Will a weakened America emerge victorious against communist China?

[startergear]

kwanza mimi ntaweka na refence kabisa, cha kwanza unatakiwa ujue China ndio nchi yenye uchumi mkubwa kwa sasa kwa mujibu wa IMF (IMF Admits China Has Overtaken The US As The World’s Largest Economy; But Why Is The Media Silent? )
kumvimbia marekani usifikiri ni ishu ya kitoto ni lazima uwe nae sawa au umemzidi

si kweli kwamba china haina conglomerates kubwa duniani, sema sio maarufu kama za west na nyingine ni kubwa kuliko hata za west, Alibaba, Huwawei hizo ni kampuni ndogondogo China, katika makampuni 10 makubwa zaidi duniani , matano yametoka china manne us na moja saudi arabia, kampuni la kwanza na la pili kwa ukubwa duniani yote yametoka china (https://www.forbes.com/global2000/#142b81a9335d )

soko la hisa halimaanishi kwamba uchumi wako ndio mkubwa kuliko mwingine, na wala soko la hisa sio kigezo cha uchumi wa nchi ndio maana China hilo jambo sio ishu sana, Makampuni mengi ya china wanaorodheshwa marekani lakini mwisho wa siku faida kubwa inaenda kwenye makampuni ya china na sio marekani! ndio maana kuna baadhi ya makampuni trump aliyatoa sokola hisa marekani

Suala ya yuan kutokutumika kimataifa huu ni mfumo ambao china wanautaka wenyewe na yuan hawataki ipande thamani kuliko dola kwasababu ya kuvutia uwekezaji wa moja kwa moja! ukiwa na dola mia ni rahisi kuwekeza China kuliko marekani! dola 100 kwa marekani ni hela ya maji ya kunywa tu lakini ukiwa china hiyo hela unaweza fanyia mengi sana! Ndio maana mpaka kesho china hawezi pandisha thamani ya yuan ili kuvutia watu na marekani hua analalamika sana kila siku juu ya hili lakini hawez fanya lolote,mpaka kampuni kama telsa na apple kuwekeza china ndo ujiulize

China ni mtengeneza silaha mzuri tu, ila sio muuzaji silaha kila nchi na strategy yake, china, india na urusi ndo nchi pekee zina hypersonic missiles mpaka sasa hata hao marekani na israeli hawana ! china ina jeshi kubwa kuliko nchi yoyote duniani (29 Largest Armies In The World) , China ndo nchi yenye jeshi la majini kubwa kuliko nchi yoyote
(China Has The World’s Largest Navy. And It’s Getting Better, Pentagon Warns )

china ndo nchi inaoongoza kwa matumizi ya artificial intelligence duniani (China Leads in Practical AI | Enterprise IT News) na kampuni zinazojihusisha na AI ni nyingi China kuliko marekani

Kwa mara ya kwanza china imeipita marekani kwa mauzo ya filamu duniani (In 2020, China Surpassed America In Box Office Revenue ) china haiitaji hollywood tena bali hollywood ndo inahitaji china kwa sasa

kwenye cyber security china wapo vizuri sanaaa, waliwaibia NSA pentagon silaha ya kufanyia hacking (Chinese spies stole NSA hacking tools, report finds) na wakaitumia kuwa hack wao wenyewe kwa miaka kadhaa bila kushtukiwa, kwenye cyber securty China na Urusi wapo vizuri sana kuliko unavyofikiri

suala la vita , experience na vifaa kwenye vita vina advantage ndogo sana, marekani alipigwa na kataifa kadogo sana ( vietnam)lenye silaha duni sana na bila experience yoyote mpaka akakimbia akarudi kwako! vita ni teknik bana sio silaha wala experience! unaweza pigana vita miaka 20 mfululizo lakini ukaja kupigwa na mtu ambae hakuwahi kunyanyua hata jiwe maishani mwake! hakuna siku marekani atamvamia na kumpiga mchina, america hana uwezo huo hata china hawezi piga marekani! hizi nchi kamwe haziwez kuingia vitani kwasababu hakutakua na mshindi kati yao

Naomba nikiri kwa mara ya Kwanza nimeanza kuichukia JF baada ya kusoma hili bandiko,,,,,

 

[HUNIJUI SIKUJUI]

Naomba nikiri kwa mara ya Kwanza nimeanza kuichukia JF baada ya kusoma hili bandiko,,,,,

🤣 🤣 🤣 🤣 🤣

 

[zithromax]

hizo ni teknolojia ndogo ndogo sana kwa karne hii, na wala hazina umihimu wowote, mbona uku kwetu tuna mpaka azam cola

Nimeuliza maana Kwenye uchambuzi huu kuna mdau anaigusia kama novel discover una saha ya marekani katika karne hii 21

 

[Masamila]

Mkuu hujadadavua vizuri: Fiat Money ina faida au hasara kwa uchumi wa Marekani ???

