China's Navy Breaks out to the High Seas

[folium]

Rows of dilapidated five-story dormitories in the city of Nantong, previously housing China Rongsheng Heavy Industries Group Holdings Ltd.’s 38,000 employees, were abandoned after the shipbuilder teetering on collapse cut almost 80 percent of its workers over the past two years. Most video arcades, restaurants and shops serving them have closed.

A $6.6 trillion credit binge during the past five years, encouraged by Beijing policy makers as stimulus to combat a global economic slowdown, now threatens to stoke a debt crisis.

At stake are trillions of yuan in bank loans that companies producing everything from ships to steel to solar power are struggling to repay as the world’s second-largest economy heads for the weakest annual expansion since 1999. (emphasis mine)

By Bloomberg News - Nov 18, 2013 9:17 PM PT

-------------

Let's not forget that China is communist and it is harder to separate some corporate debt from government debt than it is in capitalist Western countries.

From your same Nov 2013 Bloomberg article:

“In the next three to four years, industries with excess capacity will be the main source of credit loss for banks and their nonperforming loans as China cleans up the legacy,” said Liao Qiang, a Beijing-based director at Standard & Poor’s. “The speed of the process will depend on the government’s determination and whether they are willing to incur short-term pain for long-term gain.”

And:

"Premier Li Keqiang, who took office in March, pledged to open the economy to market forces and strip power from the government in a process he described as “very painful and even feels like cutting one’s wrist.” In July, he vowed to curb overcapacity, which the government blames for driving down prices, eroding profits and generating pollution. Policy makers meeting in Beijing last week said they would elevate the role of markets in the nation’s economy."

Also:

“If credit allocation in China improves, the ultimate credit cycle and economy downturn will be mitigated,” Werner (analyst at Sanford Bernstein) wrote in an Oct. 21 note to investors. “However, if China continues to rely on debt to fund its economic growth, the country’s ultimate credit cycle will be more severe.”

As with most global economies in the last 5 years how the problems are addressed is far more important than the problems themselves. Sticking plaster or root and branch reform, forget the capitalist/communist subtitles, its all about politicians with cojones...

We will just have to wait out to see the conclusion.

[NeverSure]

Rows of dilapidated five-story dormitories in the city of Nantong, previously housing China Rongsheng Heavy Industries Group Holdings Ltd.’s 38,000 employees, were abandoned after the shipbuilder teetering on collapse cut almost 80 percent of its workers over the past two years. Most video arcades, restaurants and shops serving them have closed.

A $6.6 trillion credit binge during the past five years, encouraged by Beijing policy makers as stimulus to combat a global economic slowdown, now threatens to stoke a debt crisis.

At stake are trillions of yuan in bank loans that companies producing everything from ships to steel to solar power are struggling to repay as the world’s second-largest economy heads for the weakest annual expansion since 1999. (emphasis mine)

By Bloomberg News - Nov 18, 2013 9:17 PM PT

-------------

Let's not forget that China is communist and it is harder to separate some corporate debt from government debt than it is in capitalist Western countries.

From your same Nov 2013 Bloomberg article:

“In the next three to four years, industries with excess capacity will be the main source of credit loss for banks and their nonperforming loans as China cleans up the legacy,” said Liao Qiang, a Beijing-based director at Standard & Poor’s. “The speed of the process will depend on the government’s determination and whether they are willing to incur short-term pain for long-term gain.”

And:

"Premier Li Keqiang, who took office in March, pledged to open the economy to market forces and strip power from the government in a process he described as “very painful and even feels like cutting one’s wrist.” In July, he vowed to curb overcapacity, which the government blames for driving down prices, eroding profits and generating pollution. Policy makers meeting in Beijing last week said they would elevate the role of markets in the nation’s economy."

Also:

“If credit allocation in China improves, the ultimate credit cycle and economy downturn will be mitigated,” Werner (analyst at Sanford Bernstein) wrote in an Oct. 21 note to investors. “However, if China continues to rely on debt to fund its economic growth, the country’s ultimate credit cycle will be more severe.”

As with most global economies in the last 5 years how the problems are addressed is far more important than the problems themselves. Sticking plaster or root and branch reform, forget the capitalist/communist subtitles, its all about politicians with cojones...

We will just have to wait out to see the conclusion.

China already has the massive debt and the overcapacity. Even if they tear down the overcapacity, the debt remains. There is not a market for the overcapacity. China's shadow banking system hides the truth and there is no transparency.

Now to China's military. Even if they had lots of money to spend on it, they lack the technology. They have been completely unable to copy (yes, they always copy rather than innovate which puts them behind the curve. Modern militaries are developing new things while China fails to copy the existing things) the stealth fighters, bombers, nuclear stealth subs, "shoot over the horizon" missiles, and so on.

Unless someone was stupid enough to fight China on its own soil (always a mistake and proven over and over) China ain't shit in the air or on the seas.

This is why the US thumbed its nose at China's recent "no fly zone" by sending 2 unarmed B-52 bombers through there. It knew China didn't dare do anything about it. China lost big face on that one, but it made the point.

