Why the US Will Still be the Only Superpower in 2030

Version 2.0 of this article is posted here. 

One of the most popular dinner party conversation topics is the possibility that the United States will be joined or even surpassed as a superpower by another nation, such as China.  China has some very smart people, a vast land area, and over four times the population of the US, so it should catch up easily, right?  Let's assess the what makes a superpower, and what it would take for China to match the US on each pillar of superpowerdom. 

A genuine superpower does not merely have military and political influence, but also must be at the top of the economic, scientific, and cultural pyramids.  Thus, the Soviet Union was only a partial superpower, and the most recent genuine superpower before the United States was the British Empire. 

To match the US by 2030, China would have to :

1)  Have an economy near the size of the US economy.  If the US grows by 3.5% a year for the next 25 years, it will be $30 trillion in 2006 dollars by then.  Note that this is a modest assumption for the US, given the accelerating nature of economic growth, but also note that world GDP only grows about 4% a year, and this might at most be 5% a year by 2030.  China, with an economy of $2.2 trillion in nominal (not PPP) terms, would have to grow at 12% a year for the next 25 years straight to achieve the same size, which is already faster than its current 9-10% rate, if even that can be sustained for so long (no country, let alone a large one, has grown at more than 8% over such a long period).  In other words, the progress that the US economy would make from 1945 to 2030 (85 years) would have to be achieved by China in just the 25 years from 2005 to 2030.  Even then, this is just the total GDP, not per capita GDP, which would still be merely a fourth of America's. 

2)  Create original consumer brands that are household names everywhere in the world (including in America), such as Coca-Cola, Nike, McDonalds, Citigroup, Xerox, Microsoft, or Google.  Europe and Japan have created a few brands in a few select industries, but China currently has none.  Observing how many American brand logos have populated billboards and sporting events in developing nations over just the last 15 years, one might argue that US dominance has even increased by this measure. 

3)  Have a military capable of waging wars anywhere in the globe (even if it does not actually wage any).  Part of the opposition that anti-Americans have to the US wars in Afghanistan and Iraq is the envy arising from the US being the only country with the means to invade multiple medium-size countries in other continents and still sustain very few casualties.  No other country currently is even near having the ability to project military power with such force and range.  Mere nuclear weapons are no substitute for this.  The inability of the rest of the world to do anything to halt genocide in Darfur is evidence of how such problems can only get addressed if and when America addresses them.

4)  Have major universities that are household names, that many of the worlds top students aspire to attend.  17 of the world's top 20 universities are in the US.  Until top students in Europe, India, and even the US are filling out an application for a Chinese university alongside those of Harvard, Stanford, MIT, or Cambridge, China is not going to match the US in the knowledge economy.  This also represents the obstacles China has to overcome to successfully conduct impactful scientific research. 

5)  Attract the best and brightest to immigrate into China, where they can expect to live a good life in Chinese society.  The US effectively receives a subsidy of $100 to $200 billion a year, as people educated at the expense of another nation immigrate here and promptly participate in the workforce.  As smart as people within China are, unless they can attract non-Chinese talent that is otherwise going to the US, and even talented Americans, they will not have the same intellectual and psychological cross-pollination, and hence miss out on those economic benefits.  The small matter of people not wanting to move into a country that is not a democracy also has to be resolved. 

6)  Become the nation that produces the new inventions and corporations that are adopted by the mass market into their daily lives.  From the telephone and airplane over a century ago, America has been the engine of almost all technological progress.  Despite the fears of innovation going overseas, the big new technologies and influential applications continue to emerge from companies headquartered in the United States.  Just in the last two years, Google emerged as the next super-lucrative company (before eBay and Yahoo slightly earlier), and the American-dominated 'blogosphere' emerged as a powerful force of information and media. 

7)  Be the leader in entertainment and culture.  China's film industry greatly lags India's, let alone America's.  We hear about piracy of American music and films in China, which tells us exactly what the world order is.  When American teenagers are actively pirating music and movies made in China, only then will the US have been surpassed in this area.  Take a moment to think how distant this scenario is from current reality. 

8)  Be the nation that engineers many of the greatest moments of human accomplishment.  The USSR was ahead of the US in the space race at first, until President Kennedy decided in 1961 to put a man on the moon by 1969.  While this mission initially seemed to be unnecessary and expensive, the optimism and pride brought to anti-Communist people worldwide was so inspirational that it accelerated many other forms of technological progress and brought economic growth to free-market countries.  This eventually led to a global exodus from socialism altogether, as the pessimism necessary for socialism to exist became harder to enforce.  People from many nations still feel pride from humanity having set foot on the Moon, something which America made possible. 

China currently has plans to put a man on the moon by 2024.  While being only the second country to achieve this would certainly be prestigious, it would still be 55 years after the United States achieved the same thing.  That is not quite the trajectory it would take to approach the superpowerdom of the US by 2030.  If China puts a man on Mars before the US, I may change my opinion on this point, but the odds of that happening are not high. 

9)  Be the nation expected to thanklessly use its own resources to solve many of the world's problems.  If the US donates $15 billion in aid to Africa, the first reaction from critics is that the US did not donate enough.  On the other hand, few even consider asking China to donate aid to Africa.  After the 2004 Indian Ocean tsunami, the fashionable question was why the US did not donate even more and sooner, rather than why China did not donate more, despite being geographically much closer.  Ask yourself this - if an asteroid were on a collision course with the Earth, which country's technology would the world depend on to detect it, and then destroy or divert it?  Until China is relied upon to an equal degree, it is not in the same league. 

10)  Adapt to the underappreciated burden of superpowerdom - the huge double standards that a benign superpower must withstand in that role.  America is still condemned for slavery that ended 140 years ago, even by nations that have done far worse things more recently than that.  Is China prepared to apologize for Tianenmen Square, the genocide in Tibet, the 30 million who perished during the Great Leap Forward, and the suppression of news about SARS,every day for the next century?  Is China remotely prepared for being blamed for inaction towards genocide in Darfur while simultaneously being condemned for non-deadly prison abuse in a time of war against opponents who follow no rules of engagement?  The amount of unfairness China would have to withstand to truly achieve political parity with America might be prohibitive given China's history over the last 60 years.  Furthermore, China being held to the superpower standard would simultaneously reduce the burden that the US currently bears alone, allowing the US to operate with less opposition than it experiences today. 

Of the ten points above, Europe and Japan have tried for decades, and have only achieved parity with the US on maybe two of these dimensions at most.  China will surpass Europe and Japan by 2030 by achieving perhaps two or possibly even three out of these ten points, but attaining all ten is something I am willing to confidently bet against.  The dream of anti-Americans who relish the prospect of any nation, even a non-democratic one, surpassing the US is still a very distant one. 

A point that many bring up is that empires have always risen and fallen throughout history.  This is partly true, but note that the Roman Empire lasted for over 1000 years after its peak.  Also note that the British Empire never actually collapsed since Britain is still one of the the top seven countries in the world today, and the English language is the most widely spoken in the world.  Britain was merely surpassed by its descendant, with whom it shares a symbiotic relationship.  The US can expect the same if it is finally surpassed, at some point much later than 2030 and probably not before the Technological Singularity, which would make the debate moot.   

That writing this article is even worthwhile is a tribute to how far China has come and how much it might achieve, but nonetheless, there is no other country that will be a superpower on par with the US by 2030.  This is one of the safest predictions The Futurist can make. 

Comments

[usnjay]

very good article, I'm genuinely impressed.

I think the only way you could be proven wrong is if the majority of people who support the American ideals of individual freedom and liberty, generally called right-wingers, take our progress for granted and allow the country to slip into socialism.

We see now how the socialists, generally called left-wingers, are fighting desperately to regain power through class warfare & racial division. Because they control the media it is still possible for all the freedoms that so many have fought for to be lost by this generation.

But I ramble. Really good article.
usnjay

[GK]

usnjay,

Thanks, as always.

As the decline of the US can come only from within, I write a lot about the fifth-column of traitors in America.

One thing that will prevent socialism from ever taking hold is that tax cuts have *always* been proven to stimulate the economy, so much so that even Clinton did one in 1997 (which caused its own boom). It is thus impossible for leftists to increase taxes by a lot. There will be small periods of high taxes by Democrats in congress (like 1993-94), but those will quickly get reversed when the economy immediately slows.

Plus, almost 50% of US households now own stocks, so that is a major voting block that opposes high taxes too..

Even China does not think socialism makes the economy grow (their restrictions on personal freedoms aside). Check this article out if you haven't already.

[jeffolie]

Best column you have written.

[abc123]

There is a Chinese brand called SOYO. I've been waiting 38 months for my rebate.

[davemon]

Very interesting read. I generally agree with what's written here.

Now to think outside the box.

In 15 years, there's a good chance you can order a vehicle online and then have it drive to you.

Take that a step further. Someone builds a factory that can mass produce UAV weapons platforms in the thousands. It's fully automated and only needs raw materials.

The Global Hawk can fly for 48 hours straight, long enough to get around this planet.

So, imagine swarms of thousands of UAVs flying in at low levels to attack a crounty, enough onboard AI to avoid most threats, and pull their attack.

Take out the human labor factor and anyone with a few hundred million could be a new Superpower.

davemon

[GK]

davemon,

Yes, but that is essentially a James Bond villain, which is a concept that existed since 1962.

Remember, a person with a few hundred million could be stopped by others of similar resources, or even specialized individuals who can eliminate such villains.

It is still not more dangerous than Al-Qaeda getting a nuclear weapon, which for some reason has not happened yet.

[ATS]

GK,

Great essay. Here are a few points.

The US is not an empire and should not be compared with other empires past and present. As Michael Mandelbaum writes in "The Case for Goliath", the world and America's political and economic competitors do not and have never responded to America the way that empires have typically been responded to throughout history. For example, whether in Germany, Italy, Britain, Puerto Rico, the Koreas, Japan, Afghanistan, or even Iraq, we do not see large masses of humanity ganging up on America to destroy it or to flush out its military. China on the other hand might be better termed the Han Empire, i.e., the dictatorial imposition of one national identity, state, language and culture -- the Han --upon a myriad of other, unwilling cultures and nations.

Also, China like most non-Western societies is a closed, xenophobic culture which cannot allow large numbers of non-Chinese (let alone Tibetans, Uighur Muslims, and other minorities within China) to settle and develop China for economic or other purposes. This is illustrated by China's history, and especially one particular chapter.

