West must prepare for Chinese, Indian dominance: Wolfensohn

[deadparrot]

SYDNEY (AFP) - Western nations must prepare for a future dominated by China and India, whose rapid economic rise will soon fundamentally alter the balance of power, former World Bank chief James Wolfensohn has warned.

Wealthy countries were failing to understand the impact of the invevitable growth of the two Asian powerhouses, Wolfensohn said in the 2006 Wallace Wurth Memorial Lecture at the University of New South Wales at the weekend.

"It's a world that is going to be in the hands of these countries which we now call developing," said Australian-born Wolfensohn, who held the top job at the global development bank for a decade until last year.

Rich nations needed to try to capitalise on the inevitable emergence of what would become the engine of the world's economic activity before it was too late, he said.

http://news.yahoo.com/s/afp/20061126/wl_asia_afp/australiachinaindiaeconomygrowth

[WHEN CRABS ROAR]

1. Learn Chinese now.

And I thought no one was watching.

[NEOBuckeye]

2. Too late? We're already past that.

Big Oil, Big Auto and Big Pharma/HMO have all conspired to maintain their dominance in the US, at a time when we should really be evolving past those monopolies. Meanwhile, the rest of the world moves forward with new ideas, and new technologies, unhindered by monopolies controlled by stingy men.

[katsy]

3. Oh well, now I understand... hey it's all going to be ok.

Rich nations have capitalized.

But someone define "nation" for me.

Does Wolfensohn define nation as in "we the people" or bush's base of corporate haves and have mores?

nevermind....

[htuttle]

4. "Da-shiong bao-jah-shr duh la doo-tze!"

[aquart]

5. Powerhouses? Our technology and their cheap labor.

Now it's THEIR technology. Our getting cheaper labor. Weren't we clever?

[qazplm]

6. power isnt just about having

a larger GNP.

China and India are going to be too preoccupied dealing with their billion plus populations and the simple issues of feeding, clothing, housing and keeping safe and secure their populations to be a dominant world superpower.

That is not to say the two nations arent going to be very very important for a myriad number of reasons, but there are other nations like the US, the EU when they get their act together and even Russia if they do the same, who are better able to translate their power outward .

I think people underestimate the problems with having a population over a billion in India or probably two billion by 2050 in China.

[cosmicone]

7. Do you mean to say that the western white people are

somehow better than the Indians and Chinese?

It takes tremendous finess to manage a growth of 8+% every year and both China and India have shown a stellar management of that growth. When they convert to nuclear power over the next 2 decades, their energy costs will go down and their products even more competitive.

Not to mention the fact that both those countries have no debt-drag like the US, EU and Russia have.

As far as military power goes, both are regionally dominant with huge standing military. They simply have no need to be the policeman of the world because good old USA is spending big bucks to do it already.

[WCGreen]

8. The growth is decieving...

If you start with one and add another, that's a 100% growth...

If you start with 100 and ad one, that is 1% growth...

[Pawel K]

19. I don't see where he said that

The fact is that China and India have a huge population problem. This is a fact that will hunt them for centuries. I am no expert in economics but when you have a billion people crowded in small areas your chances of large economic development is going to be extremely difficult.

No doubt American economy is suffering while other countries, especially in Asia, are booming. But to say we are doomed doesn't seem to make much sense to me; especially since now we are finally starting to elect the right people (hopefully this trend will last).

[Conan_The_Barbarian]

38. It's called the catch up effect

Its because of the law of dimishing returns to capital per worker. If you have 10 people building a house and only 1 tool box it takes a long time to put that house together. Throw them a second toolbox and they'll build the house that much faster. Take another set of workers, each with their own tool box, giving them another won't do much. Each country has a ton of a labor but proportionally capiteral per worker they are still behind meaning they still have huge potential for growth. 2-3% Real GDP increase is nothing to scoff at in the post-industrial western world.

[WCGreen]

9. Remember, China and India are bitter foes...

They faught a war back in the sixites and China is lending aid and comfort to Pakistan...

And remember, both have hostile neighbors and we in the US enjoy relatively good relations with all our neighbors...

[oblivious]

11. We sure didn't see that in Hu's historic visit to India last week.

- Supporting US-India nuclear power agreement.
- Offering India nuclear technology.
- Proposing a China-India free trade zone
- Making a free trade agreement with Pakistan and offering nuclear assisitance without a peep from India.

