US superpower status is shaken

[swerve]

how is large population of china in poverty aye? lets compare this to USA they are around 12-13% poverty level, while China is 10%. Hmm lets see by ratio USA has more people in poverty then China. China only has larger numbers cause its population is larger..

Different nations use different definitions of poverty. Some national poverty lines are set as a percentage of average income, not an absolute limit. The US definition is absolute, but much higher than the Chinese definition, or the World Bank definition. In 2007-8, a single person with an income of less than $10400 was defined as poor in the USA. This was significantly more than the average income per head in China, even adjusted for purchasing power parities. In other words, according to the US definition of poverty, most Chinese are poor.

Look at this. (2.57 megabyte PDF).

 

[swerve]

Not at all, China will need decades to begin to match the United States, the Chinese themselves don't think they''ll overcome the Americans in this century.

That's per head. In absolute GDP terms, China expects to overtake the USA fairly soon at purchasing power parities. The World Bank estimates (with Chinese official co-operation) that Chinas GDP is about 55% of the US level now (51% in 2007), & is widely criticised for underestimating it. No credible economist thinks it's an overestimate, & other estimates are up to 75%. It's closer than the USSR ever got.

GDP at exchange rates will converge more rapidly, but starts further away, & will take longer to close the gap. It should still overtake the USA long before the end of this century.

 

[black shark]

Yeah, given today's circumstances. If China overtakes you guys economically and gain enough money to buy new toys, you guys are gonna be in trouble.

FYI Tavarisch...I'm not from the US.

 

[Tavarisch]

FYI Tavarisch...I'm not from the US.

Sorry. I just assumed you were.

 

[nevidimka]

What the... makes you think that the US of today are in the same situation as the SU 17 years ago? Does the US have a history of decades of communism? Has the SU been the center of the world's economy for decades? Has the SU been the center of inventive and economical spirit for decades? Has the SU had a free and prospering population? Has the SU had absolute cultural dominance apart from the countries that were occupied? Is there anything like a soviet way of life that billions of people go for?

Man, I'm an old European and we're feeling comfortable claiming cultural superiority over the US, but this doesn't change the fact that the US are and will be the world's dominating superpower despite all your Russia and China fanboy blah.
Never underestimate America's ability to reinvent themselves, emerging stronger than they were before.
I'm sorry, but fact is, all other countries are only trying to catch up with the Western Hemisphere. And although there might be a donturn now, it will take a while.



Hey propaganda-boy, do you have the slightest idea what poverty means by western compared to chinese standards? I guess not. "so dont write nonsense comments if non are true. lack of knowledge is evident in the last paragraph written. "

Perhaps you should tone down your argument. I wonder why this is allowed by the moderator. My opinion is not a soviet fanboyish thingy whatever way you may want to put it. I just remember reading a site that said, both US and Soviet Union championed 2 different ways of managing the economy. 1 being a state controlled economy by the Soviets and the free market economy by the US. The Soviet Version collapsed 17 years ago, and every1 in the west were celebrating the victory of free market. But 17 years down the lane the western style itself collapsed. The soviets collapsed earlier coz its economy was much smaller to the US. The strain of war on the financial system of both superpower pushed their economies to the edge. That is what I remember from the top of my head on what the website was saying.

That is why I said the US is in a similar situation to the SU back then.

 

[Waylander]

But it is just wrong.

The US is in no way in as a bad situation as the SU was when it imploded.
Sure the whole world faces an economical crisis and naturally the US is hit badly because it still is the backbone of the world economy.
But nevertheless it is not a failure of the system by itself. Some things went wrong which doesn't mean the whole system is broken.
What do you think? The US and with it the rest of the west is breaking apart and suffers poverty unknown for centuries while the rest of the world prospers because the US system is dead?
Everybody is going to suffer, especially these countries which rely on exports to exactly the broken systems you are talking about.