From 1405 to 1421, well before Europe's arrival to the New World, a massive fleet of over 40 Chinese junks -- sailing vessels many times larger than even the largest Spanish galleons -- captained by the royal eunuch Zheng Hu explored and established trade with 30 countries lining the Indian Ocean, including Malaysia, India, Arabia, and the East African Coast. After returning with a treasure trove of new goods, foods, animals and cultural knowledge, rather than build what would easily have been the largest trans-oceanic trading network the world had seen until then, the Chinese imperial ministers, for fear of contaminating China with the influence of "foreign devils", BURNED Zheng Hu's ships and captain's logs and destroyed most of the valuable goods brought back by his expedition. No trading network was maintained, no new knowledge was gained from 16 long years of exploration, and China descended deeper into despotism and poverty.

That's about all one needs to know to understand the Chinese mindset vis-a-vis "superpowerdom". Even if offered a chance to be the foremost engine of culture and commerce in the world, the Chinese will choose ethnic purity and cultural protection over progress and maturity.

[Yo-yo]

ATS,

Your last sentence is pure nonsense. I've been to China a few times over the past decade, I can assure you the Chinese are not really interested in cultural protection. They want to be a rich developed nation, and they are fully aware of the cultural implications of that. China is becoming a western country at breakneck speed. I would think another 50 years of reform should do it.

[Kate Moe]

I have to agree wtih Yo-yo, having visited China in the last few years. Unlike most nations, China is not afraid of the western/American culture. Where rival nations' mantra is "modernization without westernization", China seem to be "modernization and westernization with Chinese characteristics." China seems determine to learn from other countries' mistakes: from why the Soviet's system collasped to why western Europe is declining. From this they seem to understand that isolation and protectionism have devastating long term result and that is not the fate China is eager to share, after all they are learning from their own past mistakes.

[Kosha]

Great article. I will be sure to keep the 8 points in my back pocket for the many inevitable encounters I continue to have with my many European friends...

[ATS]

Yo-yo,

Are the Han Chinese willing to allow 33% or more of their traditional territories' population to become white, hispanic, Indian, other Asian, etc. (as are now 33% in the US ethnic and racial minorities)? Even 10%? No.

Just like Japan and South Korea decades earlier, China embraces surface westernization -- I agree, Bejing youth do wear jeans, dye their hair pink and listen to iPods -- but it resists any significant relocation of non-Chinese immigrants into Han society. For example, while Mandarin-speaking Han Chinese are permitted to colonize and settle Tibet, Tibetans are confined to their own territory and prevented from settling in Han territory. Despite a desire to develop rapidly, Chinese remain suspicious of the "other" who lives among them (as opposed to the other who injects capital into their economy and makes them richer) and sacrifice the benefits of foreign immigration in order not to be diluted culturally.

This is a different attitude from both the US and traditional Western empires such as the Romans and British who opened their culture's and capital's doors to those they ruled. Beijing and China's other major cities do not contain significant Tibetan or Uighur enclaves, and rightly or wrongly China does not encourage Western, American, Indian, etc. professionals to settle China en masse unlike America and other Western countries which have encouraged such immigration.

This is simply China's traditional protectionist mentality which will, as in the past, prevent it from attaining superpower status. China's economic and monetary policies remain largely protecionist and history shows that the Chinese will have difficulty breaking this pattern.

[E J Hosdil]

Very interesting piece and enjoyable to read. I believe that some of your 8 points are more important than others. All in all you are correct, there is no way that the Chinese economy as well as other factors will catch up so fast.

ATS,

Tibetans and such do move to other Chinese cities. They are not confined to their regions.

That said, consider during the HK handover that the Vitenamese were deported and the Indians in the colony were very worried about Chinese rule.

I think the more confident a nation is, the less it worries about such things. And China is very confident right now.

[Peg C.]

Holy c*ap, this was great, and extremely timely! I sent it to a bunch of co-workers. Our corp. is heavily in bed with BRIC (Brazil Russia India China) and will have few U.S. employees in a decade. It's been a very bad week for us and this cheered me right up! Plus it is RIGHT ON, and needed to be said. Plus, it's guaranteed to drive the anti-America crowd (including all of Hollywood, the Drive-By Media, and 2/3 of the Senate) insane!

[Al Fin]

You might be interested in the article by Liber and Press in a recent Foreign Affairs.

The professors from Notre Dame and UPenn claim the US has enough nuclear superiority over Russia and China to destroy their nukes in a first strike, leaving no nukes to Russia or China for retaliation. An intersting read.

The professors come across as left wing multiculturalists who are uncomfortable with american ideals being backed by that much firepower.

[Professor Blather]

My first - but not last - visit to your blog.

And I'm impressed. Despite the billion words generated each and every day, the blogosphere is actually desperately seeking good, insightful, thought-provoking writing.

That was all of the above.

[usnjay]

Al Fin
I read the article you linked, very interesting and I agree with your analysis.

Here's a couple quotes that indicate the authors oppose American interests:

"Russia and China -- and the rest of the world -- will live in the shadow of U.S. nuclear primacy for many years to come"

--It contains an attack on US plans for a missile defense, claiming such a system is offensive in nature:
"the sort of missile defenses that the United States might plausibly deploy would be valuable primarily in an offensive context, not a defensive one"

-- and finishes up with a nice criticism of Iraq:
"But if the United States adopts a more restrained foreign policy -- for example, one premised on greater skepticism of the wisdom of forcibly exporting democracy..."

Foreign Affairs magazine long ago stopped pretending it didn't oppose the US, so this isn't new information.

usnjay

[GK]

Professor Blather,

Thanks for your encouragement, and welcome. Suggestions on further topics for articles are welcome.

I hope to gradually claw up the ladder of blog traffic and get 1000 visitors a day. I am currently at about 350/day, but the rise will take several months at this rate. I will persevere..

[Greg]

Great post, my only comment would be that this might be better represented as a composite rating. Where if a country were to have a dominant role in one or more of the categories you list that might offset weakness in some of the others.

You're biggest single point in the essay to me might be the one about the Asteroid heading for earth. I think you could argue that during the Soviet Union's peak the world community would have looked upon both the US and USSR jointly to solve that problem.

Now the Soviet Union was quite lacking in many of the criteria you list, but in a few it was dominent. Deffinetly no. 3 and in a way 4 and in a totally different manner 8 (by ignoring that criteria, heh). It held sway over much of the globe via its ideology and force of will. An evil empire but an empire nonetheless.

[James Jones]

Great post. However, you support your rosy prediction of continued US primacy by restricting your analysis to a period ending in 2030. What about the rest of the 21st century!??? What do the current trendlines predict if extended through 2050, 2075, 2100?

My objection to your arbitrary restriction of analysis to 2030 is two-fold:

1) We need to plan now for the geo-strategic environment beyond 2030. History isn't going to stop at 2030 and the geo-political and geo-economic balances will continue to evolve --- perhaps very unfavorably.

2) Global influence is partly based on a perception of how global power is shifting. Rising powers tend to gain influence because other nations believe they will be stronger in the medium-to-long term. Declining powers tend to lose influence because other nations believe they will be weaker in the medium-to-long term. You can already see this in the behavior of many nations in East Asia and SE Asia vis-a-vis China and the US. Very few of these nations want to openly balance against China despite great anxiety about China's long term intentions. This behavior is driven by the belief that China will become much stronger over the next two generations in both absolute and relative terms. China is weaker than Japan at this time and substantially weaker than the United States. However, both of these powers are not gaining strength at the same rate that China is. (Note: India is the wild card in this analysis because of its population size and its rapid economic growth over the last decade).

My other objection to your analysis is your use of a US-template for superpower status/behavior. Why do you limit yourself to this template? Recorded human history spans 5,000 or more years. There might be a few other templates that the Chinese, or the Indians, or the EU, or a revived Islamic Caliphate would consider more relevant/advantageous. Your #8 status criteria/behavior is particularly odd:

"Adapt to the underappreciated burden of superpowerdom - the huge double standards that a benign superpower must withstand in that role."

Why does a superpower have to be benign? In particular, why should a superpower be benign if it is competing for global dominance with another superpower and several great powers/potential superpowers? It's quite possible to be a benign superpower (hegemon) when you have crushed all of your peer/near-peer competitors. It's probably very useful in securing the acquiescence of your defeated competitors, especially if you don't want to physically incorporate them.

However, most of recorded history demonstrates that more ruthless behavior is a necessity for long term victory over rival great powers. Maybe China's rise to global power will be different. Let's hope so.

But we shouldn't plan on it.

We also shouldn't plan on maintaining our primacy indefinitely -- unless we change our grand strategy to dramatically increase our relative power versus current/future competitors.

[GK]

James Jones,

The article itself addresses many of your questions. Let me try to put it differently.

1) 2030 is chosen because that is the timeframe many give. Beyond that, prediction is harder, particularly since almost all credible futurists believe that we will experience a Technological Singularity in the 21st century. Read the link in the article. I believe the Singularity will be around 2050.

2) Yes, perception matters. Japan was taken a lot more seriously in the 1980s than today. However, perception is fickle, and moves on once an expectation is not met. Just 5 years ago, everyone was talking about China exclusively. Now almost all articles in the MSM discuss China and India simultaneously.

3) I do discuss past human history, mentioning the British Empire and Roman Era as past superpowers. However, the template has to include at least 6-7 of the 8 factors above. The EU has a growth rate so much lower than the world average that it has no chance of rising in relative importance in the forseeable future.

4) A superpower certainly does not have to be benign, which exactly the point of items 7 and 8. The fact that the US is benign is not appreciated anymore, and people exhibit huge double standards towards the US is evidence of how much people have forgotten that a superpower could be MUCH, MUCH worse than the US.

If China rises, they will be asked for the same things that the US is asked for (aid to Africa, aid for disaster vicitms, peacekeeping forces, etc.) If they do not provide this, the pressure on the US vanishes, anti-Americanism reduces hugely, the burdens the US currently bears are lifted. People won't criticize the US for Abu Ghraib-level offenses if China is regularly conductign a Tianenmen Square massacre every few months.

[C-141 Crew Dog]

Great article, but a country like China does not need to surpass the United States as a superpower, it only needs to end the U.S.'s superpower status. I think opponents of the U.S. and the west see nuclear proliferation as a means to that end. When everybody's got nukes, then who do you blame when a sumggled weapon takes out a city?

[James Jones]

GK -- Thanks for the illuminating response. I did not realize that you expect the Singularity will occur in less than fifty years. (Around 2050). I also did not realize that you agree with many theoreticians of the Singularity that this event will make all past models of human behavior obsolete -- including competition between groups for power and wealth or for racial, cultural, ideological, or religious dominance.

That is an extremely big assumption.

My own assumption is that violent competition will continue between human or post-human groups until there is a planetary sovereign or a solar system sovereign with a monopoly on large-scale force. The three great questions will still need to be answered:

1) Who rules?

2) Who is ruled?

