Will the United States continue to be the powerhouse of the world?

TomF

Will the United States continue to be the powerhouse of the world?

When you compare the birthrates in Russia and the countries making up the European Union (including the soon-to-join countries) to the birthrate in the United States, it becomes glaringly obvious that a bunch of doddering European old folks aren't going to be vigorous enough to be leading the world, or to be "the world's policemen" to modify a buzz phrase, in the forseeable future..

The United States continues to attract millions of immigrants who somehow melt-in and become Americans within a generation. In contrast, Europe has its guest workers.

With that in mind, do you think the United States will continue in its present vigor for a long time to come, or will it stumble over attempts to form a new world order?

ykt0di9url7bc3

I think the USA will keep doing what it wants and when it wants....stopping briefly to make sure they look good doing it.....


Its a fine position for a government to be in...a lot of hardwork and diplomacy and you're top of the world

Éomer of Rohan

When you compare the birthrates in Russia and the countries making up the European Union (including the soon-to-join countries) to the birthrate in the United States

You are correct but i think it important to make the point that population dynamics follow cyclic patterns and Europe has just entered her 'recessive' phase while the US is at the height of her 'growth' phase. Russian population growth decline has been serious due to the 20 million men who died in WWII - always a serious factor. That WILL recover, analysts predict, and Russia will enter a growth phase around 2050 - I do have a link for that and will see if I can find it.

of doddering European old folks aren't going to be vigorous enough to be leading the world

Naturally I disagree with this sentiment. I think that European democracies are becoming stagnant, yes, but people are also reaching the point where this form of government is not what they want and then maybe more radical (NOT extremist, please do not confuse the terms) democracies will emerge leading to Europe once again becoming the world's leader. Do not forget that Europe has more respect internationally than the US could ever have.

With that in mind, do you think the United States will continue in its present vigor for a long time to come, or will it stumble over attempts to form a new world order?

This is not a question of PGD in my opinion (Population Growth Dynamics), more a question of how much will the camel / house of cards / insert analogy here take before it snaps / falls / whatever.
America has been shaping the world overtly and covertly for 50 years, more so over the last 20 years since the emergence of 'free market' or 'liberal' capitalism and the booms (and heightened poverty) that resulted. This was because so many areas became dependent on the foremost capitalist system to provide capital for investments and such and the US economy benefitted from this reliance just as Britain did before her. If a popular and acceptable alternative to the exploitation of Free Market Capitalism emerges then America's position of dominance will fall since an alternative would be immune to the first strike weapons of Trade Sanctions and the damning report of 'not adhering to international commitments' delivered by the WTO which automatically suspends international aid and a lot of investment. Is this likely? In such an apolitical world, not really, but much can happen in the 70 years span of a human life.

The other option is will America be knocked off her perch as the foremost military power? So long as the US retains the command of the world economy, probably not in the forseeable future since she could win an arms race through economic might - unless a second MAD situation reemerged more deadly than the first which, given the American fondness for ABM at the minute, is not unlikely. However, the US does face growing opposition from many countries, disparate groups, across the world and should she overstep herself, for example in North Korea and a nuclear missile or several took out the Western Sea Board then America would collapse into anarchy; no system could withstand the strain of loosing over 50 million workers and industrial and scientific and cultural resources to match - naturally should this happen, North Korea would be obliterated but that wouldn't make a shred of difference to America and probably not to the World economy either which would go into meltdown (consider the effects of September 11 2002 and then multiply that effect a thousand fold due to the disastrous nature of the attacks not to mention the abrupt halt in America's centres of trade, her western ports, hollywood, her centres for scientific research like Los Alamos etc). In effect, due to the belligerent nature of the Bush administration and the detrimental effect that Sept 11 has had on US common sense, I would not put such a scenario out of reach.

TomF

While surfing around, I found a newspaper column that says almost what I said above about birthrates. I didn't see this before posting the poll, the author and I just seemed to be on the same wavelength. As my wife might unkindly note, "Fools seldom differ."

The column is at
http://www.suntimes.com/output/steyn/cst-edt-steyn161.html

Here is an excerpt from it.
"By 2050, there will be 100 million more Americans, 100 million fewer Europeans. The U.S. fertility rate is 2.1 children per couple, in Europe it's 1.4. Demography is not necessarily destiny. But it will be for Europe, because the 20th century Continental welfare state was built on a careless model that requires a constantly growing population to sustain it.

According to a UN report from last year, for the EU to keep its working population stable till 2050 it would need another 1.58 million immigrants every year. To keep the ratio of workers to retirees at the present level, you'd need 13.5 million immigrants per year. But the developing world's fertility rate is also dropping fast. Newborn Third Worlders will reach adulthood with a range of options, of which Europe will be the least attractive. The EU will have the highest taxes not just in the West, but in most of the rest. A middle-class Indian or Singaporean or Chilean already has little incentive to move to the Continent. If the insane Bush-Steyn plan to remake the Middle East comes off, even the Muslims may stay home. If it doesn't, the transformation of Europe into ''Eurabia'' will continue.

