<p>"Well, at this point....they aren't innovative"</p>
<p>Do they have to be? </p>
<p>Look around, is every US business innovative? Or do some lead and others copy? </p>
<p>Being first isn't necessarily the best thing all the time. Being first means you suffer the pains of R&D, while your copiers wait till you get the bugs out. Besides China really hasn't caught on to copyrights yet and what that means. Need an album?</p>
<p>Opie - interesting analysis, but I disagree with the overall direction that you imply and the idea that China is in a clearly dominant economic position. True, the US now holds a record deficit with China, but one must look at what that really means. China has ultimately acquired a vast reserve of American dollars, many of which are used to purchase the US govt's debt - bonds. If China were in a clearly advantageous position, it would be able to sell the billions it has in bonds to the government and acquire actual capital. But, if that were to happen, the value of those very bonds would depreciate drastically and China would end up losing money on the deal. At the same time, China's government doesn't want to allow their currency to appreciate. Congress is having quite a time dealing with this very issue, as China wants to remain the supplier of "inferior" goods - that is, the cheapest products on the market. Were the dollar to depreciate in respect to the yuan, the United States would likely switch from becoming primarily dependent on Chinese goods to other Asian nations with which it does not have a massive deficit. China is experiencing large growth in large part due to the fact that it has become a great supplier of cheap goods to major importers like the US and EU. However, if those goods suddenly become more expensive, China will lose its advantage in the international market and the US would slowly take control of the current deficit. One must also consider the fact that China has WELL over a billion people. By taking on the role of the world's cheap supplier, China is able to provide jobs for many of those people. As long as the money continues to come in and the dollar remains strong, these people will have jobs. If China loses the US as a primary (as in massive importing) trading partner, there will be an effect on the job market. </p>
<p>I'm not really sure how China is dealing with this, but from the country's current actions it is clear that China doesn't want the dollars to stop coming in despite the large deficit. I'm not sure anyone is really winning in the current trade situation between the US and China.</p>
<p>
[quote]
Do they have to be?</p>
<p>Look around, is every US business innovative? Or do some lead and others copy?</p>
<p>Being first isn't necessarily the best thing all the time. Being first means you suffer the pains of R&D, while your copiers wait till you get the bugs out. Besides China really hasn't caught on to copyrights yet and what that means. Need an album?
[/quote]
Higher value added processes and the innovation required to provide them are hallmarks into entering the developed world. If China wants to continue to develop the next generation of doggie toys they can go ahead. However, that path never gave success to Japan, South Korea, or Singapore. China will have to compete some day (soon) or they will continue to be an easily replaceable producer (ie: similar to Mexico or virtually any South American country).</p>
<p>Brand, Why would China want it differently? </p>
<p>They can wait. The examples you cite require them to create some sort of action. I don't disagree with your assessment of things as long as they do what you think they would. But what if they don't? :) </p>
<p>In our situation with the ruskies, did we set a date when they would colapse or did we just continue along in our way knowing we could outlast them? :) </p>
<p>China doesn't have to do, all they got to do is wait. We did not directly challenge the former soviets, we put them out of business when they could no longer compete. </p>
<p>As they continue along What happens to us? Does the American standard of living return? does it rise? Are we taking care of more people or less than in years past? It's a way to fight without firing a shot ala Ronnie. </p>
<p>They aren't stupid people and we really don't know their agenda and we have to be careful applying our customs, standards and politics to theirs. We use capitalism because we individually can rise above others, they use capitalism for? </p>
<p>I don't disagree and I think your points are very valid, provided the moves you assume are correct. However, they wouldn't play out the same if the moves change or lack of moves occurs. Doing nothing is still doing something.</p>
<p>"If China wants to continue to develop the next generation of doggie toys they can go ahead"</p>
<p>Or software, airplanes, steel and other things. We differ because your discounting them in your statements implying they're backwards. By your standards maybe, but what if they don't use your standards? Are they playing catch up or playing a different game? </p>
<p>Remember, a little asian guy in black pajamas with a AK and a sack of rice defeated the world's greatest army a while back. There was some underestimation there as well.</p>
<p>Good point - but I would say that since they are in a sense "outlasting" us in this respect, Congress is preparing to do something about that. If they can ever get their act together, I hear a considerable tariff is going to be imposed on Chinese goods to help coerce the Chinese govt. to allow the yuan to appreciate naturally. At that point, China will be forced to do something. In my opinion, the US has the slight advantage in this situation. Think of it this way - what is being exchanged for what? Chinese goods are being sold for American dollars that are used to finance our debt. If they suddenly cash in, it will hurt everyone. Americans continue to get actual product for paper that may or may not ultimately be repaid in full. But, I think the US is starting to realize that the deficit with China is getting out of control and is going to eventually pull in the reigns. </p>
