The US doesn't take the long view. This is historical, the orginal colonies put off the slave issue until it started a civil war. It's just our nature, we see things in now and tommorrow...not 20 years from now.

I understand the flaw in that rationalization. Still, thinking too far ahead doesn't make sense either. If you focus on traffic 20 miles from you, you will miss the traffic right in front of you. Still, the US used to be heavy into isolationism, not even 100 years ago. Don't think it might not consider that option again in the future. Some folks in the world might be glad if that happened, but I doubt they would stay glad very long.

not really, if you listen to what the Chinese want, they actually want the American to start returning their money. To make their point clear to Obama, They actually sold US bond for a couple of month!

China is well aware it has the domestic market to keep growing, it export to US is not as large as most assumed and can be easily absorbed by stimulus which the Chinese has no lack of money to achieve.

there are those who have repeated US would tanked if American start saving yet back with no reasoning, believing purely in the words of economist that cause this crisis, and ignoring the fact that the banks they are working for is benefiting from this debt; surely have the intentions of economist been considered?



there is 200 million car in China. This year, China now sell more cars then US, replacing it as the world largest car market, including electric hybrid vehicles. the claim of 2/100 is fairly out of touch with the reality of China which is approaching 2/10. :ywave:

at the rate it is going, in a year or two, it would exceed US 230 million cars population. and there is a good reason why chinese carmaker stock jump 200%.

furthermore, China is investing heavily on mass transit, I believe the future is not in Cars, but effective cities where you can go anywhere you want in 20 mins without even needing to look for a parking spot. so you are quite right that convenience is what would win the day; only that Cars are no longer a conveniences! :ywave:

I too believe that cars will play a lesser role in the future. However mass transit is not convenient for large areas and rural areas. I live in the suburbs and dear god if i did not have a car it would take forever to get anywhere. However if i moved to DC where mass transit is readily at hand i would not have a car. I think mass transit will take a bigger hold in cities hell even the US is slowly but surly expanding public transportation. For the people who choose to live outside cities electric cars and hydrogen would be the best fit.
China needs more public transportation and less cars till that smog issue is taken care of.

Then stop saying something similar like "I'm smarter than you" to others.

I said "I can't take you seriously". Let's see what you wrote before: "I'm willing to take up this challenge you've set. Were you sincerely offering it to me or was it some sort of bluff move you set up to make you sound intelligent?"

Do you really have to make people more angry to make your point, even if what you said is right, wrong, or in-between? This is how you offend more and more people. Just like your comment above.

I see that you got banned... AGAIN. Sigh, please stop doing this to yourself.

Anyway, it was nice meeting you. Get some help first of all.

Like I said before, China certainly has the population and resources. Allthough I would say several 100 million are below poverty level. The US itself may not dominate the world as much as it has when China tries to assert itself more, wich is fine by me, trying to be all things to all people isn't worth the headache. China can play with that mess for a while.

Though it will more than likely just drop down to 25% of the worlds GNP, wich is what it averaged before WW2. That's still a quarter of the whole, reguardless of what the rest of the world does. It's simply due to demographics, the US is essentially 50 nations in one, with the resources and population to go with it.

That is not accurate.

That is incorrect on several levels.

Accutually, yes, it is acurate. They didn't want to have the "peculiar institution" stop the actual process of creating a nation. So a deal was struck between certain senators from the North to "skip" over that aspect for southern support.

This issue was futher pushed forward with the Mason Dixon line, and again with the 3/5ths rule. Until finially it just wasn't tenable and war erupted in 1865. Now yes, slavery wasn't the primary issue then as there were several. It was a culmination of constantly putting current problems on future dockets.

Kinda like how they are placeing increased levels of debt on future generations now. This behavior will bite you in the arse eventually, better to work out minor issues, before they become complicated major issues. For instance, what if Japan and the US had worked out thier problems back in the 1920's and early 30's? Perhaps they would have been on the same side, instead of opposing each other. Heh, how would that be for an alternate history anime..instead of Japan being on Germany's side, they were allied with the US.

No it isn't. The issue of slavery wasn't "put off," it was an issue around which social, economic, and political attitudes and concerns developed over time (not only in the US, btw).

Well Said ...

Agreed ..