China PM Wants to Rule Global Tech With India

GrumpyDeveloper writes "As reported in this Wired story, China's prime minister said Sunday that China and India should work together to dominate the world's tech industry, bringing together Chinese hardware with Indian software.

BBC World Comment

[Tibe]

"China has a large manufacturing sector and India has a large software industry. China may become India's major manufacturer while India will be China's office" - BBC World (OR words to that effect)

There is simply no way...

[rhythmx]

that China can compete with the U.S. Tech when we have the best [news.com] Math and Science schools on the planet. I mean, there is so much interest within the U.S. to keep up innovation and not just be technology whores. Besides, we've patented everything [slashdot.org] anyway.

Re:Global perception...

[Anonymous Coward]

Yes, "Global perception." Since when has the "Global perception" of America has been anything but,

1) America is in decline
2) The American worker is struggling to maintain his/her standard of living.
3) American industry is getting beaten

On and on. In the sixties the Soviets were going to bury the Americans. In the eighties, the Japanese were trouncing American industry. Now, it is the Chinese and Indians.

Yet, the U.S. still maintains the largest economy in the world and (surprise!) has a lower unemployment rate than the average EU nation. China, India? Ask me in ten years, then we'll see if this is for real or more hype.

Re:Inevitable

[kahei]

I wish people would stop presenting this as a mutual tiff. The feud stems from the Chinese _invasion_ of India -- large chunks of which they still hold.

Re:they're no dummies

[alphakappa]

"The Western Hemisphere controls the food, and with it...we'll still control the wealth."

Think I should point this out. Both India and China are food surplus nations.

Thats all fine and dandy but

[Stone316]

there has to be something said about fair competition. There is a reason why doing business in the west is more expensive.. Labour and Environmental laws just to name 2.

I have no problems competing with industries half way around the world if its fair. IMHO tariffs should be place on any goods coming in from other countries that don't meet our same standards. If at the end their products are still cheaper then i'll agree we have to revise our business practices.

Re:Educational Spending?

[Anonymous Coward]

What you describe is effective protectionism enforced by the oppressive will of a majority once it reaches that level. No one benefits from buying a more expensive product, and efforts to prop up national economies with such measures only forestall their collapse and reform into actual international markets. If the US becomes isolationist economically it will only give reason for the other dominant powers to put aside hopes of reconciliation aimed at preservation of profits as it would be impossible. You are an advocate of a tenuous situation that brings war on a world-wide scale closer to reality than its has been since 1947. That policy would not only disembowel all of the US but would also paint a large target over all of their assets. Do not expect to be able to export much if your nation will not import.

Re:There is simply no way...

[Anonymous Coward]

The Bush administration have steadily been screwing over the educational system due to lack of federal funding, restrictive rules.

And, as anybody who has taken a freshman civics course will tell you, education is a locally funded government activity. The federal screwing over started in the '60s, and has gotten worse with every presidency, because raising the funds sent is a good way of raising approval ratings, even if those funds come with requirements which cost more than the raises you send.
Clinton did it, GHW Bush did it, Reagan did it, Carter did it, Ford did it, Nixon did it and Johnson did it. Singling out Bush is either partisan hackery or ignorance of what's been happening for the last 40 years.

Re:Why do democracies kowtow to a dictatorship?

[Anonymous Bullard]

Thank you for giving me a chance to respond to a "bona fide" brownshirt.

So your claims are based on the fact that your ancestors' feudal omnipotent god-kings (aka emperors) claimed all known territories around China (well actually the whole world) to be their divine possession? But didn't first the Republic and then the Communists already disown such madness last century? But that still gives you the cajones to claim ownership of your neighbouring peoples who are nothing like the Chinese at all?

If imperial invasions are OK, in that case doesn't modern-day Japan also hold a claim over the Chinese and their lands? Or what about the Mongolian descendants of Tsenghis Khan who conquered China and much of the continent (but left Tibet stay uninvaded out of respect!), surely they are China's rightful rulers since they actually ruled and administered China for generations while until its invasion last century China had never ruled or administered over the Tibetan nation. It's scarily amusing to see Chinese brownshirts crying about Japan's brutal invasion when the Chinese are doing that to their smaller neighbors now and every day.

And if a Chinese god-king's wet daydream of owning the whole world is reason enough to destroy and annex foreign people, why is China allowing other neighbours like Korea and Vietnam to be independent? They were also once claimed by China's feudal god-kings as their possession? And surely China doesn't recognize the vast majority of world's nations which have only shed their colonial masters over the last couple of hundred years!

I don't know if your masters allow you to visit the following sites, but here's what a mainland Chinese (overseas scholar) [caochangqing.com] writes about China's imperial claims over neighboring Tibet [timesoftibet.com]:

THE Chinese government on both sides of the Taiwan Straits hold opposing political views on most issues, often resorting to tit for tat policies and verbal attacks. On the Tibet issue, however, the two sides cling to the same viewpoint: both claim Chinese sovereignty over Tibet, emphasizing that Tibet has been a part of China since ancient times.

Over the past several decades, these official viewpoints have been instilled in the Chinese people by means of large scale propaganda campaigns waged by the Beijing and Taiwan governments. As a result of this brainwashing, the majority of the Chinese people have lost the ability to discover the truth. However, through a brief review of Chinese history, we can clearly see that Tibet was never a part of China until it was invaded and occupied by China in the 1950s.

