is America the new Rman Empire?

[yesman065]

Originally Posted by Aliantha

Our outlook is a bit different than a lot of other countries though. Still a bit carefree perhaps, but certainly worth knowing.

I'm certainly glad I've gotten to know the Aussies from the cellar. I'd love to go there at some point in my life and see it for myself. From all I hear and read it is beautiful.

[wolf]

Originally Posted by Phil

You actually believe that Australia would LIKE to be like America?!
to use the "theyre all descended from criminals" cliche displays a snobbery and unjustified attitude of superiority the world has come to expect from certain people in the US.

Please remove the stick from your anal cavity.

A careful reading of my statement makes it clear that I was also refering to America's rather similar origins ... however, as nations we dealt with this different, America choosing to fight for independence, Australia remaining part of the British Empire.

[Shawnee123]

Originally Posted by yesman065

I'm certainly glad I've gotten to know the Aussies from the cellar. I'd love to go there at some point in my life and see it for myself. From all I hear and read it is beautiful.

I don't know if I ever said this, but when I was pretty young, JR HI, I think, I had a dream about Australia. Nothing spectacular, it was just that i was living there with my grandmother for some reason or another. I remember waking up and feeling really good, peaceful. From that point on I swore I would go one day. I even wrote a poem about it (a silly trite young girl poem, but a poem nonetheless.) I hope to do some traveling a bit later in life and Australia will be one of my visits.

[Phil]

Originally Posted by wolf

Please remove the stick from your anal cavity.

A careful reading of my statement makes it clear that I was also refering to America's rather similar origins ... however, as nations we dealt with this different, America choosing to fight for independence, Australia remaining part of the British Empire.

*hands you stick covered in shit*

you said they were jealous .... end of argument.

[wolf]

Originally Posted by Phil

*hands you stick covered in shit*

That happens to me about three times a week.

[Aliantha]

Hope it isn't the pointy end too!

[xoxoxoBruce]

They are jealous. They've always wanted to drive on the right side of the road. :p

[DanaC]

The right side of the road is the left:P

[Shawnee123]

If you go left, you'll be right.
If you go right, you'll be left. :p

[Aliantha]

I drive on the right hand side of the road when I overtake. I don't always feel like overtaking though.

[Phil]

which side did the Romans drive on?

[Perry Winkle]

I haven't read much of the thread but I'll pitch in my two cents on the type of nations that will be world dominating forces in the future.

Here are some criteria (be kind, this is off-the-cuff):
1. Nations with a very high level of urbanization and population density (i.e., usually, smaller island nations)
2. Access to large amount of, not necessarily native, man-power (the more skilled the better).
3. Deep integration of high-tech, communications, and information services on a national level
4. Strong leadership (I was going to say "good leadership" but most likely these leaders will be barely distinguishable from villains in our lifetimes and for several subsequent generations)
5. World financial centers

I think Singapore and Hong Kong are probably the best bets. They have China and other resources to draw on, are rich enough to build world-class armies, and have technological penetration outdoing all but perhaps South Korea and Taiwan (maybe Finland, too?).

Taiwan gets some bonus points for having very strong ties to certain areas of mainland China (the province name doesn't pop immediately to mind).

South Korea is another decent bet. They have to maintain military vigilance because of their friends to the north, Seoul is a world city (one of the most well connected in the world), and they have a reasonable agricultural base.

[piercehawkeye45]

I thought money and education would be more important?

The reason why America is a superpower is because they have all the money. The reason why America will fall is because of education. The other nations are stressing education more so all the jobs that need workers with a higher education will go there resulting in that country getting the money.

[Undertoad]

There's the oft-quoted (by me) Ralph Peters' Seven Signs of Non-Competitive States:

Traditional indicators of noncompetitive performance still apply: corruption (the most seductive activity humans can consummate while clothed); the absence of sound, equitably enforced laws; civil strife; or government attempts to overmanage a national economy. As change has internationalized and accelerated, however, new predictive tools have emerged. They are as simple as they are fundamental, and they are rooted in culture. The greater the degree to which a state--or an entire civilization--succumbs to these "seven deadly sins" of collective behavior, the more likely that entity is to fail to progress or even to maintain its position in the struggle for a share of the world's wealth and power. Whether analyzing military capabilities, cultural viability, or economic potential, these seven factors offer a quick study of the likely performance of a state, region, or population group in the coming century.

These key failure factors are:
* Restrictions on the free flow of information.
* The subjugation of women.
* Inability to accept responsibility for individual or collective failure.
* The extended family or clan as the basic unit of social organization.
* Domination by a restrictive religion.
* A low valuation of education.
* Low prestige assigned to work.

[Hippikos]

Originally Posted by Undertoad

There's the oft-quoted (by me) Ralph Peters' Seven Signs of Non-Competitive States:

Traditional indicators of noncompetitive performance still apply: corruption (the most seductive activity humans can consummate while clothed); the absence of sound, equitably enforced laws; civil strife; or government attempts to overmanage a national economy. As change has internationalized and accelerated, however, new predictive tools have emerged. They are as simple as they are fundamental, and they are rooted in culture. The greater the degree to which a state--or an entire civilization--succumbs to these "seven deadly sins" of collective behavior, the more likely that entity is to fail to progress or even to maintain its position in the struggle for a share of the world's wealth and power. Whether analyzing military capabilities, cultural viability, or economic potential, these seven factors offer a quick study of the likely performance of a state, region, or population group in the coming century.

These key failure factors are:
* Restrictions on the free flow of information.
* The subjugation of women.
* Inability to accept responsibility for individual or collective failure.
* The extended family or clan as the basic unit of social organization.
* Domination by a restrictive religion.
* A low valuation of education.
* Low prestige assigned to work.

Several of these factors are applicable in China, which, as we all know, is a non-competitive state. Or issit?