it was time for China to rein in lending and prevent a credit bubble from swelling.
Then reality intervened. After the overnight repurchase rate zoomed to a record 13.91 percent, Zhou had to back off, hastily injecting fresh funds to stem the turmoil. The chaos traumatized money markets. Some were dismayed by signs that Zhou would end the era of easy money in China. Others feared that he couldn’t.
Indeed, continuing unease this week underscores how limited Zhou’s powers actually are. Over the past decade, China’s economy has grown addicted to excessive credit growth, with state-owned banks encouraged to finance as many new skyscrapers, highways, airports, dams and ghost towns as needed to pump up gross domestic product. Free-flowing liquidity -- mostly to state-owned enterprises -- kept stocks and real estate buoyant, foreign investors bullish and China’s 1.3 billion people away from Tiananmen Square.
Zhou can’t cut off the money now without banks suffering from withdrawal. And the danger is that nobody really knows how healthy China’s giant, state-owned banks are, or how big its shadow-financing system has grown. When Stephen Green of Standard Chartered Plc in Hong Kong called China’s credit system “a big black box, and it’s quite scary,” he wasn’t exaggerating.
Mystery Data
How can anyone trust that China is growing at a rate of 7.7 percent, as the government claims, when crucial variables in its data tabulation are a mystery? Bank of America Corp. economist Lu Ting in Hong Kong risked China’s ire by alleging its trade surplus was 1/10 the $61 billion it reported as of mid-May. The nobody-knows character of China’s credit system -- quantity, quality or excesses -- is even more worrisome.
The U.S. shadow-banking system, with its off-balance-sheet vehicles and murky dealings, helped drive world markets off the rails in 2008. Imagine the damage an entire shadow economy could cause if it unravels.
China’s leaders avoided bursting one bubble in 2008 by creating new ones. Yet China cannot forever delay its day of reckoning. Total credit may reach 200 percent of GDP this quarter, up from 130 percent in 2008. Mainland banks are currently adding assets at the rate of an entire U.S. banking system every five years.
Traditionally, Beijing has viewed opacity as a powerful tool for policing the channeling of funds between banks and companies. That murkiness is now proving dangerous. The central bank needs to confirm it will rein in interbank liquidity, explain the means by which it plans to do so, and indicate what the endgame is. Its vague, boilerplate statements are only exacerbating distress in the markets.
At the same time, Zhou is fundamentally helpless: He cannot be truly effective unless the country’s top political leadership decides that the Communist Party is going to get out of the banking business. China needs to allocate capital less recklessly and price it according to economic reality, not according to the dictates of officials who profit from the current arrangement. If the government really wants to reduce the role of state-run companies in China’s economy -- as it should, because only a thriving private sector can increase innovation and competitiveness -- it must privatize the banks first.
Powerful Creature
Putting off that hard task has turned the Chinese economy into a Frankenstein monster. It’s a giant and powerful creature born of unorthodox experiments, and its makers are increasingly losing control.
No one envies Chinese President Xi Jinping and Premier Li Keqiang. They must manage a slowing economy and institute critical reforms, all without panicking the markets and destabilizing Chinese society. They should study the precedent set by former premier Zhu Rongji, whose efforts to modernize state-owned enterprises in the late 1990s put more than 40 million Chinese out of work but added much-needed balance to the economy.
Any shock therapy will be painful. And to be effective, it must treat the underlying problem, not just the symptoms. Otherwise, Zhou’s every effort to drain credit will only send waves of panic through the markets. He’s right that China’s Frankenstein needs to be stopped. But only its creators can do that.
(PUBLISHED IN Bloomberg)

http://www.bloomberg.com/news/2013-06-24/china-loses-control-of-its-frankenstein-economy.html
 
I never said that the US was wrong, in fact I actually thought it was the right thing to do for the US. Iraq had violated international law with it's invasion of Kuwait, and the US and allied forces did the right thing by pushing them back.

Again, you keep stating that I have a poor understanding of what happened, but I've cited you many sources and shown you what the argument that the US used to sell the war with Iraq to the public. It doesn't matter what the US's real intentions were, because we're not talking about them. If we were, I'd be using a completely different argument.
Even if it was wrong about what Iraq did to Kuwaiti babies, etc., how does that lessen the severity of what Iraq did? It does not. Saddam Hussein was determined to expand Iraq's oil interests and dominance in the ME. But just like B41 who could not attacked Iraq for no reasons, Saddam also could not invade Kuwait for no reasons. So he put up the charge of lateral drilling by Kuwait.

The lesson for you here is that history is a chain of cause and effects, actions and reactions. There are no insane people in charge of countries. Whatever that they do, they ALWAYS come up with a reason to justify their actions. Whether those reasons are valid, somewhat valid, or outright invalid are for different discussions. But what make you intellectually dishonest, no surprise here, is that you isolated what the US did without considering whether the reasons we did were valid or not. In other words, you dishonestly omitted history and its chains of events.

Except that this "democratic" alliance is a figment of your imagination/fantasy. There is no such alliance. The free trade pact with all pacific countris including ASEAN in fact includes very non democratic countries, hint, it isn't China.
Did I said it exists? I did put up a source that says such an alliance is a PROPOSAL, did I not? So if it is a proposal, then how can it be a figment of imagination?

