China will be the dominant power of the 21st century
The debate is finished. The distribution of the voting points and the winner are presented below.
After 1 vote and with 3 points ahead, the winner is...
- Publication date
- Last updated date
- Type
- Standard
- Number of rounds
- 5
- Time for argument
- Two weeks
- Max argument characters
- 10,000
- Voting period
- One week
- Point system
- Multiple criterions
- Voting system
- Open
China has been growing so fast for so long and the train it wont stop going no it wont slow down no way to slow down, and we are gasping our last arrogant racist breath of eurocentrism
GDP
$14.2 trillion (nominal; 2019 est.) $27.3 trillion (PPP; 2019 est.)
GDP rank
2nd (nominal; 2018) 1st (PPP; 2018)
GDP growth
6.7% (2016) 6.8% (2017) 6.6% (2018e) 6.2% (2019f)
GDP per capita
$10,153 (nominal; 2019 est.) $19,520 (PPP; 2019 est.) actually about 3 times as fast really, face it we are toast
The people of the united states are at each others throats
middle class people now held US$7.3 trillion in financial assets and real estate - a jump of about 330 per cent since 2000
well I can guarantee this will be a decisive factor in the conflict between America and China as well, and it won’t end well for China seeing how they produce 11 million more barrels per day.
America was growing by 5, 6, 7 percent consistently until there economy became so big that growth wasn't sustainable, we can't rule out this not happening for China as we see their growth plummet the same way we saw America's plummet in 2001 and 1985.
the growth of Chinese millionaires from what it was 5 years ago however is impressive no where else in the world is it growing so fast and benifiting such a large population
BoP is on pro, but his opening was relevant.
For this type of debate, the contender's job is the cast doubt. He missed the obvious thing of introducing say India as a potential country to become dominant; this leaves the debate as just China v. USA in terms of growth rates...
This debate could have been better with some more direct comparisons (fertility rate in China is low, how is it in the US or India?), and the implementation of better forecasting techniques. The oil issue was a pretty good one for the USA (the explanation of Britain in particular). The GDP growth of China was remarkable, but the rate of slowing suggests it is not sustainable to carry it past the USA. The civil unrest is a valid threat to any predictions about China's future, particularly with the source putting it side by side with knife attacks in Palestine. And finally the number of millionaires (which con countered with a population comparison, making it a problem of greater inequality brought on by the communist system) even if unchallenged, would not override everything else.
In short, con used evidence to cast sufficient doubt on the prediction.
The chance to convince the audience was inside the debate rounds. Start a new debate if you feel you left out an argument winning point, and include it then.
china is catching up gnp growth is 6% vs our barely 2%