<p>As Mr. Payne said, what does China have that Mexico or virtually any South American or Asian country doesn't? The cheapest goods and a massive trade partner. What happens if the seller loses the buyer?</p>
<p>For now, China can't really compete with the USA. They are simply far too behind in technology, but they're doing their best to catch up. We have to cut them some slack though, I mean they JUST submerged out of a revolution where they decided to burn all of the books that had "Western" ideas. Heck, 46.2% of China's population is living under $2 dollars a day. I'm sure it also helps that US's economy is about 5-6 times larger. </p>
<p>What furhter delays there progress is the extensive trade regulations on what can be imported to China and what can't. US prevents numerous high tech products/knowledge from ever touching Chinese soil. This is not to say that many technologies are stolen, they are, but more the most part we still hold the majority. This is where the "knowledge is (or should be) free" argument might enter. </p>
<p>As for who has the economic advantage, I think US does. A significant amount of US's economy is domestic as opposed to China's, where they rely heavily on foreign exports. If massive tariffs were suddenly created, America would be more able to absorb the collateral damage. Sure we might feel a recession, but China will probably be experiencing something of the equivalent to the Great Depression. Their super heated economy is in a precarious state as it is already.</p>
<p>As for who is more innovative, I really don't think it has anything to do with race or ethnicity. I think it has more to do with how the social structure/economy is structured. Especially how money is allocated towards research and development. China has issues with allocating the right resources to scientists in R&D. All too often there is corruption involved, and the research grant is awarded to the highest bribe. Everything else...China is just way way wayyyy too different from America. They still have a ways to go, but they are catching up fast.</p>
<p>Thanks to Wal-Mart China will soon be the super power.</p>
<p>"Thanks to Wal-Mart China will soon be the super power"</p>
<p>beat me to a point. As our politicans comtemplate tariffs on Chinese trade, do we think we'll have 100% support for it? :) No, I think not. Dollars will be spent politically to keep the status quo. </p>
<p>China has a labor situation quite different than other countries. They have the ability to use means of driving labor that we abolished over a 100 years ago. </p>
<p>I also think some here are confused by their position in the world. Some have talked about how "we" are superior here there and everywhere. We're number 1!!</p>
<p>Well, sometimes it best to be last... (sex is the first thing that comes to mind here.) :)</p>
<p>
[quote]
Well, at this point....they aren't innovative. That is a fact.
[/quote]
</p>
<p>You are confusing innovation in general with technological innovation. And I would dispute your claim, even in technological innovation.</p>
<p>
[quote]
As Mr. Payne said, what does China have that Mexico or virtually any South American or Asian country doesn't? The cheapest goods and a massive trade partner. What happens if the seller loses the buyer?
[/quote]
</p>
<p>The economic world does not exist outside of the political-economic world. China's political situation is vastly different from other developing countries.</p>
<p>
[quote]
China has issues with allocating the right resources to scientists in R&D.
[/quote]
</p>
<p>This is very true. On the other hand, China's leaders are essentially technocratic, and they aren't stupid. The situation is improving, although not nearly as quickly as it should.</p>
<p>
[quote]
Well, sometimes it best to be last... (sex is the first thing that comes to mind here.)
[/quote]
</p>
<p>Yes.</p>
<p>I am from China. I can't understand why people talk about my country. Can't you guys just ignore us? We are not doing anything. I hope America could change its focus to some other country and let us live peacefully.</p>
<p>Long live U.S. - China friendship.</p>
<p>
[quote]
You are confusing innovation in general with technological innovation. And I would dispute your claim, even in technological innovation.
[/quote]
<a href="http://www.sasi.group.shef.ac.uk/worldmapper/display.php?selected=205%5B/url%5D">http://www.sasi.group.shef.ac.uk/worldmapper/display.php?selected=205</a></p>
<p>I don't believe I'm confusing anything.</p>
<p>
[quote]
I am from China. I can't understand why people talk about my country. Can't you guys just ignore us? We are not doing anything. I hope America could change its focus to some other country and let us live peacefully.</p>
<p>Long live U.S. - China friendship.
[/quote]
</p>
<p>I agree with the last part, but this does not mean that the topic should not be discussed. Still, I do think that Yellow-perilism is part of the "China threat" discourse. That does not mean that the relationship between China and the US should not be discussed. But it does mean that perhaps it should change in quality.</p>
<p>
[quote]
<a href="http://www.sasi.group.shef.ac.uk/wor...p?selected=205%5B/url%5D">http://www.sasi.group.shef.ac.uk/wor...p?selected=205</a></p>
<p>I don't believe I'm confusing anything.
[/quote]
</p>
<p>Actually, China isn't doing that badly on that map. It's proportion of scientific papers and patents, compared to the U.S., is not that bad in proportion to its GDP as compared to the U.S.</p>
<p>
[quote]
Actually, China isn't doing that badly on that map. It's proportion of scientific papers and patents, compared to the U.S., is not that bad in proportion to its GDP as compared to the U.S.