[folium]

Rows of dilapidated five-story dormitories in the city of Nantong, previously housing China Rongsheng Heavy Industries Group Holdings Ltd.’s 38,000 employees, were abandoned after the shipbuilder teetering on collapse cut almost 80 percent of its workers over the past two years. Most video arcades, restaurants and shops serving them have closed.

A $6.6 trillion credit binge during the past five years, encouraged by Beijing policy makers as stimulus to combat a global economic slowdown, now threatens to stoke a debt crisis.

At stake are trillions of yuan in bank loans that companies producing everything from ships to steel to solar power are struggling to repay as the world’s second-largest economy heads for the weakest annual expansion since 1999. (emphasis mine)

By Bloomberg News - Nov 18, 2013 9:17 PM PT

-------------

Let's not forget that China is communist and it is harder to separate some corporate debt from government debt than it is in capitalist Western countries.

From your same Nov 2013 Bloomberg article:

“In the next three to four years, industries with excess capacity will be the main source of credit loss for banks and their nonperforming loans as China cleans up the legacy,” said Liao Qiang, a Beijing-based director at Standard & Poor’s. “The speed of the process will depend on the government’s determination and whether they are willing to incur short-term pain for long-term gain.”

And:

"Premier Li Keqiang, who took office in March, pledged to open the economy to market forces and strip power from the government in a process he described as “very painful and even feels like cutting one’s wrist.” In July, he vowed to curb overcapacity, which the government blames for driving down prices, eroding profits and generating pollution. Policy makers meeting in Beijing last week said they would elevate the role of markets in the nation’s economy."

Also:

“If credit allocation in China improves, the ultimate credit cycle and economy downturn will be mitigated,” Werner (analyst at Sanford Bernstein) wrote in an Oct. 21 note to investors. “However, if China continues to rely on debt to fund its economic growth, the country’s ultimate credit cycle will be more severe.”

As with most global economies in the last 5 years how the problems are addressed is far more important than the problems themselves. Sticking plaster or root and branch reform, forget the capitalist/communist subtitles, its all about politicians with cojones...

We will just have to wait out to see the conclusion.

China already has the massive debt and the overcapacity. Even if they tear down the overcapacity, the debt remains. There is not a market for the overcapacity. China's shadow banking system hides the truth and there is no transparency.

Now to China's military. Even if they had lots of money to spend on it, they lack the technology. They have been completely unable to copy (yes, they always copy rather than innovate which puts them behind the curve. Modern militaries are developing new things while China fails to copy the existing things) the stealth fighters, bombers, nuclear stealth subs, "shoot over the horizon" missiles, and so on.

Unless someone was stupid enough to fight China on its own soil (always a mistake and proven over and over) China ain't shit in the air or on the seas.

I wouldn't get too excited about superior technology. Look at the Allied forces tanks in WW2. The mass produced M4 Shermans (nicknamed Tommy Cookers or Ronsons, after an advert, "lights up the first time, every time"), or the Soviet T34 series were hardly technological masterpieces compared to Panthers or Tigers, but there were just a shed load of them and could be expended and replaced at a rate that the Germans could not match. No fun for the crews but a war-winning strategy of quantity over quality. See Chinese tactics during Korea for the quantity/quality debate.

[folium]

Rows of dilapidated five-story dormitories in the city of Nantong, previously housing China Rongsheng Heavy Industries Group Holdings Ltd.’s 38,000 employees, were abandoned after the shipbuilder teetering on collapse cut almost 80 percent of its workers over the past two years. Most video arcades, restaurants and shops serving them have closed.

A $6.6 trillion credit binge during the past five years, encouraged by Beijing policy makers as stimulus to combat a global economic slowdown, now threatens to stoke a debt crisis.

At stake are trillions of yuan in bank loans that companies producing everything from ships to steel to solar power are struggling to repay as the world’s second-largest economy heads for the weakest annual expansion since 1999. (emphasis mine)

By Bloomberg News - Nov 18, 2013 9:17 PM PT

-------------

Let's not forget that China is communist and it is harder to separate some corporate debt from government debt than it is in capitalist Western countries.

From your same Nov 2013 Bloomberg article:

“In the next three to four years, industries with excess capacity will be the main source of credit loss for banks and their nonperforming loans as China cleans up the legacy,” said Liao Qiang, a Beijing-based director at Standard & Poor’s. “The speed of the process will depend on the government’s determination and whether they are willing to incur short-term pain for long-term gain.”

And:

"Premier Li Keqiang, who took office in March, pledged to open the economy to market forces and strip power from the government in a process he described as “very painful and even feels like cutting one’s wrist.” In July, he vowed to curb overcapacity, which the government blames for driving down prices, eroding profits and generating pollution. Policy makers meeting in Beijing last week said they would elevate the role of markets in the nation’s economy."

Also:

“If credit allocation in China improves, the ultimate credit cycle and economy downturn will be mitigated,” Werner (analyst at Sanford Bernstein) wrote in an Oct. 21 note to investors. “However, if China continues to rely on debt to fund its economic growth, the country’s ultimate credit cycle will be more severe.”

As with most global economies in the last 5 years how the problems are addressed is far more important than the problems themselves. Sticking plaster or root and branch reform, forget the capitalist/communist subtitles, its all about politicians with cojones...

