Eupedia Forums
Site NavigationEupedia Top > Eupedia Forum & Japan Forum

View Poll Results: Who Will Become The Next Superpower?

Voters
66. You may not vote on this poll
  • European Union

    17 25.76%
  • China

    34 51.52%
  • India

    3 4.55%
  • Russia

    1 1.52%
  • Brazil

    1 1.52%
  • Japan

    2 3.03%
  • Other

    8 12.12%
Page 2 of 4 FirstFirst 1234 LastLast
Results 26 to 50 of 89

Thread: Who Will Become The Next Superpower?

  1. #26
    Southern Sun Achievements:
    Veteran10000 Experience Points
    Duo's Avatar
    Join Date
    25-04-03
    Location
    The EU capital
    Posts
    655
    Points
    12,140
    Level
    33
    Points: 12,140, Level: 33
    Level completed: 28%, Points required for next Level: 510
    Overall activity: 0%


    Ethnic group
    Albanian
    Country: Belgium





    Quote Originally Posted by moffeltoff
    But a german nation had existed before it was only ripped apart by the nobles ,who wanted their individual territories to be indipendandt.
    And not to forget dutch isnエt an own language its a german dialect ,which was spoken about 200-300 years ago in the north of germany and there was always a treatie ,which held the territories togethet more or less "Heilige rische Reich deutscher Nationen",so I do think ,there is a fair bit of a general german culture around.
    You are just proving my point... that culture within Europe has been mixed and intertwined... so attributes of german culture have rubbed on into other nations and vice versa. So when you say German that probaply includes attributes from other cultures as well so i'd say that national identity is somewhat artificial in europe and the only identity that can encompass us all is European.

  2. #27
    Azzuro Achievements:
    1 year registered

    Join Date
    12-01-06
    Location
    near Frankfurt
    Posts
    59


    Ethnic group
    Half german half english
    Country: Germany



    Of course the cultures mixed ,but only to a certain extent and in the E.U. the generall language would probably be English ,even though england hasnエt played a role as big as germany or france in europes history ,but the main reason is because I love speaking german. =)
    Kommunism is like Carneval in Cologne everyone is drunk an no one works...

  3. #28
    Regular Member Achievements:
    1 year registered
    KrazyKat's Avatar
    Join Date
    16-01-06
    Location
    England
    Age
    33
    Posts
    47


    Country: United Kingdom



    Quote Originally Posted by Duo
    You are just proving my point... that culture within Europe has been mixed and intertwined... so attributes of german culture have rubbed on into other nations and vice versa. So when you say German that probaply includes attributes from other cultures as well so i'd say that national identity is somewhat artificial in europe and the only identity that can encompass us all is European.
    Coming from this, I'm predicting a reduction of Nationalism in Europe, the Middle East and Africa. The idea of nations seems a bit strange in the first place, dividing the world into us and them, not even based on language, ethnicity or religion. Africa and the Middle east have it worse as many of these countries' borders were jsut a by-product of collonialism and have nothing holding them together. Hence so much ethnic confilct everywhere.

  4. #29
    Regular Member Achievements:
    1 year registered
    KrazyKat's Avatar
    Join Date
    16-01-06
    Location
    England
    Age
    33
    Posts
    47


    Country: United Kingdom



    Also what I love(?) about that chart of military expenditure earlier is how Japan has a larger budget than the UK, despite claiming to only have a self-defence-force.

  5. #30
    Southern Sun Achievements:
    Veteran10000 Experience Points
    Duo's Avatar
    Join Date
    25-04-03
    Location
    The EU capital
    Posts
    655
    Points
    12,140
    Level
    33
    Points: 12,140, Level: 33
    Level completed: 28%, Points required for next Level: 510
    Overall activity: 0%


    Ethnic group
    Albanian
    Country: Belgium



    Quote Originally Posted by moffeltoff
    Of course the cultures mixed ,but only to a certain extent and in the E.U. the generall language would probably be English ,even though england hasnエt played a role as big as germany or france in europes history ,but the main reason is because I love speaking german. =)
    I doubt the EU would even try to touch the sovereignty of local languages... that is why in the eu parliament all the documents are in all languages of the members nations and there are translators for the debate so that mps talk their home language.