Best case scenario: The EU winds up as Vienna with Swedish tax rates. Don't get me wrong, I love Vienna. As remnants of greatness go, it's very pleasant. I quite like Stockholm, too--well, I like the babes. But they're gonna be a lot wrinklier by 2050, and Sweden's already got a lower standard of living than Mississippi. Its 60 percent overall tax rate is likely to be the base in the Europe of 2020 and fondly recalled as the good old days by mid-century.

Worst case scenario: Sharia, circa 2070.

For America, it doesn't make much difference whether the Austro-Swedish or Eurabian option prevails. This is nothing to do with disagreements over Iraq: You can't ''mend bridges'' when the opposite bank is sinking into the river. The death of Europe in its present form is a given."

OfflerCrocGod

As already pointed out by eomer population is cyclical it goes up it goes down also Americas might is its economy. The fact is the USs economy is smoke they have a huge trade defecit with the rest of the world, in other words they make nothing they have no manufacturing capability, when was the last time you saw something with made in the USA written on it?.

The countries they are in most debt to are European countries (France, Switzeland), they have the crappiest education system in the world; and are happily cutting the education budget in favour of the army. The huge numbers of immigrants they are getting are Mexicans, not exactly famous for being industrious or intelligent.The might of today was built by european immigrants who fled this place after the war (let us never repeat that mistake!!!), that has stopped.

So the US is now reliant on immigrants from Asia (India, China), and because of the 11th of sept attacks Immigration controls have stepped up significantly; meaning the US is no longer the promised land. It is inevitable that within 20 years Chinas economy will eclipse both the USs and ours(the European trading block is the largest Market/economy in the world).

Oh by the way America is in debt to the tune of nearly 2 Trillion Dollars to the rest of the world. From the worlds largest creditor to the worlds largest Debtor in 20 years. Not Good. Also nearly a Million ppl in America are employed by Walmarts giving you an idea of there Economic "Strenght".

Europe is not dying it's just born:p

shotamoose

Originally posted by TomF
Sweden's already got a lower standard of living than Mississippi.

No it doesn't. GDP per capita (ie average income) is similar in the two places, which is not the same thing as 'standard of living'. Poverty, illiteracy, socioeconomic inequality and malnourishment are far less prevalent in Sweden than in Mississippi. Also, the small number of super-rich drives up average incomes across the US. Swedes take longer holidays, too, so they produce a comparable GDP per capita in less time. And Swedish families in the tenth income decile, ie poorer than 90% of the population, have incomes 60% higher than their US counterparts.

Source for this: For Richer , by Paul Krugman.

Koopa

i was going to say the same thing as above, and compared to places like mississippi sweden has almost no crime

Éomer of Rohan

Well for the benefit of TomF, I read that article through and allow me to tell you a few things about it, beginning with the shaky logic and shakier principles that this author has built this tower of intellectual Yankophilia.

The fact is that all the supposed alternatives to U.S. hegemony also depend on U.S. ''aggression'' (guns) and ''materialism'' (money), to put it in that Canadian historian's terms

No they don't and in fact this contradicts the point the same author made earlier in his speech which assumed that Europe was going to be the first superpower with no teeth. The alternative to US hegemony is neither from materialism or from aggression but from internationalism; the maturing and concensus of many nations across the world to higher ideals and trade - a growing culture being fostered by the fading imperial nations and by the new economies who are unwilling to waste money on exorbitant defence budgets when there is no need.

For America, it doesn't make much difference whether the Austro-Swedish or Eurabian option prevails. This is nothing to do with disagreements over Iraq: You can't ''mend bridges'' when the opposite bank is sinking into the river. The death of Europe in its present form is a given

This is ironic because there are various points at which the author attacks the French and Chirac for the position they occupy on Iraq - and has waited until now to make scathing attacks on the EU.

Parris is falling prey to theories of ''imperial overstretch.'' But, if you're not imperial, it's quite difficult to get overstretched. By comparison with 19th century empires, the Americans travel light. More significantly, America's most obvious ''overstretch'' is in her historically unprecedented generosity to putative rivals: Unlike traditional imperialists, she garrisons not remote ramshackle colonies but her wealthiest allies. The United States picks up the defense tab for Europe, Japan, South Korea, Saudi Arabia and of course Canada

Putative means 'supposed' yet when were these nations rivals to the US post WWII; the generosity shown these nations today is not an effect of their enmity, it is the effect of US paranoia towards the Soviet Union and her Stalinist Allies and nor is it the overstretch that Parris was referring to for he was implying that America is building too many enemies by her equivocal and often threatening stance on many issues to be able to defend herself from them all. I also have to point out the historical innacuracy of this; Britain did not garrison 'ramshackle colonies,' in fact this describes more the US attitude to expansion towards the Pacific than European expansion in Africa or the Far East where Britain built herself a huge empire founded on cities spread across the globe; Hong Kong to Wellington to Sydney to Calcutta to Praetoria to Nairobi to Cairo to Baghdad to Kingston to Toronto and Ottawa and then London. The Dutch were the same; most of the Australaian Archipelago advanced itself due to Dutch settlers and the treade they generated - advanced far enough to obtain their independence.

