Political Crossfire Forums

[Rubris]

China's future is one that I have been focused on for some time now. Their prowess over the world is slowly reaching its true potential, and I fear that this is bad news for us in the United States. China's military is matched by very few and its mass population gives it a huge advantage both militaristic and economically. They have the ability to produce at an incredible rate and have the ability to conquer all in their way. I believe that in the future, the country that we will be hearing the most of will be China and that everyone is aware of their position in the world. I both fear and admire what they are becoming and what they already are, I fear that they may take the United States position as the global leader soon. We will just have to wait to see what happens
-Rubris

[Locke25]

Rubris wrote: China's future is one that I have been focused on for some time now. Their prowess over the world is slowly reaching its true potential, and I fear that this is bad news for us in the United States. China's military is matched by very few and its mass population gives it a huge advantage both militaristic and economically. They have the ability to produce at an incredible rate and have the ability to conquer all in their way. I believe that in the future, the country that we will be hearing the most of will be China and that everyone is aware of their position in the world. I both fear and admire what they are becoming and what they already are, I fear that they may take the United States position as the global leader soon. We will just have to wait to see what happens
-Rubris

mmm, i agree. except you kind of make them out to be flawless, which isn't true. they've definitely got some problems..

[Poon]

Despite China's current developments in her economy and military, that country still places a far 3rd place behind Russia and the U.S. in both areas.
Chinese gov't still depends largely on the former Soviets for technological aid, something that many in the States do not like seeing. However, by the time China does match (in several decades) or perhaps overtake the U.S. in terms of military and economy, I think international influences will have changed China from the inside dramatically.
By that time, who knows how the international landscape will appear... Perhaps a more unified European Union? Perhaps the rise of India? Yes, people should keep an eye on China, but it sure is no where near the world threat that the Soviets once posed.

[superskippy]

China has the potential to became a great Superpower, or to be swallowed by it's own growth, China missed the truck that propelled most of today's 1st world nations, that truck consisted of low priced oil and raw materials, in todays world since the turn of the century and the industrial revolution peetered out nations gobbeled up oil contracts and raw materials at an extreme rate, now those materials are very centralized in nations like the US, Russia, and the Middle East. China from an economic stand point is like the US at the turn of the century, a fast growing industry with standerds of living souring, however unlike the US it has to compete for ever larger oil and raw material contracts, and for every contract it loses it's industry slow's or over extends itself. It relies on raw materials to propell itself forward, and that is becoming ever harder and harder to do.

A good analogy for China woudl be this. It has a great fire going, but wood is becoming harder and harder to get.

On a quick note about her military China's military is very outdated and very mis-managed it need's several years of radical reform to make it effective against a 1st rate military power.

[dgs_vex]

i have a slight doubt about the military part. we really do have a partner, japan and maybe taiwan.
(from what ive been told)
japan is a defeated country, if we actually read the japanese-american surrender conditions. japan accepted the unconditional surrender but i dont know the unconditional terms are. from what i can "decrypt" from the webpage, its says japan pretty much surrenders itself over to the US and i dont think the US has given power back to japan.

feel free to prove me wrong.

[Zapper]

AS HU JINTAO, China's president, flies to America this month, commercial ties between the two countries are at a new low. Alongside tensions about China's currency, its growing trade surplus with America and intellectual-property theft, is a new concern: the aggressive international expansion of China's corporations.

In Washington, the $18.5 billion bid by CNOOC, a mainland oil producer, for Unocal, a Californian rival, was portrayed not as a commercial deal, but as a state-funded grab for strategic American assets. It triggered such political opposition that CNOOC abandoned its bid. The FBI has just launched an initiative to expose economic espionage by visiting Chinese students and businessmen. And in Congress, Richard D'Amato, a Democrat and the chairman of the US-China Economic and Security Review Commission, worries aloud that Chinese firms listing shares in America are siphoning American money into a “China bubble”. Nor is concern confined to the United States. India's security bureau is reportedly considering restricting the expansion in India of Huawei, a Chinese telecoms-equipment maker, over its suspected military ties.

