Shhh … let Pinguin and Curtis Qin play in their room.
It’s very simple. In the process of empire building England spread her laws and social stability to other nations. While the United States fought and won freedom as a separate state the people within held the same social structure. The Constitutional laws are a reflection of Magna Carta laws. Except for accents, you’d be hard pressed to see a difference between Canada, the United States, The UK, Australia, New Zealand, etc…
We all have a common (if not colorful) ancestry with England. The same social structure that made England successful is seen in all those countries. For all practical purposes, it was the dynasty of the British Empire that landed on the moon. We are completely independent and at the same time very much the same people. The dynamic that brought these countries together in WW-II successfully integrated the vanquished into the world market to the point that Europe formed a federation.
The same cannot be said of the Spanish empire. It was a different dynamic and did not spawn a unifying social structure. However you want to quantify the British Empire it has produced a sizable number of advancements and absolutely dominated the last century in terms of the progress of mankind.
It appears that this overwhelming success has left you with feelings of anthropological inadequacy when it has nothing to do with ancestry.
Who cares?
I’m Canadian. It doesn’t hurt my quality of life that there are a number of countries with bigger GDPs than Canada. Why would the United States give a crap?
If anything, as pointed out, this simply provides the USA with a bigger market to sell goods to.
Sorry, but you have no idea about the Hispanidad. :rolleyes::rolleyes:
You speak from your ignorance, only.
I bet we have between Hispanics more links to the “motherland” than your links to the Queen’s social club you have there.
You are a different kind of Hispanic than I am, then. I was raised to pretty much hate the Spanish and everything they stood for…and only after that to hate the Anglos and everything they swiped from us. 
Regardless, I don’t see what any of this has to do with the purported subject of your OP. Did you want to continue to discuss that, or just go off on these little tangents?
-XT
Because the U.S. believes it is the ruler of the world. :rolleyes:
yes it’s been really impressive How South America has pulled together as a unit.
Really? Americans believe that the United States actually rules the world? Can you provide examples of such Americans?
And, furthermore, your position is that if China’s GDP exceeds that of the United States, suddenly that will no longer be true? The USA will see itself as ruling the world when its GDP is one dollar more than China’s, but not when it is one dollar less?
I love threads where I learn about what I believe. There is no shortage of people around here willing to inform me that I believe this, that, or the other. I must start writing my beliefs down as I am enlightened.
Indeed. I was raised to hate the Anglos first, and only to make some critics to the Spaniards. :rolleyes: By the way, I was born at the time when we were just the backyard of Americans, and they controlled the region by mean of the ITT and the Anaconda :rolleyes:
I still remember when I was I child I wrote in notebooks (paper notebooks) brand “Colon”, with the following lemma: “To Castle and to Lion, a New World gave Columbus”
At least, we haven’t had a major war since the 19th century. That’s something.
Indeed. My position is that the gunboat age is closing for the United States, simply because it wouldn’t be able to continue playing the worldwide rough raider.
[QUOTE=pinguin]
Indeed. I was raised to hate the Anglos first, and only to make some critics to the Spaniards. By the way, I was born at the time when we were just the backyard of Americans, and they controlled the region by mean of the ITT and the Anaconda
I still remember when I was I child I wrote in notebooks (paper notebooks) brand “Colon”, with the following lemma: “To Castle and to Lion, a New World gave Columbus”
[/QUOTE]
That’s nice. Could you perhaps use a few more rolley-eyed smileys? You’ve nearly got me convinced, but I think you need a few more to make whatever point you think you are making…
-XT
What do you need to be convinced? Perhaps a picture of the Sept 11 Chilean coup?
I’m already convinced that you are pretty much babbling incoherently, and that your major ‘debate’ tactic revolves around the use of rolley-eye smiley faces and hijacks of your own purported OPs into weird little tangential side discussions…when it’s not complete non-sequiturs with no relation to the subject supposedly being discussed. So, since there doesn’t seem to be anything to debate here, and since your ‘I hates America’ schtick has really been done much better by other posters, I’ll bid you ado at this point.
