"China Does Not Have the Ability to Challenge the U.S."

I do find it rather funny that you are now abusing me when all I said was that China produces a lot of Americas hard goods, you have tried to start up another argument about cars/motorcycles but failed. You did not even know that Electrolux was Swedish, you thought they were American. You seem very biased against China for some unknown reason but you better get used to them as they will be top dog in the world economy.

 

That is what I said and you tried unsuccessfully again to try and start on a different argument. What seems to be your problem?

 

The average American does not live like that. Just face facts you were wrong and China has more consumers than America and they will have even more in the future and your country will never ever catch up to them.

 

What do you mean catch up to the Chinese? The U.S., despite having 1/5 the population of China, has more than twice the GDP.

The number of consumers in a country is largely irrelevant. What's important is the capital said country's consumers are willing to part with for consumer goods. Do you understand what a consumer and what disposable income are?

 

I thought it was pretty easy to follow what I meant but if you really did not know I will explain it. China,that is a country in the east has many more consumers than America,consumers are basically people who consume products. The population of China is so huge that America will never ever catch up with it,therefore America will have less consumers and China will have more as they do today. I hope that you can now understand.

 

Yes, I did know it was Swedish. However, can you deny that they have multiple factories in the US?

Sorry, your attempt to derail this is a repeated failure.

Just like the things like the amount of "consumer goods" bought in China. Busted over and over, but apparently we all do not understand you.

Better luck next time though, and in actually present some kind of evidence.

 

No you never, you said it was American.

 

No, I have no understanding of what you're saying. All the economics, finance, and accounting classes I've taken have taught me that consumer population numbers are nominal and irrelevant. It's the total disposable capital wielded by a country that makes it a consumer power house.

Let me explain with a rough example:

It's better to have 100 customers with $200 in your store than 200 customers with $20.

Out of curiosity, is english your first language?

 

Well go get someone to read it for you then.

 

And while this is all very entertaining, I doubt that China is going to be taking over or threatening the US with iPods, COSCO furniture and a bunch of new Corvetts (the ship, not the car).

What a lot of FanBois tend to not realize is that the military of China (other then it's Army) is largely a joke. And it certainly has not been able to take it's dominance in the manufacturing of cheap TVs and MP3 players and make a real dominant military out of it.

I think in reality most of them realize this, which is why they keep trying to divert these threads to other areas that have nothing to do with the military.

 

You're making a very vague and broad statement that you need to qualify. Posting a one liner and then insisting I need someone else to help explain it is both rude and infantile. Since you appear to be new to the forums, I suggest you go to more effort to substantiate your points and use a less abrasive style of discourse. You'll be taken much more seriously, and it will help to create and foster enriching and rewarding threads if you follow these simple rules.

 

No, I made a very easy to understand statement that China has more consumers than America and always will. It really is that simple, that you cannot understand it is your problem not mine.

 

I feel that you are not really getting what is actually happening in the world. The Chinese are going to be the biggest economy and therefore will have more money than America. They will be a much bigger economy than America. They will be over twice the size of the American economy. America does not have the money to keep spending vast amounts on its military, China will have more. It is just a matter of time. American dominance in the world is coming to an end and you will just have to accept it.

 

Consumers are just people who buy things. The nominal number of consumers a country has is irrelevant. It's how much money those consumers can control.

You're essentially arguing that you, with 10 one dollar bills, are richer than me, with 5 twenty dollar bills, because you have 10 bills and I only have 5; even though I have ten times as much money as you.

 

Well there is something that you at least know.

 

I can see any further effort is wasted on you.

 

I can see any further effort is wasted on you.

 

More consumers does not matter at all, if they have very little to spend.

You could have 3 billion "consumers", but if the disposable income is $1 a year, it does not matter at all. This is what you absolutely fail to grasp. And it has nothing to do with military power.

Yea, time. Some back and let us know when that actually happens. In maybe 100 years if things continue the way they are now.

China is so far behind the US militarily it is not even funny. They have one "Aircraft Carrying Cruiser", the US has 10 Nimitz class supercarriers. China has 6 Ballistic Submarines *2 conventional 4 nuclear), the US has 18. China is still strugling to get real working prototypes of it's first generation of Stealth Fighters, the US is on it's Second Generation.

No, the comparison is not even close. And then really look at what China has. A lot of their equipment is either old Soviet stuff, copies of old Soviet stuff, or a bit more modern and cobbled together with many different technologies (with lots of key components made by other countries).

As I have said many times, China is largely a Paper Tiger. A potential danger to it's immediate land neighbors, not much of a threat at all to anybody else.

The ability to make cheap equipment does not mean they have the ability to make a serious military threat.

 

Actually controlling Taiwan will be anything but militaristic. But anyway, go on...

I think you're reading the cold war into it. Sure, the Chinese are building their military assets, but its also true they dont have ANYTHING on the US. Furthermore, Chinese domination can only be curbed by economic integration and exportation of ideas - not an escalation in arms. Keep in mind the Chinese are escalating in the most dangerous areas, such as the militarization of space IN RESPONSE to US activities. Its the same with Iran. It surprises me how delusional the US public is. Iran , like China, has attempted to acquire nukes ENTIRELY out of self defence and the deterrence they bring. Now certainly the Chinese would like to be regional superpower, if they aren't already, but the 'world military power' aspect is as much the result of US hegemony as it is Chinese aggression.

 

I really cannot take you seriously, you did not even know that Electrolux was Swedish you claimed they were American. As for consumers, China has more of them and always will.Your anti Chinese views are very funny but I think you are in for a shock.

 

I hope China hands Obama a string of serious defeats. Anything that helps to weaken him is good.

 

When you say China, what do you mean, specifically? Who in China actually controls all these resources?