Why did China get the Olympics, again?

[gopunk]

Originally posted by: ElFenix

Originally posted by: gopunk

1.) china is not a third world country. if you had any clue of what it's like over there, you would know this.

actually once they broke from the USSR back in the 50s or whenever they became 3rd world.

no, it was debated whether or not they were third world.

third world are countries like cambodia or liberia... china simply does not belong in that category. "third world" is a term used to denote developing nations. well, obviously, every nation is developing, but china is way closer to the united states in terms of development than it is to cambodia.

everybody that thinks china is third world should go visit it... then visit a real third world country.... then we'll see how many of you still think it's third world.

 

[rufruf44]

Originally posted by: Dhruv[/i

China is a third world country, and we have U.S. bases much nearer to China than they have to us. I.e. pakistan, afghanistan, Turkey, Japan, Taiwan. we'll suffer losses, but it will be 1000 to 1, if not more. By the time 1 Chinese jet fighter reaches our shores, 10,000 bombs would have dropped in Beijing. China has a HUGE army, and they will inflict damage, but you're giving them too much credit.

You're mistakenly assuming that China will attack the US. Why would they ? They will already conquer Taiwan thus achieving their objective. If there's war, that will be because the US declare war and attack China (presummably to free Taiwan). The only way to reach Taiwan is by sea, and even the US 7th fleet is susceptible to nuclear attack (which China has a good stockpile of). China will be in the defensive to protect their shores, with the exception of striking at US bases in Korea and Japan which present the closest threat on them. Provided US marines and other ground forces able to land in Taiwan, they're pretty much will be heavily outnumber, ala the Korean war, with limited reinforcement, fighting against overwhelming number of enemy and constant stream of reinforcements.

Also, don't confuse just because China is 3rd world country, their army as the army of 3rd wold country like Iraqis. The comunist party equip the Red Army well (they have to, its their only tool to control the population), and although they're at least a decade behind the US in technology, they still possess credible threat to US Bomber and fighter with the air defenses, and a sizeable airforce to go against the US's. They have cruise missile and other long range attack as well to inflict as much damage as possible, and worse to come worse, they can nuke the US forces, causing God knows how many lives will be lost.

So I ask again, is it worth it for the US to go to war against China and receive these type of losses, just to protect an island that has no significant value whatsoever to the US? Do you think the major US companies with trilions of dollars invested in China will just let the government declare war and watch all their investment burn to ashes (either sized by the Chinese or destroyed during war) ? I doubt China can hold off US forces forever, but the eventual destruction and casualties will be truly overwhelming.

 

[Dhruv]

Look, I don't like the term third world either, it makes this type of labeling makes one country sound better than another.

But, the fact is its considered a developing nation, which is the new, P.C. term for third world. Per capita its still a poor nation.

 

[cnwk64]

China is not a third world country, but not far from it.
for most of you that have been to China, most likely, you stay in coast cities or major cities. (Shanghai, Fuzhou, Xiamen, Guangzhou, Beijing, Nanjing, etc)
most major cities in China are highly developed and people are highly educated.
But don't forgot that China has 12 Billion people, and only few % of them live in cities.
China has hugh problem with country side developing, different income between coast and inner cities, and huge number of farmers that move to cities and seek better living (btw, in China you can't move from one area to another without Gov permit).
If you have friends from Shanghai and middle of nowhere in China. you will see the difference.

 

[ManSnake]

Originally posted by: cnwk64
China is not a third world country, but not far from it.
for most of you that have been to China, most likely, you stay in coast cities or major cities. (Shanghai, Fuzhou, Xiamen, Guangzhou, Beijing, Nanjing, etc)
most major cities in China are highly developed and people are highly educated.
But don't forgot that China has 12 Billion people, and only few % of them live in cities.
China has hugh problem with country side developing, different income between coast and inner cities, and huge number of farmers that move to cities and seek better living (btw, in China you can't move from one area to another without Gov permit).
If you have friends from Shanghai and middle of nowhere in China. you will see the difference.

Total population of the world is 6 billion, China has ~1.2 billion people, not 12 billion.
Anyway, 20% of the total Chinese population live in cities which translates to ~250 million people which is roughly the size of US.

 

[gopunk]

Originally posted by: cnwk64
China is not a third world country, but not far from it.
for most of you that have been to China, most likely, you stay in coast cities or major cities. (Shanghai, Fuzhou, Xiamen, Guangzhou, Beijing, Nanjing, etc)
most major cities in China are highly developed and people are highly educated.
But don't forgot that China has 12 Billion people, and only few % of them live in cities.
China has hugh problem with country side developing, different income between coast and inner cities, and huge number of farmers that move to cities and seek better living (btw, in China you can't move from one area to another without Gov permit).
If you have friends from Shanghai and middle of nowhere in China. you will see the difference.

china is poorer than america, of course, but aside from that, the poor people in america aren't much different from the poor people in china... only difference is that they're poor in cities, instead of poor in the countryside. it's not like our poor are any smarter or better than china's poor.