It is not like the SU where a whole system broke apart economical as well as political. Texas and some other states are not going to declare independence from a one party regime while the economy goes to shambles because most of the companies are whoefully inefficient and don't have the technology to survive on the world market.

 

[Manfred2]

Let them think what they will. Everyone from King George to Osama bin Hidden has underestimated the US. Why should the current gang be any different... or smarter?

 

[riksavage]

I think we all need a reality check! Look at the defence spending figures for 2007 (below). Even if the likes of China hide much of their expenditure, they are still WAY BEHIND the US. If you add China, Russia and India's spending together it doesn't even come close!

It's not just the huge disparity in spending today, but the existing military infrastructure which the US currently has in place - industrial manufacturing, R&D, land/sea/air bases and other incalculable assets such as strategic intelligence gathering capabilities, which make them generations ahead of the rest of the world.

Top World-wide Military Spenders: 2007
Spending
Country $bn

USA - 546.8
UK - 59.7
China - 58.3
France - 53.6
Japan - 43.6
Germany - 36.9
Russia - 35.4
Saudi Arabia - 33.8
Italy - 33.1
India - 24.2
South Korea - 22.6
Brazil - 15.3
Canada - 15.2
Australia - 15.1
Spain - 14.6
World Total 1008.2

SOURCE Stockholm International Peace Research Institute

 

[Ananda]

how is large population of china in poverty aye? lets compare this to USA they are around 12-13% poverty level, while China is 10%. Hmm lets see by ratio USA has more people in poverty then China. China only has larger numbers cause its population is larger

.

Defense is not my field, but economics & finances certaintly are. China poverty standard still uses the similar poverty line for developing countries. The poverty line's income below USD 2.0 per day.

Compare dollar to dollar, lower income bracket in US (begin at below USD 1,200 per month by lattest US standard) are Middle Class group in developing countries including CHINA.

US might be in trouble, but hey so do all the world including china at this moment. Growth by more than 8% ?? even the very optimist in China Leadership can't realistically hope for that.

 

[Feanor]

First thing is first, the USA is not a real free market economy. Keep in mind that the financial market controls both the labor and goods market. And the financial market is controlled by the Fed. So while you don't have economic planners who decide exactly how much and what to make, by controlling the interest rates the US economy is still centrally planned from the Federal Reserve, to a large extent.

A real free market simply doesn't work.

 

[kato]

In 2007-8, a single person with an income of less than $10400 was defined as poor in the USA.

If we start talking about relative poverty, the US fixed rate definition is in some way placed artificially at an amount that equalizes the resulting poverty rate with European countries btw.

And it's a non-standard definition. For example, in the EU, someone is defined as "threatened by poverty" if they earn less than 60% of the median income; "poor" if they earn less than 40%. The WHO, OECD and other organisations use a similar definition.

The current US fixed rate definition is at about 30-35% of the median income, but gets somewhat screwy with families (no per-person rate).

In Germany, for example, 13.5% fall within the first slot, 4.4% in the second slot above. If the same calculation was applied to the USA (with US income), around 11.7% would fall in the second slot alone there.

National poverty lines are irrelevant.

 

[waraich]

its economy is already a superpower, its not could be a superpower it is already. China account balance is $372 billion, while USA is -$731 billion, 5 times greater in debt then the next country which is Spain. So if any so USA will go to war cause of loss of ground, not China, they have can just buy ground instead of fighting for it.

My friend for super power economy is also major factor but still US is far ahead of China in high tech (Nano technology) may be 20 Years or more .Nano technology will actually decide the ranking of super powers

http://nextbigfuture.com/2005/11/discussion-of-ranking-countries-in.html
http://www.azonano.com/details.asp?ArticleID=1134

But if present economic crunch in USA continued for next two years which is very much expected because still not touched the peaks and Chinies latest stretegy to investment in technology sector (Railway,control systems,telecom,software) to mantain their growth rate above 8% then there is possibility that China will emerge as greatest super power very soon.