Mkuu kukujibu ni kwamba Fiat Currency ina faida kwa USA sababu iliyofanya uwepo wa FIAT Currency ni kutotosha kwa Madini ya dhahabu na fedha katika mahitaji ya Currency

Ila pia FIAT Currency inakuwa liability katika namna fulani kwa Mmarekani sababu ya madeni ( yeye US ame'run' trade deficits kwa muda mrefu sana kiasi kwamba waliyokuwa wana'run' trade surplus kwa muda mrefu wamekuwa wanarudisha hizo hela za trade surplus kwa kununua Treasury bonds(hapa wanamkopesha USA) of which nikiweka katika mizani USA anafaidika zaidi na FIAT Currency na pia mataifa mengine hasa ya ASIA akiwemo UCHINA nayo yanafaidika na Fiat Currency

 

[MALCOM LUMUMBA]

Kwanza kabisa, nimeshangazwa na ombi lako kuhusu andiko la Huntington la miaka ya 50 ambalo limezungumzia "decline of America". Nimeshangazwa kwa sababu sijapata kufahamu sababu juu ya ombi hilo. Je, ni kwa sababu hautaki kukubaliana na hoja yangu kwamba mjadala huu na mingine ya namna hii imekwisha jadiliwa toka miaka ya 50 ama ni kwa sababu nyingine tofauti?

Kama umemfuatilia Samuel P. Huntington vizuri kuna ugumu gani kuniwekea rejea ???
Kuhusu PPP umeongea mambo mengi sana lakini bado maswali yangu hayapatiwa majibu ambayo niliuliza awali.

Mosi, ulisema Nigeria na Iraq zina PPP kubwa kuliko Scandinaviana Countries: Nikauliza mbona kwenye The Big Mac Index ya mwaka 2020 Nigeria na Iraq hazipo hata kwenye kumi bora lakini Scandinaviana Countries kama Norway zipo ???

Pili, nikauliza je ni vyema na sahihi kutegemea kikokotoo cha GDP kinachotumia Market Rates na International Traded Goods nila kuzingatia Non-Traded Goods, ???? (Hujanipatia majawabu zaidi ya kuzunguka mbuyu)

Tatu, nikaomba unieleze jinsi ambavyo tunakokotoa PPP kwa urahisi kabisa, lakini hujafanya hivyo zaidi ya kuelezea GDP per Capita (PPP): Lengo la kukuuliza hili swali ni kukurudisha kwenye yale madai yako kwamba Nigeria ina PPP kubwa kuliko Scandinavian Countries, lakini kwenye The Big Mac Index 2020 haipo.

Sasa hebu turudi kwenye hoja zako mpya ulizozizungumza:
Mosi, umesema takwimu zinasema kwamba Marekani inafanya vizuri kwenye PPP kuliko Uchina lakini hizo takwimu zinazotoa hayo maelekezo hujatuwekea, wala chanzo chake. Mimi chanzo changu kinasema Uchina ana PPP kubwa kuliko Marekani. Hebu pitia hapa: Visualizing the Composition of the World Economy by GDP (PPP)

Pili, umeleta vitu kama The Ease of Doing Business Index, Indices of Economic Freedom na Global Competitiveness Index, nasema well and good. Sasa nakuuliza swali rahisi kabisa ambalo benki ya dunia waliulizwa mwaka 2013 wakashindwa kujibu: Kwamba wanavyopima DBI wanatumia Metheodology Gani ??? Maana tofauti na PPP na GDP ambazo tafiti zake ziko Empirical DBI haina kabisa methodology. (Nirekebishe kama nakosea mtaalamu)

Kama watafiti wanakuja kwenye nchi ya Tanzania kupima urahisi wa kufanya biashara halafu wanafuata watu wakubwa tu kama Dewji, Bakheresa, Patel na wanazuoni wakubwa utasema hiyo tafiti ni sahihi kupima uchumi wa nchi kweli ??? WB walienda visiwa vya Samoa na kuwauliza wataalamu 26 tu kuhusu DBI ya nchi hiyo: Utasema hiyo ni tafiti sahihi na hicho nacho ni kikokotoo sahihi kweli ???