Yest it's all pretty much ignored in the West and on DU.

[WCGreen]

12. Still, with the built up bitterness over centuries

of warfare is hard to discount...

India doesn't need China, China needs India...

Remember, India is a Democracy and China, well.....

I still believe there will be more problems between those two than between the US and China...

[oblivious]

10. With one child per couple, China's problem will be an aging population.

[muriel_volestrangler]

22. US Census Bureau estimates for Chinese and Indian population

China: 2000: 1,269 million; 2025: 1,453 million; 2050: 1,424 million
India: 2000: 1,004 million; 2025: 1,449 million; 2050: 1,808 million

China is already close to its expected maximum, due to the strict laws about population, while India will overtake it in about 20 years time (assuming they don't enact similar laws, or contraception takes off in a huge way there).

[adigal]

44. I think you are whistling past the graveyard

Both countries are kicking our butts because their governments control the corporations and don't give them tax credits when the outsource jobs. That is our biggest disadvantage with competing with these companies.

[Odin2005]

13. China is a house standing on a house of cards.

Looks are deceiving. There is growing unrest in the countryside, one economic panic could send the country into a massive crisis, even revolution. People assuming China is the Next Big Thing are in for a rude awakening, IMO.

[JNelson6563]

14. Really? Check this out....

http://www.atomfilms.com/af/content/haha_america

Click on Watch Film, it's a bit silly but don't let that fool you.

[The Backlash Cometh]

16. Something is going to happen in that country if the greedy get too...

greedy.

[rman]

29. All the truths in that flick don't change a thing

about the fact that the vast majority of the Chinese people are being oppressed and exploited.

[JNelson6563]

32. No one argues that point

In fact, it gives China a big advantage over the US. There's no way we can compete with them globally and maintain our standard of living. Not only do they crush us in the global marketplace competition, we are going deeper into debt, to them!

So yeah, lots of people are oppressed by the communist regime in China and it will hasten our economic doom. A counter-point I was making to the post I originally replied to.

Julie

[rman]

33. It gives China the Economic Power an advantage, it's a disadvantage

to most of the Chinese population. Only a small, mostly already rich and powerful minority of Chinese benefits from it.
By your reasoning, China would have an even bigger advantage if they'd use outright slavery instead its contemporary equivalent. In fact any capitalist state would benefit from slavery as a form of cheap labor.

Anyway, it is what people rebel against; history is replete with examples - hence the "house of cards" claim, which you disagree with in spite of agreeing with the underpinning argument for that claim.

[JNelson6563]

36. Yes, that is true

Any nation would be stronger, untouchable even, if they were to utilize slave labor. I'd like to think no one would even try to refute that.

So yes, you grasp my point that China-the entity- has a major advantage with their near-slave labor wages. Yes, it's oppressive and a horrible burden for the Chinese populace to shoulder. No argument there.

Doesn't change the fact that this set of circumstances makes China stronger and stronger and the US more vulnerable.

For the life of me I don't understand all these attempts to change the subject.

Julie

[rman]

41. No matter how economically powerful China is,

it is arguably a house of card (because of exploitation of its workers).
I think that's the topic that you responded to and that we are discussing.

[JNelson6563]

42. A sturdier house than America's

If China and other foreign interests stopped coming to our Treasury auctions our house of cards would topple. Just like that.

Far easier toppling to achieve than what it would take to collapse China's house.

Julie

[rman]

48. Economically yes, but not socially.

The "house of cards" metaphor pertains to the social circumstances, not to the economy.

[adigal]

45. We just had a professor who spends 1/ 2 the year in China

come in. Their big problem: pollution. The Chinese, he said, are allowed to travel freely, practice religion and hundreds of millions of them are experiencing an increase in their standard of living. They no longer make 3 dollars a week, he said. They have apartments, and want cars.

[rman]

47. Here's a report from a Sky News team that spend some time in China

Many Chinese do not have apartments, nor do they experience an increase in their standard of living.

Human Rights in China
Sky News

"A Sky One journalist team courageously defies the Chinese police as it tries to capture on film the consequences of Communist reform. Images that belong to the Middle ages will shock the viewer as poor Chinese people are being robbed of their dignity, well-being, health, decency, basic human rights and future as well as amenities, property and homes. The deplorable situations depicted in this short report do not belong in a civilized world by any acceptable standard."