Moreover, it is an article of faith for the American press that America is not an Imperial power; they use the definition of colonial imperialism to escape the truth in fact. America maintains 'protectorates' on which American citizens may 'reside' at their whim, all the while though, an American appointee oversees these regions such as the Marianas, Guam, the US Virgin Isles and so on - but this is not the definition of an Imperial power; the world Imperial is from the Latin 'Imperator' - Commander. The US does indeed exercise a vast amount of command over the world either militarily or economically; this cannot be denied.

What will it take to nobble the Yanks? Or, to be more accurate, what will it take for the Yanks to nobble themselves?

What will it take for the americans to influence themselves??? Yes that makes perfect sense and I would like to have met that author to ask him what he meant. Ignoring that, the Europeans are trying to use the UN, the body they are supposed to use, something that is certainly not 'nobbling' which is defined as 'dishonestly influencing' in the Oxford English Dictionary.

Victor

Originally posted by TomF
Will the United States continue to be the powerhouse of the world?

Big assumption.

Originally posted by TomF
it becomes glaringly obvious that a bunch of doddering European old folks aren't going to be vigorous enough to be leading the world,

Are you out to argue the point or just create offence?

Originally posted by TomF
The United States continues to attract millions of immigrants who somehow melt-in and become Americans within a generation.

Is this why 40m of them claim to be Irish?

Lennoxschips

Sweden has one of the highest standards of living in the world. Who made up that article?

Éomer of Rohan

Will the United States continue to be the powerhouse of the world?

Big assumption.

Do you disagree that America is the powerhouse of the world? Militarily, they are unchallenged with 4 million men under arms and the highest technology available in the world today. Economically, they are the biggest economy and are the highest earning nation on earth. Their culture is like a virus, poisoning unstained minds across earth through western controlled media, through junk food, through apoliticality and the 'coolness' associated with apathy not to mention the ridiculously uninventive and unoriginal 'fashions' and 'music' that belches forth from said nation of widely uneducated people. For as much as I hate it, America is the 'powerhouse' ie occupies the pinnacle in everything that defines earthly power, of the world.

it becomes glaringly obvious that a bunch of doddering European old folks aren't going to be vigorous enough to be leading the world,

I reckon it was a sounbyte effect.

Is this why 40m of them claim to be Irish?

Half of which probably aren't LOL. 'My great great grandfather was Irish and he married an Irish American, so I'M Irish' I heard one friend of mine say to which I asked if she was born in Ireland and she said no. Much to her disgust I explained to her that that does not make her Irish.

If all these people WERE Irish, I might think differently about travelling on an Irish passport.

Éomer of Rohan

Sweden has one of the highest standards of living in the world. Who made up that article?

Some two bit reporter from the Chicago Sun Times who has obviously never studied European history never mind been to Sweden.

Éomer of Rohan

A present for TomF:

Austria 8,169,929 82,738
Belgium 10,274,595 30,230
Denmark 5,368,854 42,394
Finland 5,183,545 305,470
France.. 59,765,983 545,630
Germany 83,251,851 349,223
Greece.. 10,645,343 130,800
Ireland 3,883,159 68,890
Italy.. 57,715,625 294,020
Luxembourg 448,569 2,586
Netherlands 16,067,754 33,883
Portugal 10,084,245 91,951
Spain... 40,077,100 499,542
Sweden.. 8,876,744 410,934
UK ..... 59,778,002 241,590
EU15 .... 379,591,298 3,129,881

I really like that total tally LOL.
These are c/o Victor the moderator who I am sure will suplly you all with the link if you ask nicely.

SloanerF1

Originally posted by TomF
By 2050, there will be 100 million more Americans, 100 million fewer Europeans. The U.S. fertility rate is 2.1 children per couple, in Europe it's 1.4. Demography is not necessarily destiny. But it will be for Europe, because the 20th century Continental welfare state was built on a careless model that requires a constantly growing population to sustain it.

The idea that this should strike fear into Europeans is ridiculous. In addition, building political ideologies on the basis of population estimates places a government on a slippery slope.

TomF

Reference the "snapshot" numbers posted above which I take for populations and annual births . I remember from my first course in analytical geometry that at least two points on a curve are needed to calculate the slope. Do the slopes of population change for the European countries indicate declining populations or increasing populations? What are the numbers of deaths in the same period for those countries? Inquiring minds want to know.

Chaos-Engine

Link to Article

I'd urge you all to have a read of this very insightful piece about where the US is going and how this war is the turning point...

Éomer of Rohan

The real question is not 'will they?' for as has been evidenced, they cannot ignore the constraints placed on them by the world but should they remain powerhouse - should we let them, for their dismissal of a body which Americans have held as the ultimate in diplomacy since 1945 is outrageous, no?