[The Eagle]

US and Europe have been made redundant, the former superpowers are no longer needed.

Soon India will give handouts to the UK...

This post has been edited by awake_eagle: 30 March 2012 - 06:51 AM

[interestrateripoff]

Competition?

Is that allowed in the free market?

[VeryMeanReversion]

awake_eagle, on 30 March 2012 - 06:47 AM, said:

US and Europe have been made redundant, the former superpowers are no longer needed.

The US still has most of the real reserve currency ..... weapons.

[Gone baby gone]

VeryMeanReversion, on 30 March 2012 - 07:30 AM, said:

The US still has most of the real reserve currency ..... weapons.

I don't know, China has a few of them too!

The BRICs can do what they want, while they are still dependant on the developed countries as their export market, they will end up dancing to our tune.

[madpenguin]

What, on 30 March 2012 - 07:58 AM, said:

I don't know, China has a few of them too!

The BRICs can do what they want, while they are still dependant on the developed countries as their export market, they will end up dancing to our tune.

Precisely!, always amazes me that anyone commenting on the rise of the BRICS and so called "Tiger economies" always ignores where the money came from in the first place, if we stop buying, or bring the manufacturing and services home they would collapse back into obscurity.

Many people in these countries have known severe economic hardship in their lifetimes, I doubt they will become the kind of consumers who will replace demand from the West in sufficient number to keep the factories running, they will be more inclined to put the money in the bank or invest it

This post has been edited by madpenguin: 30 March 2012 - 08:14 AM

[Grrrr I'm a tiger]

What, on 30 March 2012 - 07:58 AM, said:

I don't know, China has a few of them too!

The BRICs can do what they want, while they are still dependant on the developed countries as their export market, they will end up dancing to our tune.

Exactly.

Would be the best thing in the world for them to boycott us and withhold their 'essential' exports from us.

Let's face it, this is Russia Today.

[R K]

Priceless.

They'll be at war with each other before we're taking Rouble's or Yuan in payment for anything.

Reading Putin's propoganda is bad for your mental health (unless he's paying you of course)

[georgia o'keeffe]

madpenguin, on 30 March 2012 - 08:07 AM, said:

Precisely!, always amazes me that anyone commenting on the rise of the BRICS and so called "Tiger economies" always ignores where the money came from in the first place, if we stop buying, or bring the manufacturing and services home they would collapse back into obscurity.

Many people in these countries have known severe economic hardship in their lifetimes, I doubt they will become the kind of consumers who will replace demand from the West in sufficient number to keep the factories running, they will be more inclined to put the money in the bank or invest it

ahh the usual hubris, we're great we are. the numbers are pretty clear and have been for years, both educationally and wealth wise, the middle classes in the BRICS are growing, in the west they are shrinking from a combination of deflation/stagflation, theres bitching on this site every day about how its not fair, as their middle classes grow it will naturally create internal demand as it has in every other country in History, as they fall in the west it will eventually reduce external demand and trade will somewhat relatively balance as far as it can outside of free markets, at some point in the future as will wealth, what will always determine who is successful and who falls by the wayside in both the West and Brics has bugger all to do with whats happened in the past but everything to do with what happens going forward and whats been happening, the wealthiest countries as ever will be those that are least corrupt and strike a reasonable internal wealth disparity balance. As far as I can see it’s the corruption in the west that has rocketed in the last decade and continues at a rate of knots which is why the political disharmony is rocketing their, in some of the secondary/tertiary countries it has/is falling, in some it remains the same

This post has been edited by Georgia O'Keeffe: 30 March 2012 - 08:40 AM

[Errol]

Red Knight, on 30 March 2012 - 08:24 AM, said:

Reading Putin's propoganda is bad for your mental health

No worse than reading the propaganda of Camoron or Obama (or any of the Euro fools for that matter). Indeed, in many ways, Putin talks a lot more sense.