We will just have to wait out to see the conclusion.

This is why the US thumbed its nose at China's recent "no fly zone" by sending 2 unarmed B-52 bombers through there. It knew China didn't dare do anything about it. China lost big face on that one, but it made the point.

Flights into US, Japanese and UK ADIZs by Soviet Bears and Blackjacks were fairly routine pre-1989 and have recommenced more recently under Tsar Vlad.

Don't mistake an ADIZ for a no-fly zone.

Radar should pick up any incursions and then fighters can intercept (if they can catch them, always tricky with the Blackjacks),and shadow any "visitors".

This is not Top Gun with Maverick and IceMan flicking to guns and downing bogies. Over-enthusiasm leads to screw-ups like Hainan in 2001 or KAL007 in 1983.

http://indrus.in/articles/2012/11/28/bomber_patrols_why_russia_is_pulling_back_19399.html

http://freebeacon.com/bears-buzz-alaska-again/

http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-2279699/Russian-bombers-US-scrambles-jet-fighters-Russian-nuclear-bombers-circle-airspace-Guam.html

How many Soviet or Russian Bears/Blackjacks have been shot down over UK/US/Japan ADIZs? Zero....

[NeverSure]

Rows of dilapidated five-story dormitories in the city of Nantong, previously housing China Rongsheng Heavy Industries Group Holdings Ltd.’s 38,000 employees, were abandoned after the shipbuilder teetering on collapse cut almost 80 percent of its workers over the past two years. Most video arcades, restaurants and shops serving them have closed.

A $6.6 trillion credit binge during the past five years, encouraged by Beijing policy makers as stimulus to combat a global economic slowdown, now threatens to stoke a debt crisis.

At stake are trillions of yuan in bank loans that companies producing everything from ships to steel to solar power are struggling to repay as the world’s second-largest economy heads for the weakest annual expansion since 1999. (emphasis mine)

By Bloomberg News - Nov 18, 2013 9:17 PM PT

-------------

Let's not forget that China is communist and it is harder to separate some corporate debt from government debt than it is in capitalist Western countries.

From your same Nov 2013 Bloomberg article:

“In the next three to four years, industries with excess capacity will be the main source of credit loss for banks and their nonperforming loans as China cleans up the legacy,” said Liao Qiang, a Beijing-based director at Standard & Poor’s. “The speed of the process will depend on the government’s determination and whether they are willing to incur short-term pain for long-term gain.”

And:

"Premier Li Keqiang, who took office in March, pledged to open the economy to market forces and strip power from the government in a process he described as “very painful and even feels like cutting one’s wrist.” In July, he vowed to curb overcapacity, which the government blames for driving down prices, eroding profits and generating pollution. Policy makers meeting in Beijing last week said they would elevate the role of markets in the nation’s economy."

Also:

“If credit allocation in China improves, the ultimate credit cycle and economy downturn will be mitigated,” Werner (analyst at Sanford Bernstein) wrote in an Oct. 21 note to investors. “However, if China continues to rely on debt to fund its economic growth, the country’s ultimate credit cycle will be more severe.”

As with most global economies in the last 5 years how the problems are addressed is far more important than the problems themselves. Sticking plaster or root and branch reform, forget the capitalist/communist subtitles, its all about politicians with cojones...

We will just have to wait out to see the conclusion.

China already has the massive debt and the overcapacity. Even if they tear down the overcapacity, the debt remains. There is not a market for the overcapacity. China's shadow banking system hides the truth and there is no transparency.

Now to China's military. Even if they had lots of money to spend on it, they lack the technology. They have been completely unable to copy (yes, they always copy rather than innovate which puts them behind the curve. Modern militaries are developing new things while China fails to copy the existing things) the stealth fighters, bombers, nuclear stealth subs, "shoot over the horizon" missiles, and so on.

Unless someone was stupid enough to fight China on its own soil (always a mistake and proven over and over) China ain't shit in the air or on the seas.

I wouldn't get too excited about superior technology. Look at the Allied forces tanks in WW2. The mass produced M4 Shermans (nicknamed Tommy Cookers or Ronsons, after an advert, "lights up the first time, every time"), or the Soviet T34 series were hardly technological masterpieces compared to Panthers or Tigers, but there were just a shed load of them and could be expended and replaced at a rate that the Germans could not match. No fun for the crews but a war-winning strategy of quantity over quality. See Chinese tactics during Korea for the quantity/quality debate.

I thought you just complained about dated information. ??

When you change the subject from the situation today, to WWII, I know you've run out of ideas for real debate about today.

My dad was a machine gunner in one of those tanks. He was at D-Day. He fought through France into Belgium where he was badly wounded. He is still alive at 96 and without him and his fellow troops, you would be doing the goose step today.

I have no idea why the Brits hate the US for saving their asses enough to cheer on China's evil communism, but you are blind.

[jimmybcool]

I wouldn't get too excited about superior technology. Look at the Allied forces tanks in WW2. The mass produced M4 Shermans (nicknamed Tommy Cookers or Ronsons, after an advert, "lights up the first time, every time"), or the Soviet T34 series were hardly technological masterpieces compared to Panthers or Tigers, but there were just a shed load of them and could be expended and replaced at a rate that the Germans could not match. No fun for the crews but a war-winning strategy of quantity over quality. See Chinese tactics during Korea for the quantity/quality debate.