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=g2COZeCrvpg

[Shakespeare]

25. I don't think you know very much about China.

Actually, protests in the non-urban provinces are on the decline. The standard of living across the board is rising in China.

Their economy is MUCH more solid and stable than ours is at the moment, and it's not going to decline anytime soon.

[depakid]

26. Agreed completely

China is an utter disaster waiting to happen. Their current "system" is unsustainable economically, ecologically and sociologically.

The poster child for overshoot and collapse.

[NewJeffCT]

35. China is far from a house of cards

It is certainly far from perfect in China, and they have a long, long ways to go... but, they are gradually opening up their country over time. It's often 1 step forward & 2 steps back progress, but they are becoming more open. It may take 10 or 15 years, or maybe more. But, the Chinese tend to look long-term at things like this.

Over the past 25 years, however, China has moved 300 million people out of poverty. That is the equivalent of the entire US population moving out of poverty. With the continued growth of their economy, would anybody be surprised if another 300 million move out of poverty in the next 25 years? Can we say the US is making similar strides in cutting poverty these past 25 years? No, thanks to Bush & Reagan, we've seen an increase in Americans living in poverty.

There is also a lot of central planning that occurs in China that aids their competitiveness. The central government will say, "City XYZ is dedicated to making widgets" and then they will give incentives to widget-makers to relocate their factories to XYZ. In the US, the states compete against each other, and also against foreign competitors. There is no real central planning.

And, most importantly, China is quietly going around the world and making friends with countries in Africa, the Caribbean, etc and making very friendly trade deals with those nations. Meanwhile, the US is going around the world pissing on everybody. If there is ever a key vote on trade issues in the UN, or over Taiwan, who do you think will get more votes, the country that is being nice and friendly and buying their exports and raw materials, or the country that is pissing on the world?

[The Backlash Cometh]

15. chuckle. And those asshats that send our jobs to India didn't see

this coming?

Count on one thing, however, expect the Indian and Chinese poor to rise up in protest once they see the middle class and upper class feed off on their labor.

[Joe Bacon]

17. Blame it on the Red Ink Republicans!

The Red Ink Nazi Republicans sold us out lock stock and barrel to the Chinese. China owns our treasury notes. We are now their colony. You can bet the Chinese Politburo just sits back and laughs at how stupid the Nazi Republicans are. I wonder how much funding they give to Norquist and his TV Preacher pals!

[endarkenment]

18. The center of gravity has already shifted.

In some respects the neocon adventure in the middle east, and the neocon overall strategy of world hegemony as outlined in the infamous PNAC document of 1998, are a futile (and now failed) effort to delay the inevitable. The center of global civilization has been moving inexorably westward, shifting from Europe to America, from New York to California and from California to first Japan and now the asian continental giants of China and India. The neocon strategy is to play king of the hill with oil resources. Not exactly a brilliant strategy, and certainly not one that can possibly succeed over anything but a very short term perspective.

[tavalon]

20. Well, this is a duh moment

Anybody who has been paying any attention would find this to be old breaking news. Are we really so oblivious as to be unaware of this? Of course, I want Bush et al, to be unaware because he thinks "nukular" bombs are the solve to anything.

[Gregorian]

21. If this were 1980 this would be news.

Even in 1990 it was so blaring in obviousness. You'd have to be blind to not know. Maybe only those who paid attention to where the manufacturing was going would realize this.

Or is this just a panic struck author who sees the vast infrastructure that China is investing in, not only in their own country, while we piddle away the last bid of loaned money we will have.

Hey, America either get's smart and get's a new economy, or it's over. And even then, even if we do create a new alternative energy economy, China is right there ready to help manufacture it. And steal it.

[lovuian]

23. End of American Empire

coming to an end

[rman]

30. The continuation of the corporate empire

Many big corporations already have moved production to China. The controllers of those corporations don't care where the money comes from and they don't really care in which part of the world their residency is located, as long as the area is clean and pretty.
Things won't change much for them when China takes over as economic super power, but things will change for common Americans.

[Javaman]

24. Maybe yes , maybe no...

all depends on what happens after the oil runs out.

[The Anti-Neo Con]

28. When all oil runs out...

the world will be thrust back into the middle ages. There will be no more suerpowers.

