Usa Power In Decline

[Evil Goblin]

Is the "American Era" over and if so, is that a good thing?

 

It seems that various nations around the world are increasingly happy to stick two fingers up to Obama's America, with Iran, Brazil, Venezuala, North Korea and even Germany prepared to treat the US with disdain. If only Cameron didn't have as wide a yellow streak down his back as Blair and Brown and stuck up for BP a bit more then perhaps Britain could stop being in thrall to the "Great Satan".

 

And with America in decline, who will be the real Superpower of the future?

[La_Dolce_Vita]

I predict it will be the East African Federation of Somaliland in the year 2089.

[groudleho]

Is the "American Era" over and if so, is that a good thing?

 

It seems that various nations around the world are increasingly happy to stick two fingers up to Obama's America, with Iran, Brazil, Venezuala, North Korea and even Germany prepared to treat the US with disdain. If only Cameron didn't have as wide a yellow streak down his back as Blair and Brown and stuck up for BP a bit more then perhaps Britain could stop being in thrall to the "Great Satan".

 

And with America in decline, who will be the real Superpower of the future?

 

"Beware the sleeping dragon, for when she awakes the world will shake"

Winston Churchill

[thebees]

"Beware the sleeping dragon, for when she awakes the world will shake"

Winston Churchill

 

I think it's about right, provided they ride their growing pains.

[thesultanofsheight]

This says it all really:

 

http://www.newser.com/story/91842/us-debt-to-hit-196-trillion-by-2015.html

 

"America's national debt is now at a dizzying $13.6 trillion and will reach $19.6 trillion in 5 years, according to a Treasury Department report. By 2015 the debt will, for the first time, exceed the value of all goods and services produced in America in a year, reaching 102% of GDP"

 

The whole economy will be owned by China by 2020.

[SugarBee]

I think Sultan is correct!

[pongo]

If only Cameron ..... stuck up for BP a bit more

 

Well hang on there. BP is responsible for a very serious environmental disaster from which they also potentially stand to benefit in terms of higher prices. Why should a national government 'stand up' for a share holder owned company anyhow ?

 

It can also be considered a given that the permitting process for offshore drilling will be drastically tightened. In hindsight, it's obvious that drilling technology has raced far ahead of the technology needed to address events such as the Gulf spill.

 

http://seekingalpha.com/article/207409-how-the-gulf-spill-may-affect-oil-price-and-supplies

[Chinahand]

"Beware the sleeping dragon, for when she awakes the world will shake"

Winston Churchill

It was actually Napoleon and over 200 years later you could say that China still hasn't fully awoken.

Link discussing it.

[VinnieK]

I'm still sceptical about the rise of China, not least because the hyperbole surrounding the issue so closely resembles the hysteria that accompanied Japan's rise in the 80's. By now Japan was meant to be a major world power that dominated science and manufacturing - instead it's become just another modern (if a little stagnant) economy with a pretty mediocre scientific record.

 

It might be a naive view, but isn't much of China's prosperity tied up with international, and particularly American markets for manufactured goods and dependent on importing resources?

 

Much of the success of other great powers, such at the US, the British Empires and Germany etc was largely built on a strong foundation of domestic markets which then fuelled and was in turn stimulated by further economic expansion, the availability of domestic natural resources, and further encouraged by periods of sudden scientific and industrial advances. China's success, by comparison seems to be built almost entirely on the consumerism of the Western world, its domestic natural resources can't keep up with the demands of its manufacturing industry. Also, despite all the hype the developed world still enjoys a very comfortable margin in scientific progress over that being achieved by China.

 

I don't doubt that US power is waning, or that China will take its place as a modern economy, but as far as I can see a collapse in American fortunes would only harm China, especially since an awful lot of Chinese money is tied up in U.S. foreign debt.