The T34 series is probably the most apt use of numbers versus quality. I believe I read somewhere once that the Russian crews were ordered if they saw a Nazi King Tiger tank they were to not waste time shooting at it as it was apparently impervious to their gun. They were to make all effort to ram it. And stay rammed locking their tank to the Tigers treads. Two or three of them to do so if necessary. The simplicity of the Russian and Yank tanks to construct meant the Allies could trade 3 for 1 and gain ground.

But I don't feel this is an apt comparison to what we are talking about here. Yes, if anyone is foolish enough to invade China their numbers will have an impact on the outcome. However we are talking about projecting force via Naval and Air forces. In this area quantity doesn't trump quality. China could put to sea with 20 battleships and 10 carriers and likely not match a single US carrier task force. Likely not return with any of these ships. Or land a blow. The technology to kill before the enemy even sees you is a massive advantage in naval and aerial combat and China lags in those areas. They know it.

Not that it truly matters since as noted above the US and China are in a lover embrace financially.

[folium]

@NeverSure re your comments about ungrateful Brits, etc

Well there's a coincidence, my dad also fought through Normandy in a Sherman and he knew exactly its failings losing more than a few good friends, but mercifully his unit were one of the first to be re-equipped with Comets, probably the only decent Allied tank that made it to WW2. So thanks for the lecture about "otherwise be goosestepping" etc, or I'll have to respond with the equally churlish and unnecessary barbed comment from late 1943 referring to the arrival of US units and also harking back to 1917, "better late than never...again".

Not sure where you get the US hating nonsense from, personally I'm a big fan from both family and professional perspectives.

My dad's takeaway from his experiences, and one that I utterly concur with, is that going to war better be for a d__n good reason and done properly.

Not blind, just very aware of the consequences of big talk at a convenient distance from the sharp end.

My point remains the same that, thanks to globalization and intertwined economies, a conflict in the western Pacific over meaningless scraps of rock and reef is in no one's interest, and while there will no doubt be plenty of willy-waving from both sides to satisfy armchair generals back home, lets just hope that the politicians keep a suitable lid on actual events.

[jimmybcool]

My point remains the same that, thanks to globalization and intertwined economies, a conflict in the western Pacific over meaningless scraps of rock and reef is in no one's interest, and while there will no doubt be plenty of willy-waving from both sides to satisfy armchair generals back home, lets just hope that the politicians keep a suitable lid on actual events.

Actually don't those rocks sit on top of a lot of mineral and oil reserves? Could be that is what this is all about.

[NeverSure]

So thanks for the lecture about "otherwise be goosestepping" etc, or I'll have to respond with the equally churlish and unnecessary barbed comment from late 1943 referring to the arrival of US units and also harking back to 1917, "better late than never...again". -snip-

You seem to want to avoid the topic here which is China's behavior, and perhaps its capability. You lost that one.

Better late than never? Late to what? The US didn't want to go to war but Churchill came over and begged first for equipment after Britain's fleet was sunk, and then for more. The US gave planes, etc., and then some troops, and then... 1/2 million US troops died over there.

[folium]

So thanks for the lecture about "otherwise be goosestepping" etc, or I'll have to respond with the equally churlish and unnecessary barbed comment from late 1943 referring to the arrival of US units and also harking back to 1917, "better late than never...again". -snip-

You seem to want to avoid the topic here which is China's behavior, and perhaps its capability. You lost that one.

Better late than never? Late to what? The US didn't want to go to war but Churchill came over and begged first for equipment after Britain's fleet was sunk, and then for more. The US gave planes, etc., and then some troops, and then... 1/2 million US troops died over there.

China's behaviour?

Posturing for a domestic audience and seeing what it can get away with. Likelihood of pushing it to full blown conflict? Slim, unless Beijing totally loses the plot.

Chinese capability? Quantity not quality, but don't mess with them, rather like the Turkish military writ large. Again likelihood of full blown conflict, slim, due to commercial/financial/operational capability considerations.

You might need to brush up on your history. Check out the Sept 1940 Bases for Destroyers Agreement, Roosevelt's Dec 1940 Arsenal for Democracy pledge and the vital Lend Lease Deal of March 1941 which passed Congress in the teeth of isolationist Republican opposition. Also the BPC bought planes (they actually commissioned and paid for the development of the finest Allied fighter of the war, the P51 Mustang), and other hardware with gold in the Cash And Carry arrangement to allow Roosevelt to sidestep the Neutrality Acts.

Pearl Harbor gave the US little choice about going to war and I am not sure what you mean by the British fleet being sunk in 1940/41?

If you would like to check the link below you will see the breakdown of US losses in WW2.

U.S. Combat Dead by Theater of war: Europe–Atlantic 183,588 (Army ground forces 141,088, United States Army Air Forces 36,461, and Navy/Coast Guard 6,039)

http://cgsc.cdmhost.com/cdm/compoundobject/collection/p4013coll8/id/130

Removing the scourge of Hitler from Europe and the Japanese from the Pacific theatre was a phenomenal achievement by many millions of people from a wide range of countries. Avoiding such a bloodbath in the future is in everyone's best interest.