[Copperred]

27. It's not the West who needs to prepare...but America who needs to stop being lead around like fear

..batted cattle.

What is funny about this...is while Wolfensohn is right in many respects........

he fails to educate the public that when he says West...he really means ONLY AMERICA.

EUROPE is fully ready and looking forward to the rise of India and China...they have no fear of such....

...........makes u go hmmmmmmmmmmmmm

[sweetheart]

31. No, the racists will knock 'em down with militarism

Do you actually believe the USA military complex will stand about and let itself be
out-economy'ed? It demands to be central, and the only way that holds is in a
world war mindset, one where the big nuclear weapons and fighter jets are relevant.

As their social maxims will prevent them from outright attacks on china or india,
they will likely exacerbate attacks either by resource imperialism, or by arming
and supporting china to attack india, and vice versa, to set asia back 100 years.

They MUST have world war, or they won't survive. Given that, i expect world war
before india and china eclipse the US military-industral 'owner' complex.

[NewJeffCT]

34. Do you know how much business GE does in China & India?

GE is a top defense contractor, and they do upwards of $5 billion/year in sales in China (that is GE products that are sold in mainland China to Chinese), and are growing in India rapidly as well - their CEO recently said they expect to double their sales in Asia over the next several years. That's not counting billions more in items that are made in China and shipped to the US, Canada & Europe.

I don't think major defense contractors like GE would want to disrupt their revenue streams by starting a war between China & India.

[sweetheart]

37. They get to sell 'em twice

Look at all the construction that needs to be done in lebannon, think
of all those repair and construction contracts. GE similarly knows that the
contract to rebuild china will be bigger than any plant destroyed in war.

IG Farben (Afga, Bayer, BASF, Aventis), Thyssen... still around... war
profiteering is profitable... GE needs the war revenues, it can afford to
lose a plant or two in asia.

[NewJeffCT]

39. There is a big difference between 1 or 2 factories

and thousands of factories working for Wal-Mart, Target, GE, KMart/Sears, etc... not to mention automakers like GM, Toyota & Honda (Japan may be one of the few that would vote with us against China if things came down to that)... not to mention major European companies as well.

[sweetheart]

40. Lotta folks felt that way about Germany

...before WW2. There was strong US and British sympathies for the Nazis, strongly
believing in their corporate similarlity as peoples, that 'we' should just get over
those differences, and rather come to admire how nazis achieved low unemployment
and efficient imprisonment of its underclass.

[NewJeffCT]

43. there are major differences, though

While US corporations did business with Hitler & Germany, including Prescott Bush's company, they did not have such a massive level of direct investment in Germany like major corporations do now. Back then, we sold them products and raw materials that allowed Germany to build their war machine.

Now, Wal-Mart is a $300 billion corporation, and well over $200 billion of that revenue comes from products actually made in China.

If there is a war between India & China, some major corporations here in the US are in heaps of trouble financially. Just the disruption in shipping might put Wal-Mart under - the port city of Guangzhou (Canton) has more traffic than every port in the US combined. Guess where Wal-Mart ships a lot of their stuff from? Guangzhou.

[sweetheart]

46. what did 9/11 disrupt?

In banking and finance, before 9/11, there was a momentum towards creating a global
real-time financial clearing and depository backbone that worked in real-time with
every person on earth... this radical democratization of wealth was attacked
on 9/11 by the disruptors to get back to a military paradigm. You can read a
lot of finance journals today, and find nothing about the trends of open peer
to peer connectivity that existed before.

A total re-ordering of world power would also take place with a nuclear attack
on iran, or a nation that is not china or india, just a sort of disruption to
erase the dimension of advantage, and nothing, not even all the world's wealth
can protect you from theives armed with the US military.

That military destroys more value per second than any on earth, it is what it
is designed to do, and god help whomever that complex seeks to disrupt, as no
amount of trade or family ties will hold back people with such an addiction to
direct action with military force. Britain tried opium wars to disrupt china,
and that worked by first and foremost the gunboats. Not at the time did they
consider the size of the economy they were distrupting, nor its impacts on the
rest of humankind for so many centuries.

The disruptors are still out there, and they are intense nationalists, both
democratic and republican, who don't think of vietnam as millions dead and
a failed invasion, but as something the US could have won had they stuck it
out.... disrupting. Free traders of money switch over to free traders of B-52
bombing sorties, cast in the same mold.