China's Emergence As A Global Superpower

China is pissed off that America owes them so much money.

China is taking over American computers one at a time. They are pissed off at us, but they can't attack us with their weak ass military, so they are venting through internet hackers.

We supposedly owe China 1.4 TRILLION dollars!

I propose we cut off any internet with Chinese citizens and non-business entities. PERIOD.
 
“Fortunately China & Taiwan appear to be coming together peacefully. From Hsu’s 22May09 Email letter:

“… After a productive five-day visit, Chen and his counterpart in Taiwan, Straits Exchange Foundation (SEF) chairman Chiang Pin-kung signed four agreements to increase direct air transportation and postal links:
1. 108 direct flights to the Mainland each week
2. Daily direct flights
3. Tax-free cargo shipments between 11 Taiwan ports and 63 Chinese ports
4. 60 direct cargo flights between the two nations each month …”

Here from more than 3 years old post 509 is a summary I posted about reunion of Taiwan:
...First note this is not a prediction, only what could be true, and is not adequately recognized.
1) China wants Taiwan back and is building a "fifth column" of support in Taiwan for reunion, especially in the business community of Taiwan. In the best of all worlds, from Chinese POV, Taiwan will vote to rejoin mainland.
2) China cannot take it back by threat of force with strong US support of Taiwan, but is making major investment in stuff needed for an invasion as way to make Taiwan think twice about going for independence, etc.
3) China cannot neutralize US military might, even off its own shoreline.
4) Because of 1, 2 &3, China is also preparing for an economic struggle with US, (in case their efforts to get Taiwan to ask back in by vote, fail.)
5) This "eco war" weapon is a hoard of dollars gained by selling non-durables and junk to US that does not make US stronger. Unlike the steel, dams, factories etc. China is acquiring from US and others. (Briefly: "loading the economic gun") It will be (and already is to some extent just by internal unavoidable needs.) used to drive up the cost of commodities, especially oil, when the gun is "fully loaded." An example of an "avoidable need," which may be used when gun is loaded, is for China to start building its own "strategic oil reserve."
6) China does not want eco war with US as that will hurt entire world, including China. China only wants to make the threat of eco war.
7) China needs to develop other markets for it production - It could and to some extent is, allowing internal consumption to grow, but propaganda and information control are keeping normal aspirations for more domestic consumption restrained as too well an informed and rich middle class is threat to CP. (Next thing you know, if they can freely Google etc., is they will want a choice in their government, two party system, etc.) I.e. it is safer for CP to develop foreign markets than the internal one, and this also helps to continue the low cost pool of labor when the rural migration to the cities slows as it must eventually.)
8) Item 7 is to make item 6 creditable and thus make item 5 useable as threat to US to make achieving item 1 feasible. ...
Quad’s next replying post ended as follows:
...If China were to try to leverage its economy to overturn the basic strategic position of the US, the whole thing would rapidly escalate into a military confrontation which, as you've already stated, they would lose. I just can't see the US standing still while China makes a blatant move to destroy the American economy and infrastructure. Even if the plan worked on the US as you say, you can't fire an economic gun without shooting yourself in the foot: their economy will get hammered in the process, and they have no way of ensuring that they'll come out on top in the resulting turmoil. Even discounting the US, they'd face an angry populace at home, and Russia and Japan on their borders.
I agree (then and now) that they will not actually fire that gun, at least not so long as they still need US customers to buy a significant part of their production (but without rapid recovery from the current crisis, Americans cannot do that buying as they ae too deep in debt.)

First paragraph of post 517, in its entirety:
Soon China can sell it production internally - will not need to accept US dollars. OR buy US treasury note and bills.
Without this recycling of dollars back to US, how will US deficits be financed?...
Shows that my POV has not changed, and is being confirmed. Post still asks a very important question, especially now that China is only buying 1 year Treasury paper. Now the answer is known, as I predicted elsewhere: by the FED and Treasury's big fast printing presses.
Can you say "RUN AWAY INFLATION & DOLLAR COLLAPSE" (in one breath)? Easy, is it not? And just how easy it can happen.

