IMF Bombshell: Age of America Nears End

[Modern Saint]

For the first time, the international organization has set a date for the moment when the "Age of America" will end and the U.S. economy will be overtaken by that of China.

Scary - read on.

http://finance.yahoo.com/banking-bud...nd-marketwatch

[Tig]

We've seen the parallels the US shares with past global powers for many years, from the Roman Empire to the United Kingdom.
Not much of a surprise, yet not welcome, either.

[reverend1]

We'll see, not the first time this type of predictions have been made. I'll take the innovation and spirit of business anytime. Once we get our shit together and some of the road blocks out of the way we'll be fine.

[Coda]

We've seen the parallels the US shares with past global powers for many years, from the Roman Empire to the United Kingdom.
Not much of a surprise, yet not welcome, either.

...inevitability...when a super power has to worry about the world, it disregards its foundation. The US has been THE power for the last 70 years, and now things at home have gotten to a point where there just isnt enough resources to spread around. I say good. We can get things at home straighted out...

[Peeker]

I've always thought it best to take care of home first, then worry about other shit.

that said, I didn't understand piss-all in that article.

[huskerdude]

Hardly a surprise. we don't really have a functioning economy anymore.
I know I've been talking up The Wire a lot recently, but I saw a quote in it yesterday that fits perfectly here:

We used to make shit in this country. Build shit. Now we just put our hand in the next guy's pocket.

[Sad Navigator]

It's not that scary. Plenty of nice people live in countries that don't have a WE'RE NUMBER ONE economy.

Also, the Brit and Roman Empire parallels are kinda dippy. True the Brits and the US styled themselves after their ideas of who the Romans were, but the whole thing is context-ignoring comparing ahistorical apples to anachronistic oranges.

[gibby mcfender]

I don't get much into politics and am admittedly not as caught up on all this stuff as I should, but I can make observations. And this struck a chord w me: "This is the result of decades during which China has successfully pursued economic policies aimed at national expansion and power, while the U.S. has embraced either free trade or, for want of a better term, economic appeasement."

And Huskerdude's quote as well.

[reverend1]

I don't get much into politics and am admittedly not as caught up on all this stuff as I should, but I can make observations. And this struck a chord w me: "This is the result of decades during which China has successfully pursued economic policies aimed at national expansion and power, while the U.S. has embraced either free trade or, for want of a better term, economic appeasement."

And Huskerdude's quote as well.

That's exactly it, we're not allow to win. It's more important to be fair, and be politically correct and make sure no-ones feelings get hurt.

[gibby mcfender]

Distraction as a side effect of complacency is a bitch.

[mattburnside]

I'll take the innovation and spirit of business anytime.

We offshore that stuff now.

[Coda]

...there is a difference between having a strong interior, and having a strong grasp on global happenings...you cant have one without the other...for the past decade or so, America has become more involved in keeping the peace, globally, while ignoring the failings of the interior...I think the graceful thing would be for the US to bow out...let someone else take over...why does America have to be #1 all the time...I think if you tell people you are the best, than you actually need to be...but hey, what do I know?...

[Tig]

It's not that scary. Plenty of nice people live in countries that don't have a WE'RE NUMBER ONE economy.

Also, the Brit and Roman Empire parallels are kinda dippy. True the Brits and the US styled themselves after their ideas of who the Romans were, but the whole thing is context-ignoring comparing ahistorical apples to anachronistic oranges.

I can live without the number one economy as long as our people aren't suffering severely or we become some other country's bitch.

So as the largest, most demanding consumer nation with a huge yet thinned out military presence far beyond it's boarders, the US comparison to the Romans and UK is somehow context ignoring and dippy? Granted, the US is far more overboard in almost every regard than the other two past super powers (except we don't have as many colonies and territories). If that is what you refer to, then I understand. Otherwise elaborate or present more accurate comparisons please.

I'm not trying to argumentative, but would like to hear of something more accurate. I try to keep my mind open to a broader horizon and opinions of others.

[reverend1]

...there is a difference between having a strong interior, and having a strong grasp on global happenings...you cant have one without the other...for the past decade or so, America has become more involved in keeping the peace, globally, while ignoring the failings of the interior...I think the graceful thing would be for the US to bow out...let someone else take over...why does America have to be #1 all the time...I think if you tell people you are the best, than you actually need to be...but hey, what do I know?...

I really don't care about policing the world at all. It is very important that we remain the #1 economy in the world, as well as, the worlds reserve currency because of the unique advantages that affords us. One important thing to remember is that we consume most of the goods produced in China and elsewhere. Without us to purchase their products they are in big trouble. It is also important to note that you really don't know what the true numbers are coming out of places like China. They manipulate all of the numbers in their favor so it looks good to the outside world. Just look at the fake footage of their fighter jets that was really footage from Top Gun. If it's not really working they just fake it. They are facing even higher inflation than we are right now. That on top of the huge gap between the ultra wealthy and the average Chinese worker who earns just over $4,000 per year are causing a lot of social unrest. So far they have crushed the protests with overwhelming force, but things aren't as rosy their as they would like us to believe. It is also important to remember the IMF has a agenda to replace our currency with a new currency that they would control and would give them tremendous power. When I say new currency, I don't mean the Euro or Swiss Franc they want to create something completely new that they would govern. These thing are cyclical I wouldn't be too concerned at this point.

