The IMF... How can anyone take what they say seriously? http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/International_Monetary_Fund#Membership
I lol'ed at this part for some reason. It just doesn't feel like it's the kind of word you'd use against a country, of course Taiwan isn't one.
Measured in dollars, the U.S. GDP will still be 70% bigger than China's by then, but the trend is unmistakable: At some point, barring a wreck of China's economic freight train, China will eclipse the U.S. to become the largest economy in the world. What will this mean? Well, psychologically, it will mean that Americans will have to get used to the idea that they're not the biggest kid on the block anymore. For most participants in the global economy, China will have become the most important trading partner and market, and China's economic policies, not America's, will dominate the global conversation. Similarly, and perhaps more momentously, China's military will eventually be larger than the U.S.'s, which will mean the U.S. will no longer be the most powerful country in the world. It's easier to have influence over other countries when you can speak softly and carry a big stick. Once China vaults past the US economically, it will have the wherewithal to carry an even bigger stick--unless the US wants to continue to bankrupt itself by outspending everyone else despite its smaller GDP. Adding to the change in fortunes is the fact that America's financial situation is vastly weaker than China's: We have a huge deficit and massive debts; China, meanwhile, funds our consumption (by lending us money) and runs a surplus. Over the next couple of decades, therefore, much of the US resources that might have gone into growth and infrastructure spending, will be used instead on interest payments, budget cuts, and social programs. This will likely make the US feel poorer, especially relative to the explosive growth in China. Regardless of when the exact date comes, in other words, we're headed for a new world order--one in which China, not America, will be the center of the world. http://finance.yahoo.com/blogs/dail...VvZmFtZXI-?sec=topStories&pos=2&asset=&ccode=
And how does that matter? Considering that the average american consumer still consumes about 14 times as much as the average chinese consumer in a year (and let's face it, this is how we all measure our lives in material terms) who do you think will be more influential in shaping global demand as far as consumption goes? Look at it anohter way, there's nearly 1 million more people in Oklahoma than there are in Brooklyn. Who exercises more cultural influence globally? The only time you'd find most Brooklynites sporting OK derived threads would be in the ironic thrift store sense.
Actually, according to some fundamentalist weirdos, it's late May of this year....so if you were planning on taking the kids to Disneyworld for vacation, now might be a good time.
Not only economic clout, but political as well...and China's not exactly a friend of ours (they're friends with North Korea, if that helps any). The political landscape may very well change drastically before our generation's past...and this will affect not only our lives but our children's (and theirs). Just sayin'.
You mean we won't be speaking Chinese, using chopsticks, and watching Happy Girls every night? Surely you underestimate the end of America.
It's not doomsday and the title is over the top. Well, there are 1.5 billion people in China, almost 6 times of the U.S. population. The measure is economy size and this is not surprising as more people naturally generate more economies. GDP per capita wise China is even way behind Libya. For the Chinese people that's certainly a more important number to pay attention to.
Open, non-rhetorical question: which countries have the biggest, most powerful militaries and whom are they more likely to align with between U.S. and China?
I think what's missing in the IMF report is that it did not mention a large part of China's GDP go unreported in its official figure. Some experts have estimated that may be up to 30% or more of China's economic activities do not get counted because of its vast underground/cash economy, whereas everything get scanned at the check-outs in the U.S. In China, you can pay cash to buy a Ferrari and doesn't get counted as business transaction.
Maybe in the 1890's, not so much when your economy is completely dependent on others, particularly the consumption of others. New York City's economy is smaller than Canada's. Who is more influential in global economic & social affairs, New York City or Canada?
Do you think China's economy will always depend on other countries so much? If 20% of Chinese reaches middle class that is more than the whole population of United States, they won't be spending money they have? In case you did not realize, Chinese are buying more cars than the Americans, in 10 years they will buy more cars then the Americans and Europeans combined. That is just one small example of increase in domestic spending in China.
In large cities I think eventually they will set a fixed number of license plates to limit the number of vehicles, like that they have in Hong Kong.
As long as it's based on masses of low wage workers selling goods with a purposefully undervalued currrency - yes, absolutely, and it still is and will be in 2016. And they're facing some demographic curves that make things very tricky as you push the timeline further, Global economies operate on curves that smooth out over time, something that people don't seem to appreciate.