Post 514,slightly condensed, has interesting link which still works.
Answer to thread's question is Yes; but if in near future, it is more likely to be by US collapse than China's growth.
See CNN program text on how it will probably happen. …Read text at: http://transcripts.cnn.com/TRANSCRIPTS/0603/19/cp.03.html
{then}you will understand how US can become a minor power in less than a year.
I was telling the same story back in 2005. Here is post 85 of this thread:
I also want to offer my reason as to why China keeps accepting Dollars, buying US bonds etc. - They know that they can not defeat US in a military contest. - Both would be losers if it comes to a nuclear ICBM exchange. They now (or soon will) have the power to destroy US economically at any time of their choosing. I doubt they will do this, but they will be in a position to demand the US conform to their wishes, especially about Taiwan.
 
Last edited by a moderator:
"... GM's sales there increased 33.8%, to 671,148 units. They were up 75% in May over the previous year. While the company shutters factories and lays off workers by the thousands in the U.S., it has announced plans to build a new factory in China and unveil 30 new or updated models, with the goal of doubling its sales in the country to 2 million vehicles within the next five years. ..."

From: http://www.forbes.com/2009/06/03/gm...utomobiles.html?partner=globalnews_newsletter
 
China in addition to becoming the world's largest car market:

"... 2008 was a big year for China’s online industry. The country surpassed the U.S. as the largest internet population in the world with over 298 million users, and an internet penetration rate of 22.6% surpassing the 21.9% world average. China added 8.7 million high-speed connections last year alone bringing the total number of broadband connects to over 75 million. ..."

From Hsu's Email of today.

Internet in China is sensored but in a few years will be twice a large as in the USA.
 
"... Russia may switch some of its reserves from U.S. Treasuries to International Monetary Fund bonds, the central bank said today. ... Treasuries fell, pushing 10-year yields toward the highest level in seven months, in response to Ulyukayev’s statement. The dollar fell against the euro on speculation that Russia will reduce its holdings of U.S. debt.

About 30 percent of Russia’s international reserves, which stood at $401.1 billion on May 29, are currently held in Treasuries, Ulyukayev said. Kudrin said on May 26 that Russia planned to buy $10 billion of IMF bonds using money from its foreign reserves.

The IMF securities would give countries a different way to contribute to the fund and are unlike traditional bonds because they pay an interest rate pegged to the IMF’s basket of currencies, known as Special Drawing Rights.

China is expected to buy as much as $50 billion of the bonds, IMF Managing Director Dominique Strauss-Kahn said yesterday.

From: http://www.bloomberg.com/apps/news?pid=20601087&sid=ahoIPyEdpHUI

Brazil has just slipped into technical recession. I.e. 1Q09 GDP dropped by 0.8% mainly due to ~20% collapse of sales to the USA.
 
I apologize for not having the time to read all of this as it is of great interest to me. Though I agree with Billy on a great many points, I think he's mistaken in saying the Chinese have any intention of allowing their population to reach an American standard of living. The ideal balance for the CCP is to let a certain class become extremely rich, another be just below American standard and the vast majority still poor. The money of the rich will prop up the party, and the poor will not organize into anything resembling a real threat. The Chinese still have a good amount of Hegelian and Confucian thinking ingrained in their minds (though the majority are of the belief that their Hegelian philosophy was invented by Mao) and believe strongly in the inevitability of history. The middle class and wealthy are happy to see the country become the world powerhouse while the majority remain poor. They have absolutely no qualms about this arrangement. Whereas western hearts are turned off by the notion of mass poverty and horrible inequality, the Chinese view this as simply the natural order of life (funny for a supposedly socialist nation). The middle class and certainly the wealthy class would never consider risking a penny or drop of blood of their own to help the 700 million+ poor. I don't believe we will ever see a Khordikovsky in China. For that reason, the CCP has already figured out how to properly balance wealth in the nation to suit it's own power.

I also think you misinterpret the Taiwan issue a bit. Both of us are working on guesses here, but I don't think the Chinese leadership are as passionate about Taiwan as their citizens often are. Again you have to remember that the Chinese take a long view of history and are simply convinced that, whether it be 50 or 100 years, Taiwan will inevitably return. There is no hope of the young Taiwanese voting to return and the current culture in Taiwan seems to be growing even greater distanced from any notion of ethnic fraternity. The only way I can see a somewhat democratic reunification anytime soon is if a GMD president effectively gives it away piece by piece without really consulting the populace. Ma has been heavily criticized for stepping in this direction already. Regardless, the 'Taiwan question' is used primarily to rally the citizenry behind the CCP. As such, it's in the CCP's interest to let this one play out for a few more decades. I think they'd be more likely to take a hard stance on Taiwan if there was domestic discontent or rising anger from the middle class.