[NeverSure]

So thanks for the lecture about "otherwise be goosestepping" etc, or I'll have to respond with the equally churlish and unnecessary barbed comment from late 1943 referring to the arrival of US units and also harking back to 1917, "better late than never...again". -snip-

You seem to want to avoid the topic here which is China's behavior, and perhaps its capability. You lost that one.

Better late than never? Late to what? The US didn't want to go to war but Churchill came over and begged first for equipment after Britain's fleet was sunk, and then for more. The US gave planes, etc., and then some troops, and then... 1/2 million US troops died over there.

China's behaviour?

Posturing for a domestic audience and seeing what it can get away with. Likelihood of pushing it to full blown conflict? Slim, unless Beijing totally loses the plot.

Chinese capability? Quantity not quality, but don't mess with them, rather like the Turkish military writ large. Again likelihood of full blown conflict, slim, due to commercial/financial/operational capability considerations.

You might need to brush up on your history. Check out the Sept 1940 Bases for Destroyers Agreement, Roosevelt's Dec 1940 Arsenal for Democracy pledge and the vital Lend Lease Deal of March 1941 which passed Congress in the teeth of isolationist Republican opposition. Also the BPC bought planes (they actually commissioned and paid for the development of the finest Allied fighter of the war, the P51 Mustang), and other hardware with gold in the Cash And Carry arrangement to allow Roosevelt to sidestep the Neutrality Acts.

Pearl Harbor gave the US little choice about going to war and I am not sure what you mean by the British fleet being sunk in 1940/41?

If you would like to check the link below you will see the breakdown of US losses in WW2.

U.S. Combat Dead by Theater of war: Europe–Atlantic 183,588 (Army ground forces 141,088, United States Army Air Forces 36,461, and Navy/Coast Guard 6,039)

http://cgsc.cdmhost.com/cdm/compoundobject/collection/p4013coll8/id/130

Removing the scourge of Hitler from Europe and the Japanese from the Pacific theatre was a phenomenal achievement by many millions of people from a wide range of countries. Avoiding such a bloodbath in the future is in everyone's best interest.

This thread topic is:

China's Navy Breaks out to the High Seas

You lost that debate so we have to keep talking about WWII?

[Scott]

Please stay on topic.

[folium]

So thanks

for the lecture about "otherwise be goosestepping" etc, or I'll have to

respond with the equally churlish and unnecessary barbed comment from

late 1943 referring to the arrival of US units and also harking back to 1917,

"better late than never...again". -snip-

You seem to want to avoid the topic here which is China's behavior, and

perhaps its capability. You lost that one.

Better late than never? Late to what? The US didn't want to go to war but

Churchill came over and begged first for equipment after Britain's fleet was

sunk, and then for more. The US gave planes, etc., and then some troops,

and then... 1/2 million US troops died over there.

China's behaviour?

Posturing for a domestic audience and seeing what it can get away with.

Likelihood of pushing it to full blown conflict? Slim, unless Beijing totally

loses the plot.

Chinese capability? Quantity not quality, but don't mess with them, rather

like the Turkish military writ large. Again likelihood of full blown conflict,

slim, due to commercial/financial/operational capability considerations.

You might need to brush up on your history. Check out the Sept 1940 Bases for Destroyers Agreement, Roosevelt's Dec 1940 Arsenal for

Democracy pledge and the vital Lend Lease Deal of March 1941 which

passed Congress in the teeth of isolationist Republican opposition. Also the

BPC bought planes (they actually commissioned and paid for the

development of the finest Allied fighter of the war, the P51 Mustang), and

other hardware with gold in the Cash And Carry arrangement to allow

Roosevelt to sidestep the Neutrality Acts.

Pearl Harbor gave the US little choice about going to war and I am not

sure what you mean by the British fleet being sunk in 1940/41?

If you would like to check the link below you will see the breakdown of US

losses in WW2.

U.S. Combat Dead by Theater of war: EuropeAtlantic 183,588 (Army

ground forces 141,088,

United

States Army Air Forces 36,461, and Navy/Coast Guard 6,039)

http://cgsc.cdmhost.com/cdm/compoundobject/collection/p4013coll8/id/

130

Removing the scourge of Hitler from Europe and the Japanese from the

Pacific theatre was a phenomenal achievement by many millions of people

from a wide range of countries. Avoiding such a bloodbath in the future is

in everyone's best interest.

This thread topic is:

China's Navy Breaks out to the High Seas

You lost that debate so we have to keep talking about WWII?

Happy to debate about whatever comes up on the thread.

Premature declarations of "Mission Accomplished" tend to be somewhat embarrassing, so what exactly is the point you are putting forward concerning Chinese naval capabilities or lack of, before WW2 reared it's

ugly head?

[LawrenceChee]

The Chinese pride and identity over its recent success is a long term restoration to its past status as a world player. History tells us there is rise /falls of nation and we must be graceful in accepting as each giant falls into the background, another must rise to take its place.

