|
Your verdict: The "America in
2025" scenario is plausible, with a few qualifications. Today, response
to your comments.
Many thanks for your "America in 2025" responses.
Reactions ran the gamut, from enthusiasm and curiosity to skepticism
and surprise. Mostly you were grateful for a break from the popular
"America is doomed" fare.
Today we'll look at a few of your
comments. (I can't respond to them all, but I do read them all.)
First we'll go to the angriest of the
bunch.
You sound so stupid and uneducated to
write this article. I feel bad for you and United States of America. Be
humble and don't shout to be heard. The Chinese will grow stronger and
stronger for the next 400 years. The Chinese civilization existed 5000 years
not out of nothing. They have a solid foundation. They bounced back so
rapidly in 30 years not because they are lucky. Better be more circumspect of
your stupidity instead of bragging what little you know of the Chinese. They
work hard and very hard for their race and country. See more astounding
inventions and development of science and technology big time in the next
decade from China. Provide respect when respect is due. Provide credit when
credit is due. Shouting on a crumbling foundation and telling how strong you
are is absurd stupidity at its worse. Be humble, acknowledge your weakness
and work very very hard. This may slow down
America's slide down to oblivion in the international stage. Be hardworking
my friend. You are doing a great disservice to your country. Good luck
brother.
-- Thin Foong
C.
Don't feel bad for me, brother. Life
is good and I count my blessings often (just as many others do).
I think you missed the point of the
piece. While the setup was provocative -- "America beats China" --
it was meant as a deliberate contrast to what so many in the mainstream media
believe. You don't have to go far to find the view that China will dominate.
Open just about any newspaper or magazine and you'll find it.
No one is shouting or trying to deny
credit or respect. If you have the ability to look 400 years into the future,
your crystal ball is far superior to mine.
Note, too, that no definitive forecast
was made as to what will happen. We did not say for certain that America will
rise up -- only that it's possible.
On the opposite side of the coin:
You will mostly receive criticism from
expatriate wanna-be's who are so disgusted with
America that they speak openly of moving to places like Nicaragua, where
there is a long, glorious history of ... oppressive government and
dictatorship. Why these types are so unwilling to stay and fight for our
country's future is beyond me. But their departure will set the stage for a
new group of innovators and entrepreneurs, who will continue America's long
tradition of dynamic change.
As for your column, a Chinese
implosion and the rise of American natural gas to replace foreign oil seem
very plausible. It will be more of a challenge to recover some of the
overseas manufacturing jobs, since there are plenty of other countries
besides China who will offer plenty of warm bodies for cheap labor. Nevertheless, there is every reason to try and
accomplish this.
Congratulations for thinking outside
the box, for having a little confidence in your fellow Americans and for
making a legitimate observation that since the century has just started, the
nation that will dominate it remains undecided.
-- JACK
Yes, exactly! The dominant nation is
still undecided. There are many twists and turns left to navigate.
A simple question from TD
reader Jim:
Will this all still be viable if the
Greenback becomes defunct as the currency of global trade?
Yes, without a doubt. Remember that
currencies are not valued in a vacuum. In some sense, a country's currency is
like a stock certificate, i.e. shares in the country's net worth.
This is relevant because, even when
America loses its status as issuer of the world reserve currency, the USA
will still provide valuable goods and services to the world. Grain exports
will become increasingly valuable over time. And U.S.-based manufacturing
will become more competitive as the value of the U.S. dollar falls.
It's a funny thing. The weaker the
U.S. dollar gets, the stronger a competitor America becomes on the world
stage. At the same time, a weaker U.S. dollar is also the best encouragement
possible for the "buy America" mentality, because it makes imports
more expensive.
When you add in the fact that the
United States still accounts for nearly 25% of global economic output, it
becomes easier to see why currency values have upper and lower bounds and do
not readily fall to zero.
Your thesis is feasible, but it will
require some significant changes to get there, primarily in bringing
manufacturing jobs back to the U.S. Not only the current administration and
unions, but environmental laws and activist groups are very unsupportive of
manufacturing in general. Right now, it is extremely difficult to build
almost any new manufacturing facility or start up an old one that has been
down. It will require a significant change in perspective to get this
changed, since we have been going in the opposite direction for quite some
time. New technologies can help our fuel supply issues, if we can get
"permission" to build the plants required to utilize them, and
figure out how to operate them economically.
And as the rest of the world's demand
for food increases, we definitely have the ability to step into the supply
gap, as long as we can get past the current practices of paying farmers to
NOT grow crops, or the even more stupid practice of growing corn (with
financial subsidies!) for fuel ethanol instead of food.