Finally, I think you neglect to realize the - to borrow a phrase - unknown unknowns. Anything from a collapse in North Korea to an American resurgence, or any other number of international issues could destabilize China's plans. It's not easy for the party to ensure enough nationalism to be fierce CCP supporters without crossing the line into demanding China take a bigger role on the international stage. It's a very fragile system in China and I wouldn't be surprised if the next 10 years sees something big get in the way of China's grand plan.
 
The ideal balance for the CCP is to let a certain class become extremely rich, another be just below American standard and the vast majority still poor.

It is the same balance that America strives to. We need our cooks and gardeners from Mexico, nannies from Utah, and soldiers from the poor to keep going.

Anything from a collapse in North Korea to an American resurgence, or any other number of international issues could destabilize China's plans.

Only thing that will destabilize China is the massive environmental change like severe weather and earthquakes which is coming....
 
It is the same balance that America strives to. We need our cooks and gardeners from Mexico, nannies from Utah, and soldiers from the poor to keep going.
I don't think it is the same balance. America doesn't strive to have such a large portion of it's population not properly educated, living in essentially squalor on less than $500 a month. Every country has gardeners and nannies; not all of them have 700 million poor farmers and factory workers as well.
Only thing that will destabilize China is the massive environmental change like severe weather and earthquakes which is coming....
I thought of adding that in but I honestly don't know what the major environmental threats to China are. Earthquakes destroying poorly built cities is obviously a possibility, but I'm not sure how likely it is they'll get many more of those.
 
I don't think it is the same balance. America doesn't strive to have such a large portion of it's population not properly educated, living in essentially squalor on less than $500 a month. Every country has gardeners and nannies; not all of them have 700 million poor farmers and factory workers as well.

Granted, China has a lot of poor people. So do America. I work with a lot of welfare people here that get food allowance that is barely covers the food as it is comparatively high price here. Our soldiers and Wal-Mart workers live on government food subsidies. We no longer have factory workers. These people do not know how to fill out an application.

I thought of adding that in but I honestly don't know what the major environmental threats to China are. Earthquakes destroying poorly built cities is obviously a possibility, but I'm not sure how likely it is they'll get many more of those.

Drought, Heat, Cold, Typhhons and Floods are major concerns as the intensity of weather patterns is changing for the worse.
 
... (1)Though I agree with Billy on a great many points, I think he's mistaken in saying the Chinese have any intention of allowing their population to reach an American standard of living.... (2)I also think you misinterpret the Taiwan issue a bit. Both of us are working on guesses here, but I don't think the Chinese leadership are as passionate about Taiwan as their citizens often are....
On(1): I do not think I ever said that but if I said something like that I was not being clear. I have said that the living standards of the Chinese would increase mainly because the CCP needs to have their own population buying the production of their factories and services.

China has had quite a shock in leaning how quickly US and EU buying power can and did collapse. The CCP has as it first intention staying in power and control but they know that requires them to continue to provide a better material life to their population. The CCP is a very repressive government which restricts the freedoms of expression etc. of it people but despite that they generally support the CCP because there more and better food on table, aspirations for a cell phone and at least computer access for all etc are being approached. I.e. the average Chinese easily remembers when food on the table was not regular and owning a bike was their wildest hope. They more than "accept", they "support," the CCP as these new material advances are more important to 99% of the Chinese than abstract things like free speech, which many think threatens "social harmony" and their continued material progress. Many westerners, think the "hunger for freedom" will lead to collapse of the CCP, cause democracy etc. I think that will not happen until all who went days with only a few grains of rice to eat are dead, gone and forgotten. That "they will revolt for freedoms" POV comes from those whose only experience or direct knowledge of a friend with a food problem is that their belt no longer closes.

I have serious doubts that it is even possible in a sustainable way to raise 1.3billion people to the average US use of energy and raw materials, so certainly never intended to convey that was the intention of the CCP. Many of my post have included the fact that "some Chinese are more equal than others" and I expect that will continue under the CCP to be the case.