[go read the facts and come back..., and change that brown shirt while you're at it!]

Although I was a journalist in China, I did not know the above mentioned historical facts until I came to the United States. Like my fellow Chinese, I had always thought that Tibet was a part of China. All of my knowledge concerning the Tibetan situation has been based on the official Chinese history texts, newspapers, books, and movies. It was only after coming to the USA and reading unbiased history books that I began to understand the truth about Tibet.

The Chinese should pay due heed to the reality of the situation in Tibet today. Since the Chinese occupation of Tibet, the human rights of the Tibetan people have been wantonly trampled upon. Furthermore, the Tibetan people are systematically discriminated against and persecuted by the Chinese colonialists.

Now you've got a choice to make: Either put that brown shirt back on and join the Communist Party-approved riots against the Japanese, or apologize the Tibetan people for the violent and arrogant imperialist invasion of their peaceful country. What the Japanese did in China during their invasion was evil and their government should apologize profusely

What happened in the auto industry

[sjbe]

The same things were said when Japan made a move to dominate the car industry, so what happened?

The US manufacturers have steadily lost market share [detnews.com]. Toyota passed Ford to become the #2 automaker (based on worldwide sales) and is steadily gaining on GM for #1. Further Toyota is about to pass Chrysler in the US market (~11% vs ~12% market share respectively) Chrysler nearly went bankrupt and was eventually bought by Daimler-Benz. Lexus (Toyota again) passed Cadillac and Lincoln to become the #1 selling luxury car brand in the US. US automakers sell nearly every small/compact car for a loss because of inefficient manufacuturing and high labor/pension costs. Toyota and Honda are leading the charge into hybrid automobiles, well ahead of US auto firms. Hybrids are very likely to be the next dominant technology in autos. The light auto segment the US manufacturers have held onto is pickups/SUVs that have accounted for the majority of their profits in recent years, and they are starting to lose their death grip on that segment too. Recent gas prices won't help SUV sales [bloomberg.com] either.

While I'm painting a bit more bleak picture than it actually is for Ford and GM but if you think nothing happened in the industry due to the Japanese, you simply don't understand the industry. I wouldn't say the Japanese or US manufacturers dominate (no one does) but I can say that Japanese automakers have had a HUGE impact on the industry, largely at the expense of the US manufacturers. Most of the recent innovations in manufacturing processes (Just-in-time, lean manufacuturing, etc) were pioneered by Japanese manufacturers. I'm a manufacturing operations engineer and I've been to and conducted statstical analysis of plants for most of the big auto companies and the Japanese simply are better manufacturers overall. You don't even have to take my word for it, there is plenty of evidence out there to support me. But I've been there and I can tell you that Ford & GM are playing catch up. The reason they haven't lost (read gone-bankrupt/aquired) is that auto manufacuturing isn't strictly a price game. Styling, dealer/sales networks, and historical buying preferences matter. And the US manufacturers aren't complete incompetents. But if it were strictly a matter of price/performance GM and Ford would already be gone.

+3 Inspiteful

[Anonymous Coward]

Pakistan fundmentalist dictatorship?

Dictatorship? yes.
But the dictatorship is more secular than fundamentalist. The fundamentalists are in
the opposition.

Don't blame Pakistan and let India slide on the fundamentalist epithet, either.

Dell does NOT manufacture overseas for US Market!

[twifosp]

Well, if people stopped buying foreign products (including not buying Dells and such that are manufactured over seas and branded as American products) and therefore only bought American products we would have a huge boost in the economy with more revenue bein generated and more money available for education and everything else.

This is a flat out untrue statement.

Dell does manufacture computers overseas yes, but currently ALL computers sold by Dell in the US are manufactured in the US.

Foriegn factories are for foriegn markets. Tech support, is completely different. As you already know.

Now the actual PARTS used for these computers are built overseas, but find a computer part that isn't.

Re:Educational Spending?

[alphakappa]

"Just curious, you slam because of the lack of funds for higher education, but do you contribute to the American economy and the American worker by buying American products"

The flaw in this reasoning is that there is no way to define an 'American Product'. Few products can be 100% American since we do live in a global economy where many of the components needed for any industry come from various sources. See, even your gasoline comes from the Middle east - In theory you could be using only American gasoline instead of contributing to a 'foreign' economy.

You don't need to contribute to the economy by an 'American only' policy. Businesses outsource to reduce costs and increase profits. When your local American company makes more profits and increases its stock value, it brings more money to the American economy. Whether it comes to employees or goes elsewhere is a different matter, but the money is mostly used/invested in America, so your economy is not really without funds.

Not to start a political debate, but surely you understand the irony of spending over $200 billion in a war in the Middle East and still not having a tiny fraction of that amount to spend for education?

IMHO, it is an issue of policy and planning in the United States that's affecting education, and not 'spending on foreign cars/clothes'.

Re:Global perception...

[Stone Pony]

So you're saying that the stories are factually incorrect?

Here are some other news sources with a famously "one-sided view of the US in general". They seem to think that these things [foxnews.com] happened [heritage.org], too, but that'll probably just be their liberal media bias at work.