  6. #31
    Anjin Achievements:
    1 year registered

    Join Date
    10-04-04
    Location
    Seattle, Washington
    Age
    42
    Posts
    370


    Ethnic group
    Mainly: Italian, German, Scottish, Irish
    Country: United States



    The trouble with China and India though is that the average quality of life in those countries isn't very good. They have a huge lower class, and small middle class, and a very small yet powerful upperclass. To become a superpower you need a really big middle class.
    For information on the pros and cons of teaching at Nova English schools in Japan, check out

  7. #32
    Regular Member Achievements:
    1 year registered
    godppgo's Avatar
    Join Date
    26-01-06
    Age
    40
    Posts
    20


    Ethnic group
    Taiwanese
    Country: Canada



    Quote Originally Posted by Brooker
    The trouble with China and India though is that the average quality of life in those countries isn't very good. They have a huge lower class, and small middle class, and a very small yet powerful upperclass. To become a superpower you need a really big middle class.
    Exactly, you can build as many highrise or have a huge army, but without the proper people quality, a country can never be a true superpower.

  8. #33
    DON'T PANIC! Achievements:
    1 year registered
    Tsuyoiko's Avatar
    Join Date
    10-03-05
    Posts
    979


    Country: United Kingdom



    Quote Originally Posted by godppgo
    Exactly, you can build as many highrise or have a huge army, but without the proper people quality, a country can never be a true superpower.
    The phrase 'people quality' concerns me! What exactly do you mean by it?

  9. #34
    The Wise Idiot Achievements:
    1 year registered

    Join Date
    06-02-05
    Location
    In the land of twilight under the moon.
    Posts
    78


    Ethnic group
    I have no idea.
    Country: United States



    It seems I'm going to have to step alongside many others in saying that China does indeed look up to being a world superpower in the not-to-distant future.
    Please support the AAAAA - American Association Against Acronym Abuse

    "Don't just do something, sit there!"

    "Only a madman can handle the truth."

    Everybody Polka! http://www.youtube.com/watch.php?v=T...=anime%20polka

  10. #35
    Regular Member Achievements:
    1 year registered
    godppgo's Avatar
    Join Date
    26-01-06
    Age
    40
    Posts
    20


    Ethnic group
    Taiwanese
    Country: Canada



    Quote Originally Posted by Tsuyoiko
    The phrase 'people quality' concerns me! What exactly do you mean by it?
    Again it's probably my bad translation, I translated from the term 人民素質.
    The term people quality refers to a person's degree of conformity to modern day rules and ideas (or western rules or ideas). It has nothing to do with the person being a bad or good person. It's just a measure of how adaptable he or she is to modern world rules.

    Some common examples of low people quality observed in many asian countries include:

    - disobey traffict rule
    - pirating
    - littering
    - tax evasion
    - bribery
    - refuse to line-up when checking out at a supermarket
    - stores selling food well passed its expiry date
    - people stealing puplic equipment such as power line or sewege cap.
    - building are constructed using low grade material

    These are just a small fraction of low people quality behaviors commonly observed in most asian countries. Most of these behaviors originate from two important aspects of western thinking that asians tend to have problem adapting to. The two aspects are democracy and justice system. A majority of asian's low people quality behaviors result from a lack of understanding and respect for democracy and justice system. Some major consequencs are high crime rate, political instability, environmental degradation, and social unrest due to injustice.

    India is doing a little bit better than China in the democracy category. However, the two countries still have a very very long way to go to teach their people to respect democracy and justice system. This is not accomplished in a matter of months or years, or decades. Until then, India or China will never be a true superpower.

  11. #36
    Economist in Residence Achievements:
    1 year registered
    lonesoullost3's Avatar
    Join Date
    30-06-05
    Location
    Ithaca
    Posts
    59


    Ethnic group
    Caucasian...Polish and French I think
    Country: United States



    An economic analysis...

