MilSpex Posted August 6, 2009 Posted August 6, 2009 This unquestioning acceptance of heresay as fact is responsible for a lot of misinformation such as a man made global warming consensus, the need to switch to renewable energy (this has been dangerous in that growing corn for fuel contributed to a global food shortage) and that China will overtake the US (The Chinese put PLASTIC into baby milk to save a few bucks, don`t have ANY reputable brand names, are just building their first aircraft carrier [The US has 11 supercarrier battlegroups] and don`t care about anything long term, just making a buck today) China will never overtake the US in our lifetimes.
MilSpex Posted August 6, 2009 Posted August 6, 2009 (edited) If you did YOUR research, you would have been able to tell him that in the future, it is Japan which will take over America! Just to confirm everyone knows Japan has been in economic stagnation (no growth to speak of) since 1991, right?. Recent article in the economist: "I think Japan has appeared to be a safe haven to some investors," he says, "and I don't understand it." He notes that industrial production there is down about 30% and exports have dropped almost 40%. Moreover, Weinberg thinks Japan, with its huge fiscal deficit and exploding debt-to-GDP ratio, is in worse shape than Europe and North America. And he says he has found no evidence that the new government likely to take power after elections in August has any plan to close the deficit. "Structurally, cyclically, and super-cyclically Japan is flawed," says Weinberg. "I think Japan is economically broken." *snip* [Another guy's] bottom line: "Japan is a country very slow to change, in contrast with much of Asia and America," he says. "I think there are more attractive places for capital these days." Edited August 6, 2009 by MilSpex
Ghost Train Posted August 6, 2009 Posted August 6, 2009 This unquestioning acceptance of heresay as fact is responsible for a lot of misinformation such as a man made global warming consensus, the need to switch to renewable energy (this has been dangerous in that growing corn for fuel contributed to a global food shortage) I wouldn't characterize climate change/global warming as hearsay. The greenhouse gas effect is real because it can be based on actual IR absorption of the greenhouse gases themselves, which has been demonstrated empirically a long time ago and is the core of any respectable chemistry curriculum. I do agree that there is much under-information in the area. People link the phenomena the Carbon Dioxide alone, but neglect to mention other greenhouse gases such as Methane, and gasp* Water vapor. Detractors of climate change have argued that since the concentration of water vapor far outweighs that of the other gases, then our human CO2 contribution can't possibly dent and upset the climate balance of the world. My personal view is that although there is some debate on the exact effect of CO2 emissions, and how much it takes for things to "go bad," there is no doubt in my mind that pumping too much of it into the atmosphere produces ill effects (at least without sufficient plant biomass to gobble it up - and that's not happening anytime soon either). and that China will overtake the US (The Chinese put PLASTIC into baby milk to save a few bucks, don`t have ANY reputable brand names, are just building their first aircraft carrier [The US has 11 supercarrier battlegroups] and don`t care about anything long term, just making a buck today) China will never overtake the US in our lifetimes. Regarding the market value of China's brands, you have to remember that it has only been doing this market economy thing since the 1980's, and didn't start seeing the fruits of its labor until the late 1990's. The problem is that China is not really a free-market economy in the traditional sense. Contrasting China with India which despite its problems is indeed more market driven. The Chinese government can simply say, "I want a new highway here by next year," or "build a new international airport" there, and generally it gets done, whereas in the case of more market driven economies it is not so simple. The end-result is that its neighbor has developed recognizable private brands like Tata, Wipro, Infosys, etc (I'm in IT, so I'm biased). China seems to be content for the moment in the acquisition rather than the development of brands - like the purchases of IBM Desktops by Lenovo, or the recent acquisition of Hummer from GM. Although I think having a carrier group (or a blue water navy in general) is a vast technological and logistical achievement, we live in an era where the influence of hard-power is slowly declining. If I had to rank a civilization or state as advanced I would hardly look for a Blue Water Navy check box, as only two countries in the world (The US and the UK) can truly say they posses that. As far as the human development index goes, which measures life expectancy, education, and GDP per capita, none of the top 10 have a super-navy to speak off. The US sadly is ranked # 15.
Recommended Posts