what do you think of China?Over time,will china be richer?even richer than the USA?

Question

I have been taking an interest in china for a long time. thank you for answering.

Answer 1

I do like the US(and i wont let this cloud my judgement
too much!).
Possibly China will become"richer"and as much of a world
dominant force as the US is now.
But,although history shows us conclusively that all dominant
"empires" wane-and-wither,we might say that certain values
like "freedom" do not.
And history also shows that most if not all of these dominant
empire states were not perfect,either;far from it!
So,putting these two together,it would seem that the coming
Chinese dominance would have good and bad points(i take
it that the Chinese would,through international and national
pressure,move towards and achieve at least the freedom
that we take now for granted in the west).
So i would like to put forward a related aim,one that has very
close connections to law-and-order; that is,the aim of peace
in the world-i mean the elimination of wars and conflicts
between countries or states.
And if this should include a stiffening of current law-and-Order(by say, the United Nations becoming a armed police
force-The police force of the whole world,so to speak)then so
be it. Then China,alongside the US and all peacful countries,
would have to have an even greater committment to our
little,beautiful world,than hitherto has been the case.
And, i may add.
This could well include an Aid-to-all-countries,in the shape
of a lawful "cap"on family size- thus a lawful(as say agreed
by all countries of the United nations above)population control.
For this would not only help in the striving and Effort to bring
and maintain peace everywhere,it would also help in the
complete elimination of poverty and disease.
It would also help in making our world a more safer,clean,
prosperous and educated one.
Big words and ideas,i know.But, China itself without hardly
any outside help,tried and almost succeeded when they
took the risk ,recently, to control their (almost out-of-control)
population "explosion". And it is an "Explosion"-one which
we must "contain" and get-a-hold-of;for all the benefits ive
mentioned.
i think we owe it to the billions who will come after us- and
we owe it to ourselves,and to our ancestors too.
Thanks for giving me this opportunity to reply to this important
question.

Answer 2

China has a long standing culture of trade and a long term view of property. So much so that the Chinese as a race tend to accumulate wealth wherever they have settled, and are hated as an elite influential minority throughout the Far East.

Western culture has a long standing mercantile tradition too, but should respect China's exceptional market acumen. My own sense is that the West underestimates China by not taking a long term view, and is unable to see itself as anything but number one. The West, and in particular the USA, will not always be on top and China knows this. It can be patient and let the grind of time work in its favor. The US, on the other hand, thinks in the short term, reactively responding to military and industrial threats without seeing the larger picture. Eventually it probably will.

Answer 3

Since the USA didn't "illegally invade oil-rich Iraq," I'd have to say that no, it isn't hypocrisy; you just don't understand the issues involved. First, there is more oil beneath Alaska or in the Dakotas than in all of the Middle East combined, but you libbies refuse to allow them to drill for it even though, at least in Alaska, they overwhelmingly want to do it. Second, as we've told you before many times, there was a great deal of credible evidence to suggest that there were WMDs in Iraq that's why people like Hillary voted to go into Iraq since the President has no authority to do so on his own. So, you libbies openly debated this for weeks, if not months, allowing Saddam to get any evidence of WMDs into Iran, which is where most of them are now. Moreover, even if there weren't any WMDs as you insist, Iraq breached most, if not all of the agreements that lead to an end of Desert Storm. One was enough to go back in and take Baghdad. Thirdly, I find it rather telling that you support the harsh crackdown on the Tibetans who only want to be free and independent. If you poll the Iraqis, most are happy that the US is there and don't want them to leave quite yet. I don't think you'd get the same numbers in Tibet. Tibet proclaimed its independence from China in 1911. Tibet remained an independent state until shortly after the conclusion of the Chinese civil war, when on October 1, 1949, the People's Republic of China was formally proclaimed in Beijing and the following year launched an armed invasion of Tibet. The Chinese army of 40,000 men routed the unprepared defending Tibetan army of only 5,000. So, you have a problem with the US "invading" Iraq as you claim, but you don't have a problem with China invading and annexing Tibet. Who's the hypocrite here?

Answer 4

Richness (I think in most people's eyes) is a measure of the disposable wealth per person and, by this definition, it is difficult to see China becoming a "rich" country because of it's massive population.

This is actually it's big advantage. A high population means that labour is relatively cheap and, now China has joined the global economy, many western businesses find that manufacturing costs are far lower here than elsewhere. This inward investment, together with China's shrewd policy of buying up the lion's share of some resources (eg. steel) means that China is already a powerful economic force, with every indication that it will continue to grow.

Answer 5

Although USA rate quite high in world wealth at number 6 it is possible that China could get higher than that (they are currently around 100). Of course if they did they would be so big and powerful that they would essentially control every industry and so rule the world. Imagine if they had a forward thinking government - scary.

Answer 6

China has been a patient and wise nation. China's unfortunate communist government is just engaging in a bit of economic warfare to remind the West that she is still a powerful country.

BUT the West is powerful too and in the doubtful case of a war with Red China, the Western forces would unleash all its Nuclear, Biological, Chemical, and Weather warfare and knock China's population down a bit.

But in the meantime, the communists in China are reving up their capitalistic 'free-zones' in accordance with Marxism. Still China is now experiencing similar problems with capitalism which have plagued the West: stock market crashes; inflation; labor unrest; currency fluctuations, internal debt, corruption, and ineptitude due to inexperience with the general principles of capitalism.

And already corporations are starting to pull out of Red China in favor of the cheaper labor found in India. Maybe we should all study Hindi?

Answer 7

definitely China will rule the world.
so study Chinese.

3 World War - Chine v USA.

Answer 8

Yes, it's the 'new kid on the block' as far as industry & world economy is concerned. Pretty soon everyone's going to want to move to China. Illegal aliens?

Answer 9

They have the manpower... They are capable of the knowledge... They have the dicipline. I say YES! its very possible. As long a they dont get obsessed with themselves just like the USA its very possible.