-XT
No sir. My arguments are pretty serious.
I believe you are quoting me out of context.
Here, for instance sir, we were discussing about the impact on America about the fact this country is lossing the economical supremacy it has during a full century. I believe that’s a very important topic.
Now, if you see the thread above, you will notice that you said the following
I simply piched your argument and switched the other way around, changing “Anglo” for “Spanish” and viceverse. Watch.
Of course I just didn’t copy yours words, but I redacted it in a different manner, and answered to you.
And then, you suddenly felt offended. Isn’t that funny?
Now, I don’t know what kind of Hispanic you are, but we, Hispanics, have a tradition in literature and rethoric, and we know how to follow and twist the speach. You must know that.
There’s been a lot of confusion in this thread about what Purchasing Power Parity actually is.
GDP is a measure of how much brand new “stuff” a nation makes inside its borders every year. Goods and services and whatever. Motor vehicles, massages, taxi-cab rides, medical advice, police protection and everything else (legal) that’s recorded in the books. One theoretical way of measuring GDP would be a long list, a record of every single thing that we made: x number of cars, x number of massages, etc. Of course, to spit out one useful number combining everything, we add up the sticker price of each individual thing as a measure of its value. Doing this calculation and adding up the sticker prices of all the new stuff in the US, we get of a figure of over 14 trillion dollars.
There’s a problem, though, when we’re comparing GDP across different countries. We use dollars in Uncle Sam Land, whereas the Chinese use RMBs. The Chinese have their own list of new goods and services that they made, but their number is naturally not directly comparable. We need a measure of comparison. We need an exchange rate.
Well, in one sense that’s ridiculously easy. Go online and look at the damn exchange rate. Done. In this way, yeah, Chinese GDP is still far short of US GDP. The Chinese have a little more than a third of US GDP, about 5 trillion dollars. But there’s a problem with this simple answer: That “5 trillion dollars”, using the current exchange rate, buys a heckuva lot more stuff than an equivalent 5 trillion in the US. Remember that list of stuff? The list of all the motor vehicles, massages, taxi-cab rides, medical advice, and all the rest of it? China’s exchange rate puts it at about a third of the US economy, but their actual list of stuff puts their economy at almost the same size as that of the US. There’s information missing from the exchange rate, specifically, the real “purchasing power” inside the country. RMBs aren’t worth very much on the international exchange markets (in no small part because of strict Chinese capital controls), but those RMBs happen to buy gobs and gobs of stuff in the domestic Chinese markets. Chinese purchasing power is relatively very high, compared to the official exchange rate.
That’s the purpose of PPP. It’s to find the proper parity, a way to compensate for the domestic purchasing power.
PPP is not a completely different thing from GDP. It’s simply a new way of measuring GDP in an attempt to make more precise international comparisons. Of course, there are huge problems in measuring genuine purchasing power. The statistical headache is one reason why so many people rely on the actual exchange rate, which is so ridiculously easy to look up. People argue so much about the proper measure of PPP that it becomes much easier just to plug one number into a currency exchange equation in order to spit another simple number back out. Still, we should keep in mind that the “official” number masks some information. In China’s case, this is a helluva lot of information. The Chinese economy officially passed Japan to become the second biggest economy in the world just last year, according to current exchange rates; but in the reality of real stuff produced, the Chinese economy has been bigger than Japan’s for many, many years already.
And according to some estimates of PPP-adjusted GDP – and estimates are all we have – the Chinese economy is poised to overtake the US economy fairly soon. By the current exchange rate numbers, it will take a long time. But as far as a list of all the goods and services that China makes every year? Their list will be longer than the US list fairly soon, at least according to some estimates. Their GDP will be bigger, not according to the actual exchange rate but according to the reality on the ground of how much stuff they manage to make.
I have no idea what significance pinguin is trying to make out of all this.
This reminded me of…
Jon Stewart-
Pretty much out of this discussion, since it doesn’t seem to be going anywhere, but wanted to thank Hellestal for the explanation in simple terms for the difference between actual and adjusted GDP.
-XT
Actually Chili declared war on Japan in 1945.