3 What are the rights and responsibilities of ruler and ruled?

The ultimate answers to these questions have always been decided through violent competition. Post-humans may be different, but we should remember the example of the angels in Christian theology who fought a war in heaven to determine who would be master, Lucifer or God.

Post-humans will be the ultimate "super-empowered individuals." There is no guarantee that they will all follow the better angels of their nature.

[GK]

James Jones,

I am comfortable with predicting a Singularity date of aroudn 2050. This is actually later than the predictions of some thought leaders in this area, like Ray Kurzweil (2045) and Vernor Vinge (2030).

I don't think competition ever stops - it has not stopped in 4.5 billion years of life on Earth. I do think the Singularity represents the merger of human and artificial intelligence *for those aware enough to grasp this option available to them*. Thus, the most savvy people in both the US and China will merge, while the less savvy in both will either be left behind or even become extinct. Comparing the US to China will be irrelevant post 2050, but the distinction will instead be between the 'savvy' vs. the 'clueless'.

A crude analogy would be the comparison between humans and great apes today. They have common ancestors as little as 5 million years ago, but humans have driven many great apes to near-extinction, largely through indirect, unintentional means.

[Brian Coughlan]

Fascinating blog, and I'm rather partial to the idea of the singularity myself.

Pity about the politics:-(

[Rasulo]

I comment on only some of the points raised in the article.

2) Create original consumer brands that are household names everywhere

It is obvious that there will be Chinese household names. One time the Japanese and Korean brands were laughed at for their poor quality, and now some of them are state-of-the-art. I predict that in a decade there will be some hot Chinese brands.

3) Have a military capable of waging wars anywhere in the globe.

It's not necessary to be able to control whole world. Even if China controls militarily the Pacific and most of Asia, it will seriously limit, even cripple USA's military power. Remember, when the Soviet Union was strong, USA had no business in Afghanistan.

6) Be the leader in entertainment and culture.

Movies from Hong Kong are popular everywhere in the world and they are Chinese.

7) Be the nation expected to thanklessly use its own resources to solve many of the world's problems.

That's only wishful thinking! USA has done good things but it has also done bad things for the international community. For example, who blocked the anti-pollution treaty? Which country consumes most of the world's deminishing unrenewable resources?

[nick mallory]

Why assume China will even exist in its current form in 2030?

Sooner or later democracy is going to try to take hold in China as it did in 1989, which will result either in another vicious clamp down and consequent strangling of influence from the outside world - which will severely limit its future economic growth - or a victory for democracy which will see a break up of the old Han empire into a constellation of smaller states or the creation of a much more benign superpower.

The growth of China is good in itself, as it means millions won't be starving to death this year as they did under Mao, but it also acts as a spur to the USA to keep a strong military and keep innovating in science and technology. The USA can only fade from laziness and decadence within and the threat of China will keep it on its toes for the next 30 years just as the Soviet threat did in the latter half of the 20th century.

[alzaebo]

Count me in as number 351-
astonishing and wondrous essays.
More! Mooore! (flicks lighter)

[GK]

alzaebo,

Thanks for the encouragement. I wish I had the stamina to increase the article frequency..

[oblomov]

Rasulo,

you ask:

For example, who blocked the anti-pollution treaty?

I assume you mean Kyoto. The answer is "China and India". The reason that the US Senate rejected the Kyoto treaty is that China and India were not required signatories. Effectively, the treaty would have imposed economic growth limits on the developed world, but not on China and India.

[Max Makhija]

China- I live in China.
1. It is a wonderful place to live in.
2. The whole country works very very hard and honestly.(ofcourse there are cheats)
3.The Way the Government has managed to control and run the whole country from a penniless state in 1947 (When Chenkai Shek took away all its gold) till today is fantastic.
4. China has friendly relations with everyone.
5. China's Development is very much like that of USA.
6. China is the next super power for sure.
7.Whatever said and done. China is growing very very fast and we can feel it's speed here everyday - It is a very very vibrant economy and it has everything going for it.
USA might be what you say it is but China is much far better than the USA in many ways.
There is peace and quiet and no disturbance.
All chinese are very patriotic.
I being an Indian feel proud of the Chinese. I wish my Country was like China. But India can never even dream to come close to China.
Hats off to China.
USA watch out.

[GK]

Max Makhija,

It seems you live on a different planet than the rest of us do.

"1. It is a wonderful place to live in."
Apparently, you don't know that the Chinese govt. didn't allow people to have more than one child, and didn't allow people to marry without government approval, until recently. Many Chinese try to hid themselves in boxes just to escape out of China to Britain or the US.

"2. The whole country works very very hard and honestly.(ofcourse there are cheats)"
Apparently, you don't know about piracy of IP in China.

"3.The Way the Government has managed to control and run the whole country from a penniless state in 1947 (When Chenkai Shek took away all its gold) till today is fantastic."
So you are a fan of Communism, and hate the free-market system of Taiwan?

"4. China has friendly relations with everyone."
China has attacked nearly all the countries that neighbor it (including India), and killed 50 million people. Read about the Korean War, Chinese invasion of Tibet, Chinese attack on India, War with the USSR, War with Vietnam, continual threats against Taiwan, etc.

"5. China's Development is very much like that of USA." So you admit that the progress of China is merely do to adopting things invented in the USA? Plus, China's per capita income is $1700 a year, vs. $40,000 for the USA.

And the computer, internet, and email account you are using were invented in America. All the top blogs are written by Americans. Which items that we use in our daily lives were invented by China in the last 100 years? China may do manufacturing, but that is no path to superpowerdom.

"USA might be what you say it is but China is much far better than the USA in many ways."
Why do so many Indians want to come to the USA, and almost none want to go to China?

"There is peace and quiet and no disturbance.
All chinese are very patriotic."
Because people who question the Chinese Communist Party are KILLED. Apparently you don't know about Tianenmen Square.

My god, you are even more brainwashed into Maoist propaganda than even Chinese are.

It might greatly disturb you to know that India is the most pro-US (and pro-Bush) country in the world.

[Max Makhija]

I am a Bush Fan too- I just love him. I am the greatest admirer of the USA and I know what Democracy means.
But cannot a person believe in one or more system ?
Cannot the Beauty of other women impress you at times?
I will try and clarify my High opinion of China.
1. China has one child policy since last 25 years and it has done this to control it's population. This may be a Tough step to make in Country where there was abject poverty 25 years back.Today they have started relaxing the system but they have achieved a growth rate of 0.58%.(India on other hand is my country and it is democratic and has no control-The growth rate is 3.3% and unofficial growth rate may be around 5 to 7%)
So is bringing more lives that are going to be miserable or bringing less lives that will bring happiness around to others too- is more sensible.(Let us forget communism or democracy- Just think what is better ?.)
2.IP yes I agree- China have this problem but if you walk on the streets you can become aware that IP situation in 4 years is much more better than what it was earlier. Earlier i could buy any DVD in some of the Markets - Just Yesterday I was there looking for DVDs and guess what I found not one single shop selling.(DVD Copy in China sells for 50 cents- Just for record)
3. Have you been to China recently- There is no trace of Communism but Capitalism all around one. yes the top and the Center Core is Communist.Come to China and than Talk !
4. China has changed in the past so many years. It is now very friendly to all.(Everyone has a past)
5.Yes China is only $1700 compared to $40000 in USA - But looking at the last few years of the growth Curve and in coming years and you will see one or two zeroes being added to the former.
I just presented my view of China. To this website so that you could see China diffrently. But it seems your mind is set.
Kindly see China more clearly.
I still love Democracy but I wish it was a bit like China Communism.
A mixture of both the worlds could bring a lot of more good.

[Mike Johnson]

Interesting and enjoyable post. One of the best I've read today.

However, I think that what is being argued is that China, based on the extrapolation of 2006 trends, will not be a 2006-style superpower in 2030.

It's unclear just how the future might change the nature or cause of economic growth, or what defines a superpower, but science research and the ability to translate research into product will undoubtedly be very important.

Accordingly, I'd like to see you expand your reasoning in points 4 and 5. They seem a bit under-argued.

[GK]

Mike Johnson,

Thanks for the constructive feedback. I'll try to expand on 4) and 5) a bit more by tommorrow.

Essentially, if Wealth distribution in most countries is any guide, as well as the distribution of profit dollars within any industry with multiple competitors, it appears that 20% of the world's most productive, capable people produce 80% of the wealth. The US, due to having the best Universities, an entrepreneurial climate, and perhaps the easiest society to assimilate into, attracts a disproportionate share of these productive people from across the globe.

This might be changing slightly in recent years, but for the most part, the flow is still solidly in favor of the US. Also note that when someone from India or China comes here for graduate study (and assuming they settle here), their country of origin has already paid the cost of raising them, and educating them up to the level of a Bachelor's Degree. This costs about $200,000 in the US, but when such a person comes to the US as a finished product ready to pursue an MS or PhD, the US has effectively received an impot/subsidy of $200,000 or more. This educational subsidy flowing into the US is estimated to be $200 Billion to $500 Billion a year by BusinessWeek.

[arantius]

"and the English language is the most widely spoken in the world"

What do you mean by that?

http://www.google.com/search?q=most+spoken+language

Everything I can find says that Chinese beats English at least two-to-one, by number of speakers.

[GK]

arantius,

Chinese has more native speakers than English, but far more people KNOW English than Chinese.

Accordingly, the amount of international business and scientific research done in English is orders of magnitude more than that done in Chinese.

And don't people say that India has an advantage over China by having a lot of English speakers? Now why is that so valuable?

Why do so few non-Chinese, whether Indian, French, German, or British, have any interest in learning Chinese? Because the economic value of it is very little. How many jobs, in the world, are available to those who speak only English, vs. available to those who speak only Chinese?

If you still think Chinese will supplant English as a world language, you better start taking some classes soon.

[Virgilash]

Hi guys!

I have a few questions for you :
1. Do you know what is the so called "4-2-1 problem" ? It's something like that : in 20 years from now (so earlier than 2030) 1 working person will sustain 2 non-working parents and 4 non-working grand-parents. This will be in China's 2030. And it will be because of their policy with forcing couples to have 1 child only (in fact it's not about forcing them, it's about paying the school, medicine and so on by the government only for the first child - the rich couples can afford to have more babies. And this problem will be tougher and tougher for the chinese government - the young couples have just discovered the wonders of western civilisation - birth control, the greed for money and wealth and they don't have even the allowed 1 child (they can't forbid the acces to the idea of american lifestyle just by banning some websites) .... The same problem will be all over the world, but especially in China .... With this huge problem aboard China will be far of being a superpower ....
And don't just blame then and try to think, if you were the chinese government, what your solution would be ?
a. diminishing the taxes to encourage the economical growth but killing the non-productive older persons ?
b. rising the taxes will make a better life for older persons but will descourage the youngest to work ?