On(2): I think that "saving face" is a concern to the now retiring leaders of the main land. Many of them fought and had friend die in the conflict that ended with the nationalist invading Formosa, now called Taiwan. I think the younger leaders now taking over are more able, and in fact are succeeding to get the leaders of Taiwan to want closer ties with the main land. It is mainly the farmers of Taiwan who actively resist the competition for the mainland. However those on Taiwan who remember being hungry are not thankful to the CCP for fact it is only a memory. They have enjoyed freedom and want to keep it. Thus Taiwan reunion with the mainland (desired for the increased market etc) will be in special status, like Honk Kong etc. "One government two systems" with many freedoms preserved. Honk Kong just had the largest ever public demonstration about Tiananmen Square's 20th anniversary - more than 100,000 marching in the streets, etc.

Here are a few of the recent developments:
"... in early May the Taiwanese government announced that it would allow institutional investors from China to buy into the island’s stock market for the first time since the two sides split in the civil war.

In yet another sign of a thaw, the two sides have agreed to more than double direct flights between the island and the mainland, and envoys from the two sides have also signed a financial cooperation agreement that paves the way for the two sides to open banks and other financial service institutions in the other’s territory.

On the political front, China suddenly dropped its longstanding opposition to Taiwan’s participation in meetings of world bodies, particularly the United Nations. The sudden appearance of peace and cooperation after six decades of bitter hostility has ramifications for Asia and the United States that few in the West fully understand. The soaring Taiwan stock exchange is the first indicator of an historic turning point. ..."

From: http://www.moneyshow.com/investing/articles.asp?aid=tptp061209-17004&iid=tptp061209&scode=011415
 
Last edited by a moderator:
The CCP has as it first intention staying in power and control but they know that requires them to continue to provide a better material life to their population. The CCP is a very repressive government which restricts the freedoms of expression etc. of it people but despite that they generally support the CCP because there more and better food on table, aspirations for a cell phone and at least computer access for all etc are being approached. I.e. the average Chinese easily remembers when food on the table was not regular and owning a bike was their wildest hope.
I'm very curious how greatly the culture will change when that generation dies out. There will soon be hundreds of millions of young Chinese with no direct dialogue to the revolutionary generation. Soon, the Tiananmen generation will be the grandparents.
Many westerners, think the "hunger for freedom" will lead to collapse of the CCP, cause democracy etc. I think that will not happen until all who went days with only a few grains of rice to eat are dead, gone and forgotten. That "they will revolt for freedoms" POV comes from those whose only experience or direct knowledge of a friend with a food problem is that their belt no longer closes.
I swing back and forth in my opinion of if this will come to fruition. I think China has worked very hard to make sure their youth are 100% materialistic and national-power-focused and it would be very hard (and unwanted by the powers that be) for a reversal to take place. The simple truth is that 999/1000 Chinese would rather have 100 RMB than free speech.
I have serious doubts that it is even possible in a sustainable way to raise 1.3billion people to the average US use of energy and raw materials, so certainly never intended to convey that was the intention of the CCP.
I understand the intuition - I have it too - but why is this true? Are there not nearly a billion people in Europe? Why is Europe able to be so high above Asia?
It is mainly the farmers of Taiwan who actively resist the competition for the mainland.
And the massive swarms of youth who feel strongly nationalistic to Taiwan. Even their pop stars will proudly declare "I am not Chinese."
Thus Taiwan reunion with the mainland (desired for the increased market etc) will be in special status, like Honk Kong etc. "One government two systems" with many freedoms preserved. Honk Kong just had the largest ever public demonstration about Tiananmen Square's 20th anniversary - more than 100,000 marching in the streets, etc.
Most Taiwanese are aware that HK's reunion did not go as planned. Beijing offered large concessions to Hong Kong and promised to maintain democracy, freedom of press and freedom of assembly. In reality, all of these have been severely curbed. A mainlander friend of mine recently returned from studying in HK. I asked her if she attended the June 4th demonstrations and she violently shook her head: "someone might take a picture with me in it, and then how would I get a job back here?"
On the political front, China suddenly dropped its longstanding opposition to Taiwan’s participation in meetings of world bodies, particularly the United Nations.
Only because it entered as "Chinese Taipei".
 
As to "hunger for freedom", look at what that got us - millions of home foreclosures, two wars, and standard of living going down and down while average people can not afford basic healthcare.

Those who claim freedom are the ones like to control the masses so as to exploit them under thr guise of free trade, free dom and free in everything.

It is all about control...drop 10,000 well educated people on an island for 50 years and find them with one small group controlling the rest. That is human nature.
 
to Tyler
Enjoyed reading you reply.

