Re: What would it take for an FE'er to change their opinion?

Anything that would harm the U.S. economy to that extent would harm China to an even greater extent. Such power is no power at all.

Anything that would harm the U.S. economy to that extent would harm China to an even greater extent. Such power is no power at all.

So do you think the power to destroy everything, even onesself at the same time, is no power at all? I would have to disagree for the following reason - if the USA launched all their nuclear weapons, would they themselves not be destroyed? They would, and as such the point that the US is a super power because they have weapons is just as moot.

Quote from: NEEMAN on August 07, 2008, 03:53:19 PM

Anything that would harm the U.S. economy to that extent would harm China to an even greater extent. Such power is no power at all.

So do you think the power to destroy everything, even onesself at the same time, is no power at all? I would have to disagree for the following reason - if the USA launched all their nuclear weapons, would they themselves not be destroyed? They would, and as such the point that the US is a super power because they have weapons is just as moot.

I said "such power is no power at all". This is a turn of phrase. Obviously such a capability is power, but does it have any worth? In this sense, China has no power over the United States, because the act would do them far more harm than it would to the U.S. or other western states. Thus it has no value.


As regards your second point, it has been known for decades that nuclear weapons offer no real power over other states, as several countries now possess a 'first strike' capability. They merely serve as a check against other nuclear powers. However, the capability of the United States to wage conventional war is far, far greater than any other nation in the world today, and they are literally decades ahead of other powers when it comes to technology and research in most fields. The U.S. still has the greatest economic influence on the world, and almost all world economies are dependent on the economy of the United States. Finally, the power of the United States in military and economic terms is such that most of the time, they don't need to excercise either- countries will do as they are told or compromise. And when they don't, the consequences almost always obliterate any value opposition may have once held.

I said "such power is no power at all". This is a turn of phrase. Obviously such a capability is power, but does it have any worth? In this sense, China has no power over the United States, because the act would do them far more harm than it would to the U.S. or other western states. Thus it has no value.

At the same time, the US has no power over China for the same reasons.

As regards your second point, it has been known for decades that nuclear weapons offer no real power over other states, as several countries now possess a 'first strike' capability. They merely serve as a check against other nuclear powers. However, the capability of the United States to wage conventional war is far, far greater than any other nation in the world today, and they are literally decades ahead of other powers when it comes to technology and research in most fields. The U.S. still has the greatest economic influence on the world, and almost all world economies are dependent on the economy of the United States. Finally, the power of the United States in military and economic terms is such that most of the time, they don't need to excercise either- countries will do as they are told or compromise. And when they don't, the consequences almost always obliterate any value opposition may have once held.

I'm not so sure technology has anything to do with it (I might remind you much of the US's power comes from technology developed from their space programme, which according to FE theory doesn't exist).

The US economy isn't doing so well right now as you're probably aware (I work in the IT side of foreign exchange), at this stage the Chinese could plunge the US into an almost eternal recession.

Not everyone has the power for very long - not so long ago it was my country (the UK) that held all the cards. Power is a fleeting thing.

I am from the UK (currently living in Ireland), and I am fully aware that power is fleeting. I am not asserting eternal U.S. supremacy- the sun sets on every empire. It is simply that we have left the original point brought up by another poster, who seemed to think that what happened in the U.S. could affect little more than his Ipod.


There is a misconception that economies are based solely on money. Money and finance are of course the gears and cogs of capitalism, but they are not what drives it. If the Chinese were to plunge the U.S. into recession through the means you specify, and the world were to plunge into recession, it would be the United States, not China, that would emerge from that recession first. Why? Because the U.S. is unique in being the world leader in terms of the overall strength of it's knowledge economy, whilst at the same time still possessing immense industrial capacity.


The Chinese miracle is founded on western companies, based in the west with western interests. In doing what you describe, China would effectively be sinking the ship we all float on. But when it comes right down to it, some of us are better swimmers than others.

I am from the UK (currently living in Ireland), and I am fully aware that power is fleeting. I am not asserting eternal U.S. supremacy- the sun sets on every empire. It is simply that we have left the original point brought up by another poster, who seemed to think that what happened in the U.S. could affect little more than his Ipod.

There is a misconception that economies are based solely on money. Money and finance are of course the gears and cogs of capitalism, but they are not what drives it. If the Chinese were to plunge the U.S. into recession through the means you specify, and the world were to plunge into recession, it would be the United States, not China, that would emerge from that recession first. Why? Because the U.S. is unique in being the world leader in terms of the overall strength of it's knowledge economy, whilst at the same time still possessing immense industrial capacity.