[Virgilash]

Hi again !

Here's my second question on China :

I am living now in Canada and I can see hundreds of thousands or maybe millions of chinese people here. But actually I am from Eastern Europe (Romania). And during the comunism years, back in Romania, if anybody would try to leave the country it would had been 95% chances for that person to get a bullit in his/her head.
And now the question:
What kind of communism is now in China if it allows its citizens to immigrate anywhere they can all over the world ? And I suppose 90% of chinese immigrants have a bachelor ????
Please, I am thinking for a while on this topic and maybe somebody have a reasonable answer for it ! And dont try to give the first answer which will come in your head ... just think that chinese government is banning lots of western websites ...

And please consider the first problem - they will really need their actual young people in a few years.
I really can't find a good answer for this question, please help !!!

And please don't try to answer by attacking my english ... I explained you that I am not a native english speaker :-(

[Conrad]

Good article, you're probably right that China will not surpass the U.S. in these 10 areas in the next 25 years. But in 40 or 50 years, maybe.

However, you give too little attention to other U.S. competitors. Japan already matches or beats the U.S. in many of the 10 areas. If they just get their economy moving again like it was in the 1980s and decide to have a world-class military, they will. Europe also is in the same class as the U.S. in many of those areas, if they can really become integrated as a single entity, they could rival the U.S. for power and influence within 25 years.

[biledemon]

One question... who would win which war if:
a) China invaded the US;
or b)if the US invaded China...
I think it'd be a close one!

[Joep]

Which nation will lead the pack is dependant on power availablity

Epypt : slave power
Rome : slave power
Britton : slave power
USA : fossil fuel (current energy reservers 1.5 years)

Arabs already knows US is stealing oil. It is only matter of time when they start asking for military hardware in return for oil.

[GK]

Joep,

How is the US 'stealing' oil when we pay market prices for oil?

Plus, we import only 25% of our oil from the Middle East.

Plus, we are innovating in many areas, like ethanol, solar, wind, etc. This will take 10-15 years, but will dent oil consumption by then.

[GK]

biledemon,

Both countries are uninvadeable, due to huge size. But consider ;

1) In the US, half of the households have firearms. In China, they do not.

2) China can only shoot missiles at the US. China does NOT have aircraft carriers to conduct air raids on the US, nor do they have the means to transport troops over the Pacific Ocean, while we do.

3) Japan did invade China, and killed 10 million of them. Japan would have won if not for the US drawing away their military forces. At the same time, the US mainland has not been invaded in the 20th century at all.

4) China still can't even invade little, nearby Taiwan.

[GK]

Conrad,

In 40-50 years, we might have a technological singularity that would make the point moot. The article mentions this.

Japan matches us in at most 2-3 of these dimensions. Plus, they copy US pop culture more than most other countries in the world. In the 1980s, people were worried, but now no one thinks Japan will be a superpower.

Plus, they are among our staunchest allies, and definitely an ally against China. A democratic country like Japan being this powerful is a good thing.

[jmzhodge]

Interesting, you raise some intresting comments, although i do not complely agree with everything, i do agree it willbe a long time before china have the influance america can / does

would be good to take note of this site though
http://www.citypages.com/databank/26/1264/article12985.asp

[Sidewinder77]

Hey GK, as a pro-freemarkets singularitarian, I find your blog really terrific! I think maybe your GDP figures are a little off though. From the CIA World Factbook:

Current GDP (purchasing power parity)
US: 12.4 trillion
EU: 12.2 trillion
China: 8.9 trillion
India: 3.6 trillion

Assuming those numbers are correct and constant growth rates of:
US: 3.5%
EU: 2.0%
China: 10.0%
India: 7.5%

GDP in 2030 would be
US: 28 trillion
EU: 20 trillion
China: 87 trillion
India: 20 trillion

That implies that the Chinese government will have an economy that’s 3X larger than the US for which to draw taxes from giving it 3X resources to fund military spending, R&D, etc. Perhaps there's a decent chance strong AI will actually emerge from China.

Keep up the awesome posts!

[GK]

Sidewinder77,

Note that the numbers you quoted are Purchase Power Parity (PPP), while I cite Nominal GDP. Both have their uses. Among developed economies, the numbers are almost identical (EU, Japan, Australia, etc.), but for developing economies, they can be far apart.

You have already seen the PPP list, but look at the nominal list.

But when comparing the size of an economy relative to another, nominal matters, as that is the metrics by which they interact with each other.

For example, US Stock Market Capitalization is $20 Trillion, while China's is just $600 Billion - a 33X difference. US world trade is also about 6X that of China.

PPP matters for comparisons like saying a gallon of milk in China costs $1 while in ther US it is $3, so the person n China earning $5000 a year is more on par with an American earning $15000 a year.

[Rob]

One factor hasn't been addressed concerning the future of China is the demographic one. The Chinese one child per family policy, combined with the asian proclivity for sons is raising a generation of men with no chance of ever finding any women to marry, and procreate to the next generation. What is China going to do with all those surplus males? Are they thinking strategically, and stockpiling cannon fodder for the next war? Or will China suffer a catastrophic loss of population, similar to what Russia is suffering now? Given this factor, I have serious doubts that China will be any kind of a power at all by 2030.

[Doug]

"And the computer, internet, and email account you are using were invented in America. All the top blogs are written by Americans. Which items that we use in our daily lives were invented by China in the last 100 years? China may do manufacturing, but that is no path to superpowerdom."

Sorry, couldn't let this pass. First Computational device - Babbage (British), inventor (sic) of the internet Berners-Lee (British). Top Blogs? I find most blogs written by Americans to be crude, insular, ill-informed and arrogant.

This sort of attitude is why Americans of a certain type, the ones who believe they have the 'Only' truth are loathed in Western Europe and everywhere I have ever lived. (That's quite a few countries by now.)

D

[GK]

Doug,

Nope. Babbage's device was not a computer, merely a collection of brass gears. The first computer was the ENIAC in the US in 1946. Furthermore, that you have to go back almost 200 years for examples of Britain's greatest achievements tells all.

The Internet was invented by the US at DARPA in the 1960s. Tim Berners-Lee was a child at the time. Furthermore, Tim Berners-Lee's work on the WWW (a descendant of the Internet, but not quite the same thing) was done at MIT, after he relocated to the US.

Why is Britain not the home of any modern high-tech company, where the US has Google, Yahoo, eBay, Intel, Cisco, Microsoft, etc?

It appears your 'alternative' European 'truth' is not really a truth at all, but merely envy. This sort of attitude is particularly why Europe's importance in the 21st century is plummeting.

Many countries in the world are pro-US. India has 3 times the population of Europe, so the Euro-centric superiority complex is rapidly hurtling into the dustbin of history. The inability of Europe to solve any of the world's problems (including in their own continent, with Bosnia) certainly doesn't help, though.

But I fully agree with you that Britain's previous superpowerdom was for the same reason as America's - the Protestant value system. This has done more to elevate the world past the 16th century than just about anything else, and is rapidly benefiting countries that are adopting practices derived from this system today. The world should be grateful to Britain for this.

[Christopher Byron]

This is a comment reguarding your article Why the US Will Still be the Only Superpower in 2030 and why CHINA won't. I saw your words blame and condemn China for human rights violations, what about the U.S. role in human rights violations. Look at all the evil this country does. The U.S. should apologize before anyone. You will never convince me that the U.S. is the savior of the world as day by day we become more and more evil. Take the log out of your own eye before you take the one out of China or anyother country. The U.S. will answer to God for our wicked ways.
Chris Byron 100% American

[GK]

Christopher Byron,

I think you have taken moral equivalence to an illogical extreme. If you think anything the US does comes close to China's killing of protestors at Tienanmen Square, you are ignorant.

Plus, the US is a democracy, and China is not. But I already know that anti-Americans like you are opposed to democracy anyway.

I bet you think the Iraq War is the worst atrocity in the history of humanity, and that Guantanamo is worse than Auschwitz. Is this what you think? Please confirm.

Comments like yours prove to me that the US will remain a superpower, because anti-Americans have to outright lie and misrepresent situations in order to condemn America. If you restricted yourself to actual facts, you would have very little to support your fanatical hate.

[TP]

GK,

Don't know if you remember me from our discussions in July mainly concerning Iraq and politics, but I have to admit on this topic we may not be as diametrically opposed! I actually believe that China (and India, etc.) have alot further to go in order to acheive dominance in any area that the US currently holds sway.

Of course, my biggest concern is that the status quo of relative world-wide stability is being threatened by the foreign policy actions of the current administration and of our "competitors". I am kept from abject fear by the fact that mistakes like our current middle-eastern fiasco can be corrected in the longer term. However, if there is ever a nuclear conflict that severely upsets the status quo, all of these predictions are rendered meaningless. For this reason, the US should continually strive to maintain and enhance its worldwide image. All but point #1 and 3 exist, at least partially, as psychological advantages and thus, can arguably be much more susceptable to change relatively quickly. The reason so many product brands and entertainment offerings are valued worldwide is that there is an underlying respect for all things "American". If we continue to tarnish this image with unwarranted invasions of sovereign nations and illegal torture, we risk losing this psychological edge. China is in no position, right now anyway, to take this edge from us. Their tarnished past is too fresh (unlike slavery here). However, it is in our best interest to always strive to become "better".
Communism is no match for Capitalism as Socialism is for Democracy.

[Dryan]

There are a number of flaws with these arguments right from begining to end.

"Tim Berners-Lee's work on the WWW (a descendant of the Internet, but not quite the same thing) was done at MIT, after he relocated to the US."

Nonsense. Berners-Lee's work started ten years previously at CERN in EUROPE. Berners Lee DID work at MIT, where he founded the World Wide Web commision which is not the same thing. After this he returned to the UK and is now at the University of Southampton.

"The first computer was the ENIAC in the US in 1946"

Wrong, there were many computers prior to ENIAC the very first being in Germany, and a machine not too different to ENIAC; Colossus was buit in the UK in and 1943 respectively. Several years before ENIAC.

"Babbage's device was not a computer, merely a collection of brass gears." ARPA net- which compared to the modern internet was such a cantankerous rediculously simple network. It's about as relevant ot the modern internet as babbages' differnce engine is to modern computing. The basic idea is there.

"the Euro-centric superiority complex"

No more so than the American one.

"US: 12.4 trillion
EU: 12.2 trillion"

Not quite, the EU economy exceeds the US and the whole of NAFTA. The EU has 12.4 trillion and the US has 12.2 trillion.