 

[gopunk]

Originally posted by: Dhruv
Look, I don't like the term third world either, it makes this type of labeling makes one country sound better than another.

But, the fact is its considered a developing nation, which is the new, P.C. term for third world. Per capita its still a poor nation.

what do you mean by developing? lets get that straight first off... every nation is developing (well maybe except france), so obviously there is some other component.

yes, there are lots of very rural regions. but can you honestly look at a city like shanghai and say with a straight face that it's a "developing" nation? tsingtao has timers on their traffic signals.... we don't even have that here! *parts* of china are crappy, but china is way too diverse of a place for you to be able to generalize it into one category. it would be like a foreigner looking at hick towns in america and going "damn, that's a third world country"

 

[Dhruv]

Originally posted by: gopunk

Originally posted by: cnwk64
China is not a third world country, but not far from it.
for most of you that have been to China, most likely, you stay in coast cities or major cities. (Shanghai, Fuzhou, Xiamen, Guangzhou, Beijing, Nanjing, etc)
most major cities in China are highly developed and people are highly educated.
But don't forgot that China has 12 Billion people, and only few % of them live in cities.
China has hugh problem with country side developing, different income between coast and inner cities, and huge number of farmers that move to cities and seek better living (btw, in China you can't move from one area to another without Gov permit).
If you have friends from Shanghai and middle of nowhere in China. you will see the difference.

china is poorer than america, of course, but aside from that, the poor people in america aren't much different from the poor people in china... only difference is that they're poor in cities, instead of poor in the countryside. it's not like our poor are any smarter or better than china's poor.

Gopunk, Shangai and the other highly industrialized, wealthy cities of China constitute but a fraction of the population of China. If you look at the per capita income, even when you take into account purchase power ratio, the poor of America are MUCH wealthier. Why do you think so many products that we purchase are made in China? Is it because of the famous Chinese workmanship? No, thats what Japan is known for. Its because labor is dirt cheap. Your statement is contradicted by the fact that sweatshops exist in China. It would be much easier (and we would prefer) to purchase goods made in our own country. No tariffs, no customs charges, no shipping or air freight charges, insurance charges would be a lot less, delivery times would be faster, and quality would be tighter controlled. But, despite all these advantages, we still don't. Heck, we dont' even import from Mexico nearly as much and they are a lot closer to us and they are developing too. the bottom line comes into play. Even after adding all these extra charges, Chinese labor is still a fraction of the cost of labor in the U.S. And besides, if the workers aren't working 12 hour days, we can just beat them in China and not do the same here in the U.S. to increase productivity. We can pollute the environmnet more freely their and use more dangerous chemicals in the production of goods there, because if workers get sick, they won't have as much recourse. Why would the poor of China stand for this if they were in anything more than extreme poverty? No one is saying someone is better. Better is a relative statement. But to say that the poor of China is the same or equals the poor of the U.S. is absurd.

You spoke of Shanghai and other developed cities. Well, as i said before that does not represent China. If it did, one could argue that the U.S. is a pretty poor nation because of cities like Watts and Compton. You really have to compare the per capita incomes and then relate that to how far that money would get them, without doing detailed analysis, i'm willing to bet that the average income of the poorest segment of society in the U.S. is still relatively higher than the average income of the poorest segment of society in China.

 

[Dhruv]

Originally posted by: gopunk

Originally posted by: Dhruv
Look, I don't like the term third world either, it makes this type of labeling makes one country sound better than another.

But, the fact is its considered a developing nation, which is the new, P.C. term for third world. Per capita its still a poor nation.

what do you mean by developing? lets get that straight first off... every nation is developing (well maybe except france), so obviously there is some other component.

yes, there are lots of very rural regions. but can you honestly look at a city like shanghai and say with a straight face that it's a "developing" nation? tsingtao has timers on their traffic signals.... we don't even have that here! *parts* of china are crappy, but china is way too diverse of a place for you to be able to generalize it into one category. it would be like a foreigner looking at hick towns in america and going "damn, that's a third world country"

By the way India has timers in their traffic signals too. Its software engineering industry is probably 1 or 2 in the world. People of the state of Kerala, in the south have 97% literacy. Guess what though, its still a very poor nation. But we all know that though because the media are not forced to only show the good parts. Traffic timers don't impress me, i like looking at the statistics like purchase power parity, human development index, and per capita ratios. Maybe thats just me, but thats how I know a nation is prospering in terms of financial strength.

