Leader for World Economy ; USA? or some other country?

As you all may know, the USA's economy has been quite heavily in debt for the past few years.
So, the USA economy has plummeted. As for my theory, I'd think that either Saudi Arabia might
be able to control the economy due to the reason that most countries get their oil from Saudi Arabia. Or maybe
It'll be the newly-industrialized China, or South Korea? Who knows.. Tell me your opinions on this.

This topic may have been relevant four years ago, but America's economy hasn't plummeted. The recession is over (and has been over for years where I live) and even during the recession we still had the worlds strongest economy.



China is catching up, but when you look at it for GDP per capita it's nowhere near America (in fact it's ranked 88th in the world.) South Korea and Saudi Arabia don't even compete at all in any of the rankings.

Well, there was that whole "government shutdown" scare last year.

I wouldn't say we're completely out of the recession. Just because you rich Texas kids don't feel it doesn't mean we don't.

I wish I was rich   I keep getting turned down for jobs  :'(

Spending from the government is factored into GDP, that's why it's fairly inaccurate for which is the 'world power'. I think it's only getting worse for us right now because our government is pretty much socialist and won't admit it.

are you an american Mushu

if you are I am going to laugh so hard

our government is pretty much socialist and won't admit it.

Obongo and his socialist agenda!!!!

Who cares, really? Do you have enough money to stay clothed, fed, and indoors? Then its enough.

Well, there was that whole "government shutdown" scare last year.

I wouldn't say we're completely out of the recession. Just because you rich Texas kids don't feel it doesn't mean we don't.

The "government shutdown" scare was because a bunch of old selfish farts were arguing over who would get their way and had nothing to do with the economy. Yes there are still burdens left on the population by the recession but the economy is still doing strong. The only industry really suffering is the automotive industry because everyone is still scared to spend money and who buys new cars anyways. So if you live around Detroit or Chicago or Pittsburgh, then yeah you might be feeling the effects of the recession a little bit. But the country as a whole is out of it.

Spending from the government is factored into GDP, that's why it's fairly inaccurate for which is the 'world power'. I think it's only getting worse for us right now because our government is pretty much socialist and won't admit it.

Our government is as far from socialist as possible. As for being an economic world power, the worlds largest corporations are American corporations, the worlds largest stock trade is the American stock trade, and private business in America exports nearly $1.3 Trillion dollars of products globally each year (3rd place in the world).

China may have half the money America does, but per capita it has $6,000 per citizen compared to America's $47,000.

If you want a country that could be the world's economic leader, you should look to Germany. It's amazingly well industrialized and exports more than America and also has a population that isn't piss poor like China. It still hasn't reached America's terms in GDP (or GDP per capita) but it's certainly not that far behind.

Also for government spending going into account for GDP. Here's a list of countries who spend a higher percentage of their GDP than America.

came back to say that scalinger is a retard.

are you an american Mushu

if you are I am going to laugh so hard

our government is pretty much socialist and won't admit it.

Obongo and his socialist agenda!!!!

He talks about 'fairness' every 5 minutes like companies were made to create jobs. Companies are made for profit and they have to invest in people to get the work done, jobs are pretty much the natural byproduct. If we keep trying to raise taxes and throw more rules at the companies that create jobs, we'll lose more.

Who cares, really? Do you have enough money to stay clothed, fed, and indoors? Then its enough.

What about internet? That's as important as food. >_>

@Sword: Texas has very few liberals, the midwest in general is doing well because it has less people who punish success. Here in Colorado we're getting a large shipment of Californians and it's starting to take a toll.

What are you even talking about

I'm basically saying the fairness/spread-the-wealth-mentality is what makes countries(or states) poor. We are ahead of most countries, but that was because we were more on the end of letting businesses fail or restructure instead of bailing them out but that changed even for us. Germany is doing pretty good, but if they keep bailing out irresponsible countries, they'll be going down too.

I'm basically saying the fairness/spread-the-wealth-mentality is what makes countries(or states) poor.

America is still literally the furthest thing from the "spread the wealth" mentality so that's completely irrelevant.

We are ahead of most countries, but that was because we were more on the end of letting businesses fail or restructure instead of bailing them out but that changed even for us.

First off, most government subsidies go to small agricultural businesses to ensure we have a strong domestic food supply. Second, even if we did, why would putting money into a business and back into the economy and out of government hands be bad for the economy?

Germany is doing pretty good, but if they keep bailing out irresponsible countries, they'll be going down too.