I hope I live to see some of these
changes, and the end result you see as possible.
-- Robert
You are absolutely right. There are
many obstacles to bringing manufacturing back to the United States. And
current farming practices will have to change. Nothing short of severe crisis
will bring about these changes.
But that isn't a permanent roadblock,
because severe crisis is what we're going to get in the next few years (maybe
sooner rather than later).
Humans don't like disruptive change,
and neither do markets for the most part. But when pressure builds to the
point of violent upheaval, disruptive change is forced into the system. Think
of an old water heater that the landlord refuses to replace. He can put it
off and put it off -- but when the thing finally blows up, he can put it off
no longer.
Right now, America has both a debt crisis and an unemployment crisis.
We are still in denial in regard to both -- neither is being treated as
full-blown disaster yet. But when the boilers blow up, a radical break with
the recent past will follow.
A time frame of 14 years is more than
enough for (1) the blowups to take place, (2) radical
response to kick in, and (3) benefits of the new system to take hold.
Reader John A. in Curacao writes:
Let's hope the Chinese and others
continue to play by the current rules, i.e. they make a deal to pay for the
goods and services they need to keep their people content. If the world
should revert to the old ways of doing things, you just take it from the
other guy, like has happened for the past 2000 years at least, we could be in
for some really big problems!!
Remember the reason for the Vietnam
War, the Domino Theory. The Chinese are still playing by the current rules,
but what if they really needed, say the resources of, Australia, who could
stop them from just taking it like the Europeans did to North and South
America and a lot of the rest of the world, only the USA.
The world has been very complacent for
the past 60 years, most people think there will never be another Hitler or
Stalin or some other megalomaniac.
I think it [is] only a matter of time,
perhaps not in our lifetime as most people believe, but with a severe global
depression major conflict could be sooner than most people think.
If China decided to attack Australia,
the United States would certainly intervene. (The Aussies would also do a
fair dinkum job of defending themselves I reckon.)
Of course, the thought itself is a
very scary one, and you are right to have concerns. "Severe global
depression," coupled with a shortage of vital resources, is exactly the
type of backdrop against which world wars come about.
Geopolitical strategist George
Friedman adds to this concern by noting that, in historical terms, trade ties
can actually increase the likelihood of conflict (rather than decrease as
many would think). Senator Chuck Schumer is a walking explanation for this.
Robert S. points out something
important:
Your forecast could come true, but a
certain ingredient must be emphasized: "The strong take it away from the
weak, but the smart take it away from the strong". The transistor came
from the brain of a small town Iowa kid with a great education. We beat the
rest of the world to atomic energy, again thanks to the superiority of our
technology. I can cite numerous other examples, but you get the point. But
today, our universities are populated by foreigners eager to learn and return
home to compete with us, while the local students play football and party.
Twenty-five grand tuitions discourage the serious and low income students.
Sadly, our technical institutions are not exempt from the current
budget-cutting spree. WE had the brainpower when I got my degree in 1943.
Will we realize that it is the ingredient to fulfill
your forecast.
It's a fair question as to whether
America will retain its edge in technology and innovation. Maintaining a
dynamic entrepreneurial culture is key to making
that happen. I would argue, though, that America still has some of the best
research centers and entrepreneurial clusters on
the planet. Maintaining that will be one of the big challenges.
And finally, TD reader C.C.
inquires:
This is great thinking outside the
box. You don't know how good this makes me feel to hear some good news for a
change.
Do we still face some very bad days
coming soon? Do you think 2012 or is Obama going to have his cronies buy into
the market to help him get re-elected?
Hate to be a party pooper, but
"very bad days coming soon" is essentially guaranteed. The insanity
happening in Europe is a microcosm of the entire world right now -- we have
"kicked the can down the road" in respect to all the problems that
led to 2008 in the first place.
Severe
crisis is going to hit, and hit hard, because that is the only thing
disruptive enough to create real change. Politicians can't do it. I have no
idea who will be elected in 2012, but he (or she?) will preside over some of
the darkest days America has seen in generations. The analysis here is in
respect to good things that could happen on the other side -- once we have
taken our medicine.
Justice
Litle
Taipan
Publishing Group
Article
brought to you by Taipan Publishing Group. Additional valuable content can be
syndicated via their News RSS feed. www.taipanpublishinggroup.com. Don't forget to
follow Justice Little on Facebook and Twitter for the latest in financial
market news, investment commentary and exclusive special promotions. Article
originally published here
|