 

[ReAl PrOeLiTeZ]

.

Defense is not my field, but economics & finances certaintly are. China poverty standard still uses the similar poverty line for developing countries. The poverty line's income below USD 2.0 per day.

Compare dollar to dollar, lower income bracket in US (begin at below USD 1,200 per month by lattest US standard) are Middle Class group in developing countries including CHINA.

US might be in trouble, but hey so do all the world including china at this moment. Growth by more than 8% ?? even the very optimist in China Leadership can't realistically hope for that.

you must understand you cant use western term of poverty and implement it into chinese terms, the same goes the other way around. poverty level on how i took it is china's way for china and western way for america. remember US$1 can get you nothing in western countries while in china it can. so say 5000 yuan= US$1000 (not correct but example), in china its like US$5000 not literally. but everything in china is so cheap that they earn say $100 yuan their its like someone earning US$100 in USA and spending on it.

To Waraich.
technology superpower is one thing but i was refering to economy. so dont mix up your thinking with mine. i said superpower economy, not superpower technology.

 

[ReAl PrOeLiTeZ]

I think we all need a reality check! Look at the defence spending figures for 2007 (below). Even if the likes of China hide much of their expenditure, they are still WAY BEHIND the US. If you add China, Russia and India's spending together it doesn't even come close!

It's not just the huge disparity in spending today, but the existing military infrastructure which the US currently has in place - industrial manufacturing, R&D, land/sea/air bases and other incalculable assets such as strategic intelligence gathering capabilities, which make them generations ahead of the rest of the world.

Top World-wide Military Spenders: 2007
Spending
Country

USA - 546.8
UK - 59.7
China - 58.3
France - 53.6
Japan - 43.6
Germany - 36.9
Russia - 35.4
Saudi Arabia - 33.8
Italy - 33.1
India - 24.2
South Korea - 22.6
Brazil - 15.3
Canada - 15.2
Australia - 15.1
Spain - 14.6
World Total 1008.2

SOURCE Stockholm International Peace Research Institute

defence budget yeah they might be big, but look at their nations accounts. every year they raise their budget but more is deducted from their account. so what if you have a big military "borrowed money" budget, in the end your account is such in debt. having a big defence dont mean nothing in terming yourself a superpower. china has a big population jeez it must be a superpower then since its got more people. dont worry great britain and australia are also near the bottom of national account funds in debt too, so not singling out usa.

so what big military budget dont mean squat, their just playing arogant and not admiting that their budget is going to start going down a bit soon. though in military china is still no superpower like the usa i admit that. but economy it is. technology, china is half way their in technology, but usa i dont think they are superpowers either. id say europe are superpowers of technology. space id say usa.

everybody stop saying stuff that i didnt write. i never refered to military and technology of china being superpowers. i said economy. individual spendings is another factor. but china assests in economy is superpower status. thats it for now.

To Falstaff. your extremely rude, in your reply post to me, and im gonna ignore this time, but next time try using words that arent biased or uncivilised. eg: propaganda boy. im australian afterall. but the truth is the truth. even if dont support china.

 

[autumn child]

Let me share alittle insight in the current situation of world powers.

The US is feeling the pain from the financial crisis, but i predict that the US will recover and still continue to be very important player in the global economy and security in the next few decades. The US has a resilient economic and political system that can accomodate change and reforms. One of the reason that Japan is unable to recover is its inability to reform itself quick enough to meet new challenges.

The EU is not a super power since it is not fully integrated and has many weaknesses in the system, i.e. each EU state does not give up military sovereignty, only some economic sovereignty. But what i am worried about is the Total Factors of Productivity (TFP) in the EU which is very low, only 0.2. TFP is important for sustainable economic growth as it allows a country to develop with less reliance on limited resources. The low TFP also means that European workers are too comfortable with their live and unwilling to work extra hours to increase productivity. In contrast US TFP is quite high (1.6) compared to the EU. This mean that the US has much greater room to grow economically than the EU under limited natural and human resources.