Yes because Germany (or any nation) is going to purposely give enough money away to collapse. You might begin to understand how macroeconomics works if you weren't the ideal model of someone so far on one side of the spectrum they've got their head up their ass.

First off, most government subsidies go to small agricultural businesses to ensure we have a strong domestic food supply. Second, even if we did, why would putting money into a business and back into the economy and out of government hands be bad for the economy?

Well, the car companies got bailed out for one. The reason why it doesn't work when the government puts money into businesses is because some of it gets lost through the government not to mention it's taken from others. Also, if they were doing bad, it is  because they aren't an efficient company in the first place, so giving them money won't force them to tighten the belt and get their act together. Imagine if they still bailed out companies that made stage coaches, it would be a huge waste of money on a company that didn't revolutionize their product.

Yes because Germany (or any nation) is going to purposely give enough money away to collapse. You might begin to understand how macroeconomics works if you weren't the ideal model of someone so far on one side of the spectrum they've got their head up their ass.

Germany shouldn't be giving out any money at all. Instead of giving them 'fish' they should teach them how to fish.

First off, most government subsidies go to small agricultural businesses to ensure we have a strong domestic food supply. Second, even if we did, why would putting money into a business and back into the economy and out of government hands be bad for the economy?

Well, the car companies got bailed out for one. The reason why it doesn't work when the government puts money into businesses is because some of it gets lost through the government not to mention it's taken from others. Also, if they were doing bad, it is  because they aren't an efficient company in the first place, so giving them money won't force them to tighten the belt and get their act together. Imagine if they still bailed out companies that made stage coaches, it would be a huge waste of money on a company that didn't revolutionize their product.

So again you prove you're retarded and you have no idea how money works.

1. Recession occurs
2. Poorer areas like Detroit and Chicago are hit especially hard
3. People save up money and avoid buying new cars
4. Car manufacturers suffer huge losses because of this
5. Pretty much all of the poor people living in Detroit and Chicago work in car factories and lose their jobs.
6. Government gives money to car manufacturers
7. People in areas hit hardest by recession get their jobs back
8. They get money to put back in the economy!
??
9. Profit! (Literally!)

I'm not even going to touch the fishing comment because that's just stupid and irrelevant when you apply it to an entire nation.

Another thing I'd like to point out is your lack of distinction between the government and the economy, especially for someone so laissez faire as yourself.

So again you prove you're retarded and you have no idea how money works.

1. Recession occurs
2. Poorer areas like Detroit and Chicago are hit especially hard
3. People save up money and avoid buying new cars
4. Car manufacturers suffer huge losses because of this
5. Pretty much all of the poor people living in Detroit and Chicago work in car factories and lose their jobs.
6. Government gives money to car manufacturers
7. People in areas hit hardest by recession get their jobs back
8. They get money to put back in the economy!
??
9. Profit! (Literally!)

I'm not even going to touch the fishing comment because that's just stupid and irrelevant when you apply it to an entire nation.

Another thing I'd like to point out is your lack of distinction between the government and the economy, especially for someone so laissez faire as yourself.

   Well, there's the government employees(who get paid more than private employees) who have to do the paperwork for all of that.
If a company is doing bad, it might be because, in that instance, maybe they should diverse instead of focusing heavily on cars, maybe they were too regulated(once again, the government's fault), maybe they should exchange different goods/services.

   For the most part, companies go down for a reason. The government can't make a company more effective, but they can change their playing field. If they take tax money and give it to companies not doing so well, that's rewarding companies that don't have their stuff together and essentially rewarding failure. It's harsh that people have to lose jobs, and you would think that giving a company money would save it, but it doesn't work that way. It's basically giving a friend money who wastes it on things they don't need and them coming back for more.

   In regards to Germany, they are a more efficient country, they are more willing to save money. What I'm saying is, maybe instead of Germany giving other countries money, the other countries could just learn from how they do things.

Well, there's the government employees(who get paid more than private employees) who have to do the paperwork for all of that.

That's the most broad comparison I've seen in awhile. Also how is paperwork relevant to anything?

If a company is doing bad, it might be because, in that instance, maybe they should diverse instead of focusing heavily on cars, maybe they were too regulated(once again, the government's fault), maybe they should exchange different goods/services.

Or y'know, a company could be doing bad because it was a recession and (get this!) companies don't do very well in recessions. Also the only thing regulations have ever hurt is the paycheck the CEO gets.