    It's spring break!!! Which means I will have time to post!! (Hello lonesoullost3, it appears that you have not posted on the Japan Forum in several weeks.....hahahahaha) So time to start posting ^_^

    I don't think China will become a superpower and let me go ahead an argue why. Here's the problem: sure they're growing fast but they will hit a peak because they have inefficient use of manpower. The economic principal is that you want to have an ideal kapital (spelled with a K so as not to confuse with monetary capital) to labor ratio. The problem with China is that they don't have enough kapital. Therefore they have a huge amount of labor that is not being utilized and their productivity is limited by their amount and quality of kapital (the latter being equivalent to technology). By reaching this upper limit China will slowly start decrease in growth rate. Theories in developmental economics suggest that as a country approaches the capacity of the leading country (currently the US) the developing country's growth rate will decline until it actually starts to fall back from the leading country (who is growing at a "normal" rate of about 2-3% per annum).



    The vertical axis describes the growth rate of the developing country relative to the growth rate of the leading country (whose growth rate has a relative value of 0). The horizontal axis describes the capacity of the country relative to the leading country (whose relative capacity=100). Also, this graph represents only one country's graph with a an ideal potential capacity and a 1:1 ratio between absorbtion rate and relative capacity (where if my graph wasn't hand drawn in paint, point C would be the intersection of two 45 degree lines coming from points X and Y). A country which has less potential capacity could have B interesect more to the left and thus have point Y be further left, never interescting the leading country's capacity. A country with the same capacity but less absorbtion rate would have a maximum less than C.

    Reading the graph:

    1. Point A is the steady state where the developing country begins the process of 'catching up'.
    2. Point B is the steady state where the country has reached the maximum (and optimum) equlibrium point of growth rate vs. capacity.
    3. From point X to point C, the developing country is absorbing information and technology from the leading country (which it must interact with in order to catch up) at a rate less than it's potential capacity to absorb. However, this rate is gradually diminishing (consider it a rule of Diminishing Marginal Growth Rate for each 'unit' of capacity you increase). Point C is where the developing country is absorbing at optimal capacity. From Point C to B is where a developing country is slowly being unable to keep up with the amount of of information being channeled into it from the leading country. I will explain B to Y later.

    The following take the above and apply it to the catching up process:

    4. From point X to point A the developing country is growing but at a slower rate than the leading country. Thus, the gap between the two countries increases, even though the developing country is growing. If a country does not have enough momentum to reach and sustain point A it will fall back to point X.
    5. From point A to C, the developing country is growing (due to bullet #3) and the gap between the two countries decreases. It will continue increasing it's growth rate until point C.
    6. From point C to B the developing country is still catching up, however because it's absorbtion rate is not optimal, it begins a period of decline in growth rate (also due to the DMGR referenced above).
    7. From B to Y the developing country is attempting to close the final gap between the leading country and itself. However, once this country crosses point B to the right, it will fall back up to point B because it's relative growth rate (although still positive in absolute terms) is now negative. Thus, the gap between the two countries increases (from the excess point) to equilibrium point B again. Therefore, it is possible for a country to exceed point B in the short-run, but in the long run it will always fall back to B. Currently, Japan is at a point B, roughly 90% - but not higher.

    Ok - so why does the country's growth rate go relatively negative at this point? At point B the absorbtion rate decreases to a level at which the developing country can only sustain a growth rate equivalent to that of the leading country. Theoretically, if the country somehow jumped to point Y it's absorbtion rate would be 0 because it now has the same capacity as the leading country - hence all information and technology that is transferable has been acquired. However, we must keep in mind that these growth rates and capacities are all relative and that the leading country is growing and increasing in capacity as well! If the leading country was stagnant there is nothing stopping a well developed country like Japan to catch up 100% with the leading country. However because this is not the case highly developed countries will reach their own "point B" and remain that way. The only way for a country to surpass the leading country is for a drastic change in that country's economy to occur over a sustained period.

    OK - I think I explained that as best as I can....let me try to sum it up using an analogy (which I actually think comes from a Chinese saying).

    A horsefly lands on the rear of a horse, who then starts running. The horsefly then proceeds to walk along the back of the horse towards its nose. Then the fly, wanting to overtake the horse, leaps off its nose to fly ahead. The horsefly was ahead for a brief instant, but the speed of the horse was faster and the fly falls behind and lands on the horse's back again.

    The horsefly first landed on the horse's back - Point A.
    Starts walking up the back - point A to B.
    Jumps of the nose of the horse - temporarily exceeding point B.
    Falls back to land on the horse's back - return to B.