Advertisement

The real scaremongers assert that the Chinese state is a single—and single-minded—entity with a master plan to reclaim China's rightful place at the centre of the world. China's companies are thus mere tools of an expansionist policy propagated by Beijing's leadership. More subtle are the fears that, because it is impossible to untangle the ownership of most Chinese companies, foreigners cannot be sure to whom they are selling. When the ultimate authority could be the Communist state, that is a worry.

The Chinese government certainly wants to create globally competitive firms and it is pushing some to secure strategic resources, like oil and metals, overseas. The Chinese state also still has a broad influence over business. But the chaotic way this power is exercised contributes to the weakness, not the strength, of Chinese firms. “It is not a plausible argument that China Inc can take a co-ordinated Long March overseas,” argues George Gilboy, a research affiliate at the Massachusetts Institute of Technology. “It can't even manage that domestically.”

After two decades of reform and privatisation, only about a third of China's economy is still directly controlled by the government through state-owned enterprises (SOEs). But these are concentrated in key sectors like defence and utilities. While many of the biggest state firms have publicly quoted subsidiaries on international stock markets, the government retains ultimate ownership—one of the objections raised against CNOOC. The top 190 or so SOEs are directly controlled by the State Assets Supervision and Administration Commission (SASAC)—set up in 2003 to restructure these often moribund firms.

And yet even this group of elite companies is not guided by a single, controlling hand. Take telecoms: China's early decision to deregulate the sector and break up the state monopoly into four competing firms—two fixed-line (China Telecom and China Netcom) and two mobile (China Mobile and China Unicom)—was widely admired. It made China the world's largest telecoms market and created fat profits for operators. Yet Beijing's bureaucrats now threaten to undo this good work. Frightened by the growth of new services and a price war, they recently forced the bosses of the four firms to take each other's jobs to discourage competition, to the amazement of some independent directors.

Infighting among bureaucracies with competing agendas crops up again and again across China's industrial landscape. It made life so difficult in the power industry, that some foreign investors quit in disgust, causing power shortages. Overseas investors have been equally befuddled in the media sector, where joint-ventures promised over the past two years are suddenly off the agenda. The media regulator, SARFT, which also oversees cable television operators, is battling MII, the telecoms regulator, to prevent the big telecoms operators from launching competing internet TV services. That SARFT happens to be the last of four stamps of approval needed to obtain a licence could cripple the industry before it is born.

Battles between competing branches of central government are overlaid by struggles between central government and local officials, who want to protect jobs in their own backyard. In a country with a saying “the hills are high and the emperor is far away”, edicts from Beijing are routinely ignored.

The contrast with Japan is stark. The Japanese government had less direct control over its corporations, but its officials co-ordinated their domestic development before earmarking sectors for overseas expansion. The Chinese bureaucracy, while in direct charge of more of the national economy, is riven by factional infighting.

Unhappily, the resulting chaos is also hurting the most promising two-thirds of the economy that is in private hands. Private companies are often beholden to state banks for capital and to local officials for favours and contracts. Since private enterprise was not even acknowledged until 1988, entrepreneurs had to bring state investors aboard as political protection, becoming so-called “red-hat” companies. Yasheng Huang, a professor at MIT, says that the results can be disastrous: “Government shareholders may be passive at first, but once a company succeeds, they interfere. Countless Chinese firms have been driven to bankruptcy or failed to grow big because local governments decided to exercise their legal claims on ownership.”

Take Kelon, a refrigerator maker. Currently on the brink of collapse after an embezzlement scandal, it once was China's best firm. With the help of its tiny township government in Shunde county, its founders, Pan Ning and Wang Guoduan, turned it from the 42nd-largest fridge maker in 1984 into China's biggest in six years. Focused management and marketing flair (Chinese people put fridges in the living room to impress visitors, so Kelon made the smartest models) led to a Hong Kong listing and global awards. However, in the late 1990s, Guangdong's provincial government forced Kelon to take over a loss-making SOE air-conditioner maker at an exorbitant price. Because Mr Pan and Mr Wang had not shifted ownership to Hong Kong, Guangdong officials could force the Shunde shareholders to fire them and appoint a bureaucrat to replace them. He then rapidly ruined the company.