Another factor that the US has is the entrepreneurial resource. US citizens continually innovate and is entrepreneurial at the same time, thus we see emergence of companies such as google, amazon and starbucks. The top 100 brands in the world are mostly american company. European fails to take advantage of IT development in the early 2000 and as a result is quite underdeveloped compared to the US in this sector. We all also know that starbucks coffee does not make the best coffee and even got its original inspiration from european coffee shop. The american entrepreneurial spirit can make starbucks into a corporate giant while the european coffee still stays in europe. Japan is another example of a country lacking in entrepreneurial spirits after it reach its peak in the 80s. Some economist argues that Japan lost two decades is partly the result of lack of entrepreneurs to stimulate the economy.

In the case of China, most people have extreme views, its either china is all good and powerful or china is poor and miserable. The truth ofcourse lies in between. China's GDP per capita is about 3500USD and using PPP it is slightly more than 10000 USD per capita still only abput one fifth of US GDP/capita. So china is a relatively poor country compared to US but a relatively wealthy among developing nations. I have confidence that chinese economy grow at 8% this year but it is mainly due to "data messaging" by the bereau of statistics. The real growth is between 6 to 7% as estimated by world bank, still a good and healthy growth rate. There will also be no mass rioting and social instability if china grows below 8%. Entrepreunur spirit is strong and alive while TFP is also high, therefore china, like the US have huge growth potential, thus the interaction between china and US is increasingly important and will dominate future world affairs in the future.

I do not like to use the term superpowers because the world is increasingly integrated and unlike during the cold war where SU economic is isolated and US does not rely on SU economy. Reliance create power. At the moment many countries economic well-being relies on the US, therefore the US has alot of economic power over other nation, but the US also heavily and increasingly relies on chinese money for their increasingly large debt to maintain growth. does this mean that china is also a superpower since the US also relies on china? Many economist agrees that the current system of asian savings paying for US consumption is broken and unsustainable, but will continue further as china plans to buy more US treasuries and OBama encourage consumption for economic recovery. This is the Brettonwood two system, where the US dollars value is tied to asian savings and increasingly China's savings (currently worth 1.95 trillion USD). Hence the G-2 concept of China and US relationship, where the world's affair will rely on the two nation's interaction. Both China and US increasingly rely on each other, which means they have power over one another. The next few decades or even centuries will probably see no real superpower in existance. This is the new world order.

Fortunately (or unfortunately depending on your perspective) military power is becoming less reliable to measure a country's power. In increasingly integrated world, any military action will have serious economic consequence. Nuclear arsenals and the brettonwood two systems ensure that major military conflict between major state impossible. military might of major power can only coerced isolated small/weakened states (Iraq, afghanistan) but not other major states with nuclear arsenals or even small states with major power backing as we have seen in Georgia.

 

[swerve]

If we start talking about relative poverty, the US fixed rate definition is in some way placed artificially at an amount that equalizes the resulting poverty rate with European countries btw.

And it's a non-standard definition. For example, in the EU, someone is defined as "threatened by poverty" if they earn less than 60% of the median income; "poor" if they earn less than 40%. The WHO, OECD and other organisations use a similar definition.

The current US fixed rate definition is at about 30-35% of the median income, but gets somewhat screwy with families (no per-person rate).

In Germany, for example, 13.5% fall within the first slot, 4.4% in the second slot above. If the same calculation was applied to the USA (with US income), around 11.7% would fall in the second slot alone there.

National poverty lines are irrelevant.

The federal US poverty definition is an absolute, not relative, line, calculated by pricing a basket of goods & services, has a small element of allowance for regional price differences (but not enough), & takes into account that per-person costs reduce as family numbers go up. There's a table of values, depending on family size. Imperfect, but one of the (technically - not its level) best poverty definitions out there. But most of the worlds population probably don't think that level of income represents poverty.