    Hopefully that will help make things clearer - but be sure to ask if it doesn't!
    One more graph (Solow's Growth Model) then I will sum EVERYTHING up in relation to China (and any other country for that matter).



    Y-axis is $, X-axis is amount of K(apital)
    This one is easier to explain. sf(k) is the national savings of a country as a function of K(apital). (dn)k is the cost of capital where d is the depreciation rate and n is the population growth rate.

    The intersection of these two lines provides K* - the steady state amount of kapital a country wants to obtain. At this ideal amount of kapital the country's output is maximized. Because of the diminishing nature of the savings function (referencing to the decreasing slope) countries with lower levels of savings (and thus lower levels of kapital) will accumulate kapital (and thus increase output) faster than countries with a higher level of k.

    Once a country reaches it's K* it cannot surpass it. Why? Once the kapital curve exceeds the savings curve kapital requires more money than the economy has (which is in the savings rate). In other words, the savings rate limits the upper bound of kapital accumulation.

    SO: China (as an example) is growing extremely rapidly - it is definitely near it's peak at point C in the first graph. However, due to it's problems with kapital efficiency and accumulation and it's pending decrease in growth rate it will not be able to successfully become an economic superpower in the way the US is now. Thus, it will eventually reach its own point B. Everyone knows that the one-child law in China is to slow population growth. Why is this so important? The obvious factor is feeding everybody - China already has a HUGE portion of it's population in the agriculture industry (49% by 2001 estimates). The second reason goes back to kapital accumulation and Solow's Growth Model. As n (the population growth rate) increases, the kapital curve becomes steeper and thus K* decreases. When the steady state kapital decreases output is lower and thus growth is lower. Therefore, from an economic perspective, the one-child law is the absolute best move China has done to boost its economic growth.

    OK - that's it...I hope I didn't miss anything - sorry for being so long winded. It's break so I'll be sure to check back here to see if anyone has questions.

    References:
    http://www.cia.gov/cia/publications/...k/geos/ch.html
    Wan, Henry Y. Economic Development in A Globalized Environment
    Personal notes from lectures
    http://www.operationdeep.org
    Create Possibilities.

  12. #37
    Regular Member Achievements:
    1 year registered
    godppgo's Avatar
    Join Date
    26-01-06
    Age
    40
    Posts
    20


    Ethnic group
    Taiwanese
    Country: Canada



    lonesoullost3,

    Wow that's some analysis, I am definitely going to have some questions after digesting what you've written. I'll post after I organize my thought.

  13. #38
    Mikawa Ossan
    Guest


    lonesoullost3, great post!

    Do you mean to imply that there will never be another superpower, in your opinion? Or are you just ruling out China?

  14. #39
    Economist in Residence Achievements:
    1 year registered
    lonesoullost3's Avatar
    Join Date
    30-06-05
    Location
    Ithaca
    Posts
    59


    Ethnic group
    Caucasian...Polish and French I think
    Country: United States



    Quote Originally Posted by Mikawa Ossan
    lonesoullost3, great post!
    Do you mean to imply that there will never be another superpower, in your opinion? Or are you just ruling out China?
    I'm not ruling out the possibility of another superpower. On the contrary, I'm just pointing out it's not as easy as just having sustained 'rapid growth' on a rate of 12% a year. There needs to be some exogenous factor that causes a new superpower to arise. Look at how the US surpassed Europe: the combination of WW1 and WW2 absolutely devastated Europe.

    In WW1 the US was not touched at home even though globally international trade suffered a drastic recession. During the interim between WW1 and 2, the whole world suffered a depression (a "Great" one in the U.S ). As a result, the whole world stayed at approximately the same relative economic levels.

    In WW2, the US was hardly touched at home in an economic fashion. Pearl Harbour was a major event, yes, but not in an economic fashion (short term losses which is to be expected, but in the long run the market came back with a vengeance). And of course, PH was nothing compared to what was happening all across Europe. But the drastic long term economic hardships in Europe led to the US's ability to surpass Britain, France, and Germany. The US's economy was the most stable during WW2 and thus in 1945 it was the obvious foundation of which to bulid another world economy.

