How is a country with a lower per capita income than Mexico hailed by so many as the next global superpower? http://www.alternet.org/world/148284/the_china_superpower_hoax/?page=1
Probably because the lower per-capita income is trumped by the fact that they have a billion-plus people. Experts? Really? Let's do some Math 101 (all numbers made up). Current cars on road 2 months ago: 100 million Sales last month: 1 million Sales this month: 1.2 million Increase in sales per month: 20% Increase in total cars on the road (ie increase in monthly gas consumption): approx 1.2% Of course gas consumption wouldn't go up at the rate of sales. That doesn't even make sense. When US car sales dropped 30-40%, our gas consumption didn't drop 30-40%. Why would it go up like that? Something tells me these "experts" are really just random people who have no clue what they are talking about. They certainly have a massive amount of housing infrastructure being built. But the critical difference between that and what happened here is that they have a huge population that is slowly but surely urbanizing. Even though that housing isn't used now, it certainly will be over the coming years. They don't really have an oversupply of housing in the long-term. His other point of what types of things they are building might be correct - but ultimately, the underlying demand for added housing and commercial space will be there.
By that definition Russian with it's 22K nuclear warheads wasn't a Superpower either. Its what the nation achieve as a whole that defines Superpower status.
What are you talking about? The USSR boasted a GDP PPP of about half that of the USA, and the USSR operated in a very inefficient economic environment. For comparison, PRC is at a GDP PPP of about a seventh that of the USA today.
I SEE what you did there. I see you took a macro economics course in college talking about purchasing power parity. I SEE.. OK, now carry on.
First of all, half is a huge number and inefficiency is irreverent. By the same standards, you're japan is a superpower. Secondly, are you giving me GDP after Perestroika or before? Here's a chart of the Soviet during the "peak" of the cold war during the 50's. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_regions_by_past_GDP_%28PPP%29 GDP: Soviet: 510,243 USA: 1,455,916 That's about 1/3, still awful numbers for the USSR when they're suppose to be the second most power nation on earth. I'm not saying China is there, but superpower is about global hegemony.
If Japan were allowed to not rely on the US defense umbrella, than there is little doubt they would not also be a super power this century. Unfortunately for them, they lost that status when they lost WWII. We're talking GDP PPP pre-Perestroika. The Cold War hardly peaked in the 1950s, it was just getting started. A better year to look at would be 1973. #1 USA: 3,536,622 #2 USSR: 1,513,070 #3 Japan: 1,242,932 China is not going to be a super power under its current trajectory.
For reference: Comparison between USSR and US economies (1989) according to 1990 CIA World Factbook Code: GNP (PPP adjusted, 1989) USSR: US$2.6595 trillion US: US$5.2333 trillion Population (July 1990) USSR: 290,938,469 US: 250,410,000 GNP per capita (PPP adjusted) USSR: US$9,211 US: US$21,082 Labour force (1989) USSR:152,300,000 US: 125,557,000
USSR was pretty much dead, if not dying, by then. I took two upper-div courses on the subject some years back, and clearly remember that their economy was quite rotten and illusory to compare by simple econ stats vs a country that developed like the US. I think that by the beginning of the 30s, a long and gradual 'decline' had started so that it was a miracle how they weren't too far behind the US in the 60s and 70s.
why are you even considering China a "super power"? majority of Chinese don't think so, not even close. people here started that label.
What trajectory are you referring to? 10-12% annual growth, helping keep the world out of a global depression, and basically financing a significant chunk of the world's debt puts them in pretty good position...
Now I preface this by saying that I think it's debatable whether or not China is or will be a superpower. And I personally leans towards the "they're somewhat powerful". But why is low per capita income factoring into this? If country A has 100 people each making $1, and country B has 5 people making $5 each. Does this mean country B is 5 times the power as country A? Quantity is a type of quality. Just because millions of Chinese people toil away making peanuts doesn't mean the country isn't benefiting incredibly from their contributions.
<object width="512" height="288"><param name="movie" value="http://www.hulu.com/embed/pnTeL-M9moMUs4tx90eXLA"></param><param name="allowFullScreen" value="true"></param><embed src="http://www.hulu.com/embed/pnTeL-M9moMUs4tx90eXLA" type="application/x-shockwave-flash" width="512" height="288" allowFullScreen="true"></embed></object>
Reminds me of this incredibly ridiculous mall they built in some town. Apparently it is the world's largest but unbelievably 99% of the mall remains unoccupied! It opened in 2005 and has remained a veritable ghost town. There are a combination of factors as to why it failed, but I wouldn't be surprised if the government had something to do with such an ostentatious endeavor. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/South_China_Mall Heres a pretty interesting documentary you can view about it. You have got to see this place to truly understand the scope of the failure. Its well worth 13 min of your time: http://www.pbs.org/pov/utopia/utopia_part_3_the_worlds_largest_shopping_mall.php
First of all for me, from an economical POV, China is no doubt the next super power. No doubt its per capita income is no where near the USA or most of the western societies. But its really an unrealistic comparison as you have to factor in average spending and requirements. In terms of GDP, this whole belief that the country is pushing its GDP up by government activities is untrue in my eyes. no doubt it may have happened, but thats not anywhere near the whole truth. considering that since a decade ago its economy would ultimately crash, no signs are indicating this at all. China being a superpower is more dependent on its buying power than its production power. No country in the world can compare in terms of buying power, purely because of the population. Any, IMO, the author seems to be just intimidated by the growth of China. maybe a chinese banged a member of his family and never called them back :grin:
China is going to be in a big mess when their billion + population gets old and they have the children of the 'one-child policy' to provide for them.