With this terrible reading comprehension problem, I see no need to address the rest of your post.
 
NO the world does not want another superpower along with US, even US as a superpower is not required. If their would be another superpower in the world it would definitely be a nuclear power with a big military and economy, which is followed by both the power do not wanting to go on a direct war and another era of proxy war in different parts of the worlds will be started whenever the interest of both the powers will collides as the world have already seen this happening in the case of Soviet Union and the US.

the world should be free of any superpowers but their should be great powers or powerful organizations who should be strong and equally organised with humble prospective towards different worlds matters
 
China has been an expansionist power throughout its history. The building of the great wall of china from the pacific coast to the gobi desert for over 20000yr is a testament to this. As china extended, the wall was also expanded. What started as small states in todays central China has grown to exand almost all of East Asia.
 
BEFORE I begin, I'd like to say that I'm being a devils advocate. I'm presenting the other side of the argument, don't feel so insulted by my words.

I'm merely presenting facts, it's not my job to make sure that no one is offended. No matter what I say, someone will be offended, so it's really a moot point for you to make.

Moving on...

You're grasping at straws and making more assumptions, and once again, adding words to my statements. There is no evidence to suggest that a civilian would be the one to step on a landmine, it could just as easily be an animal, or a rock that's thrown. You're connecting dots that hardly connect and correlating things that cannot be proven.

Your examples make no sense, we as humanity can see the world move, we have the technology for that and even before technology, it was already proven that the earth moves around the sun, so, again, ridicules analogy. This situation is completely different.

I have not seen Iraq, I have not been to Iraq, and I certainly don't know personally that's lost someone in Iraq, BUT that still does not invalidate my points. Really, all you're trying to do now is character assassinate me, I thought you'd actually make a valid point.

I don't think you understand how burden of proof works. The claimant is the one that must prove the claim, not the judge nor the jury.

You claimed that the US military action has done tremendous good, I'd like to hear what that is. If you don't have the answer for this, I'm more than willing to make your argument for you. Really, I am.

Well, once again we are into a "Proof/Disproof" logic.

You can proof something exist by proof something (Clause, condition or whatever materially) exist in this world.
You can proof something DOES NOT Exist by proofing something does exist once again, (clause, condition or whatever)

But you cannot disproof something simply base on you cannot proof something that had exist.

Once again, I cannot proof beyond reasonable doubt that there are in alien in this universe, we, as a person cannot travel thru all the galaxy in this universe alone, hence there are no way we can definite proof alien does exist. But the question, failure to proof alien does it automatically proof alien does not exist??

You ask me to proof via a single case that US Army did good in Iraq. If I fail to provide the case, then US army only did not do good in Iraq, that's your argument.

I simply raising a question using the same logic of yours, since you said on the record that there are NO LIVE SAVED by the US intervention. To support your story, you will need to go thru EVERY ASPECT of the war and I am assuming you did that because you go on the record saying there are no good deed done by the US Military in the war.

Then you said you were never in Iraq, so I wonder how do you know your argument is true??

By the way, I never claim You claimed that the US military action has done tremendous good, I am saying you are selectively looking at the wrong side of the looking glass, do I imply the bad side does not exist? No.

My point is, there are GOOD AND BAD angle when you look at any incident. You choose to look at only the bad stuff That's your problem.

There are millions view on one single object, you can bring out the good or bad for almost anything if you like, take Hilter as an example
If you go back to Germany and ask German that are 80 + and most probably served the Wehrmacht, you will bound to see or hear that some of them will say Hilter ain't that bad?? Heck, there are WW2 & holocaust denialist even today, they will tell you Hilter ain't that bad at all. So, simply, your point does not hold water
 
Considering how many Chinese related threads, the mods may rename this section from China & Far East to China the Mighty. :hitwall:

China can this and that, Chinese are here and there. One day we will see Chinese can fly over the water and turn water into wine. I´m bored. Where are other countries and their contributions?
 
This author serious? Why did China invade Vietnam? For rice?
China loved Vietnam so much so they wanted to kill us, or if not possible destroyed our towns and roads when they left. Well, to be fair, you American were not better than them.
 
Well, once again we are into a "Proof/Disproof" logic.

You can proof something exist by proof something (Clause, condition or whatever materially) exist in this world.
You can proof something DOES NOT Exist by proofing something does exist once again, (clause, condition or whatever)

But you cannot disproof something simply base on you cannot proof something that had exist.

Once again, I cannot proof beyond reasonable doubt that there are in alien in this universe, we, as a person cannot travel thru all the galaxy in this universe alone, hence there are no way we can definite proof alien does exist. But the question, failure to proof alien does it automatically proof alien does not exist??

You ask me to proof via a single case that US Army did good in Iraq. If I fail to provide the case, then US army only did not do good in Iraq, that's your argument.

I simply raising a question using the same logic of yours, since you said on the record that there are NO LIVE SAVED by the US intervention. To support your story, you will need to go thru EVERY ASPECT of the war and I am assuming you did that because you go on the record saying there are no good deed done by the US Military in the war.