    It would take another event of a degree similar to that of a world war for the US to be overtaken by a country - at least in my opinion. There would need to be some event which caused the US to fall behind in technology - because as I said in my previous post, technology is the key factor in determining who's the leader. However, with the clear majority of the US's economy dedicated to either services or technology (and services are always a result of technology), it would need to be a major event.

  15. #40
    Satyavrata Achievements:
    Three FriendsRecommendation First ClassVeteran50000 Experience PointsTagger First Class
    Maciamo's Avatar
    Join Date
    17-07-02
    Location
    Lothier
    Posts
    8,712
    Points
    704,021
    Level
    100
    Points: 704,021, Level: 100
    Level completed: 0%, Points required for next Level: 0
    Overall activity: 24.0%


    Ethnic group
    Italo-celto-germanic
    Country: Belgium - Brussels



    In some ways, the EU already is a superpower. It's not yet a single federal entity, but its influence in the world already equals (or surpass) that of the USA. Economically, the EU single-market is the largest market in the world (with the highest GDP). In matters of sports or culture, the influence or power of the EU has long been greater than the US. Militarily, the US still leads, but is it what matters most in today's world ?
    My book selection---Follow me on Facebook and Twitter --- My profile on Academia.edu and on ResearchGate ----Check Wa-pedia's Japan Guide
    ----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
    "What is the use of living, if it be not to strive for noble causes and to make this muddled world a better place for those who will live in it after we are gone?", Winston Churchill.

  16. #41
    Regular Member Achievements:
    1 year registered
    godppgo's Avatar
    Join Date
    26-01-06
    Age
    40
    Posts
    20


    Ethnic group
    Taiwanese
    Country: Canada



    I find your analysis on growth rate really interesting. Your analysis is based on theories from developmental economics which I have absolutely no knowledge of (actually I have very little knowledge on economics as a whole, its more like a hobby to me). With lack of training in economics, I tried to use engineering theories to interpret your analysis, which I’ve found to be strikingly useful when understanding your analysis. Here is how I break down the analysis:

    1. A phenomenon is observed in the real world
    2. Numbers and data are collected from the real world
    3. Identify important parameters to the phenomenon
    4. A model is developed to simulate the real world phenomenon
    5. The model is tested using real data to predict the outcome of a similar phenomenon
    6. Difference between the model and real world result is compared and corrections are made
    7. The model is used to test real data again
    8. Repeat step above steps until a satisfactory model has been achieved

    Most physical and social phenomenon can be modeled one way or another by the above process and it is also the approach I took in understanding your analysis.

    In most engineering problem, the time interval between implementing model and receiving results are usually within a reasonable amount of time and therefore it is possible and practical to develop a so-called optimum model. I could only imagine what a daunting and tedious task it must be is to try to model a social phenomenon as complicated and immense in scale as the growth rate of a country. I guess it would be nearly impossible to consider every single parameters when developing a growth rate model. So what are some of the important parameters you used when plotting the relative growth rate vs. relative capacity graph?

    Also, what causes absorbtion rate to decrease as capacity of the catching up country increases? I guess this question would be the same as to ask what Diminishing Marginal Growth Rate is. I tried to think of is as a student raising his grade from 20% to 70% with relative ease while raising from 95% to 100% would require relatively much more work than raising from 20% to 70% grade.

    Also on the horsefly example, what is perceived as the growth rate here?

    Thanks!

  17. #42
    Regular Member Achievements:
    1 year registered
    Silverbackman's Avatar
    Join Date
    05-03-05
    Posts
    102


    Country: United_States



    Quote Originally Posted by Maciamo
    In some ways, the EU already is a superpower. It's not yet a single federal entity, but its influence in the world already equals (or surpass) that of the USA. Economically, the EU single-market is the largest market in the world (with the highest GDP). In matters of sports or culture, the influence or power of the EU has long been greater than the US. Militarily, the US still leads, but is it what matters most in today's world ?
    Yes this is true. If considered a single entity it definitely meets the criteria of superpower. However until it becomes a single federal republic it cannot be considered a nation.