Now, worryingly, something similar may threaten Haier, China's leading white-goods maker, which recently failed with a bid for Maytag, an American rival. Admired globally for its efficiency and innovation, Qingdao-based Haier is the creation of Zhang Ruimin, China's most famous entrepreneur, who transformed a company so demotivated that its workers used to urinate on the factory floor. Yet Mr Zhang has just lost a long fight to reward his managers with shares via a Hong Kong listing. Late last year SASAC ruled that Haier was owned by the Qingdao government and that management buy-outs at big SOEs were forbidden. Compare that with Legend (now Lenovo), which bought IBM's computer business—it escaped state influence and has flourished. A “red-hat” company, it was originally banned from selling personal computers in China, so went to Hong Kong to export, set up a joint venture and obtained a Hong Kong listing. Although it returned to China to manufacture, its production and research facilities are registered as Hong Kong affiliates, not with Legend China, and it is reducing the share owned by its state sponsor. Mr Huang of MIT argues, “there is nothing domestic about Legend except the nationality of its managers. It is as foreign in China as GE.”
Reasons to be fearful

Foreign fears about the expansion of Chinese firms are often compounded by the murkiness of their ownership. Take Huawei, a telecoms firm that is the most global of any Chinese company, and also among the least transparent. Although technically private, its shares are probably owned by local state telecoms customers. It also has a $10 billion credit line from China Development Bank, famed for its loans to support state policy. Its founder, Ren Zhengfei, was a former People's Liberation Army officer. But the fact that no one knows who runs Huawei could weaken it. It has grown fast in a booming market, but its unclear ownership means it cannot easily get a stockmarket listing, nor reward staff with stock options. It may also hinder plans for overseas expansion—like a rumoured bid for Britain's Marconi—since potential foreign partners will be wary of a firm with such an opaque ownership structure.

Fears that Chinese firms are acting as the commercial arm of an expansionist state are thus belied by a more complicated and disorderly reality. The real reason to fear China's overseas expansion is quite different. Because Chinese firms have grown up in an irrational and chaotic business environment, they may export some very bad habits. As Mr Gilboy puts it: “when Japanese companies took over American ones, they mostly made them better. If the Chinese run foreign firms like they operate at home, driving prices down, misallocating capital and over-diversifying, that is genuinely something to fear.”

http://www.economist.com/business/displayStory.cfm?story_id=4352026


China, like Russia is far too weak and un-organized. Neither will ever be a super power. Japan's economy has been slugish over the past few years and lacks the militairy power to vie for the spot.

[antonio62]

Danpt2000 wrote: Despite China's current developments in her economy and military, that country still places a far 3rd place behind Russia and the U.S. in both areas.

Russia although it produces some of the best weapons and technology in the world is not the second best military in the world.

China will continue to grow for the time being as the years progress the growth rate will most likely slow down. China due to the one Child policies will face demographic problems. BY this time the thing that makes China so attractive economically, there low wages, will be gone or at least shrunk considerably. They will probably become the most powerful nation in the world in the coming decades but then I think India may overtake them. They certainly wont be a hugely powerful nation with no one to rival it.

[flying bird]

Is China a threat to US?
No,definately not.why, because US fears about any country to take its place to be the leader of the world. In the past, it feared about the Sovit Union ,now China,maybe as you mentioned above ,India in the future(although I don't agree with you).But no matter which country has the potential ,the US will destroy it.In this sense , China itself is not a threat to America,but its position now has decided the current situation and the policies towards China made by the US. :lol:

[antonio62]

China owns your economy though. If they wanted they could destroy it.

[Poon]

antonio62 wrote: China owns your economy though. If they wanted they could destroy it. Owned? Yes U.S. have a trade deficit of over $230 billion annually, and that number is rising each year. That is because American consumers are still hungry for apparel, computers, audio and video equipment.

