I think your position applies to the west
in general, the US is just a little larger. Penalty of a 'post-industrial' society the Academics keep telling us is the way to go... :mad:
Quote:
Originally Posted by
Fuchs
...Services are almost irrelevant as base for military power. You can't get a rifle from an UPS driver, you cannot sell his services to other nations in exchange for their rifle - but an industry worker can make a rifle for you.
Well, you can in the US -- most of them have a couple of rifles at home...;)
Quote:
The U.S. economy is like a canoe with two rowers and eight steersmen...
There's more truth in that statement than you realize. I agree with it as you meant it but it's also true in the sense that there are too many steersmen trying to make decisions -- ending up with no one in charge all too often... :D
Quote:
The shipbuilding graphic (more modern data is even more extreme; (it) is relevant because mankind has never experienced that a naval power kept its superiority on the seas in face of a challenger who had a greater shipbuilding capacity. Much less a shipbuilding capacity that's stronger by more than an order of magnitude.
Mankind has never experienced many things that are now occurring. The world is in the early throes of major change; too early to tell how it will fall out. A lot of historical paradigms are going to be laid to rest -- many won't, it's true but we don't know yet which will and which will not...
Thus, your comments are all correct -- but I'm not sure they prove what you think they prove.
I think there's a context issue.
Quote:
Originally Posted by
Fuchs
...And Ken; wasn't it you who - just a couple of days ago - wrote in the context of technological changes that you don't trust "everything changes" attitudes?
Minor changes in technology do not necessarily change operational techniques and practices; sometimes they do, sometimes they don't. IIRC, that discussion was on the increased lethality of munitions -- a change that I believe has had only a minor effect on warfare.
Changes in the human condition, OTOH, will wreak even more technological change which may obviate current changes -- and techniques.
Quote:
Actually, I think they prove that we (in the West) should stop considering our nations as being what they once were. Too many people don't understand that we are in decline in several aspects even though we are in rise in others. Instead, many people seem to believe that the 'power' ratios in the Western world are just like the were decades ago (plus China's industrial rise).
I agree that too many do so. I do not however believe most do so.
Quote:
How many people would believe that the South Korean shipbuilding industry has many dozen times the capacity of the U.S. one, or that Poland's and Croatia's shipbuilding industries are larger as well? It's likely easier to find people who still consider the extreme U.S. shipbuilding effort of WW2 as an indicator of national power.
Why would they not believe it, it's true -- the US Shipbuilding industry is very much aware of it. Part of this discussion lies in the realm of the never ending quality versus quantity argument which there's little sense in going into that here. On the WW II shipbuilding effort, the real issue is the pre war level versus the 1944 level; most of that effort was built from scratch. Could it be again? Probably. Will it need to be? Not soon.
Quote:
Most Western nations/economies would have trouble to mobilize and equip as many soldiers as they did in WW2. The million men armies would have almost no uniforms. Most of the textile industry is gone, after all!
On the other hand: Even the present, relatively weak steel industries are still much more capable than they were in WW2 (and the steel is better).
Somehow, I have this idea that a lack of textiles will not be a major problem in future war... :D
Sheer Industrial Production (Steel, Ship Building) tends to be ....
misleading indicator, at best.
Have always thought that raw industrial production is a poor indicator, which tends to mask deep seated problems. For example, the PRC leads in steel production, but they are highly dependent on outside sources for a substantial portion of both coking coal, and iron ore. Lose even partial access to those outside resources, and all you have is a large pile of sunk costs into non-productive assets. Truth of the matter is that China (PRC) is only a part of the overall manufacturing and fabrication process, and for the really finished goods requiring high quality, precision steel, there's a lot of other players outside of China who all have to be involved, otherwise the entire process goes into free-fall. That's why there is still a fair amount of steel producing capacity here in the US.
Which brings up a critical point. Manufacturing locations like China, Vietnam, India, and other locations have been seriously damaged by the vast increase in transportation costs over the last 6 to 9 months. The entire "offshoring" business has totally been changed because of the increases in transportation costs (and we are not talking small increases), and there's large international businesses out there who are currently sweating blood over the possibility that they are going to take some massive writedowns on investments made over the last several years in "offshoring" manufacturing capacity.
Check and see how many new announcements of major investments and/or expansions in production capacity are being made within the last 5-6 months in places like China. Hint: Not Many. There's a reason - the uncertainty in the marketplace is forcing a comprehensive review of many projects, and project validity with gas prices at $2.50 a Gal. is one thing, project validity is much more uncertain (and unlikely) at $4.00 a Gal. And remember, the government of the PRC was subsidizing fuel prices, and those subsidies have been cut by at least 40% to 45%, with more increases to come.
If you talk to any number of business analysts who are really have the insides into China's manufacturing potential, they are much less confident than what oftentimes gets presented in the MSM, specifically in that many very difficult issues China has to face just get ignored or glossed over.
In short, I'm a little bit worried about US economic power, but for different reasons. We need to build a substantial energy production base (and I'm not necessarily concerned just about oil) for both natural gas and electricity, but also high speed internet capacity (REAL high capacity broadband, not this wannabe nonsense being foisted off onto the general public these days). And addressing those issues, at least here in the US, are directly in the political realm.:mad:
Actually, the Big Mac index is also an illusion.
Quote:
Originally Posted by
Fuchs
You overestimate the relevance of the USA.
Always reliably countered by your understating it... :D
Quote:
And the reference to welfare state - well, that reminds me of a stereotypic misunderstanding by Americans. We pay to steer the society a bit and to keep the poor less poor. That's actually not more expensive than to have a higher crime rate and 0.75% of the countries' population in jail.
Not more expensive but less likely to increase our already bad but not quite as bad as yours culture of dependency on the government. ;)
It is a fun map and any discussion
about the validity of this or that theory should always be made with the thought in mind that Economists are like Doctors -- if one tells you something you don't want to hear, there's always another that will tell you the opposite.
The dismal science is well named... :wry:
I'm still not going for the Kimchi, don't care what blandishments Ron offers.