Article

2003-11-21 East Asia

Archived material is restricted to Rantburg regulars and members. If you need access email fred.pruitt=at=gmail.com with your nick to be added to the members list. There is no charge to join Rantburg as a member.

Posted by Steve White 2003-11-21 2:41:49 AM|| || Front Page|| [4 views since 2007-05-07] Top

#1 One of these years we will see a climate event like the 'year without a summer' that occured around 1870. There were multi-year crop failures in temperate regions. I recall reading about mass starvation in Finland.

It will be huge destablizing event and when it does it will pay to be in country like the USA or Australia that will be able to feed itself.

Posted by Phil_B 2003-11-21 4:53:27 AM|| 2003-11-21 4:53:27 AM|| Front Page Top

#2 Anyone want to start taking bets on whether we're seeing the beginnings of economic warfare between China and the US? I remember reading somewhere else that a lot of US companies and those in Japan and South Korea have just recently consolidated their arguments regarding patent violations in china, or in other words intellectual property rights violations. Apparently they're planning stick chinese companies with something around $21 billion worth of fines.

Posted by Val 2003-11-21 5:34:09 AM|| 2003-11-21 5:34:09 AM|| Front Page Top

#3 How much of the Chineese governments legitamacy still rests on the Iron Ricebowl? Are they still subsidizing staples?

Posted by Shipman 2003-11-21 7:45:28 AM|| 2003-11-21 7:45:28 AM|| Front Page Top

#4 IIUC this i parly a result of prosperity. As chinese incomes rise, people eat more meat - since animals are less than perfect converters of plant protein to animal protein, this increases demand for grain.

Posted by liberalhawk 2003-11-21 8:28:52 AM|| 2003-11-21 8:28:52 AM|| Front Page Top

#5 liberalhawk - Good point. If things start to go downhill (I'm talking before famine type levels here) then families who once were able to afford better food and meat will see these things go up out of their price range. Since the government takes credit for everything, it seems to reason that it would also get the blame. They could get some level of unrest before things go out of hand.

Posted by Laurence of the Rats 2003-11-21 9:09:22 AM|| 2003-11-21 9:09:22 AM|| Front Page Top

#6 China is strung about as tight as a nation can get without coming apart. I commented on China's economic problems yesterday - the food situation is only part of it. The recent industrialization is placed a huge strain on the infrastructure, especially the transportation and power grid. China has always been a marginal food producer, which is one reasons Chinese emperors have always wanted states such as those in Southeast Asia and the Pacific as suzeranities, paying tribute in food. The fact that Taiwan, ten percent China's size, with even LESS arable land, is almost China's equal in terms of economic productivity is especially galling to the mainlaid - but Taiwan, because of the threat from the mainland, did what was necessary to be as self-sufficient as possible.

China is a huge country whose population is extremely diverse, both in education, ethnicity, and economic development. There are pockets that live in every century, developmentally, from the tenth to the 21st. The authoritarian, top-down management style that collapsed in the old Soviet Union is not being significantly more successful in China, where the problems are different, but no less demanding.

Posted by Old Patriot 2003-11-21 12:08:09 PM|| [http://users.codenet.net/mweather/default.htm] 2003-11-21 12:08:09 PM|| Front Page Top

#7 The fact that Taiwan, ten percent China's size, with even LESS arable land, is almost China's equal in terms of economic productivity is especially galling to the mainlaid

Taiwan - Population (22,603,001), Land Area (32,260 sq km), 2001 Nominal GDP ($0.282T)

China - Population (1,286,975,468) Land Area (9,326,410 sq km), 2001 Nominal GDP ($1.159T)

Taiwan has 1.8% of China's population, 0.34% of its land area, but 24% of China's GDP. Now that's galling.

Posted by Zhang Fei 2003-11-21 12:28:08 PM|| 2003-11-21 12:28:08 PM|| Front Page Top

#8 but thats mainly industrial productivity, not agriculture.

Posted by liberalhawk 2003-11-21 12:51:50 PM|| 2003-11-21 12:51:50 PM|| Front Page Top

#9 Sorry, LH, but you need to do a bit more research. Taiwan is virtually food-independent. Yes, agriculture, including forestry and fishing, "only" account for about 12% of their GDP, but they are a net food EXPORTER - quite a similar situation that the United States enjoys at present (agriculture a small portion of GDP, but most internal needs met by internal production, and food exports far exceed food imports). Percentage of GDP is unimportant, as long as you can still satisfy the needs of your population. Famines occur when you can't, and China has repeatedly suffered from famines. Quite a few of them have resulted in changes of governments.