[Sad Navigator]

So as the largest, most demanding consumer nation with a huge yet thinned out military presence far beyond it's boarders, the US comparison to the Romans and UK is somehow context ignoring and dippy? Granted, the US is far more overboard in almost every regard than the other two past super powers (except we don't have as many colonies and territories). If that is what you refer to, then I understand. Otherwise elaborate or present more accurate comparisons please.

Well, the US isn't in the same kind of business of ruling and colony-having as Rome or Ye Olde British Empire. Also, the current style of globalism afoot in the world is different than what was going down in 1890 or 90 CE. Economies rooted in different systems. Heck, theories of how to exercise military power that are a lot different. Different conceptions of citizenship and nation.

Can you draw up parallels? Sure, why not. But its not good history to posit universal "rules" for how empires operate and then use that rule to explain the present. (Because history is all about particular contexts.)

I mean, look at the various "falls" of these empires. Rome fell, but Constantinople kept on chooglin' doing all sorts of Roman-type stuff for quite some time. The British Empire, rather than being sacked by barbarians or whatever cliche you'd like, saw its empire dwindle via independence movements in former colonies. (Which happened to a lot of the former 19th-century colonial heavyweights, e.g., France.) And the US's paranoia is really about losing economic and cultural clout. It's not so much that Wyoming is gonna kick out the US gov't and declare Wyoming an independent nation or that beardy Canucks are gonna charge south and sack our Sonic Drive Ins. It's more that oil my not be valued in dollars in a few years and that people might not lust after our consumer cultural products.

And even after America "falls" we'd likely still retain the ability to blow most of the world all to hell. That's a way different situation than, say, the fall of the Roman Empire.

[Tig]

Good points, all taken.
However, beardy Canucks would likely prefer White Castle over Sonic.

Compared to past generations, baby boomers and their offspring have become extremely spoiled. Societies, similar to individuals, seldom strengthen or develop personal growth when all is easy with smooth sailing. The tough times strengthen and build secure, independent/interdependent people.

[John Watt]

The last colonial superpower was England, with The English Navy.
The United States stayed out of World War Two, at first, while steel and nickel companies supplied the Germans.
When England got bombed down, almost out, The United States entered the war, taking over.
Attacking Asian islands forced the Japanese to defend themselves, very desperately.
South Korea, South Vietnam, used-to-be all of South America, Canada, Iraq, Israel, Egypt, and many more,
are colonies of The United States. America took over Columbia in 1944, controlling everything coming out.
Society, whether you like it or not, is a political science. You have to build it first.

Please, can we be realistic, global citizens? Free your mind, and your heart will follow.
Thinking America is policing the world is buying into your own well-oiled, military propoganda.
Thinking American economies have to be globally dominating, is forgetting most of the world that doesn't know dollars.
And seeing Canada as needing your protection, when Canada won the last war with America, is just wrong.
A person who is fighting an invasive military force, in his own country, is not a terrorist.
A people who become suicide bombers and rocket-bomb launchers, as a last resort, are not terrorists.

My recommendation? You should watch foreign news. See what the rest of the world sees.
Either that, or dig up that old sixties, number one New York Times book, "The Ugly American".
Now that Canadian blood is in that Afghanistani oil, I can type "The Ugly Canadian".
Professor Marshall McCluhan, who promoted the term "Global Village", has only become more relevant.
Maybe you should read that and "The Medium is the Message". You'll understand our world more.

My Scottish bottom line? You can't build a society by making money off of someone else's money.

Please accept my experience. I'm more into polling, not trolling.

[Coda]

I really don't care about policing the world at all. It is very important that we remain the #1 economy in the world, as well as, the worlds reserve currency because of the unique advantages that affords us. One important thing to remember is that we consume most of the goods produced in China and elsewhere. Without us to purchase their products they are in big trouble. It is also important to note that you really don't know what the true numbers are coming out of places like China. They manipulate all of the numbers in their favor so it looks good to the outside world. Just look at the fake footage of their fighter jets that was really footage from Top Gun. If it's not really working they just fake it. They are facing even higher inflation than we are right now. That on top of the huge gap between the ultra wealthy and the average Chinese worker who earns just over $4,000 per year are causing a lot of social unrest. So far they have crushed the protests with overwhelming force, but things aren't as rosy their as they would like us to believe. It is also important to remember the IMF has a agenda to replace our currency with a new currency that they would control and would give them tremendous power. When I say new currency, I don't mean the Euro or Swiss Franc they want to create something completely new that they would govern. These thing are cyclical I wouldn't be too concerned at this point.

...the fail point isnt that China may do that, its that they even have the opportunity to do that. Like SadNavigator said, the "American Empire" isnt like the British, or even the Roman. It based solely on influence and reputation. America has gotten itself involved in situations where it felt it was stepping up and taking charge, but lacked the foresight to see that they were really gaining a 21st Century Colony. Take Iraq, for instance. The US invaded, and then pretty much took control, but it didnt end there. We found that some people were not happy with the American presence. So there we have a sort of twisted Colony system. Only instead of depending on solid goods in return for our investment (ala Tea, Opium), we received the credit for defending freedom, and democracy. The problem with that is that some people dont accept that as payment for their services. They want cash, and with no cash being developed, there is only one way things could go. Down...

...I personally thing America has been the "big brother" to the world for too long now. We are Globalized enough that when shit needs to be taken care of, there are plenty of countries willing to share the load. Like it or not, we live in a globalized society, and we need to stop being #1, and begin being "American". I think America should develop a hybrid-isolationist type of diplomacy. Lets build the country up from the inside, and set an example, instead of setting an example of a system that is slowly bleeding to death...