  18. #43
    Mikawa Ossan
    Guest


    Quote Originally Posted by lonesoullost3
    I'm not ruling out the possibility of another superpower.... There needs to be some exogenous factor that causes a new superpower to arise. ...
    It would take another event of a degree similar to that of a world war for the US to be overtaken by a country - at least in my opinion. There would need to be some event which caused the US to fall behind in technology - because as I said in my previous post, technology is the key factor in determining who's the leader.
    Thanks once again for a great post!

    I, once again, have some questions. (Incidentally, I ask because, although I do have my own opinions, I have never studied economics. Therefore it is very enlightening for me to be able to ask someone who obviously has specific questions. Thanks for answering at least this far! m(__)m )

    How do you feel about the enormous national debt that the U.S. has? Do you not feel that this will, over time, erode the U.S.'s financial standing globally as more and more of the budget is devoted to financing this burden?

    How about the military situation? With the U.S. so mired in Iraq, coupled with Rumsfeld's zeal for "slimming down" the military, it seems to me that if another major war were to break out, it would break the military unless the U.S. were either reinstate the draft or leave Iraq. Both possibilities, I suppose, but hardly a position of unequivical strength.

    And about the savings rate, which you touched upon earlier. It seemed to me that you basically said that the lower the savings rate, the better. However, do you not think that the savings rate can slip too low? If people have a negative savings rate, it means that they are buying on credit. That hardly seems tenable over long periods of time!

  19. #44
    Economist in Residence Achievements:
    1 year registered
    lonesoullost3's Avatar
    Join Date
    30-06-05
    Location
    Ithaca
    Posts
    59


    Ethnic group
    Caucasian...Polish and French I think
    Country: United States



    Godppgo and Mikawa Ossan here's to you:

    Quote Originally Posted by godppgo
    So what are some of the important parameters you used when plotting the relative growth rate vs. relative capacity graph?
    Here is where I must mark my own limitations in understanding growth theory. As I am not the economist who developed this theory (he's actually my professor), I can only say that the two most important factors were growth of income per capita and level of income per capita. When developing economic theories one most always hold ceteris paribus many unmeasurable/abstract variables like consumer preference or attitudes towards the market in the case of investment. Thus these models can come close, but can never accurately predict what would happen if one of these exogenous variables changes drastically. There could be rough estimates (increases, decreases), but nothing with a quantitative value. So I'm afraid that's all I can answer about this question.

    Quote Originally Posted by godppgo
    Also, what causes absorbtion rate to decrease as capacity of the catching up country increases? I guess this question would be the same as to ask what Diminishing Marginal Growth Rate is. I tried to think of is as a student raising his grade from 20% to 70% with relative ease while raising from 95% to 100% would require relatively much more work than raising from 20% to 70% grade.
    Ok, so your analogy of a student's grade is perfect for explaining Solow's Growth Theory. It's much easier for a developing country to approach a k* level of kapital than a country which is nearly there. The decrease in absorbtion rate is not entirely attributed to the developing country (which also could be explained by your above analogy). Rather, because that country is getting closer to the leading country, there is less information and technology for it to absorb than before.

    Quote Originally Posted by godppgo
    Also on the horsefly example, what is perceived as the growth rate here?
    Growth rate would be the relative speeds of the horse and the fly. The horse's gallop is the leading country's growth rate. So while the fly is on the horse's back standing still they have the same speed and thus same growth rate. As the fly walks along the horse's back it appears as if it's 'overtaking' the horse so it's relative speed and growth rate are faster. When it tries to overtake the horse by jumping off and falling back, it's relative speed and growth rate are negative.

    --------
    Quote Originally Posted by Mikawa Ossan
    How do you feel about the enormous national debt that the U.S. has? Do you not feel that this will, over time, erode the U.S.'s financial standing globally as more and more of the budget is devoted to financing this burden?
    Like I said - a long term severe economic depression would have to hit the US (which in turn would actually effect the global economy, but we'll hold that constant for now). The debt issue is not that big - the US has only been debt-free only a handful of years since its inception. Debt can be easily financed by increasing taxes (instead of giving rebates like Bush has done - although it does have its potential merits). Also, more of the budget would be focused to financing the debt only by taking away money from other projects (e.g. military spending or more likely odds: domestic spending).