[/quote]
If you factor in PPP China has the second biggest economy in the world.</p>
<p>Europeans, backwards in their ways compared to the Eastern peoples until about the 16th century, forged their new world order out of colonies fueled by slavery, violence, deceit, and oppression. And now that they're ahead of the game, they want to change the rules and make sure that any newcomer, particular of non-Western origin, "plays by the rules". **** that ****. If you're that concerned about pollution, then use all the blood money you Europeans have acquired through 500 years of criminal (retroactively speaking, of course) activity and let the Brazils, Indias, and Chinas pollute and kill their way to the top, just like you did centuries ago.</p>
<p>Interesting Discussion:)</p>
<p>China has been far bolder with external reforms but imposed substantial constrains on indigenous enterprises. In fact it was only 4 years ago when domestic companies were granted the same rights as foreign businesses(foreign businesses enjoyed these right from 80s). The reason of this bias was to keep private domestic businesses from challenging China's SOEs(state-owned Enterprises). Now that's what i call real Socialism.</p>
<p>Stats tell a different story- the Macroeconomic story. At the micro level things are quiet different.</p>
<h1>In a survey of 25 emerging market economies conducted in 2000 by Credit Lyonnais Securities Asia, China ranked 19th in corporate governance.</h1>
<h1>Forbes 200 features only 4 companies from Mainland China.</h1>
<p>And, of course, whether the data for China are accurate is an open question(de-valuation of Yuan etc.). In china bureaucrats tightly control capital allocation to private firms. It's widely claimed that Chinese markets have Capitalization of $400+ billion, but if you factor out non-tradeable shares owned by government, the figure reduces to $150 billion(Source: Foreign Policy 2003).
To summarize Chinas export-led manufacturing boom is largely a creation of foreign direct investment (fdi), which effectively serves as a substitute for domestic entrepreneurship. We will have to see if it works in the long run.</p>
<p>
[quote]
Europeans, backwards in their ways compared to the Eastern peoples until about the 16th century, forged their new world order out of colonies fueled by slavery, violence, deceit, and oppression. And now that they're ahead of the game, they want to change the rules and make sure that any newcomer, particular of non-Western origin, "plays by the rules". **** that ****. If you're that concerned about pollution, then use all the blood money you Europeans have acquired through 500 years of criminal (retroactively speaking, of course) activity and let the Brazils, Indias, and Chinas pollute and kill their way to the top, just like you did centuries ago.
[/quote]
</p>
<p>What you said is true but you can't live in the past, And quiet frankly nationality doesn't matters now. </p>
<p>Around hundred years ago, an old Indian Parsi Gentlemen traveled upto London to get permission to borrow funds from British market for his proposed Steel company. The British Government obviously refused. He returned back and gathered funds from Rich Indians and Kings. Tata Steel was thus Born. Now 100 years after, his great grandson acquired the biggest Steel company of land where his grandfather wasn't allowed to trade.</p>
<p>Nobody was able to stop Tata this time.</p>
<p>Isn't it hypocritical for Britain to denigrate China's labour policies when in their own history, they exploited children in order to make their products competitive in the world market? Isn't it hypocritical for America to say anything given that a large part of their country's labour history is slavery?</p>
<p>But that's history now.</p>
<p>
[quote]
nbachris2788 wrote:</p>
<p>Europeans, backwards in their ways compared to the Eastern peoples until about the 16th century, forged their new world order out of colonies fueled by slavery, violence, deceit, and oppression. And now that they're ahead of the game, they want to change the rules and make sure that any newcomer, particular of non-Western origin, "plays by the rules". **** that ****. If you're that concerned about pollution, then use all the blood money you Europeans have acquired through 500 years of criminal (retroactively speaking, of course) activity and let the Brazils, Indias, and Chinas pollute and kill their way to the top, just like you did centuries ago.
[/quote]
</p>
<p>Us Europeans, eh? I'm not sure where you're posting from, but I doubt it's China. Ask yourself why that is. You might like the idea of a risen China as the dominant world power. I don't, becuase I tend to dislike totalitarian societies. I'm kind of an individualist. Maybe you enjoy censorship?</p>
<p>Now, your points about pollutions and child labor are confusing. Do you think rampant pollution and the use of children to produce cheap goods and services...is a good thing? We can't change what our ancestors did, but we can shape our present and our future. You'll notice we don't use slaves now or practice child labor. Should we condone such acts in other countries?</p>
<p>The West has won the culture war, my friend. Whether or not China or the other rapidly industrializing countries ever surpass the dirty, cruel white devil nations - they're going to do so using Western ideas and a western-derived military. You can be sure we won't sit back and let them, though. Enjoy your global conflict.</p>