 

[gopunk]

Gopunk, Shangai and the other highly industrialized, wealthy cities of China constitute but a fraction of the population of China.

the cities are what make up china. they are the backbone of china. i've seen statistics that indicate over one third of chinese live in a city or large town. so no, you can not tell me these cities are irrelevant.

If you look at the per capita income, even when you take into account purchase power ratio, the poor of America are MUCH wealthier. Why do you think so many products that we purchase are made in China? Is it because of the famous Chinese workmanship? No, thats what Japan is known for. Its because labor is dirt cheap. Your statement is contradicted by the fact that sweatshops exist in China. It would be much easier (and we would prefer) to purchase goods made in our own country. No tariffs, no customs charges, no shipping or air freight charges, insurance charges would be a lot less, delivery times would be faster, and quality would be tighter controlled. But, despite all these advantages, we still don't. Heck, we dont' even import from Mexico nearly as much and they are a lot closer to us and they are developing too. the bottom line comes into play. Even after adding all these extra charges, Chinese labor is still a fraction of the cost of labor in the U.S. And besides, if the workers aren't working 12 hour days, we can just beat them in China and not do the same here in the U.S. to increase productivity. We can pollute the environmnet more freely their and use more dangerous chemicals in the production of goods there, because if workers get sick, they won't have as much recourse. Why would the poor of China stand for this if they were in anything more than extreme poverty? No one is saying someone is better. Better is a relative statement. But to say that the poor of China is the same or equals the poor of the U.S. is absurd.

i wasn't talking about money at all, i was actually thinking about how they act.

You spoke of Shanghai and other developed cities. Well, as i said before that does not represent China. If it did, one could argue that the U.S. is a pretty poor nation because of cities like Watts and Compton. You really have to compare the per capita incomes and then relate that to how far that money would get them, without doing detailed analysis, i'm willing to bet that the average income of the poorest segment of society in the U.S. is still relatively higher than the average income of the poorest segment of society in China.

nobody ever said china is richer than america, did they? i don't remember saying that. shanghai doesn't represent all of china, BUT NEITHER DOES the countryside. as i said before, china is too diverse for you to be able to put one label on it. your argument looks fine... on paper, if you've never been to china. but if you have, and you've seen their cities, and how the people there are, i would be *shocked* if you can still tell me that's third world. it would be like saying americans are whites.

 

[gopunk]

Originally posted by: Dhruv

Originally posted by: gopunk

Originally posted by: Dhruv
Look, I don't like the term third world either, it makes this type of labeling makes one country sound better than another.

But, the fact is its considered a developing nation, which is the new, P.C. term for third world. Per capita its still a poor nation.

what do you mean by developing? lets get that straight first off... every nation is developing (well maybe except france), so obviously there is some other component.

yes, there are lots of very rural regions. but can you honestly look at a city like shanghai and say with a straight face that it's a "developing" nation? tsingtao has timers on their traffic signals.... we don't even have that here! *parts* of china are crappy, but china is way too diverse of a place for you to be able to generalize it into one category. it would be like a foreigner looking at hick towns in america and going "damn, that's a third world country"

By the way India has timers in their traffic signals too. Its software engineering industry is probably 1 or 2 in the world. People of the state of Kerala, in the south have 97% literacy. Guess what though, its still a very poor nation. But we all know that though because the media are not forced to only show the good parts. Traffic timers don't impress me, i like looking at the statistics like purchase power parity, human development index, and per capita ratios. Maybe thats just me, but thats how I know a nation is prospering in terms of financial strength.

well statistics don't impress me much, to tell you the truth... statistics are only good if you have nothing else to formulate your opinion on. any respectable statistician will tell you that that one of the greatest shortcomings of statistics is that they show you but a small slice of the actual picture.

look, just compare china to third world nations, and you will see why china can not be a third world nation. it just doesn't belong with those nations. i'm not saying china is on the same level as the united states, or japan, but not everything that isn't "first world" is automatically "third world".

 

[Bluga]

The per capita income caculation cannot applied to China, because the populaton is FIVE TIMES more than the States.

It is estimated that when China's GDP per capita reaches US$4000, China will be the biggest economy on earth and wil have more wealthy people than the States.

Remeber: China's population is 5X of the States. You can't everyone wealthy, but you ca have lots of rich people.

 

[BFC]

This is a good place as any for my first post...

The world is broken up into three sections, zones, or whatever you want to call it, depending on socio-economic condtions (please do not ask what the exact criteria is to determine these divisions. I just remember studying this in my highschool world geography course, and that was such a long time ago..)