[madpenguin]

Georgia O, on 30 March 2012 - 08:29 AM, said:

ahh the usual hubris, we're great we are. the numbers are pretty clear and have been for years, both educationally and wealth wise, the middle classes in the BRICS are growing, in the west they are shrinking from a combination of deflation/stagflation, theres bitching on this site every day about how its not fair, as their middle classes grow it will create internal demand, as they fall in the west it will eventually reduce external demand and trade will somewhat relatively balance at some point in the future as will wealth, what will determine who is successful and who falls by the wayside in both the West and Brics has bugger all to do with whats happened in the past but everything to do with what happens going forward and whats been happening, the wealthiest countries as ever will be those that are least corrupt and strike a reasonable internal wealth disparity / economic rent balance. As far as I can see it’s the corruption in the west that has rocketed in the last decade and continues at a rate of knots, in some of the secondary/tertiary countries it has fallen, in some it remains the same

And of course Russia, India and China are paragons of virtue with no corruption of any kind whatsoever

China and Russia may have a chance, India..unless they change radically will slide back into obscurity, having more poverty than any other country (including Africa) is no basis for establishing an economic powerhouse

[georgia o'keeffe]

madpenguin, on 30 March 2012 - 08:42 AM, said:

And of course Russia, India and China are paragons of virtue with no corruption of any kind whatsoever

China and Russia may have a chance, India..unless they change radically will slide back into obscurity, having more poverty than any other country (including Africa) is no basis for establishing an economic powerhouse

Which is why i highlighted the wealthiest countries will be those that have a reasonable gini and lowest corruption and stated some places its reducing, some its unchanged and some it been rocketing (most notably the West). Im not picking winners and losers, im just stating the ultimate reality

This post has been edited by Georgia O'Keeffe: 30 March 2012 - 08:47 AM

[madpenguin]

Georgia O, on 30 March 2012 - 08:46 AM, said:

Which is why i highlighted the wealthiest countries will be those that have a reasonable gini and lowest corruption and stated some places its reducing, some its unchanged and some it been rocketing (most notably the West). Im not picking winners and losers, im just stating the ultimate reality

If you suggest that economic success is somehow linked to low corruption I would suggest you are ignoring several thousand years of human history, and would also suggest you never get a job in either sales or politics

Corruption in one persons dictionary could be called expediency in anothers.

Look at any great economic empire and tell me corruption didn't play a big part in it's development, the recent Wikileaks papers on how the US operates show this clearly.

The British Empire virtually ran on bribes to local potentates and warlords

This post has been edited by madpenguin: 30 March 2012 - 09:19 AM

[easy2012]

madpenguin, on 30 March 2012 - 09:08 AM, said:

If you suggest that economic success is somehow linked to low corruption I would suggest you are ignoring several thousand years of human history, and would also suggest you never get a job in either sales or politics

Corruption in one persons dictionary could be called expediency in anothers.

Look at any great economic empire and tell me corruption didn't play a big part in it's development, the recent Wikileaks papers on how the US operates show this clearly.

The British Empire virtually ran on bribes to local potentates and warlords

I would say complacency, sense of entitlement and hubris are they key to determine who are the winners and losers.

[madpenguin]

easy2012, on 30 March 2012 - 09:25 AM, said:

I would say complacency, sense of entitlement and hubris are they key to determine who are the winners and losers.

Winning means you actually do, or produce something in the first place which other people want, of course resting on your laurels will lead to failure.

Most of the products originating from the East were developed in the West, being a cheap source of labour doesn't guarantee economic success, and in any case inflation in the BRICS is starting to erode the low wage cost advantages, certainly in countries like India this is already happening

The rising cost of oil will also make shipping products round the world less sensible as time goes on. The growth of advanced automation will also almost certainly hurt economies reliant on plentiful cheap labour in time, I heard a Government minister recently saying that some manufacturing was already returning to the UK, it wasn't bringing many jobs however as it was heavily automated.

Robots don't need wages, or ask for time off, they only need maintenance

This post has been edited by madpenguin: 30 March 2012 - 09:45 AM

[Sour Mash]

What, on 30 March 2012 - 07:58 AM, said:

I don't know, China has a few of them too!

Not a military expert but the last time I saw figures for the Chinese they had surprisingly weak forces with respect to the global theatre. OK, they had huge numbers of infantry and tanks but next to no way of projecting their power other than rolling over their borders to invade neighbouring countries. Bad news for their neighbours, not much for us to worry about.

Their navy wasn't much to shout about either but most importantly, relatively few nukes and again no way to deliver them over long distances.


Of course all this can be rectified and they have the money and productive capacity to do so.