Then you said you were never in Iraq, so I wonder how do you know your argument is true??

By the way, I never claim You claimed that the US military action has done tremendous good, I am saying you are selectively looking at the wrong side of the looking glass, do I imply the bad side does not exist? No.

My point is, there are GOOD AND BAD angle when you look at any incident. You choose to look at only the bad stuff That's your problem.

There are millions view on one single object, you can bring out the good or bad for almost anything if you like, take Hilter as an example
If you go back to Germany and ask German that are 80 + and most probably served the Wehrmacht, you will bound to see or hear that some of them will say Hilter ain't that bad?? Heck, there are WW2 & holocaust denialist even today, they will tell you Hilter ain't that bad at all. So, simply, your point does not hold water

No offence, but I literally don't have any idea what you're trying to say in this comment. I'd reply, but I don't want to sound like I'm misquoting you or something.

Can you restructure your comment please?
 
Even if it was wrong about what Iraq did to Kuwaiti babies, etc., how does that lessen the severity of what Iraq did? It does not. Saddam Hussein was determined to expand Iraq's oil interests and dominance in the ME. But just like B41 who could not attacked Iraq for no reasons, Saddam also could not invade Kuwait for no reasons. So he put up the charge of lateral drilling by Kuwait.

The lesson for you here is that history is a chain of cause and effects, actions and reactions. There are no insane people in charge of countries. Whatever that they do, they ALWAYS come up with a reason to justify their actions. Whether those reasons are valid, somewhat valid, or outright invalid are for different discussions. But what make you intellectually dishonest, no surprise here, is that you isolated what the US did without considering whether the reasons we did were valid or not. In other words, you dishonestly omitted history and its chains of events.

First of all, please don't use such a tone with me. You look like a pretentious *** when you do.

I actually don't disagree with your logic, but you haven't really made a valid argument against my claims, as you're only targeting my train of logic, instead of tackling my points. I've already mentioned what most of what you said and it just seems like you're repeating my own words, in a different phrasing.

Considering how many Chinese related threads, the mods may rename this section from China & Far East to China the Mighty. :hitwall:

China can this and that, Chinese are here and there. One day we will see Chinese can fly over the water and turn water into wine. I´m bored. Where are other countries and their contributions?

It's because China is the second most dominant entity, unless you involve a united EU, then it's the third. Of course you're going to get a lot of threads about China, as it's poised to become the next superpower of the world, people are naturally curious about the transition that China is in right now.

I found the article to be interesting, though I disagree with a lot of what it says. Regardless, my interest made me share it on the forums with everyone.
 
China won't be a superpower.Where have we seen this film before?:" East Asian nation,populated by very intelligent people,feels that it has been humiliated by westerners stars to industrialise fast,grows a powerful economy ,arms herself to the teeth ,considers Asia HER rightfull sphere of influence and wants to kick 'evil whites out',thinks it's powerfull enough and acts on her thoughts.


Gets beaten to a pulp.The end"

China didn't learn anything ofcourse,unfortunately i don't think that in this day and age,with this technology in wars they would be so lucky as the japanese.
 
The political system that have killed millions of its own people and still dictator. :tdown:

Who don't provide any choice and freedom to their citizens. :tdown:

who have invaded each and every neighbor or had dispute with. :tdown:
 
China invaded Vietnam and directly fought UN during the Korean war. China is an irresponsible power which has helped spreading WMD to unstable nations like North Korea and Pakistan. Other matters of concern are China's trade practices, its propping up of nations like north korea , stealing of technology and industry secrets , lack of charity and the list goes on.

Things might change with China becoming richer and confident. But the China of today wouldn't make a good superpower.

The UN without China was an illegal UN. It was just another NATO at that time.

The political system that have killed millions of its own people and still dictator. :tdown:

Who don't provide any choice and freedom to their citizens. :tdown:

who have invaded each and every neighbor or had dispute with. :tdown:

Kill milions of its own people? I guess you are accusing U.S. government of the holocaust to the American natives, right? LOL. And Snowden would tell you what is the true freedom of America.
 
Considering how many Chinese related threads, the mods may rename this section from China & Far East to China the Mighty. :hitwall:

China can this and that, Chinese are here and there. One day we will see Chinese can fly over the water and turn water into wine. I´m bored. Where are other countries and their contributions?

Hahaha, are you jealous, sweety?
 
China has been an expansionist power throughout its history. The building of the great wall of china from the pacific coast to the gobi desert for over 20000yr is a testament to this. As china extended, the wall was also expanded. What started as small states in todays central China has grown to exand almost all of East Asia.

Fail. The current great wall was built during the Ming dynasty 500 years ago. The others were just earth ramparts.

China loved Vietnam so much so they wanted to kill us, or if not possible destroyed our towns and roads when they left. Well, to be fair, you American were not better than them.

Vietnam love Champa so much they invaded their country and killed tens of thousands of people. They also love Khmer Krom so much that thousands of them flooded into the Mekong Delta.
 

Pakistan Affairs Latest Posts

Back
Top Bottom