   For the most part, companies go down for a reason. The government can't make a company more effective, but they can change their playing field. If they take tax money and give it to companies not doing so well, that's rewarding companies that don't have their stuff together and essentially rewarding failure. It's harsh that people have to lose jobs, and you would think that giving a company money would save it, but it doesn't work that way. It's basically giving a friend money who wastes it on things they don't need and them coming back for more.

Spoiler for:

Nobody spending money means nobody gets money

   In regards to Germany, they are a more efficient country, they are more willing to save money. What I'm saying is, maybe instead of Germany giving other countries money, the other countries could just learn from how they do things.

I think it's funny that you believe there are entire countries where absolutely nobody knows how to manage a budget. (Other than America )
Sometimes countries have little to no resources, are landlocked and fucked over for trade, have to deal with costly wars/disasters. I'm sure if every country had the mighty Scalinger running shit, the world would be much better off.

Or y'know, a company could be doing bad because it was a recession and (get this!) companies don't do very well in recessions. Also the only thing regulations have ever hurt is the paycheck the CEO gets.

Oh yeah, Apple and Ford are doing totally terrible..

Nobody spending money means nobody gets money

In capitalism you risk your money to make more money, however, that's your personal choice. When government invests in a company, you have no choice. Maybe instead of the money going through the government, it's employees, and failed companies, maybe that money could have gone to a new company that wouldn't have been a failure.

I think it's funny that you believe there are entire countries where absolutely nobody knows how to manage a budget. (Other than America )
Sometimes countries have little to no resources, are landlocked and fucked over for trade, have to deal with costly wars/disasters. I'm sure if every country had the mighty Scalinger running shit, the world would be much better off.

I would have to say America is doing a terrible job budgeting(if we even had a budget, there is no official budget right now). Our government is huge and growing bigger by the day. Some employees write off personal expenses in bills and go on vacations or buy things with our tax money. Anyways, companies move if the country isn't an economical place for them to stay(if they get overtaxed/regulated). A country needs to make sure that all the money spent by the government is well spent. They should cut all the programs or government jobs that only waste our money. After such, they would have a much easier time staying afloat and could pay to prepare/deal with wars/disasters. Resources would still be a problem though.

I'm not even going to bother anymore.

This whole thing is dumb.

GM is too big to fail. had it, it would have cost the loss of 200,000 and some jobs in and instant not just a few from the restructuring.

all of the stuff you're saying is retarded.

Sword is surprisingly knowledgable in economics. hat tip to you swordo.

GM is too big to fail. had it, it would have cost the loss of 200,000 and some jobs in and instant not just a few from the restructuring.

all of the stuff you're saying is retarded.

Sword is surprisingly knowledgable in economics. hat tip to you swordo.

They would have lost like 50,000, but regardless of how many jobs lost, they didn't modify their company to be profitable. They've been bailed out multiple times and now they are wasting money on trying to sell that piece of shit Volt and you guys are calling me retarded? The govt. is just postponing the inevitable.

it's only because you are.

they've restructured, you're a moron and sure the volt is a pile of shit but so are all electric cars except the Honda FCX Clarity.

if you wanted to make a thread to voice your opinion and tell everyone else they're wrong even when presented with data you should have picked a different sub forum.
This hasn't been a debate. move this shit to the sewers.

Strike is right but I wouldn't go so far as to say you are retarded or a moron, just not informed. 

Also on the note of electric cars, give it another 10 years.  They will all probably become very nice but as for now, it's a new thing and many things are being improved upon as the years progress.

And we need companies like GM to stay in business.  If we lose them, we do lose jobs and that is counter productive to creating jobs.  We also need people to start spending more money and doing it wisely, meaning within their means.  Big banks need to stop giving loans to people who can't afford them as well and for profit colleges need to be watched over because frankly college expenses are getting higher and higher (and sorry if anyone doesn't agree but if a colleges sports program isn't bringing in enough money, they need to stop putting more money toward the sport and more to the students).  All of this stuff combined created one big snowball effect that many people are struggling with today.

I wouldn't go so far as to say you are retarded or a moron, just not informed. 

That's because you're not a cool kid.

Also on the note of electric cars, give it another 10 years.  They will all probably become very nice but as for now, it's a new thing and many things are being improved upon as the years progress.

They have plenty of efficient cars. They just don't want to release them until they squeeze every last bit of money out of gasoline powered cars.