As a communist country, they carry a lot of advantages on the political front to achieve certain goals / reforms that are impossible in a bi-partisan structure and yet that very format also carries with it a natural target board for critism that it must accept over many issues and handling especially when you are doing well and there is a tinge of envy. China is learning and adapting to that.

The Navy uprising and the railroad construction are pillars to China's ability to protect itself and indeed, for every country that thinks China is irrelevant in terms of its technological advances, there are also countries which marvel at its ability to stand against some tough critics and deliver the results.

China will continue to build up on its navies and army abilities and while technologically inferior to the west, the tenacity and the sheer quantity of its army is a good deterrant for any countries foolish enough to think they can strike China again like a ragdoll. It wont happen again in the very near future

There is no doubt in this region, the best technological army belongs to the Japanese. There is also no doubt the biggest interest in establishing trade ties with no conditions will continue to be the tool China use to engage its neighbors in diplomacy...some like it ..some find it distasteful and again there is a renewed confidence in China that like many of its western powers USA, UK, Australia and the likes...at times you really dont have to win over everyone in your policies and decisions. You just have to do your own thing and be comfortable in it.

BTW ..there is no doubt at the back on my mind that this starwars ...ac / dc or whatever fanciful acronym will win no wars as eventually you will run out of money and missiles in fighting an enemy that likes to stay hidden in the background...the Taleban have set a precedent ...hide in the mountains and eventually the bombing will have to stop...all these "shock and swe" can only last for months at most and it will run of money and political will...sit tight and wait.

[Publicus]

Foreign holders of US Treasury debt as of Sept 2013:

http://www.treasury.gov/resource-center/data-chart-center/tic/Documents/mfh.txt

T-bills or other debt instruments are very rarely redeemable on demand but there is a market for anything and everything, though of course the selling price is only as ever as high as the highest price a buyer is prepared to pay. Bottom line China and the US are locked in a financial embrace that neither would want to duck out of needlessly.

There's nothing new about local insurgencies being the mainstay of conflict, intra-state warfare has always been the exception albeit often disproportionate in its impact when it does occur. Look at US history, how many serious international conflicts has it been involved in, compared to internal or regional "police" operations (eg endless excursions to places such as DR, Haiti, Honduras, Panama, Nicaragua, Colombia or Grenada)?

Who would have predicted that the US would become a superpower in 1890? Forecasting is a game littered with the corpses of once-wise players...

PS 53% of the Chinese population was urbanized at the end of 2012 and it is forecast to rise to 70% by 2035 (in 1990 it was a mere 26%). A number equivalent to the current population of the USA (north of 300 million) will move from rural to urban areas between 2010 and 2025. Like the US, China only deals in big numbers!

I get the feeling that it won't only be "peasants" in China that are clamouring for a larger slice of the pie as income inequality becomes a greater issue globally.

Thanks for the chart. I was too lazy to look it up. And it shows China is one of many debt holders of US national debt. The largest but not a majority stake holder. And I like your phrasing - Bottom line China and the US are locked in a financial embrace that neither would want to duck out of needlessly. Which is why China can not become a superpower if it destroys the US economy by dumping it's T-bills.

Which of course if it tried would be worth a lot less on the open market than waiting for maturity.

I am surprised at the number of Chinese moving to the cities. If 300 million are living in urban areas that would mean 800 million in the farms. And at that point it becomes problematic for the chinese officials.

I don't see a relentless march to world superpower for China. It may happen. Or not. And the US may fade in 20 years. Or not. No clue. At this point I'd side with the US pulling away from failure as easier than china reaching success. But ya never know.

The present situation of having a sole superpower is historically unusual, normally there are 2 or 3 overlapping.

You slightly miss the point re urbanization in China. There are currently almost 700 million Chinese living in urban areas with another 300 million odd forecast to join them over the next 2 decades.

Both the US and China can be superpowers simultaneously if they manage their internal and external affairs carefully.

You are correct. I misread your post.

Wow. I believed that the majority of Chinese were still living in rural areas and not participating in the real economy. If that isn't true it makes a massive difference in my thought processes on Chinas future. How will they assimilate all of those people?

I see problems in China's future. Hopefully they are bumps that can be managed and don't upset the world applecart.

I'm glad you asked.

A major reason the Cold War (the first one) ended is that the US bankrupted the former USSR into spending a huge amount on its military in addition to the vast amounts the CCCP itself decided to spend on thousands of nuclear warheads and missiles, dozens of nuclear powered submarines, a huge standing army etc etc.

The USSR failed to provide for a consumption based domestic economy while overspending on its military. The CCP-PRC needs to do the same as the former Soviet Union needed to do and failed to do. While the CCP is absolutely mortified of political reform lest it suffer the Gorbechev effect, it none the less is following the path of the former USSR in military spending and failing to developed a domestic base to its economy.

More over, the CCP-PRC has a problem the former USSR had but not to the extent of the CCP-PRC, i.e., the CCP-PRC is buried in debt and rotted through and through by corruption that is endemic and massive, making the CCCP look like Boy Scouts..