The Chinese miracle is founded on western companies, based in the west with western interests. In doing what you describe, China would effectively be sinking the ship we all float on. But when it comes right down to it, some of us are better swimmers than others.

Sure, but I bet the Romans thought the same with all their inventions. "We're but two hot meals away from anarchy". The US depends on the rest of the world, just like the rest of us.

The US, without a doubt, has come a long way in the past 200 or so years. China has such massive manpower one cannot discount what they are capable of. I believe it would be naive to discount anything that may happen in the future, but one certainly can't count on past events to predict the future or we'd all be rich.

I would not disagree with anything you have just said, but that's a long way from thinking China a genuine threat to the United States as things stand today. The balance of power can only change if the economic balance of power changes, and in my opinion, in terms of 'knowledge economy', the true basis of U.S. strength, China will lag behind the United States and other Western democracies as long as free thought is suppressed. Under such conditions, free thought is not only discouraged but actively suppressed, and closed minds cannot open new doors. As long as the majority of Chinese people are encouraged not to think freely, China will not surpass the west. Great minds develop in circumstances conducive to thinking, and the China of today is not such an enviroment.


Anyway, it is late, and I have work in the morning, so this will probably be my last post tonight. Until tomorrow Hotpoint. =)

I would not disagree with anything you have just said, but that's a long way from thinking China a genuine threat to the United States as things stand today. The balance of power can only change if the economic balance of power changes, and in my opinion, in terms of 'knowledge economy', the true basis of U.S. strength, China will lag behind the United States and other Western democracies as long as free thought is suppressed. Under such conditions, free thought is not only discouraged but actively suppressed, and closed minds cannot open new doors. As long as the majority of Chinese people are encouraged not to think freely, China will not surpass the west. Great minds develop in circumstances conducive to thinking, and the China of today is not such an enviroment.

True, but do not discount human nature. Most significant discoveries are made by the individual - and not inividuals in power. Those in power tend not to be the most intelligent, because they seek power, not knoweldge.

Anyway, it is late, and I have work in the morning, so this will probably be my last post tonight. Until tomorrow Hotpoint. =)

Same

Give me a million dollars, and my opinion will change.

Quote from: Professor Gaypenguin on August 05, 2008, 04:43:19 PM

Shadow object. Buttabing-buttabang.

What does "shadow object" mean? If there is an object that seems to cast a shadow on the moon in such a manner, what is it?

(Please, don't put things like "Buttabing-buttabang" as if your answer is the be-all and end-all of the discussion, because with all due respect it doesn't come across very well)

It means shadow object, the clue is the name. And I can say buttabing-buttabang if I want.

And India will be the next super power

India? Nah. China will become democratic before india will become competent.

But China is fucked, unless they sort out their population they're destined for civil war because of the excess of men.

But China is fucked, unless they sort out their population they're destined for civil war because of the excess of men.

Solution: have a war low-intensity conventional war with Russia.

Quote from: Professor Gaypenguin on August 08, 2008, 12:02:21 PM

But China is fucked, unless they sort out their population they're destined for civil war because of the excess of men.

Solution: have a war low-intensity conventional war with Russia.

That would be nice, let them and the Ruskies fight it out.

Quote from: NEEMAN on August 09, 2008, 02:01:06 PM

Quote from: Professor Gaypenguin on August 08, 2008, 12:02:21 PM

But China is fucked, unless they sort out their population they're destined for civil war because of the excess of men.

Solution: have a war low-intensity conventional war with Russia.

That would be nice, let them and the Ruskies fight it out.

It's very possible too. There were loads of tensions between the U.S.S.R. and China over borders during the cold war. China is eager for population space in the north, and siberia is really really empty. Me smells conflict.

Quote from: Professor Gaypenguin on August 09, 2008, 02:04:35 PM

Quote from: NEEMAN on August 09, 2008, 02:01:06 PM

Quote from: Professor Gaypenguin on August 08, 2008, 12:02:21 PM

But China is fucked, unless they sort out their population they're destined for civil war because of the excess of men.

Solution: have a war low-intensity conventional war with Russia.

That would be nice, let them and the Ruskies fight it out.

It's very possible too. There were loads of tensions between the U.S.S.R. and China over borders during the cold war. China is eager for population space in the north, and siberia is really really empty. Me smells conflict.

Hmm maybe you're onto something, never really thought about that. In any case I'd be happy for Russia to focus its aggressions Eastward rather than Westward, they've been too quiet too long....just like Germany hmm