While large American firms are selling commerical aircraft, chemicals, semiconductors and electronic equipment to China. Its this ravenous consumerism that is fueling Chinese economy and allowing the Autocratic CCP to retain control without allowing political freedoms to its people. You want to solve the trade deficit? Do with what you have now, and don't go out buying useless electronic equipment and computers when you already have plenty in your home.

I predict that China will have to change politically if they want to keep this modernizing program going and their heated economy from boiling over.

[antonio62]

Danpt2000 wrote: antonio62 wrote: China owns your economy though. If they wanted they could destroy it. Owned? Yes U.S. have a trade deficit of over $230 billion annually, and that number is rising each year. That is because American consumers are still hungry for apparel, computers, audio and video equipment.

While large American firms are selling commerical aircraft, chemicals, semiconductors and electronic equipment to China. Its this ravenous consumerism that is fueling Chinese economy and allowing the Autocratic CCP to retain control without allowing political freedoms to its people. You want to solve the trade deficit? Do with what you have now, and don't go out buying useless electronic equipment and computers when you already have plenty in your home.

I predict that China will have to change politically if they want to keep this modernizing program going and their heated economy from boiling over.

I was referring to them owning so many dollars.

[mr_FOBolous]

wow...Zapper make China sounds so threatning. just remember this: what China is trying to do right now is what all countries in the world are trying to do and is what America have been doing for decades.

[gordon1]

i dont think that China came become an absolute power in the world until it drops communism and goes to free enterprise. When it does that then i dont think that america will be the power anymore. i guess we should all start to learn how to read up to down

[gordon1]

i dont think that china can become a major power until it drops the communism and goes to the free-enterprise economy

[mr_FOBolous]

gordon1 wrote: i dont think that China came become an absolute power in the world until it drops communism and goes to free enterprise. When it does that then i dont think that america will be the power anymore. i guess we should all start to learn how to read up to down

lol...it's a common misconception that China's communist but it's not. It's only communist by name. China's not anything like how Russia or any other communist country nor do they run their country base on the communist ideals as written by Karl Marx, Lenin, or even Mao. Just the fact that China has a capitalist economy shows that it's not communist anymore because capitalism and everything communism is against. China's more like a one party dictatorship than communism.

oh and btw...China has a capitalist economy which means it basically have free enterprise though the government places a lot of rules and restriction on it.

[wlorilyn]

Ya, since the end of Mao, China's economy has been moving farther and farther from communism ideals. But, there political system is still ruled by the Communist Party.

[Sviewer]

I m sure that U.S will use the poison fruit it has been keeping, which is Taiwan. this one conflict will make people in China wanting to spend more money on their military spending. China is not the head to head enemy with U.S. but it can cause harm to the U.S domination in the world. Economy in China is booming, but there is a huge part of China that live in very poor lives.

[Borommakot]

China has always been a power in the world.It my have declined in the past but now large companies are making money by laying off American workers shipping their jobs to China. This will eventually make China the center of the economic world. It's also going to do a number on the U.S. It's like what was happening to Rome before the slaves rebellion but I won't get into that.

[Poon]

Zapper wrote: AS HU JINTAO, China's president, flies to America this month, commercial ties between the two countries are at a new low. Alongside tensions about China's currency, its growing trade surplus with America and intellectual-property theft, is a new concern: the aggressive international expansion of China's corporations.

.... Aggressive international expansion of China's corporation??!! Are you f@cking kidding me? Which nation do not have companies that tries to do that? Remember Britain's East India CompanY? How about the Multi-Nationals of American Corporations? So its OK for U.S. and European companies to do that, but when people of other races tries to even out the playing field by doing the same, then they are being too F@cking aggressive??!!

[JackarooSundown]

mr_FOBolous wrote: wow...Zapper make China sounds so threatning. just remember this: what China is trying to do right now is what all countries in the world are trying to do and is what America have been doing for decades.

As an American I am insulted. So you are saying that Americans destroy the lives of their people by keeping them under an oppressive government? Censoring out words such as "freedom" and "democracy" from the media? No Mr. Fob, you are wrong.