"Kyle.B.H" <
[email protected]> writes:
> we're just going in circles (and your name calling escalating) wrt
> to foreign policy, so enough there.
>
>> Unfortunately you- like so many- are deluded. America is facing
>> the certainty of being economically eclipsed by two other nations
>> within our lifetime: China and India. China can and will also
>> eclipse us militarily and will be the predominant world power. The
>> EU will also challenge us economically within the next decade, but
>> it is India and China that are the forces to be reckoned with in
>> the future.
>
> You're right. Socialism and Communism have been proven to produce
> much stronger economies throughout history (sarcasm). Europe
> economic growth has been flat or shrinking for a long time now due
> to the crushing effect of their massive welfare states. I won't
> hold my breath.
You know just about nothing of these economies. China realized the
economic straitjacket that socialism imposed and is embracing free
markets and the personal development of wealth. Their economy is
growing in leaps and bounds, and given the size of their population it
is a serious cause for long term concern about American dominance in
the world. We are dominant because we are the wealthiest nation in
the world with the largest economy, which in turn allows us to have
the dominant military power because we can afford it (or used to be
able to afford it, before the Bush tax cuts). That wil change, and
when it changes we will be "economically eclipsed."
> And what, Mr. Economist, doe "economically eclipsed" mean? Stronger
> trade partners? Able to produce more than Happy Meal toys without
> stealing US intellectual property? That would be great.
How about: size of economy and the influence in world affairs that
this brings. China's economy is poised to dwarf the United States'
within your lifetime, assuming you're under 50.
> Competition is only a good thing. Sooner the better.
Ah, the old "competition improves the breed" saw. If you knew what
you were talking about, you'd understand that cooperation is a more
effective force for improvement.
> Since you hate America so much, why don't you move to Inda or China?
> You appear to be one of those America haters, who enjoys every fruit
> of our society but is so sure that every place else is better. Vote
> with your feet. (don't be a hypocrite like I am for not joining the
> military, just because I support its mission).
Bwahh hahh hahh hahh! There it is, the usual "you don't agree with me
so you must hate America" ********. John Ashcroft is better at it
than you are, and he reveals himself to be an idiot every time he
opens his mouth and trots that **** out. I don't hate America, but I
do hate Geroge W. Bush and his circle of rich antisocial criminals
surrounding him. I don't hate America but I do think that it is
horribly mismanaged, and that the malfeasance of elected officials (in
both parties, BTW) is increasing at an exponential rate. I don't hate
America, but I recognize that it is no longer a "government of the
people, by the people and for the people." I don't hate America, but
I do recognize that political power is now determined solely by the
distribution of wealth rather than the distribution of
enfranchisement. I don't hate America, but I recognize that the
current policy direction is flushing ourselves down the toilet.
>> As we continue to have ill-considered short-sighted policy towards
>> the rest of the world, we will find ourselves further and further
>> estranged from the international community that we utterly depend
>> upon for our prosperity now, and our survival in the future.
>
> Trade and realtions with India and China are pretty darn good to me
> it seems. And really with Europe as well.
You're being obtuse again. Trade relations are "good" only because
those economies need us to further their prosperity. Once those
economies (this applies more to China and India than the the EU, since
the latter are inter-related state economies instead of a single state
economy) reach sufficient internal prosperity- which is
self-sustaining rather than being utterly dependent on foreign inputs-
then those countries will be in a position to renegotiate
international trade relations that are more advantageous for them, and
disadvantageous to us. We have "good" trade relationships because of
our relative wealth; as that equalizes and as these nations surpass
the size of the American economy (they have internally expanding
markets and workforce, whereas we do not), they will not have to defer
to us any more. And as India and China become wealthier, their
ability to support a large and sophisticated miltary will also expand
and will rival or surpass the US's.
Really, you should read more about how empires collapse.
> Do you actually have any exposure to international trade in your
> employment, or did you just read this on one of your America hating
> web sites and you like to throw it out there in an attempt to show
> you have such a firm grasp of geo-political-economic trends.
Neither. I just read the news and am able to think clearly, instead
of having my thoughts dictated to me by the likes of Rush Limbaugh.
It's good to clear that up. After all, I directly asked "How many