Interestingly the only source that tells me the US has the worlds largest economy is the CIA world factbook. the other two organisations, world bank and International Monetary Fund (whom I trust a LOT more) say it is lower. You can argue that the EU is not a nation- that is true, but the EU is ALREADY another superpower. It's economy is heavyweight, it's culture globally used- even in the United States, it's military- strong, yet fragmented, the militaries of the UK and France (both nuclear powers) combined with the troop force of the entire european continent is a force to be reckoned with. As of yet there is no integrated EU taskforce, but there is certain to be one in the future.

"I bet you think the Iraq War is the worst atrocity in the history of humanity, and that Guantanamo is worse than Auschwitz. Is this what you think? Please confirm."

The US has not commited the worlds worst atrocities, but it has commited atrocities.

Murdering and "re-educating" American Indians at schools where they were forbidden to speak their own language and were whipped if they did. (this was going on as recently as the turn of the 20th century)

Slavery, then segregation which lasted until the 1960's. Very democratic.
Invading mexico and Canada, violating their soverenty believeing it was America's "destiny" to control the entire contitent. (see http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Manifest_destiny)
There are more, but as a responsible citizen of your nation, I hope you already know and understand the failings as well as the successes of your Nation you so proudly tout.

"Britton : slave power"

Again wrong, Britain was one of the first nations to abolish slavery in 1807 years and years before the emancipation proclamtion in the US (see http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Slave_Trade_Act)

"If you restricted yourself to actual facts"

An error you yourself are guilty of. Your argument is full of errors. However the basic structure makes a good point, but not conclusive at all.

"only 25% of our oil from the Middle East"

ONLY? ONLY?! 25% is A QUARTER OF YOUR ENTIRE OIL ENERGY SUPPLY! That is an extremely significant number.

"One time the Japanese and Korean brands were laughed at for their poor quality"

precisely, and now some of the most desireable consumer electronics are Japanese or Korean.
Note this comment is not aimed at one particular user, it is attempting to highlight the various errors committed in the posts above.

My conclusion on the US's superpower statis in 2030 is: Not a chance. There is too much competition already and it's going to only get worse as the world becomes more globalised, the Western nations (particularly the US) already rely so much on other countries in this globalised world, it is impossible for one country to maintain a status quo. Just look at general motors in the United States as a sign of things to come. Out competed by the Japanese. This is only the beginning.

[GK]

Dryan,

You, like most anti-Americans, resort to anecdotal examples and utopian standards, rather than comparisons to other nations, to dress up your emotional anti-Americanism.

The US has not commited the worlds worst atrocities, but it has commited atrocities.

Yes. But I would say it has committed fewer than any other large country over the last 200 years, and has even prevented many atrocities across the world - something almost no other country has done.

Invading mexico and Canada, violating their soverenty believeing it was America's "destiny" to control the entire contitent.

Certainly not as bad (or recent) as Britain's or France's colonialism, or China's expansionism. Apply equal standards here, if you are capable.

Not quite, the EU economy exceeds the US and the whole of NAFTA.
Dead wrong. NAFTA is the US + Canada + Mexico = about $15 Trillion. Do the addition again. And if the EU's economy is similar in size to the US, despite having 30% more people, that isn't so impressive.

Just look at general motors in the United States as a sign of things to come. Out competed by the Japanese.

er... Japan's total economy stopped being a serious contender to surpass the US 20 years ago. Taking one anecdotal example of one of America's least competitive companies is evidence of the weakness of your argument. The richest people in Africa are richer than the poorest people in America. That does not mean that Africa is richer than America.

[Francis Pileggi]

Very thoughtful article.

[L]

What this post does not take into account is runaway immigration, both legal and illegal, into the United States. Immigrants no longer have any incentive to assimilate, so they creat balkanized enclaves, balkanized mindsets, and, in the long run, will destroy our culture, turning America into a 3rd world country.
China doesn't have to surpass America. America will sink beneath the weight of becoming Mexico.

[neshobanakni]

L. says "China doesn't have to surpass America. America will sink beneath the weight of becoming Mexico."

I'm on the same side with L. concerning illegal immigration. However, Mexico is still a much nicer place than China. As much as I hate the idea of being flooded with foreigners, I still thank God it's our North American neighbors.

[GK]

L and neshobanakni,

Yes, illegal immigration is a problem.

But to lump legal immigration into it is foolish. Legal immigrants are what keeps the US economy powerful, and many assimilate quite quickly. Asian immigrants have higher incomes than domestic WASPs.

The people who oppose legal immigration tend to be the same ones who oppose outsourcing, even though the absence of one necessitates an increase in the other.

[Dryan]

I am not an Anti American. I enjoy American products, I consume some american culture, I also enjoy British culture; Movies, Music, and food. I also consume French Products, I drive a German car, which is made of British Steel, with Czech sound system. I am using a computer manufactured in Taiwan. My mobile phone for instance, was designed in the United States, Made in China, It's operating system is British, as is my phone company.

I do not dislike everything about America and I do not claim to. I do not like everything about Europe either. I can criticise America without having the hysterical screamings of "ANTI-AMERICAN" branded on me, thanks. I can criticise Germany in a similar way or China, but would not be labelled as an Anti German or Anti Chinese. And Criticism does not always mean an inherant dislike of the Country either. Your writings demonstrate a strong US bias but I do not label you Anti-European, or Anti-Japanese.

I am a realist.

"Certainly not as bad (or recent) as Britain's or France's colonialism, or China's expansionism. Apply equal standards here, if you are capable. "

What was the war of 1812 then? Twisting it either way. Both countries wanted to expand outside of their borders. In that War both countries were exhibiting Colonial trates.

American expansionism went on almost as long as british expansionism. What was the Spanish American War? It may have had a noble cause but the countries were occupied in an extremely Imperialistic way. This was at the turn of the 20th Century too, which was the same time the British Empire made it's last major acquisitions. The Phillipines remained occupied by the US until 1946, which was about the same time the British Raj was dismantled.

er... Japan's total economy stopped being a serious contender to surpass the US 20 years ago. You misinterpret my arguement.

I was not suggesting that, What I was trying to indicatre was that American Industries- For so long global leaders are being seriously challenged by outside forces. And in many cases even beaten. This is a sign that globally the hegemony is shifting, likely not to a specific power but to a more balanced world, lead by Superpower hubs like the EU, China and India, and Japan.

Plenty of countries contribute to halting atrocities- Britain, France, Japan have all contributed to preventing attrocities.

And what exactly has the US done to help in Darfur? As far as I can see, the situation there seems to be a few lonely UN dimplomats screaming out for justice while the US and Europe flick a few pennies in their direction and hope the problem will go away. No one is taking effective action at the moment.

Have you considered that Europes 30% population advantage over the US comes from the admission of about twelve ex- Iron curtain countries about two years ago with economies that are no where near the standards of western europe?

GK you make good arguements- Just don't let yourself get blikered- There's a world out there. When it comes down to it, we're all human beings and the competition between us is no different to dog's peeing on each others territory- just far more refined.

[GK]

Dryan,

You have not answered my questions.

What was the war of 1812 then? Twisting it either way. Both countries wanted to expand outside of their borders. In that War both countries were exhibiting Colonial trates.

That you have to go back to 1812 to find something negative about America is telling. You did not respond to my point about British and French colonialism well into the middle of the 20th century.
America did nothing of the sort that recently.

Again, apply equal standards here.

This is a sign that globally the hegemony is shifting, likely not to a specific power but to a more balanced world, lead by Superpower hubs like the EU, China and India, and Japan.

The US is still about the same share of world GDP as 20 years ago, so this disproves your point.

Plenty of countries contribute to halting atrocities- Britain, France, Japan have all contributed to preventing attrocities.

Japan and Britain, yes. But France has done far less. What is France doing about Darfur? It is bad enough that France was complicit in the Oil-fot-Food scandal, which is the largest financial scam in history. But they do nothing about Darfur.

This shows that nothing meaningful happens without the US, even to this day.

Have you considered that Europes 30% population advantage over the US comes from the admission of about twelve ex- Iron curtain countries about two years ago with economies that are no where near the standards of western europe?

Have you considered that the per-capita GDP of the biggest Western European economies, like Germany, France, Italy, and Britain, are all 25-30% lower than the US? Even the poorest US states like Mississippi and Alabama have a higher per-capita GDP than Germany and France.

[maria alice]

I am from Goa, India, a tourist destination, a former colony of the Portuguese.
I really appreciate the United States for most of the work it does, always attending to calls of distress by poor, developing nations. America must not be blamed for all the problems faced by other nations. A superpower is needed to maintain the equilibrium of the world and America is the best superpower in the world. Long Live America and I wish all the Americans all the best.

[GK]

maria,

You are right. Thanks for having a rare moral clarity in a world of fashionable anti-Americanism.

[maria alice]

GK,
I really appreciate your good thoughts for your country and keep it up. Here I have to add something more, I really don't understand the ways of certain people. They'll do anything to go the US. Again, this shows that going to the US is considered a privilege. I know a lot of people from non-Christian and developing nations working in the US, earning a decent salary there and sending home lot of money and living luxurious lives here. That is fine. These are the very people, who stay in 'that country with a big heart'and criticize Americans and America. I don't understand why they do indulge in such uncalled for’ behavior. Those who don’t like America and yet are stuck there should migrate to other countries instead of staying there and criticizing it without any reason.

I have never been to the US but have read and heard a lot about it. My father always spoke good about the US, and as a kid, I grew up as a wellwisher of America inspite of all the odds that America had to face. I don't mean to say that I blindly support everything about the US. I do appreciate US because America is a doer not just a 'talker' America must live up to it's principles and standards and not bow down to please everyone.
I attend human rights course on weekends and I am the only person in my class who defends America on certain points during discussions and debates. I thought, I was alone in my thoughts pertaining to the US, but I ‘m glad, you are there too

[GK]

maria alice,

I don't understand why they do indulge in such uncalled for’ behavior.

A lot of it is just fashion. It is fashionable to say such things, so they do it.

I have never been to the US but have read and heard a lot about it.

We must find a way for you to visit. I lived in India for 7 years and my parents are born in India.

I thought, I was alone in my thoughts pertaining to the US, but I ‘m glad, you are there too

Thanks, and never give up. You know that truth is on your side, and that your sense of right and wrong is stronger than the temptations of 'fashion' that so many others fall for.

I hope you visit here and comment often.

Read this too.

[maria alice]

GK,
You have a good style of writing, defending, correcting, and presenting facts. I really appreciate what you have written. Keep the flame burning.

[Manco_Dollars]

Once again, the greatest proof that America is the best nation on earth is most of the people in the world wish to come live here. Far more then wish to move to the EU. I don't know anyone who wants to live in South Asia or Africa.

[Robb McMullan]

Thank you for taking the time to voice your opinion in this article. However, I strongly disagree with some of your points.