Employees at CCP state owned "enterprises" as they're called work two days a week; those who work five days sit around for three days - they all get cash bonuses and special benefits to buy housing and food. This is in addition to being paid exceedingly well, much better than the ordinary citizen.

The CCP's military budget assumes lebensraum, I.e., the "acquisition" of living space outside of the CCP-PRC, something already begun in Tibet and in the Xinyang Uyughur Autonomous Administrative Region. The CCP plans further expansion - outside of their existing borders and on other continents.

This is one reason the CCP has paid little or no attention to the environment. The sheeple of the CCP-PRC have the bad habit of breathing while the air is unfit for human habitation. The PRChinese have the additional bad habit of needing water to drink while the rivers, lakes, streams and waterways are full of dead fish, dead pigs, dead humans, industrial and human waste. Arable land is being turned over into housing so the CCP has to import food from among other places, the United States.

China’s Soviet-Style Suburbia Heralds Environmental Pain

China has shifted more than 300 million people into cities since 1995 -- about twice the population of Russia -- and Premier Li Keqiang must find a way to accommodate almost as many again from the countryside without further wrecking the environment and causing the nation’s fuel bill to soar

“If China doesn’t do the right thing now it will be locked into an inefficient infrastructure that leads to more congestion and more pollution,” said Shobhakar Dhakal, former executive director of the Global Carbon Project, an international scientific program hosted by the National Institute for Environmental Studies in Japan. “There’s an urgent need for the government to provide incentives for urban growth to follow a more efficient path.”

http://www.bloomberg.com/news/2013-11-06/china-s-soviet-style-suburbia-heralds-environmental-pain.html

China: Urbanization and Hukou Reform

Put simply, because migrants earn less and have less security they play a much smaller part in the economy than permanent urban residents who have better access to well paid jobs and social services.

Therefore, without reform, the hukou system will lock out ever greater numbers from China's emerging middle class and make economic rebalancing an uphill battle.

Left unchecked, this growing dissatisfaction could precipitate serious social unrest as millions feel they are being left behind while a privileged elite surges ahead.

http://thediplomat.com/2013/10/11/china-urbanization-and-hukou-reform/

[LawrenceChee]

Quote " - Employees at CCP state owned "enterprises" as they're called work two days a week; those who work five days sit around for three days - they all get cash bonuses and special benefits to buy housing and food. This is in addition to being paid exceedingly well, much better than the ordinary citizen.

Where is the proof of this ? That they work so little hours

For a moment, I could have swore you were describing senators in USA, MPs of UK and even the richest prime minister in the world from Singapore.

I see MPs sleeping in live TV in Singapore too and they are paid a healthy sum...don't see any pitchforks thrown at them yet. Or how about the Thai MP who was thrown out recently for surfing porn on his smart phone....silly if one thinks your local MP is working hard for average Joe....most govt officials are held in high regard in most countries.

As a Chinese parent would teach their children...better depend on yourself than the government.

[Ulysses G.]

BTW ..there is no doubt at the back on my mind that this starwars ...ac / dc or whatever fanciful acronym will win no wars as eventually you will run out of money and missiles in fighting an enemy that likes to stay hidden in the background...the Taleban have set a precedent ...hide in the mountains and eventually the bombing will have to stop...all these "shock and swe" can only last for months at most and it will run of money and political will...sit tight and wait.

You are talking about invading and occupying another country. Superior technology works just fine, if your purpose is to dissuade someone from bothering you or your allies - setting up artificial boundries for example.

[Ulysses G.]

Quote " - Employees at CCP state owned "enterprises" as they're called work two days a week; those who work five days sit around for three days - they all get cash bonuses and special benefits to buy housing and food. This is in addition to being paid exceedingly well, much better than the ordinary citizen.

Where is the proof of this ? That they work so little hours

For a moment, I could have swore you were describing senators in USA, MPs of UK and even the richest prime minister in the world from Singapore.

I'm pretty sure that there are a lot more employees at CCP state-owned enterprises than Senators and that they are a lot more of a drag on the economy.

[Publicus]

The quoted article below is written by Perry Link and appeared in the October issue of The China File, published by the Asia Society in New York. It discusses CCP-PRC prisons and torture.

It is followed by my commentary.

China: “Capitulate or Things Will Get Worse”

Elsewhere [the Chinese writer Han] Han brings deep insight to the question of cultural insecurity. Several essays satirize what he sees as Chinese hypersensitivity to insult:

"The virtues that we celebrate here in China—modesty, sincerity, diligence, simplicity, helpfulness, warmth, unity—are, in fact, the qualities that we most lack. We’re actually quite hopeless at these things…[but] of course, we Chinese always rate the Chinese people very highly. We should be content with that. After all, a full one-fifth of the world’s population thinks we’re wonderful."

http://www.chinafile.com/china-capitulate-or-things-will-get-worse

One cultural deficiency of the CCP-PRC communist dictatorship is that their simplistic teaching is accepted that history is the history of the rise and fall of empires. Indeed, while history has its empires, history is the linear progression of human rights, democracy and self government over rule by emperors, autocrats, dictators; that rule by dictatorship and enforced utopianism is reactionary, dangerous, self-defeating.