You asked: "Why is Europe able to be so high above Asia?"

Mainly historical reasons, I think. Has more political stability longer and better universal education, but China is closing both these gaps.

I think that it is possible for many of China's 1.3 billion to reach European standards of living, by say 2050, but by being even more European than Europeans are. I.e. more use of public transport, more living efficiently in high-rises, more use of the internet instead of going to work, more community service duties (sort of national peace core). There is no way they will drive big American style cars and live in the subburbs on 1/4 acre lots - even Americans will not be able to do that in 2050. I think by then China's problems with air and water pollution will still be bad, but improving.

IMHO, the future belongs to China and India. US and EU will be like the decayed glory that was once Rome's. As you have some first hand knowledge about China, I would be very interested to know what you think the world will be like in 2050.
 
History has proven that no country will hold the throne forever. However, America will never revert to the point where we can't defend our country from foreign invaders. So in the end it doesn't matter to me if China assumes the costly responsibility of being the worlds policemen and the largest providers of humanitarian aid and financial assistance to foreign Governments. America will be better off without the financial constraints of being a superpower. That way we can reinvest that money into our own country instead of everyone else's.
 
In 1Q09 US GDP contracted at 5.7% annualized rate, while China's grew at 7.2% but as China's is still much smaller than the US's, the gap bewteen the two is bing closed much more by US going down than by China going up. - I will not go back and find the post in this thread where long ago I predicted that would be how the difference evaporated.
 
Chinese firm buying Hummer to be rejected. – More bad news for GM. Following from 26 June09 English edition of Chinese People’s Daily:
“… The {Chinese} government is likely to reject a local vehicle company's bid to acquire General Motors's Hummer unit, because the gas-guzzling vehicles conflict with China's energy conservation goals. Tengzhong, based in the southwestern city of Chengdu, emerged as Hummer's surprise buyer … and refused to disclose the price. Auto industry analysts questioned how Tengzhong, which makes construction vehicles such as cement mixers and tow trucks, could succeed with Hummer. The Chinese government is trying to promote conservation and use of more fuel-efficient vehicles. It has cut sales taxes on cars with smaller engines and is encouraging automakers to develop electric and other alternative-energy vehicles. …”
See: http://english.people.com.cn/90001/90776/90884/6687448.html

Brazilian government also encourages econ-friendly cars: Smaller motor cars have lower sale tax rates. Also on per mile driven basis, alcohol is about ½ the cost of driving a gasoline fueled car. Thus, >90% now made in Brazil can use pure alcohol, and most cars now sold are Flex-Fuel (can use any mix). AFAIK alcohol and gasoline have same tax rate on their energy content. All stations must offer both fuels. (Imported cars use gasoline and usually are heavier.)

The main sales tax on all durable industrial products is called IPI. Today IPI’s “stimulus reduction” was extended for another 30 months for cars and major electro-domestic appliances and to natural gas stoves. (Brazil usually tries not to significantly favor any natural competitor via the tax code.)

All cars with motor <1001cc normally taxed at 7%, now 0% for stimulation of sales.
Gasoline motor cars:
1001 to 2000 cc normally 13% now 6.5%
>2000 cc unchanged at 25%
Alcohol / or Flex Fuel cars:
1001 to 2000 cc normally 11% now 5.5%
>2000 cc unchanged at 18%
 
Apologies to Billy T, I've been busy of late.
I think that it is possible for many of China's 1.3 billion to reach European standards of living, by say 2050, but by being even more European than Europeans are. I.e. more use of public transport, more living efficiently in high-rises, more use of the internet instead of going to work, more community service duties (sort of national peace core). There is no way they will drive big American style cars and live in the subburbs on 1/4 acre lots - even Americans will not be able to do that in 2050. I think by then China's problems with air and water pollution will still be bad, but improving.
Well, two things. For one the pollution problem won't be 'improving', it will be continuing to get worse but at a (possibly) slightly slower rate. Second, I understand the prediction that they may be capable of reaching Euro standards by being ultra-European, but I don't think they would make that choice. The sense in China is similar to what I imagine 1950s America was like: Everyone wants a piece of the pie and no one is willing to sacrifice a sliver of theirs for anyone else, certainly not for mother nature. Imagine is substantially more important in Chinese life than it is in the west, much to my surprise.
IMHO, the future belongs to China and India. US and EU will be like the decayed glory that was once Rome's. As you have some first hand knowledge about China, I would be very interested to know what you think the world will be like in 2050.
Let's just say I'm rooting for India!