America is basically a very good country, but it is not a "benign superpower" as you assert

In comparing America with China, keep in mind that another Confucian East Asian country, Japan, is already the second largest economy in the world. It achieved this with only about a third of the population of America. Given its greater size, China's rise is likely to be even more spectatucular than that of Japan and South Korea, with which it shares many fundamental characteristics.

By looking just at the current and projected sizes of America's and China's GDPs over the next25 years, you seem to have overlooked one very important indicator of a nation's real economic strength -- it's level of indebtedness. Privately, Publicly and Corporately, America is the most indebted nation on earth and this only seems likely to get worse. China and many other nations, on the other hand, are creditor nations. America has already ceded a lot of control over both its domestic and foreign policy making to China, Japan, et al because to seriously annoy them would mean that they would start to move their financial capital out of America.

Asia's economies, even in the puppet show democracies of Japan and South Korea, are capable of longer-term and more coordinated planning than in America, where the economic direction of the the nation is as capricious as the voting public is fickle.

By focusing just on China's rise (relative to America) as the paramount determinant of whether or not America will continue to be a superpower for much longer, you ignore the bigger picture. To wit, it will probably be the relative rise of the Asian region as a whole that will most likely remove America from its status as the world's sole Superpower.

Also, I know it's not only you that believes America has something like 17 of the top 20 universities in the world, but I don't buy it (even though I am a Harvard alum). For one thing, those ratings tend to be too Western-centric and they downplay or ignore great schools in Asia like the Indian Institutes of Technology, Tsinghua University, Seoul National University and Tokyo University. Further, I also don't think you can equate a nation's intellectual and techological capabilities with the strength of its universities. Japan, for example, gains much of its technological edge from internal corporate training and R&D that outstrips that seen in America; so, corporations in Japan have become the center of high tech development, not so much the universities. A more useful comparison of technological progress would also include a comparison of the total number of engineers being produced in America versus China and the rest of Asia. Guess whose winning this race too?

While it is true that American culture has spread all over the world, I take issue with your belittlement of China's, and by extension Asia's, level of cultural achievement. And, by equating culture with only the entertainment industry, you have also managed to insult Americans (who enjoy and contribute so much more in the way of culture than just entertainment). How, pray tell, do sales of mostly inane movies for teenagers constitute cultural hegemony?

Also, you stated that "From ... over a century ago, America has been the engine of almost all technological progress." This is complete malarkey. Just see below a few of the many important items from the last 125 years that were not invented by Americans.

Automobile - Germany

X-Ray - Germany

Computer - Germany

Penicillin - Britain

Insulin process - Canada

Electric Light Bulb - Canada

Electron microscope - Canada

DVD - Japan

Sincerely,
Robb McMullan

[GK]

Robb,

Japan, is already the second largest economy in the world. It achieved this with only about a third of the population of America.

Japan's per-capita GDP is still less than America's.

China, Japan, et al because to seriously annoy them would mean that they would start to move their financial capital out of America.

Japan is one of America's staunchest allies, even in Iraq. China will do nothin to harm the US economy as China, too, depends on the health of the US consumer.

Asia's economies, even in the puppet show democracies of Japan and South Korea, are capable of longer-term and more coordinated planning than in America, where the economic direction of the the nation is as capricious as the voting public is fickle.

South Korea did not become a democracy until the 1990s, and China still is not one. You seem to be suggesting that is a good thing.

Plus, if their long-term planning is so good, why did China not progress until so recently?

Indian Institutes of Technology

That is not ranked all that high, as it has very little in the way of MS/PhD programs. Most BS grads of IIT over the last 30 years have come to America.

A more useful comparison of technological progress would also include a comparison of the total number of engineers being produced in America versus China and the rest of Asia.

Many of those engineers come to America. Also, only a fraction of those Asian grads are qualified to work at MNC's. Plus, engineering is not the only thing that matters. America leads in management, marketing, and sales.

How, pray tell, do sales of mostly inane movies for teenagers constitute cultural hegemony?

You belittle America's entertainment industry by terming it as 'inane movies for teenagers'. 'Finding Nemo' is not only for teenagers, and did extremely well at the box office worldwide (a good metric of judging which country's films have wide influence). In a free market for films, America's films do the best by far, with India's a distant second.

Just see below a few of the many important items from the last 125 years that were not invented by Americans.

Your 8 examples are merely cherry-picked out of 100+ that could be easily listed.

[David]

I agree that the U.S. will be a superpower until 2030. The reason most great powers throughout history have failed is flawed leadership. Being that we elect our own leaders and impeach them this should not be an issue. Many people bring up that "history repeats itself", but we are living in a global world now, and the U.N. adds a whole new spin. The only way America will lose it's edge is if the pride we have and our younger generations slip.

[Sean]

A very amusing piece. I'm sure american propaganda will have just as strong a hold of its population in 2030 as it does today. "USA No. 1", is the knee jerk reaction regardless of criteria or evidence. You will notice the exodus of people over the next decade though, moving to Canada and Europe to escape the increasingly right wing xenophobic society which lack of education and culture is promulgating in the united states. The EU outstrips the US in every area you mentioned, I suppose ignoring facts is a legitimate form of argument in america. Where countries are queuing up to join the EU and sign free trade pacts (Mercosur), the reaction to invasion by the US is evidenced in Iraq every day.

Hopefully you'll figure out that wars now cost money rather than make money. The rest of the world figured that one out decades ago which is why we don't waste our money on pointless military expenditure.
Good luck with the enormous depression GWB has started
Keep up your comedy stylings, jingoism is so quaint.

[GK]

Sean,

Everything you said can be easily proven to be false. Let me point out just a few of the gaping flaws in your jealous hatemongering.

does today. "USA No. 1", is the knee jerk reaction regardless of criteria or evidence.

I have provided evidence in the article. You did not counter any of the TEN points.

You will notice the exodus of people over the next decade though, moving to Canada and Europe

FAR more people move from Canada and Europe to the US, than vice versa. The best and brightest from India, China, etc. still come to the US, and never consider coming to Europe as their first choice. If you watch the news, you would know that millions of Mexicans come to the US illegally just to do menial jobs. Also, why do you think so many Irish have come to the US? There are more Irish in the US than in Ireland.

escape the increasingly right wing xenophobic society

So why did Germany vote in Merkel, Canada vote in Harper, and France vote in Sarkozy? THIS is what you are really crying about, it appears. That France, Canada, and Germany have voted in pro-US, right-wing leaders, as that is the only economic model that works?

The EU outstrips the US in every area you mentioned

Like which areas? Military? Technology? Films? Per Capita GDP? Sending a man to the Moon?

Actually, Europe LAGS in all of these areas, and is even surpassed by China in some of them, making 'Europe' third, not even second. Europe's economy is 22 years behind the US, according to this EUROPEAN study (tee hee). Reality is something you may want to consider becoming acquainted with.

The rest of the world figured that one out decades ago which is why we don't waste our money on pointless military expenditure.

You may want to educate yourself on how the US rebuilt Europe through the Marshall Plan, after Europe fell into its own war just once too often. Your knowledge of history is weak (as is true of most anti-Americans). America defends much of Europe, and the "spoiled brat" complex of hating your protector is evident here.

Good luck with the enormous depression GWB has started

The US stockmarket is at an all-time high. Don't you even watch the news? The US unemployment rate is far lower than Germany and France. This is why people voted in Merkel and Sarkozy (again, something that bothers you greatly), and also why people are leaving Europe to come to the US.

People like you, who display an ignorance of even basic realities (like the fact that France, Canada, and Germany voted in pro-US leaders) only makes me even more convinced that fanatical anti-Americans have no facts to stand on, and thus have to sustain an increasingly bizarre fantasy fed only by their consuming jealousy.

[Sean]

My my what an emotional response. I couldn't give a shit about america yet you call me anti-american. Clearly you are operating from an emotional rather than factual basis, I suppose if you don't have a grasp of the facts you have nowhere else to go.

Having a tantrum because someone disagrees with you is hardly civilised behaviour although it seems to be acceptable in america for some reason, probably lack of manners. Your "facts" are merely erroneous conclusions. I try to shed a bit of light and educate you, and you start throwing your toys out of the pram.

Merkel and Sarkozy are not pro-american as you claim, stop using american news as a valid source, it is propaganda, not factual. When they say "fair and balanced" they're lying to you.

You carry on about a war that happened almost 80 years ago as though that has any bearing on the "future". You may as well mention Bismark or Madam Blavatsky.

" America defends much of Europe, and the "spoiled brat" complex of hating your protector is evident here.
"
Defends Europe against what? Who exactly is Europe being defended against? Or will you start rabbiting about the 1930s again.

You are wrong in your assumptions about the military industrial complex, they are based on an 19th/20th century model and have been shown to be invalid again and again. Vietnam and now Iraq show the pointlessness of olde style military violence.
You'd hardly consider the tried and tested military thinking of the 19th century which was applied in WWI to have been successful. Yet you cannot see any problems with obsolete warmongering in the 21st century.

http://www.migrationflip.com/

[Sean]

http://www.newratings.com/analyst_news/article_1546328.html

[GK]

Sean,

I am the one who posted links from reputed sources, and asked you simple questions about them. It is you who resorts to name-calling, due to your inability to answer simple questions or provide any evidence to back up your anti-US beliefs.

Let me post the questions again :

1) Merkel and Sarkozy are not pro-american as you claim,

Yes, they are, which is stated even by European magazines like The Economist. Plus, they are right-wing. You don't even know about your own continent, such is the depth of your denial.

Show me a source that shows that Merkel and Sarkozy are not right-wing

Plus, at least you admitted that Harper is pro-American. John Howard of Australia is also pro-American and right-wing. Blair also is, as was Berlusconi of Italy.

2) Defends Europe against what? Who exactly is Europe being defended against?

Don't you even know about NATO? Didn't you hear of Putin threatening Europe, which will be defended by America's defense shield? That was in this week's news.

3) You state :
Good luck with the enormous depression GWB has started

Yet you post a link showing that the US economy is GROWING by 2.3% a year (faster than Germany, Italy, France, etc.)! Your own link proves your ignorance! (tee hee - what a humiliation you have brought upon yourself).

4) You claim :
The EU outstrips the US in every area you mentioned

Yet you can't mention a single area. America is undisputably ahead military, technology, films, per capita GDP, universities, sending a man to the Moon, etc. You did not deny this, thus proving your point wrong.

In fact, the EU is even behind China in some cases, and is thus third, not even second.

5) I provided a EUROPEAN study that shows that Europe's economy is 22 years behind the US, (tee hee). You ran away from that point. That means you know it is true.

6) I said that the US unemployment rate is much better than Germany and France. You did not deny it, so that means you know it is true.