The relative definitions, of the "n% of median income" variety are essentially meaningless.

The World Bank PPP absolute poverty line is more meaningful, but still flawed, as it fails to account for different price structures, being based on whole-economy PPPs. It would understate absolute poverty in a country where basic necessities are relatively expensive, for example.

 

[Ananda]

[

QUOTE=ReAl PrOeLiTeZ;169075]

you must understand you cant use western term of poverty and implement it into chinese terms, the same goes the other way around. poverty level on how i took it is china's way for china and western way for america. remember US$1 can get you nothing in western countries while in china it can. so say 5000 yuan= US$1000 (not correct but example), in china its like US$5000 not literally. but everything in china is so cheap that they earn say $100 yuan their its like someone earning US$100 in USA and spending on it.

That's PPP (Purchasing Power Parity) issue. It's true that USD 1 in China will have different power buy with USD 2 in US. However if China poverty line still in line with what poverty line in developing countries (below USD 2 per day), than it's mean only USD 60 per month.

With US lower bracket begin at USD 1,200, even with current PPP between China and US (base on WB figure), the USD 1,200 in US still have similar purchasing power effect of USD 500 in china. This figure still far above China poverty line, and thus still considered included in 'middle income bracket' (equivalent with annual income of USD 6000 in China).

PPP do matter, but the comparison even with PPP still show lower income bracket line in US still considered to have same ammount of purchasing power of Middle Class China.

Poverty line of advanced developing countries like US still have different meaning even with poverty standard of new emerging economics power like China.

 

[waraich]

Let me share alittle insight in the current situation of world powers.

The US is feeling the pain from the financial crisis, but i predict that the US will recover and still continue to be very important player in the global economy and security in the next few decades. The US has a resilient economic and political system that can accomodate change and reforms. One of the reason that Japan is unable to recover is its inability to reform itself quick enough to meet new challenges.

The EU is not a super power since it is not fully integrated and has many weaknesses in the system, i.e. each EU state does not give up military sovereignty, only some economic sovereignty. But what i am worried about is the Total Factors of Productivity (TFP) in the EU which is very low, only 0.2. TFP is important for sustainable economic growth as it allows a country to develop with less reliance on limited resources. The low TFP also means that European workers are too comfortable with their live and unwilling to work extra hours to increase productivity. In contrast US TFP is quite high (1.6) compared to the EU. This mean that the US has much greater room to grow economically than the EU under limited natural and human resources.

Another factor that the US has is the entrepreneurial resource. US citizens continually innovate and is entrepreneurial at the same time, thus we see emergence of companies such as google, amazon and starbucks. The top 100 brands in the world are mostly american company. European fails to take advantage of IT development in the early 2000 and as a result is quite underdeveloped compared to the US in this sector. We all also know that starbucks coffee does not make the best coffee and even got its original inspiration from european coffee shop. The american entrepreneurial spirit can make starbucks into a corporate giant while the european coffee still stays in europe. Japan is another example of a country lacking in entrepreneurial spirits after it reach its peak in the 80s. Some economist argues that Japan lost two decades is partly the result of lack of entrepreneurs to stimulate the economy.

In the case of China, most people have extreme views, its either china is all good and powerful or china is poor and miserable. The truth ofcourse lies in between. China's GDP per capita is about 3500USD and using PPP it is slightly more than 10000 USD per capita still only abput one fifth of US GDP/capita. So china is a relatively poor country compared to US but a relatively wealthy among developing nations. I have confidence that chinese economy grow at 8% this year but it is mainly due to "data messaging" by the bereau of statistics. The real growth is between 6 to 7% as estimated by world bank, still a good and healthy growth rate. There will also be no mass rioting and social instability if china grows below 8%. Entrepreunur spirit is strong and alive while TFP is also high, therefore china, like the US have huge growth potential, thus the interaction between china and US is increasingly important and will dominate future world affairs in the future.