I think the shape of the world in 2050 is fundamentally unpredictable. So much could derail China or India (though the oft-worried about Sino-Indian tensions are not relevant; neither nation is stupid enough to start something big) in the next 40 years that only economists are silly enough to feign confidence on such predictions.

If I lean towards any theory it's the multi-polar view expressed by many American writers lately. I don't personally see China undergoing any mass political transformation, though I'd like to hold out hope. If China is going to change it will happen only through economic stagnation coupled with dissent within the party; there is no reason to hope wealthy Chinese will demand freedom. As such, I don't think China will play a very respected role in international events. It will stick to it's "sphere of influence" and this will startle the Japanese, Thai, Koreans and the rest of SEA as well as the neo-conservative movement in America. That said, while it will take some islands that it probably has no right to and make economic slaves out of many smaller nations, it will not really hurt the quality of life for too many people and generally be a somewhat passive beast.

The greatest fear of China's political rise is it's use of weapons sales to bring quiet where it wants. The Chinese largely created the necessary conditions for the Tamil Tigers to be put down and the Chinese will see this successful campaign as an encouragement to try again. In short, if a nation in which the Chinese have economic interests is becoming less stable, they will supply dictators and murderers with the guns and political cover to all mass slaughter.

On the other hand, the Chinese are much more pissed off about North Korea and Burma than Americans could ever imagine and for a long list of reasons. America views NK as threatening it's allies and maybe Yankee troops. The Chinese see NK as threatening their entire system, the ethnic makeup of the northern frontier and their whole relationship with Asia. Much more is on the line for China in this one.

In it's inner sphere I see China as pursuing a more western philosophy in the next 40 years; generally promoting and allowing freedom for the sake of prosperity, while still being happy with oppressive political regimes like Vietnam's that make money.

What's most interesting to watch is how it will deal with conflict outside it's own sphere. The next 10 years will be China figuring out what it's options are in that realm; as of this moment it is still not a major priority to the leadership, though the home town fans are getting restless and demand shows of power. My guess is they'll try throwing their weight around a few times both with the Americans and against the Americans, but never in a way that directly challenges America dominance. Between 2020 - 2030 China will need to decide for itself what it wants its image to be worldwide. America has chosen to be both a beacon of light and freedom as well as war and destruction. China doesn't have the rosy first half to fall back on, and frankly the populace is often more outwardly power hungry than that of America. From 2030 - 2050 I see China either changing drastically politically (not necessarily towards democracy) or the country extending it's inner sphere theory to the whole world. That is, China will use it's army and weapons to secure economic prosperity in terms of GDP and other mass indicators; a strategy that will require China to support some fairly awful governments.

Two other points of note but which I don't have time expand on:
(1) One of the most interesting relationships to watch will be Russia-China. The Russians are clearly in decline and losing sphere of influence room to the Chinese and in 10 years when the Russians wake up to this reality it will be a very hard pill to swallow. The Chinese, of course, just view it as a matter of fate.
(2) China's rise and the spread of economy-firstism will deal a huge blow to Western philosophy. For 30+ years we've heard so much about how our culture is disgusting because of it's focus on money. Well, we're about to find out just how much more the Chinese care about money, to the exclusion of nearly all other aspects of life at times. One prediction I can see coming true in the next forty years: There will be at least one journal or magazine that declares the "death of optimism". As the West watches it's fantasy of the march to freedom and justice die, political and moral philosophy will enter a phase where they are fundamentally unsure of their own purpose. I'm not sure how they'll recover.

I think my post has been a rambling mess, but I think that accurately reflects how difficult this is to predict! Look forward to your reply.
 
Last edited:
History has proven that no country will hold the throne forever. However, America will never revert to the point where we can't defend our country from foreign invaders. So in the end it doesn't matter to me if China assumes the costly responsibility of being the worlds policemen and the largest providers of humanitarian aid and financial assistance to foreign Governments. America will be better off without the financial constraints of being a superpower. That way we can reinvest that money into our own country instead of everyone else's.
When you say "We" you mean those rich American arse-holes that ran our banking system into the ground and are looking to recoup by investing in China ... those ones right??!?!?

China probably isn't interested in being the world's policeman. Actually, one would think they'd just take what they need. At least from the weak.
 
Back
Top