    Quote Originally Posted by Mikawa Ossan
    How about the military situation? With the U.S. so mired in Iraq, coupled with Rumsfeld's zeal for "slimming down" the military, it seems to me that if another major war were to break out, it would break the military unless the U.S. were either reinstate the draft or leave Iraq. Both possibilities, I suppose, but hardly a position of unequivical strength.
    The US military relies more so on being technologically advanced than on manpower - hence the recent push for unmanned vehicles and using animals. Both of these lines of research are primarily funded by DARPA - the Department of Defense's head research institution. The DARPA Grand Challenge has been going on for several years and is a competition to create an autonomous off-road vehicle that can travel 132 miles (roughly 220km) at "military speeds". These vehicles aren't remote-controlled - 100% robotic decision makers. Anyways, my point is that the US uses technology, not manpower. And thus the constant development of technology for military use (whether actual standing army is decreased or not) will contribute to the economic growth of the US. And well, if we left Iraq we'd have a heck of a lot of money to start paying back that debt wouldn't we ;).


    Quote Originally Posted by Mikawa Ossan
    And about the savings rate, which you touched upon earlier. It seemed to me that you basically said that the lower the savings rate, the better. However, do you not think that the savings rate can slip too low? If people have a negative savings rate, it means that they are buying on credit. That hardly seems tenable over long periods of time!
    I didn't mean to imply that a lower savings rate is better - in fact it's completely the opposite! I've reread my post and can't find where I might've made that error - could you point it out to me? The higher the savings rate the more kapital a country can accumulate and thus output is higher which will lead to more growth. If you can point out your confusion I can explain better and in more detail.

    Hopefully I covered everything you two wanted me to cover ^_^.

  20. #45
    Regular Member Achievements:
    1 year registered
    Tokis-Phoenix's Avatar
    Join Date
    23-09-05
    Location
    England, Somerset
    Age
    34
    Posts
    290


    Country: United Kingdom



    I tempted to vote for China, but Russia has so much potential! If only the country could sort itself out, it would be so mighty...But who knows?

  21. #46
    変な外人 Achievements:
    1 year registered
    Thor's Avatar
    Join Date
    15-07-04
    Location
    Illinois, USA
    Posts
    104


    Country: United States



    It's definently going to be the European Union, or China. They are both growing rapidly.

  22. #47
    The Great Achievements:
    Veteran5000 Experience Points
    Mitsuo's Avatar
    Join Date
    18-01-06
    Location
    In the computer
    Posts
    235
    Points
    8,018
    Level
    26
    Points: 8,018, Level: 26
    Level completed: 78%, Points required for next Level: 132
    Overall activity: 0%


    Country: United States



    I think Utah will.....Oh wait...that's not an option.

    I actually think it will be the EU.

  23. #48
    Seasonal Member Achievements:
    Veteran10000 Experience Points
    Minty's Avatar
    Join Date
    26-02-06
    Location
    Luxembourg
    Age
    34
    Posts
    614
    Points
    14,890
    Level
    37
    Points: 14,890, Level: 37
    Level completed: 5%, Points required for next Level: 760
    Overall activity: 0%

    Y-DNA haplogroup
    I am human
    MtDNA haplogroup
    I am human

    Ethnic group
    I am citizen of the world, or you could call me Chiwanese
    Country: Luxembourg



    Wink

    My husband thinks it is the EU, I am waiting a couple more years to see what happens before I decide.

  24. #49
    Regular Member Achievements:
    3 months registered
    hershal's Avatar
    Join Date
    25-03-10
    Age
    31
    Posts
    9


    Ethnic group
    South Asian
    Country: India



    I don't think there will be one superpower but more then one super power countries with power distributed among them. The most candidates will be large countries with large population.
    The distance between insanity and genius is measured only by success.

  25. #50
    Regular Member Achievements:
    3 months registered

    Join Date
    20-05-10
    Posts
    11


    Country: Sweden



    I suspect China's economy bubble will soon burst, I'm going to go with India.

Page 2 of 4 FirstFirst 1234 LastLast

Similar Threads

  1. Is Europe Superpower?
    By barbarian in forum Politics & Governments
    Replies: 55
    Last Post: 30-05-11, 18:37

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •