Discussion » Chinese Language & Culture » Can China become the world's largest economy in 10

  • Ms Bla
    Ms Bla wrote:
    China's economy grew 8.7 percent in 2009, latest figures showed, fanning suggestions that China may have surpassed Japan to become the second biggest economy in the world as the latter is expected to shrink as much as three percent due to the global financial and economic crisis. China could replace the United States as the No. 1 economy as early as 2020, leading business consultancy PriceWaterhouseCoopers (PWC) projected. But some analysts point to some underlying problems in the Chinese economy, which, they say, if left unsolved, may result in the ultimate collapse of the Chinese economy. Do you think China can sustain its development and overtake the US in 10 years as predicted by the PWC?
  • MiLo
    MiLo wrote:
  • Kodi
    Kodi wrote:
    I would say at least 20 years given that the American economy declines a bit or at least stagnates. Most people do not understand how much larger the American economy is than every other country's. Moreover, China as the largest economy in the world will look nothing like the U.S. #1 economy. It would take another 20 to thirty years for China to reach a GDP and an acceptable income per capita (household) in order to become a truly developed country. It does not really matter if China does become the #1 because in order to enjoy the level of development the United States has they will need to develop at least 6 times as much as the United States has in order to be comparable.

    Also it is questionable whether China can sustain breakneck development without addressing major problems. Favoritism, gov. monopolies, education system restricts college attendance, lack of innovation, etc.... These are major problems that need to be addressed before China can become anything more than a humongous factory where someone tells them what to do and they do it.

    A major world power "Yes" anything comparable to the USA in terms of development and quality of life "Hmmmm That depends"
  • Da Fan
    Da Fan wrote:

    why not change the question to: Is China being the world largest economy that significant? hey guys, our GDP in 1840 was still up to more than a third of the whole world all combined, but…so what?

  • Ms Bla
    Ms Bla wrote:




    It’s only a matter of time that China’s will surpass U.S. to be the No.1. The high-speed growth of China’s economy could maintain, and it will be the biggest in the world in 10 years.



    China simply can't sustain the current growth. Over-reliance on exports and a undervalued RMB, dependence on real estate and investment will lead to severe problems.


  • 哎呀
    哎呀 wrote:
    I don't care about if China will be No.1 as a whole at all.

    As we all know, the per capita GDP of China is still behind 100th place. There are still 254 million poor people living in China. (based on World Bank criteria: one dollar per day) No need to mention other problems - corruption, pollution, inequality, the increasingly huge gap between rich and poor, lacking of originality and innovation and so on.

    Yes, even though one day we may surpass US and to be No.1, SO WHAT???
  • Sara Elise Fladmark Seland
    With a good economy growth, government investment in education and the search for green energy there won't be such a bad result for the country.. I guess China can't be considered a first world contry, but it is taking the first steps to become one. Pollution is the result of a fast/cheap development, but the changes are being made for a while already.
    Yes, there is a visible disparity of growth in China, but with time to build new economic centers, surrounding areas will have an economic boost and give people (rich or poor) better life conditions, as sanitation, transportation, education and... well, i can't say about information (haha)..
    I guess an outside eye can have a different point of view, but sometimes, make mistakes too, after all, a country is made by people, and you got to understand its culture and history to really know whats going on.
  • MiLo
    MiLo wrote:
    Yes Da Fan, in 1840 we had a large economy contributed by tea, cotton and china, and today we also have a large economy contributes by export and real estate; in 1840, we lost almost everything cuz we had the 'large' economy, and today, what gonna be happpened to us?
  • Da Fan
    Da Fan wrote:

    that's why im often in a dilemma: we need a stable political system now, as well as a more advanced army, esp. navy and airforce, but, this political system got too many problem, and it changes too slow.

  • MiLo
    MiLo wrote:
    you are in dilemma? Well done, that improves you are worry of our nation's development and our ppl's future.
    Anyway, we should be cool. Our country is on the way, no matter how hard is, we just move on.
  • Joakim Lund Rangel
    I would say yes, with a very big BUT in it:

    1. Today China`s economy is only 7% of the size of USA.
    2. because the one-child rule the population in China is getting very old, and to take care of all this old people it is going to cost a lot of money and resources that instead "should" have been used for production if the goal is to grow a bigger economy.

    I say Yes, because it is very hard to deny that a population of 1.3 BILLION people united as one, with the education level going up, and the fact that China now care about the rest of the world, by opening up and play the important role in soon every area world wide.
  • 叮噹叔叔 (令狐叮噹)

    Why are we more concerned about numbers (or size), than the quality? Even when China becomes the largest economy, there is still a huge population living under the poverty line, and that is already a very low line per foreign's standard (except most African countries) ...
  • A豆腐
    A豆腐 wrote:
    This is a run, right?, if you begin in the last places, for gain positions, you must to run more fast of the others or not fall or stumble when happen these to the others.

    In system capitalism (sorry, but a mix between capitalism and comunist is like be square and circle in the same time, only a word, a tittle)

    run fast in capitalism is ¨produce and consume¨. Eat in China is cheap, so the salaries can be low for some kind of workers and for the others with high salaries, they can use the money after rents and food in consume. So, a good point for China.

    fall or stumble in capitalism is ¨crisis¨. The free market sometimes produces an excess of products, and then the market is full and the prizes down... bla bla...¨Crisis¨. The oppositive is a state that can control the market, then can control the production, so have a chance to prevent the ¨crisis¨ for the causes of excess of products. So, other good point for China.

    So, for me is possible. The only thing is that maybe, the reaction of the other runners will be put high tariffs to the products made in China.
    In any case, the poors will remain poors, and the rich will remain rich. because, where there is salaried work, there is one person with money for pay and there is other without money, that need be paid,that need the salary for live.

  • 哎呀
    哎呀 wrote:
    (潇然) Adolfo Secades, I think China is the most capitalistic socialistic nation, while many European countries are the most socialistic capitalistic countries. (Especially North European countries.)

    "The oppositive is a state that can control the market, then can control the production, so have a chance to prevent the ¨crisis¨ for the causes of excess of products. So, other good point for China. "

    Control the market, control the production? That's what they did in Soviet Union and that's what they are doing in North Korea. China used to follow the planned economy strategy and it proved to be a catastrophe. The government needs to control something, but definitely not what and how many to produce.

  • Fazio
    Fazio wrote:
    “Most people do not understand how much larger the American economy is than every other country's. ”

    I agree with it.

    Economy is not a simple question of GDP,or some others of number.

    The Frame,Avanrrage,Millitary,Education and so on.

    So many people do not really know how Larger the USA is than other Coutries...

    But i will do harder,Make my motherland stronger.

  • Da Fan
    Da Fan wrote:
    Yeah, one problem in China is that the State controls too many sectors, while I think yeah, certain sectors cannot be run by privates, but too many is not so good. And the problem in the US is the few controls almost everything, including politics, then the whole world. So, maybe imperialism is a out-dated word in China for many many years, however, basically those oligarches in the US(not the people of US) still follow such a ideaology.

    I hope China can become stronger, but I do not hope China become the next superpower, coz the world do not need a superpower, and better not having a superpower~
  • Veronica Skagen
    yeap.. GDP dun weights a country.. China, hmmm... not good enough to be name 1st world yet..
  • A豆腐
    A豆腐 wrote:
    You have reason, there is a different between the ¨hard¨control the production (and sometimes the consume, for example the number of foreigner movies each year in the cinemas) and a kind of guide of the movements of merkart using tariffs and other ways. But this soft guide is unthinkable for example in Spain, (to fine for have more than one baby (the production of humans,future workers), or a limit in foreigner movies), a my country presumes of be socialist (althought also says that the goverment is a monarchy and a democracy ?_? -square-circle-).
    I want to say that since a strict point of view liberalist, the ways of China are the ways of a state-controller (and don´t know how to say in english, in spanish is -Estado interventor-).
  • Mathew Abisai
  • Hanna Eriksen
    Hanna Eriksen wrote:
    as a populace,i think we won't give a flying fuck
  • Portable Alpha
    When measured in purchasing power parity, there is a good chance the country can make it. As far as exchange rate weighted GDP, probably needs more time down the road. The overall size doesn't matter that much, we need to look at the structure/component, productivity and efficiency, output/income per capita and metrics such as UN Human Development Index that type of variable(s), if you are concerned more over life standard.

    All due respect, as long as people have a semi-comfy lifestyle, then, as Alma has put it, nobody'd give a flying !@#$, I guess.

Please login to post a reply to this thread.


WeLiveInBeijing.com is a social community for people living in or traveling to Beijing.

Powered by: Bloc