[Evil Goblin]

There are two reasons why Cameron should be backing BP, Pongo. Firstly, the dividends it pays to UK Pension Funds etc. comprise 7% of all the dividend income of those funds and so a huge number of British people have a strong vested interest in the Company. Secondly, BP were not the only ones involved in running the Rig - it was actually owned and operated by an American company, Transocean Drilling. I am puzzled as to why that outfit has been left out of the picture and all the blsme is being attached to BP.

[Albert Tatlock]

Secondly, BP were not the only ones involved in running the Rig - it was actually owned and operated by an American company, Transocean Drilling. I am puzzled as to why that outfit has been left out of the picture and all the blsme is being attached to BP.

I think that too. However, I suspect 'BP operated the contract' and Transocean were subcontracted i.e. the same as a poor developer would still be responsible for a building falling over if he had subcontracted several brickies and one of them hadn't used any mortar on his bit.

 

Despite about to go on the swiss stock exchange, Transocean shares have halved since the disaster. They are a £30bn company themselves, employing nearly 20,000 people. I suspect insurance companies will likely become more heavily involved after the ongoing disaster and when all the unknowns are known - though Transocean have already began to see limited liability via the U.S. courts as they are already facing over 100 lawsuits apparently.

 

As a much larger company BP have the cash - but more importantly have taken responsibility for stopping/cleaning up the leak.

[Evil Goblin]

Thanks, Albert. Seems that Transocean are actually catching some of the flak, albeit in a much less high-profile way.

[pongo]

There are two reasons why Cameron should be backing BP, Pongo. Firstly, the dividends it pays to UK Pension Funds etc. comprise 7% of all the dividend income of those funds and so a huge number of British people have a strong vested interest in the Company.

 

1. That seems a cynical response to a disaster which will have a significant ecological impact. Meanwhile the lives and jobs of people who live and work in that region and many other industries will be affected. Those people and other industries are just as important as British people.

 

2. As proxy shareholder, pension fund clients have a responsibility for how their money is invested. Though I very much doubt that there will be any long term impact either on BP's profitability or on the pension funds. The total pot might comprise 7% but no well managed fund is going to be so exposed to one company or to one industry.

 

3. BP stand to gain from higher oil prices over the months ahead which will offset to some extent their losses. Though they will certainly be insured. And the price of oil is itself an insurance for them to some extent. Especially given the on going problems with the Alaskan pipeline supplies.

 

4. 30 years ago there was a similar catastrophe in the Gulf which took 10 months to fix. Like now, that also coincidentally coincided with problems with the Alaskan pipeline - leading to a sharp hike in oil prices in the months ahead. There has to be strong argument against allowing drilling in ever deeper waters and remote regions unless or until the technologies for preventing or coping with mishaps are improved in concert. 30 years on the same methods which failed last time are being tried again.

[Alias]

4. 30 years ago there was a similar catastrophe in the Gulf which took 10 months to fix. Like now, that also coincidentally coincided with problems with the Alaskan pipeline - leading to a sharp hike in oil prices in the months ahead. There has to be strong argument against allowing drilling in ever deeper waters and remote regions unless or until the technologies for preventing or coping with mishaps are improved in concert. 30 years on the same methods which failed last time are being tried again.

And like 30 years ago, it didn't just stop. The solution will most likely be the same as it was then - drill a relief well.

 

IIRC there was some proposed legislation a while back to enforce oil companies to drill relief wells at the same time in sensitive areas, but I suspect it got lobbied off the agenda.

 

The oil companies don't want to take the expense of drilling a relief well every time they want to do a bit of exploratory drilling, but if anything comes out of this hopefully measures like this will have to be instated..

[Sean South]

Re: USA's power, I feel it's just that O'bama is not a war monger like his predecessor and hasn't been going around threatening everyone. However, when he goes and if that intellectual woman....what's her name again? Oh yeah, Sarah Palin, gets in then she'll carry on where Bush left off and start pissing every Arab and Asian Country off and attacking all and sundry....