7) Why do so many more SKILLED immigrants from India and China come to the US than to Europe? You did not address this point, which proves that you know it is true, and that America is more attractive for these people to come to.

8) Also, why do you think so many Irish have come to the US? There are more Irish in the US than in Ireland. This proves me right once again. Have you ever even been to America?

Look at how many countries are pro-US, from a British source (the Economist).

You did not address any of these points, and provided no evidence to prop up you jealousy and hatred of a country that has invented nearly all the technologies that you use in your daily life.

Address these points and provide sources (as I have), or you are proven to be wrong.

[Sarnac]

I both agree fully and disagree on one key premise ...

Barring cataclysm, based on current trends, many of which I have not seen you reference, I believe that China is likely to suffer significant challenges rather soon:

1: China relies on western consumption of its low-cost products. The advent of home replicators will decimate China's solid object industry, then complex/electronic objects, then textiles (see fabathome.org for a open-source make-it-yourself first generation at-home replicator). Commercial replicators (also called rapid prototyping machines) have already printed working cellphones, mouse kidneys and (basic) 2-story concrete houses. By 4 to 7 moore's-law generations from now, middle-class people will have 3D printers for their home computers and download patterns for anything from utensils to power tools to clothing. Replicators will put most manufacturing out of business, especially as they begin to handle high-temperature materials.

2: China is an economic powerhouse because their labor is cheap (and of increasing quality). Robots are on a moore's law growth curve and their cost-effectiveness has already passed auto-making UAW workers, and within a very few years will pass walmart stockers and then chinese assemblers.

3: China has the obvious demographic problems ... 1:2:4, M/F=1.2, edu-outflow, generational-imbalance of political power combined with generational technological disconnection.

4: China has rapidly-accelerating horrible pollution problems and worse water-access disasters and water table pollution, spreading desertification, awful and worsening air-quality, and accelerating coal-power-plant construction.

5: The internet and intellectual freedom is antithetical to Chinese communism, central planning and thought-control. As the Chinese population becomes more and more educated, they will tolerate less and less official corruption, regulation and restriction.

6: The Chinese involuntary move towards increased local authority and autonomy will undermine their central-planning control, riot-prevention etc.

7: The Chinese demand for natural resources and land will (over the next 20 years) lead to migration into Siberia and thus into a CN/RU (nuclear?) conflict as Russia depopulates from Vodka, TB, emigration, and HIV.

8: An internet connected world makes it harder for China to quietly dominate and bully its neighbors (or its own people). Major regional problems (SARS++) will be harder to hide and the Chinese are not ready for international scrutiny and mistrust (note reactions to pet food and toothpaste contamination).

=-=-=-=-=

China's greatest advantage is its greatest disadvantage ... its massive cheap labor pool is becoming even larger, more educated, more free, more rights-demanding, more uppity/rebellious, more high-maintainance, and more unmanageable.

China's population seems completely capitalist except for the tiny % who are part of the Chinese Communist Party.

Bluntly, if China rises much farther than they are today, they won't be the China that we know today.

=-=-=-=-=-=-=

My area of disagreeing with your fundamental premise is that I think that a major biowarfare attack is essentially inevitable, and that no analysis that can be done now survives that cataclysmic series of events.

I also think that the replicator+robot economic cataclysm has just (barely) begun and that the singularity is therefore about to hit ... alot sooner than 2030.

Everyone assumed that the Singularity is keyed to AI ... I disagree, I think the singularity is keyed to the collapse of modern economics as replicators + robots completely change the entire rules of economics beyond all human recognition, reducing both employment and cost of living down to nearly zero.

By 15 moore's law cycles (@2030, 32768x more advanced) for both, I do not believe that any of our current economic paradigms will hold true.

[Sean]

Boy are you dumb. Sarkozy and Merkel are right wing Europeans. That means nothing when it comes to attitudes to america, yet you make assumptions based on ignorance. Sarkozy and Merkel would both be too left wing and liberal to get a nomination for the us Democratic party. They believe in universal education and universal health care. That means its free for any resident to go to a real university and get a real education. Europeans work less than 40 hours a week and get over 1 month a year off work. This allows us to not be machines. Free dental care, free cancer treatments, free neurosurgeons, free medicine.

The main point where you are completely, and hilariously wrong is this one:
2) Defends Europe against what? Who exactly is Europe being defended against?

Don't you even know about NATO? Didn't you hear of Putin threatening Europe, which will be defended by America's defense shield? That was in this week's news.

So pulling out of SALT and authorising first strike use of nuclear weapons and then building missile bases Cuba style under the noses of the Russians while appointing a military "Czar". All that is defending Europe against missiles which for some reason will travel from Iran past Poland on their way to where? Helsinki? Now why would the Iranians bother to do that?

What has happened here is pure aggression unprovoked from the us against the wishes of everyone in Europe, to once again endanger Europeans for no reason. It'll all be over soon when that imbecile is indicted and imprisoned.

You're too hidebound and indoctrinated to bother with further.

[GK]

Sean,

Boy are you dumb.

But I can still beat you in a debate quite easily, as is evident by your childish insults. A classic sign of defeat.

1) Sarkozy and Merkel are right-wing AND pro-US. Every major profile of them says so, and both are supporting Bush on Iran. Get over it (I doubt you can). You could provide no sources to prove otherwise, even though I required you to.

Europeans work less than 40 hours a week and get over 1 month a year off work.

And Sarkozy has promised to change this, as it has caused extremely high unemployment in France. That is why people voted for him.

It is amazing that I know much more about Europe than you do.

Plus, you didn't even talk about Blair, Howard, and Harper being pro-US, even if Blair is not right-wing. Albania is also pro-US.

Lastly, The BBC says that Bulgaria wants the US missile shield very badly, as a US ally threatened by Russia. Are you disputing the BBC now?

2) and universal health care.

That is why 15,000 people died in France in a heat wave in 2003, and 20,000 in Italy - because the healthcare system is dysfunctional. No natural disaster in America has ever killed over 2000 people. Sarkozy has also pledged to change this, and make France's system more American-like and efficient.

3) You did not provide any defense of your false claim that the US is in an economic depression. Your own link proves your wrong (again, tee hee). This is humiliating for you.

You also did not address questions 4, 5, 6, 7, or 8. That is very cowardly, to avoid FIVE major questions. This proves that you know I am right and you are ignorant of these topics when faced with facts from reputed sources.

You're too hidebound and indoctrinated to bother with further.

Projection. I provided reputed sources, you did not. I asked questions, and instead of answer them, you chose to cry like a child. I guess American subsidy and defense of Europe has left people like you totally helpless, and it shows.

You have lost (as Euro-leftists usually do when faced with American knowledge-based excellence), and you know it.

It'll all be over soon when that imbecile is indicted and imprisoned.

Why would Bush be imprisoned if he has broken no law?

Readers, note how 'Sean' is the umpteenth person who repeats the same propagandic talking points, but cannot point to any stats or sources, nor answer simple questions posed to him which ARE backed by reputed sources. Each of these delusional anti-Americans who have no ability to answer simple questions merely convinces me of how few true points anti-Americans actually have.

[BT Anderson]

GK,

I agree with everything you say. It is good to read a positive outlook to our future. So refreshing. All I ever is how bad everyhing is in this country from the liberal media or should I call them propagandists. I love this country and I hope we stay at the top for another 200 years. One minor correction, we did have a hurricane in 1900 that hit Galveston, Tx that Killed 6,000 to 8,000 people but that is the only one that I can find over 3,000. I am a meteorologist so that is how I know about that. But your point is accurate. 15,000 dead in France in 2003 vs. 8,000 from a Hurricane 107 years ago before satellites and Radar. Keep up the good work and keep on reminding us that we are overall a very good nation. It seems like the whole world criticises over our past mistakes but our mistakes are fairly mild compared to the horrors committed by other nations.

BTA

[RedOctober]

Wow, this is so funny. I just discovered this article by chance this morning, and I've been reading the responding posts in short bursts all day. It is truly fascinating and very interesting. It is nice to have some real, logical debate with proof to backup assertions. However GK, I think you could afford to be a little bit nicer. Yes I agree that Sean is acting like a butthead, but that doesn't mean you have to rub his face in it. Also, though I agree that many people are overly critical of America, just because someone criticizes America doesn't make them anti-American. There are many things about America that I will openly say are horrible, big mistakes, and the result of pride and poor decisions. However, I love my country and I plan to work in the government somewhere, in the hopes that I can be do my part to improve America and keep it the leading nation in the world. Well, sorry, I'm just getting carried away being a manners police.
To get to my main point, I have just started a double major in Chinese and Arabic, and I am very interested in the debate about China's and America's future. I found your article very interesting, and though I would love to believe everything you said is true, I am not going to assume that since I have done no research myself and have no previous knowledge on this topic. Though I do not disagree with anything you have said thus far, I'm sure you know, as a blogger, that you can have evidence to back up your claims and still not be sure your are right. Even if you are right and have evidence, that doesn't mean people who don't want to believe you, will believe you.
Though there is not much to say that has not already been said, I will add my two cents. I believe very firmly that America never will be, and almost can't be destroyed from the outside. If America falls, it will crumble from the inside and it will be American's fault. That is why it is so important for American's to be united, to agree to disagree. I have never believed anything more strongly than that United we stand, and Divided we fall (Kentucky's motto by the way).
Well, anyway, great job and good article, I hope you write more stuff on China, I'd love to read it. Now I'm off to check out the rest of your website.
Best wishes

[Jesse]

You make excellent points on this article and I am grateful.

GOD BLESS AMERICA!

[Sean]

Good luck with the enormous depression GWB has started

[GK]

Sean,

What depression? The US stock market is near all-time highs, and Q2 GDP growth was 3.5%.

Of course, simple economic data does not matter to self-loathing fanatics who hold the opinions that you do. That is why you continue to make a fool of yourself with such ignorant statements, exposing your jealosy of America.

[David P Shirk]

GK,
Great article. Many of my friends and I read your articles etc. with a great deal of interest. I am also glad that you have the follow through to debate the non-believers, confront them, and beat them, even on their own terms.
And for you Sean- Many of my fellow Americans and I are sickened by your childish words and non-existent points.Please stop cluttering up this page with your ridiculous claims without proof. To you I have two things to say. 1- If you are going to cite an event in history or in the modern day, please ensure it pertains to the topic in question and is in context. 2- 'A whipped dog who runs into a corner out of desperation, ought not love it's own bark so much'.
Anyway, GK, keep up with the informative, and interesting articles.

HAND - Dave

[Sean]

Perhaps your rose tinted glasses make all that red hard to see.

[GK]

Again, when confronted by facts (you know, what normal people form their opinions on), Sean retreats into defeated one-liners that expose the emptiness of his mind and jealousy of his soul.