If there was a 20th century empire it was the Soviet Union, now long vanished into the trash heap of history. Yet the CCP teaching is still accepted by the sheeple of the PRC that the United States is an empire and that it is an empire in inevitable and irreversible decline, to be succeeded by the new Empire of the CCP Dragon.

This belief is fantasy and ideology mixed with ethnocentrism.

The CCP dictators do know they can't hide with their (obsolete) army in the mountains and the countryside as Mao did 80 years ago against the Japanese and also Chiang Kai Shek. The PRChina cannot hide in the mountains to wait out the inevitable reaction to the storm it means to create.

That's because the PRChina today has trillions of dollars of infrastructure in cities containing a concentrated population to lose. To say hide it out and wait is cultural and intellectual drivel, suicide.

The CCP-PRC is building its armed forces to the tune of trillions of dollars in value. It is menacing all of its neighbors throughout the Indo-Pacific region. History has taught us we need to say the words dictators and world conquest in the same one breath, and to prepare accordingly.

Would that it were otherwise.

[FDog]

Quote " - Employees at CCP state owned "enterprises" as they're called work two days a week; those who work five days sit around for three days - they all get cash bonuses and special benefits to buy housing and food. This is in addition to being paid exceedingly well, much better than the ordinary citizen.

Where is the proof of this ? That they work so little hours

For a moment, I could have swore you were describing senators in USA, MPs of UK and even the richest prime minister in the world from Singapore.

I see MPs sleeping in live TV in Singapore too and they are paid a healthy sum...don't see any pitchforks thrown at them yet. Or how about the Thai MP who was thrown out recently for surfing porn on his smart phone....silly if one thinks your local MP is working hard for average Joe....most govt officials are held in high regard in most countries.

As a Chinese parent would teach their children...better depend on yourself than the government.

The truth doesn't sit well with the Sinophobe.

[Publicus]

China’s Hubris on the High Seas

Despite all the hype, the PLA Navy’s achievements remain relatively modest.

China’s leadership appears prone to hubris. Whether that failing is mostly a Chinese thing, or a communist thing, or a Chinese Communist thing, is open to debate. Whatever the case, a parable of China’s inexorable rise appears to beguile folk in Beijing and other power centers. History, they believe, is on China’s side.

http://thediplomat.com/2013/12/chinas-hubris-on-the-high-seas/

The analysis is by Captain James R Holmes PhD, associate professor of Naval Strategy and History at the US Naval War College, to which the CCP-PRC hasn't any equivalent or anything resembling such a thing.

The Naval War College is for senior grade naval officers who are preparing to assume Flag Rank, i.e., admiral, vice admiral, rear admiral, and to take positions of high strategic command and staff, either at the Pentagon or of strategic theaters of naval operations in various parts of the world (or at each).

The challenge to the United States and its allies is that the people who have 100% hubris over a couple of millennia don't ask questions about it - neither do they listen.

They never have any knowledge of hubris, even after it's too late.

In the home of Sun Tsu, China, It's been too late numerous times over the past 2500 years - conquered by the Mongols and the Manchus, the Brits, Japan and others - yet they still haven't any idea of hubris.

Indeed, of the four ancient centers and the birthplaces of civilization - Greece, Egypt, India, China - conscientiousness of hubris existed only in Greece and is most consistently and duly respected in Western civilization.

While hubris can and does affect all people everywhere at one time or another, it seems to have a permanent and recurring home in only certain places of the world.

Places such as the Middle Kingdom.

[drx13]

quote by OP "

I am unsure why some of the posters insist in linking "inventing" something , nobel prize winners to being relevant, powerful or having a competent army / navy."

Anyone unsure about the above is hardly suited to engage in this debate.

However there is always hope, perhaps a search of the scientific publications and some popular science on "Nature and Nurture"

might help if the reader has sufficient education.

[Scott]

An off-topic post has been deleted. Stay on topic please.

[drx13]

I think there is a good analysis of the sort of problems the Chinese will have in operating anything requiring initiative is running in a post about schooling here, but the poster makes a broader Asian look.

http://www.thaivisa.com/forum/topic/686163-would-you-send-your-child-to-thai-schools/#entry7119354

it is #10

Edited: Here's a link directly to the post: http://www.thaivisa.com/forum/topic/686163-would-you-send-your-child-to-thai-schools/?p=7118902

[Scott]

Off-topic post deleted. The topic is China's navy.

[boomerangutang]

There were some well crafted programs on TV, a few years ago, which claimed Chinese from hundreds of years ago had built giant ships and traveled far and wide around the world. I need to research it, but my gut feeling (from brief exposure to the TV series) is it's contrived. In other words, the claims of large fleets of Chinese ships visiting many ports around the world, pre-Marco Polo, look dubious, and possibly were crafted to bolster current Chinese nationalism. What thinks ye?

[F430murci]

I wonder how much of a navy they might be if they had to rely on techologies they developed ,still be junks.

Yeah, like Gunpowder, Medicine, Paper and the Compass - Never under estimate your adversary (see note *)

Ya got anything from the last 20 generations?

It's not all that long ago that Japan was the copycat nation. There are plenty of bright folks in China.

No, the bright ones leave China and move to the US. No one with any sense would stay in China.