I do not like to use the term superpowers because the world is increasingly integrated and unlike during the cold war where SU economic is isolated and US does not rely on SU economy. Reliance create power. At the moment many countries economic well-being relies on the US, therefore the US has alot of economic power over other nation, but the US also heavily and increasingly relies on chinese money for their increasingly large debt to maintain growth. does this mean that china is also a superpower since the US also relies on china? Many economist agrees that the current system of asian savings paying for US consumption is broken and unsustainable, but will continue further as china plans to buy more US treasuries and OBama encourage consumption for economic recovery. This is the Brettonwood two system, where the US dollars value is tied to asian savings and increasingly China's savings (currently worth 1.95 trillion USD). Hence the G-2 concept of China and US relationship, where the world's affair will rely on the two nation's interaction. Both China and US increasingly rely on each other, which means they have power over one another. The next few decades or even centuries will probably see no real superpower in existance. This is the new world order.

Fortunately (or unfortunately depending on your perspective) military power is becoming less reliable to measure a country's power. In increasingly integrated world, any military action will have serious economic consequence. Nuclear arsenals and the brettonwood two systems ensure that major military conflict between major state impossible. military might of major power can only coerced isolated small/weakened states (Iraq, afghanistan) but not other major states with nuclear arsenals or even small states with major power backing as we have seen in Georgia.

You have painted a rosy picture of US economy, there are few grey area which are not enlightened eg. The total US economy is arround 14 trillion dollars but actuall value may become 50% if oil buying and selling started in other currencies.That is reason US is bulling oil producing countries to sell oil in dollar which actually keeping the market value of dollar at higher demand or values.Iraq and Afghanistan war were engineered to get control of oil resources and routes to ensure the supriority of US and maitain the investor confidence.
But this big oil game to support US is now no more workable but damaging the US economy ,present economic down turn is reation of these wars and wrong US approach, but now its too late , US economy has to touch first the lowest level and as result disintegration is unavoidable as happened with SU.

World economic gurus are also pridicting the same.

 

[autumn child]

do not underestimate US economic and political resilience. I agree that the US is going to take alot of pain to reform and recover from the downturn. The fundamental economic strength of the US is still there. Its major drawback is the budget deficits and increasing debt. Oil trade is not the going to devalue the USD by 50%, Asian countries selling US treasuries anf printing USD will devalue the USD significantly. It is also in the interest of Japan and China, the two biggest buyer of US treasuries to maintain the USD so that they can maintain export competativeness of their products. Asian countries also have no other choice to invest if they want to maintain the value of their reserve. The relationship between China(and other asian countries) and US far outweigh oil trade in importance.

And US is not going to break up like the SU even if the economy hit the bottom. The society cohesiveness (political ideology, language, cultures, etc) in the US is far greater than the SU.

 

[waraich]

do not underestimate US economic and political resilience. I agree that the US is going to take alot of pain to reform and recover from the downturn. The fundamental economic strength of the US is still there. Its major drawback is the budget deficits and increasing debt. Oil trade is not the going to devalue the USD by 50%, Asian countries selling US treasuries anf printing USD will devalue the USD significantly. It is also in the interest of Japan and China, the two biggest buyer of US treasuries to maintain the USD so that they can maintain export competativeness of their products. Asian countries also have no other choice to invest if they want to maintain the value of their reserve. The relationship between China(and other asian countries) and US far outweigh oil trade in importance.

And US is not going to break up like the SU even if the economy hit the bottom. The society cohesiveness (political ideology, language, cultures, etc) in the US is far greater than the SU.

You said "Reliance Create Power" ,this is the bigest challenge ,US lost reliance of family of nations .

In business world for sucess either you should be bull or bear , in present world economic senario investors are in bearish mode.which is main reason of collapse all major sectors(service, banking,industial) of capitalist economy of US.