Posted by Old Patriot 2003-11-21 2:00:43 PM|| [http://users.codenet.net/mweather/default.htm] 2003-11-21 2:00:43 PM|| Front Page Top

#10 And, the Tom Clancy psychic vision is coming in to play here. In one of his novels he suggests that the huge cash reserves generated by the imbalance of trade with the United States are committed to military purchases (and I would suggest infrastructure, as well). Do they have the cash to buy food and oil if they need to? That is the key issue.

As Old Patriot points out, China is a country in name only. The vast differences in economic situation, language, culture, etc. amount to the Central Governement juggling balls in the air. Whenever the Central Government has dropped a ball in Chinese history, it has meant chaos, warlords, civil war, and the breakup into smaller, regional states.

Every nation in modern times that was a forced union of diverse people has broken apart. Soviet Union and Yugoslavia as examples. The diversity of the United States only works because we are not a union of diverse regions, YET.

One could argue that China has collapsed. The technocrats of the southeast owe little but nominal allegiance to Peking, and the nature of the PLA being the largest industrial organization in China adds to the strength of that theory. Army units run regions, warlord-like, not the civil (and supposed legal) government.

Posted by Chuck 2003-11-21 2:46:17 PM|| [http://blog.simmins.org] 2003-11-21 2:46:17 PM|| Front Page Top

#11 The diversity of the United States only works because we are not a union of diverse regions, YET.

Thet multiculturalists are no doubt hard at work on this "problem".

Posted by Bomb-a-rama 2003-11-21 3:02:07 PM|| 2003-11-21 3:02:07 PM|| Front Page Top

#12 i didnt mean to say Taiwan didnt have efficient agriculture - im sure they do (and IIRC they had a very successful land reform program as well:) )
Just to point out that the 24% figure didnt necessarily match up with the land data.

Re: china collapsing - yeah thats always possible, but dont forget that after every collapse China ALWAYS reunites. Despite their diversity, they are much more of a genuine nation than former SU or Yugo.

Posted by liberalhawk 2003-11-21 4:02:49 PM|| 2003-11-21 4:02:49 PM|| Front Page Top

#13 dont forget that after every collapse China ALWAYS reunites

But every single time, it's been different. The Chinese empire has both expanded AND shrunk during its long history. (During the Sung dynasty, the Chinese empire was at best a quarter of its present size). The inhabitants of Inner Mongolia, Manchuria, Tibet and East Turkistan (50% of China's territory) are not necessarily happy to be part of China, and were not part of historical China. Nationalism has not been part of the Chinese experience, but once Taiwan declares independence, people are going to start asking themselves why they have to be under Beijing's yoke. If the locals had their druthers, they'd prefer to be learning their own languages in the schools rather than Mandarin.

Despite their diversity, they are much more of a genuine nation than former SU or Yugo.

The minorities in the Soviet Union were pretty Russified, until they decided they wanted no part of the Soviet Union. Serbs, Bosnians and Croatians speak the same language and would have held together, if not for Milosevic's fascist gestures, and unfortunate American intervention. China is divided by language, customs and its vast geography. There's not a lot of national (i.e. ethnic) consciousness at this point, but that can certainly change in a heartbeat, just as, at the beginning of the 20th century, Arabs of the Ottoman caliphate decided they wanted no part of the Ottoman empire, and the Slavs in the Austro-Hungarian empire decided to opt out of an empire dominated by ethnic Germans and Magyars.

Posted by Zhang Fei 2003-11-21 4:28:00 PM|| 2003-11-21 4:28:00 PM|| Front Page Top

04:35 DEBBI PILAND
11:55 Bulldog
08:00 Shipman
07:52 Shipman
01:57 Jeff
01:54 Jeff
01:38 Atomic Conspiracy
01:25 Val
00:15 Korora
00:13 Lu Baihu
00:07 Robert Crawford
23:48 Fred
23:45 Fred
23:35 NotMikeMoore
23:35 Anonymous
23:33 Charles
23:31 NotMikeMoore
23:30 Frank G
23:26 Frank G
23:17 Anonymous2U
23:17 NotMikeMoore
23:13 Chuck
23:11 NotMikeMoore
23:10 rkb