The US Stock Market is higher than it was 6 months ago. Sean cannot admit this, even though it bothers him.

[guqin]

The author has prophesied it himself: The superpowerhood of US will last as long as the Cocacola brand will.

[Rush]

God bless Roman empire!

[josh stein]

If the past is the guide to the future, the most successful people in the world would be librarians.
... Warren Buffett.

Great empires:
1. Portugal
2. Spain
3. France
4. United Kingdom
5. United States
6. China, 21. century. Maybe ???
Great empires have come and gone. Now with the Electronics, Semiconductor revolution, there is a flat world. All can access information from anywhere in the world.

19th. 20th. century is Not a guide to the 21st. century.

[Andrew P]

There is one way that China or someone else could be a superpower by 2030 - if the USA is taken down. What if China's real plan is for the US and a unified Islam to destroy each other in an nuclear terror war allowing China to clean up afterwards? Actually, it doesn't even require a unified Islam. War with Iran could result in our destruction if Iran has the doomsday biological weapons that were invented by the USSR in the last years of the empire (although China could be destroyed too). Maybe this IS the real reason that the Bush administration has not been willing to actually go to war against Iran.

[Scott]

I think the biggest threat to the USA's current dominance is overconfidence.

The USA has external debt of $10 trillion or 79% of GDP.

It has a current account balance deficient of about $860 billion (2006 est.)

The savings rate is at its lowest rate since 1933 (hence the external debt).

Foreigners own $2.5 trillion more of American assets than Americans own of foreign assets.

The Euro has a good chance of replacing the US dollar as the world's reserve currency (according to Greenspan). This would have dramatic consequences for the US economy.

China ,which holds about $900bn of US Treasuries, agency bonds and dollars, is now in the position that it can dump its dollars on the market if the USA interfered in any China v. Taiwan confrontation. The dollar in its weakened state would almost certainly lose its position as the world's reserve currency.

Luckily China has probably played its hand too soon of course and the USA will presumably work out some sort of plan but the USA isn't in as strong a position, economically, as some people like to assert.

The word is hubris - over confidence.

[Pierre Gilly]

1.There are a number of economic forecasts that shows that Chinas GDP will pas that of the US within a generation. Look at the number of engineers that graduate every year from the US and China.
2.It's still early to say that the Chinese has a brand problem. Considering their huge trade surplus they could just buy the brand, as they've partly done with IBM. Right now the Chinese government has 1000 billion dollar in US bonds...
3.Military overextension is one common reason for empires to fall. Up to today the US has spent around 500 billion dollar on invading Iraq. That is enough money to build over 100 nuclear plant. I have no doubts that the long term effect of wasting money on bombs instead of making necessary investment will have a devastating effect on the US economy.
4. The University in the US is one of few bright spot. The question is: why shouldn't China when it become richer? There is no reason to belevie that the US will be able to maintain it's lead indefenetly.
5. There are 1,3 billion people in China. Attracting foreign talent is not a top priority.
6.Since production already went overseas it's just a matter of time before a lot of innovation joins it.
7.We have already seen a lot of Chinese movie productions. A powerhouse of 1,3 billion people will certainly produce all kind of movie. The pure size of the Chinese domestic market will give them an advantage on the world market.
8. Putting man on the moon was mostly about propaganda. The mission to the moon produce very little science. The symbolic value in the long run is also questionable. The Chinese are not only planing a man expedition to the moon, but also a permanent base there. How much prestige does Spain have today, for discovering America?
9.Most of the US aid never leaves the US. It goes from one account to another in Washington or New York. It's more a tool of helping American company than poor people. The second objective of American foreign aid is to control the aid-receiving countries. Point 9 is a new version of the white mans burden. That doesn't mean that donation from private American citizen like the one after the tsunami can be effective and helpful.
10. This last point is really strange. It assume that a superpower has to mess with the world and get blamed unfairly. It assume a lot a things that not true. The US doesn't care about genocide. The US is collaborating with the worst dictator-butcher all over the world. When Saddam Hussein gas the kurds, the US blamed the Iranian. When Indonesia invaded East Timor and killed a third of it's population the US send more arms to Suharto. When the Khmer Rouge had killed a third of it's own population and the Vietnamese put a stop to it buy invading Cambodia the US help the Khmer Rouge politically and economically so they could keep on fighting.

[GK]

Pierre,

Your points are not correct.

1) What 'projections'? I have shown how it is mathematically impossible for China's economy to surpass America's by 2030.

2) Haven't you heard how many Chinese products have been recalled due to safety issues? How many Chinese consumer brands can you even name?

3) That is just unintelligent sloganing. Why is China ramping up defense spending, if it is bad, according to your views?

4) Europe is already rich, yet has far fewer top universities than the US. China will not come anywhere close to approaching the US.

5) Wrong. India has 1.1 billion people. Far more talented people leave China to live in the US. Any top country has to be an attractive place for top top talent, yet China has trouble keeping its own top talent.

6) Production has been overseas for 40 years (first Japan, then Taiwan, now China).

7) How many Chinese made movies in the last 10 years are known globally? #? Maybe 5? China is not even at India's level here, let along Americas.

These vague generalizations without specifics show the weakness of your points.

8) Space exploration benefits all of humanity. America funds it while other countries benefit.

9) Dead wrong. This is just blind anti-Americanism. US aid is extremely high, while China's aid is zero.

10) Mess with the world? America has saved Western Europe twice in the last 70 years. It removes brutal dicators and creates democracies. No country has shed so much of its own blood and resources for the freedom of others as America.

Yet, you excuse China's genocide in Tibet, support of Burma and North Korea, and massacre at Tianenmen Square. I know that anti-Americans usually excuse anything that non-democratic countries do, but your point is an ignorant and blanantly biased one.

[Scott]

1. China at the moment has only 6% of the world's GDP, The USA has about 27% and the EU has slightly less than a 1/3 of the world's GDP. Germany accounts for about 10% of the world's exports while China accounts for about 7%.

China has a long way to go to catch the USA. Then its has to catch the EU.

2. I think if we look at the Japanese experience with building brands, then it is very likely that China will build world class brands in the future. Why wouldn't they?

3. China is spending a higher percentage of its GDP on defense than the USA. Surely it is China which is over extending itself?

4. US foreign aid is consistently overstated by American commentators. Its part of the way Americans see themselves as generous people to other nations. I researched this in quite a bit of depth a couple of years ago. If we add up private plus government aid overseas then the USA is only as generous as the EU or perhaps slightly less so. I do have the figures in quite a bit of depth to back this up.

"Mess with the world? America has saved Western Europe twice in the last 70 years."

That is statement that is only accepted, unthinkingly, in the USA.

[GK]

If we add up private plus government aid overseas then the USA is only as generous as the EU

Then the EU is certainly not in a positon to claim the moral high ground. The US is actually ahead of Spain and Italy, and this does not count US scientific research that benefits other countries, or US military defense of other countries (such as much of the EU). Taiwan, South Korea, and Israel are prosperous countries that were 'incubated' by the US. The EU has no such examples, other than bringing Eastern European countries into the EU.

That is statement that is only accepted, unthinkingly, in the USA.

Rather, in Europe there is a denial of how much they have depended on American defense. Western Europe would have come under either German or Soviet domination without American intervention.

[Scott]

"Then the EU is certainly not in a position to claim the moral high ground. The US is actually ahead of Spain and Italy"

You are just cherry picking Spain & Italy. I imagine I could cherry pick some US states as well.

I wasn't claiming that the EU had any sort of high ground. I was under the impression that the USA was claiming the moral high ground.

"and this does not count US scientific research that benefits other countries"

Can you give me some statistics that back up your assertion that the rest of the world benefits more from US scientific research than the USA benefits from non-US research?

"or US military defense of other countries (such as much of the EU). Taiwan, South Korea, and Israel are prosperous countries that were 'incubated' by the US."

The EU spends $200 billion a year on its own defense. Not quite at the level of the USA''s current $450 billion but more than enough to defend itself.

"In Europe there is a denial of how much they have depended on American defense. Western Europe would have come under either German or Soviet domination without American intervention."

You seem to be unaware that Hitler declared war on the USA 3 days after Pearl Harbor and then proceeded to sink 600 US merchant ships with U-boats off of the US East coast. Germany declared war on the USA not the other way around. It could be argued that Western Europe should thank Hitler for dragging a reluctant USA into WWII.

[Scott]

I did a little bit of research of my own.

The EU actually publishes more scientific articles than the USA.

"The European Union, which passed the U.S. several years ago in total numbers of articles published, posted an average annual growth rate of 2.8 percent during the same period, more than four times faster than the United States."

http://www.euractiv.com/en/science/eu-outstrips-us-scientific-publishing-output/article-165877

[Scott]

Well that's 2 days and you haven't come up with a source to show that the rest of the world gets a free ride off of the USA when it comes to scientific research. I take it you actually did research it, as did I, and found to your surprise that the USA actually gets a free ride off of the rest of the world.

The problem is. for America, is that some Americans think that the USA is still in the position, relative to the rest of the world, as it was in in the 1950s. That was half a century ago.

[GK]

Scott,

You might be interested to know that the EU is not a country. The EU is a group of countries. One could just as easily add the US + Canada to get bigger numbers.

You are just cherry picking Spain & Italy. I imagine I could cherry pick some US states as well.

Countries vs. countries is the correct comparison. Don't retrench now that inconvenient facts arise.

At any rate, US funding for basic research exceeds Europe by quite a bit. Furthermore, foreign students from India, China, etc. seeking PhDs invariably flock to the US rather than Europe. Where are Europe's tech companies that compare to America's Google, Microsoft, Cisco, etc?

Things like 'number of papers' are meaningless as European research papers tend to be shorter in length than US ones. Why are 4 short papers better than 1 thorough one?

The EU spends $200 billion a year on its own defense.

The EU spends so little because the US defends many EU countries (familiarize yourself with what NATO is). Furthermore, it appears you have conceded the point that the US has successfully incubated and developed the economies of Taiwan, South Korea, and Israel, whereas European countries have done nothing of the sort.

It could be argued that Western Europe should thank Hitler for dragging a reluctant USA into WWII.

Which proves my point of how Europe would have been fully conquered by Hitler if not for the US. The same goes for the Soviet threat to Europe.

is that some Americans think that the USA is still in the position, relative to the rest of the world, as it was in in the 1950s

Rather, Europe seems to think it is still in the position it was in 90 years ago. Within just two decades, the now-Islamic EU (still a collection of many countries, mind you) will be fourth in the ranking of powers, after the US, China, and India. Individual nations like Germany and France will not be in the top 5 of World GDP rankings.