but what is keeping them down there? and would the US start falling to a lower lvl and then balance out?

The big difference being is China is NOT a welfare country, you either produce or die, Obama and company want to socialize America and turn it into a welfare state. Now do you see why I stated what I did?

Enlightened ones: Noun. Def - those who have deer in the headlights looks on their faces, and "Space!  The Final Frontier" between their ears.

I tend to agree with you for the most part.  However, they do have the people for it, so by shere weight of numbers, they are a force to be reckoned with both economically and militarily.

But they will not maintain that growth for that long.  The middle class is the same all over the world.  Once they got some money, they will want the things.  And in 10-15 years, China may well me a net importer (from Zaire and Vietnam no doubt).

I have been giving all of this a lot of thought recently and I am sad to say that socialism is the eventual fate and destruction of any large organized society, even our own. It just appears, to me, to be the eventual end of any society. While it seems great in theory the application has never worked in a positive fashion and in all probability never will.

While this may sound extreme and even absurd, I believe that we are on the doorstep of a "dark ages" of sort where the world's societies will be plunged yet again into some serious economic and technological stagnation and perhaps even reversal. Of course eventually progress will take hold again but all of those reading this now will be long dead before that happens, along with their children and grandchildren. Most, if not all, of us won't even live to see it reach it's low point.

Societies have always advanced based mainly upon technological advances. We haven't seen any real major technological break-throughs in a very long time. The last one was probably the atomic bomb (a means to kill more people quicker). Nothing we've developed in the past several decades is really anything truly new, just new ways of doing old things. We've stagnated as far as true technology advances go. For us, in the end, I think we'll be known as the "electrical age". It seems like electricity has been our marked advancement and we've done about all we could with it (such as writing this reply).

It just seems to me to be the historical fate of all great societies.  They reach a technological and social peak and then either die off or are destroyed. We aren't exempt from this historical path by any means.

Not in the way most people would think of Socialism. In China there is no social health care. If you can't pay the hospital you don't go. Little or no welfare. Work is not guaranteed by the state either, there are many out of work college grads there. And speaking of college, there is a tuition fee. Capitalism is rife there, many businesses small and large, you would think you are in any western city when you walk down the street, and no the secret police don't follow you either. Forget what you've seen on TV or in the movies it's just not like that, not now anyway. I would classify their government more as authoritarian than totalitarian since Mao's death.

China has about 200 nukes of all types. Enough to hurt anyone if they wanted too, but far less than the US or Russia. I wasn't too impressed with their military (especially the ones I saw climbing on top of a local monument, to get a photo, just didn't seem too professional), but I suppose some units are better than others. Of course they haven't had any real combat since 1978 (Vietnam) and they had a poor showing there. I don't feel China will be a super power militarily anytime soon, but economically is another matter. They past Germany last year, 2 to go.

My wife owns a home there. We've often talked about negative aspects of the Chinese government right out in the open on the street, never got arrested (I'm as anti-communist as one could get). You'd have to make a scene or some sort of distraction to get hauled in. If human rights protests are part of your day, sure I'd recommend not living there. Everything I do in the states I've done in China (minus gun ownership). Between my military pension and my wifes future pension from her university, it's part of my retirement plan. 500 bucks a month and you can live pretty good there (not Shanghai, Hong Kong or Beijing though). Not coming down on you, I thought that way too before I went there.

well your not a full time live in there>  I would give the okay coming from a full time citizen there but... not a half and half

The National Health Service in the UK is an example of what many would see as a socialist measure, and last I checked it was still running+giving out free health service to everyone. Redistributive tax systems could also be seen as a slightly socialist measure, and even the US has those. Perhaps you could give a few examples of why socialism can never work, rather than just saying it doesn't work (and probably more critically what you mean by "work")?

They dont have millions of illegals coming into thier countries either draining the free health care either....

Littlewhips mother-in-law had to wait many, many months for a surgery in England because of how the "free" healthcare is set up there unless you are dieing you have to wait, and wait some more to be treated. No thanks! Canada has a simular healthcare system and while many Americans buy perscription drugs from there because it is cheaper, many Canadians that live on the border with American states come to America for health care so they can be seen quickly even though they have to pay here and it's free there, so again tthe free health care does not work.

well it does vary from area to area in Canada where some of the turnaround is quick while others are very long. But there is no money in it for the doctors either.

The reason why health care is so expensive here in the states is because of the sue happy thinking this society has become.... the cost gets passed onto the consumers

What about the massive amount of computer advances?  Medical techologies, genetics techologies in both farming and medicince, telecommuncation advances?

There are always stories of how long people have had to wait in certain cases, and while in the 80's it was underfunded it has made great strides and the waits really aren't all that much for non-urget.  My Father's cancer was spotted and operated on within a week, my GP appointments are on the day I ask for them, my wifes physio was within four weeks of going to the GP and her granmothers hip operation was about 2 months.  The key though is that nobody goes without.

You see if you were arguing that socialism isn't perfect, that would be a valid point. However since you're trying to claim it never works, that doesn't sound like "tearing my argument down". You have to have some form of queuing system to prioritise those who most need medical attention. Meanwhile anecdotal evidence is also fairly weak, since you could have 99% of people receiving treatment really quickly, and 1% really slowly. That 1% will provide plenty of anecdotal evidence of how it's not working well, but if looking at the statistics the 99% figure would suggest that yes it is working (not saying these are the actual figures btw, just pointing out how solely using anecdotal evidence isn't enough). I'm confident that if I need medical treatment I will get it, and if it's urgent then I will get prioritised over someone with a far less serious problem. Similarly if it's not urgent I am ok with waiting so someone with a more serious problem can be seen. I also know that I won't be landed with a massive bill that will potentially bankrupt me. The same could not be said of the US healthcare system.

No it will just bankupt the country