First World Nations (Developed Nations) - countries like Canada, U.S., Japan and Western Europe
Second World Nations (Developing Nations) - India, China, etc
Third World Nations (Underdeveloped/Undeveloped Nations) - Ethiopia, Nigeria, etc

China is definately not considered a third world country, however it is not First world either, but in 30 to 50 years, who knows.

BFC

 

[HamSupLo]

the crazy thing about China is that since it's such a large country, it straddles both 1st and 2nd world. Overall, if you account for the entire population, China as a whole would be 2nd world, but if you go to the big cities in the eastern Chinese coast, it's more like 1st world. I can see no discernable difference in living in Hong Kong, Taipei, or Shenzhen. Remember there's like 200+ million people living in the richest areas of China and to ignore them just because someone sees 900+ million living in Western China is crazy.

 

[lsman]

Well, i born in Hong Kong and move here (US) at 93. Back to HK for a few years of work after U guar.
Some points in general about China,
1. I am more worry about when the leader change in China, which can be anytime, how old is Jiang? It is always degree of unknown when power may shift hand after Jiang died.
2. Its same thing as Bill want to do something (mideast pace) at the latest term, so do Jiang want to establish himself in the history of China as a great leader than united the nation. This sort of thing really do matter in traditionally chinese mind.
3. Really funny about the fight in Taiwan Congress. Hope they improve.
4. I think "Pride" is important to Chinese government in term of: no losing face.
5. Had you ever look at the footage Chinese army stood at some "island" around south china sea (actually just rocks) with sea level over knee dept and armed in machine gun to guard the position. (those i believed are lands in conflict with Philipines and Indonesia), (They may be some oil there).
But yet they just refuse to claim/ do the same thing in Diaoyu/Senkaku Islands. There are many times that taiwan and hong kong ppl rent ship to go to that island (one hk activist died there). Japan has light house build there. Yet China do not have the same response cp to these rocks in south china sea.
Not all the policy are the same when $ or others involved.
6. I feel there are rise and down of every nation, this is just history.
7. can not say its all China gov fault that turn the HK go south. Its all party fault. (british, China gov. local gov. and econ. model , edu system)

 

[lsman]

Originally posted by: BFC
This is a good place as any for my first post...

The world is broken up into three sections, zones, or whatever you want to call it, depending on socio-economic condtions (please do not ask what the exact criteria is to determine these divisions. I just remember studying this in my highschool world geography course, and that was such a long time ago..)

First World Nations (Developed Nations) - countries like Canada, U.S., Japan and Western Europe
Second World Nations (Developing Nations) - India, China, etc
Third World Nations (Underdeveloped/Undeveloped Nations) - Ethiopia, Nigeria, etc

China is definately not considered a third world country, however it is not First world either, but in 30 to 50 years, who knows.

BFC

I think China gov. think that they are in the third world (more funds, i don't know), just we classified them as second.... I may be wrong.

 

[Valinos]

Originally posted by: gopunk

Originally posted by: Gooberlx2
I have no problems having them host the Olympics, so long as it doesn't get so corrupt. But then, the Olympics are corrupt when its in the USA too.

As far as the executions are concerced, sure I rather they had a reasonable trial process. But that's the difference between our nations. That's a political issue. I see it as no reason to withhol their hosting of the Olypmics. In fact, if they allow a whole slew of tourists from capitalist nations maybe it'll have some influence on the people.

i agree, what does their poor human rights record have to do with the olympics? the olympics should be about atheleticism, not politics.

So was it okay for Nazi Germany to host the Olympics? It happened, but I wouldn't say it was right to give Hitler and co. that kind of honor...The Olympics are a joke.

 

[sandorski]

Originally posted by: Valinos

Originally posted by: gopunk

Originally posted by: Gooberlx2
I have no problems having them host the Olympics, so long as it doesn't get so corrupt. But then, the Olympics are corrupt when its in the USA too.

As far as the executions are concerced, sure I rather they had a reasonable trial process. But that's the difference between our nations. That's a political issue. I see it as no reason to withhol their hosting of the Olypmics. In fact, if they allow a whole slew of tourists from capitalist nations maybe it'll have some influence on the people.

i agree, what does their poor human rights record have to do with the olympics? the olympics should be about atheleticism, not politics.

So was it okay for Nazi Germany to host the Olympics? It happened, but I wouldn't say it was right to give Hitler and co. that kind of honor...The Olympics are a joke.

Yes, it is a sporting event, not a political tool.

 

[GoingUp]

I hear the IOC has 2 new events in the China olympics.

1. Seeing which student can run the fastest to avoid being shot by communist troops.

2. Seeing how many tanks a man carrying a briefcase can stop.