Tafiti ya BDI ni Theoretical na siyo Empirical kama kutafuta GDP na PPP, utasema hii ni tafiti ya kiuchumi kweli ???
Kuna utofauti gani kwenye tafiti za DBI na zile za Social Sciences kama zile zinazodai "Human Rights fosters Economic Development" ???

Hebu mkuu tusaidiane kwenye hili.....

 

[MALCOM LUMUMBA]

Mkuu kukujibu ni kwamba Fiat Currency ina faida kwa USA sababu iliyofanya uwepo wa FIAT Currency ni kutotosha kwa Madini ya dhahabu na fedha katika mahitaji ya Currency

Mkuu kumbe wewe ni MASAMILA !!!!

 

[Masamila]

Mkuu kumbe wewe ni MASAMILA !!!!

Yap mkubwa

Nitarejea kwenye ID yangu ,naogopa kuna post za kipinzani nili"post" humu sasa nataka nisahaulike kidogo halafu nitarejeaga maana sijui lini wanaweza kutuanzishia kama watapekua pekua humu JF

 

[BAK]

Uko vizuri sana Mkuu. Huawei ile kampuni ya China ambayo ilikuwa inatamba duniani kwamba ni tishio kubwa kwa Apple na makampuni mengine ya Technology dunia sasa hivi iko chaliiii! baada ya Trump kuzuia wizi wao wa technology na pia kuwapiga marufuku kusoma USA na hata wengine visa zao kufutwa na kutakiwa kuondoka haraka sana.
Anguko la Marekani linaweza kutokea lakini si kesho wala kesho kutwa.
Baadaye mwaka huu kama COVID19 itathibitiwa na kuwa kagonjwa kadogo au kupotea kabisa duniani shuhudia uchumi wa Marekani utakavyopaa kwa at least 8% kwa mwaka ambayo kwa USA ni kubwa sana na itawafanya wengi waingie katika lile kundi maarufu la MAMILIONEA especially kama hakutakuwa na disaster nyingine duniani.

Huawei turns to pig farming as smartphone sales fall

Huawei turns to pig farming as smartphone sales fall​

By Justin Harper
Business reporter, BBC News

Published19 February
Share

IMAGE COPYRIGHTGETTY IMAGES
Huawei is turning to technology for pig farmers as it deals with tough sanctions on its smartphones.
The Chinese telecoms giant was stopped from accessing vital components after the Trump administration labelled it a threat to US national security.
In response to struggling smartphone sales, Huawei is looking at other sources of revenue for its technology.
Along with Artificial Intelligence (AI) tech for pig farmers, Huawei is also working with the coal mining industry.

Huu mjadala kuhusu "weakened America" sanjari na mijadala mingine inayofanana na huu haijaanza leo. Wamarekani na wasomi/wanazuoni mashuhuri wakiwemo kina Samuel Huntington walikuwa wakijadili kuhusu "kudhoofika kwa Marekani" tangu miaka ya 50. Kama mitandao ya kijamii ingekuwepo kuanzia kipindi hicho ikiwemo JamiiForums yetu, ni dhahiri nasi tungekuwa tumekwisha jadili humu muda mrefu sana kuhusiana na suala hili.


Mjadala huu umekuwa sasa kama utamaduni wa mara kwa mara wa Wamarekani. Tangu kipindi cha uimara wa Umoja wa Kisovieti (USSR) uliochochea mapinduzi makubwa ya kiyasayansi zikiwemo operesheni mbalimbali za anga za mbali, kuwepo kwa migogoro mbalimbali ukiwemo ule wa mafuta wa mwaka 73 pamoja na kuwepo kwa vita mbalimbali zilizoihusisha Marekani tangu miaka ya 50, mjadala huu na mingine inayofanana na huu imekuwa ikishamiri.

Katika kipindi chote hicho, wanazuoni walikuwa wakiutazama mwenendo wa utawala wa Marekani katika masuala mbalimbali ya kidunia na kuilinganisha nchi hiyo na mataifa mengine duniani. Leo hii tunaizungumzia China kama mpinzani mkuu wa Marekani katika masuala mbalimbali ya kidunia. Lakini, kipindi cha miaka ya 50 mpaka miaka ya 70 mwishoni, Umoja wa Kisovieti ama USSR ndiyo nchi iliyokuwa akitazamwa kama mpinzani mkuu atakaye pelekea "anguko la Marekani" kwa miaka kadhaa ijayo.

Baada ya USSR kuanza kudhoofika miaka ya 80, wasomi wetu haohao wakahamia kwa Mjapani na kumtaja kama mpinzani mkuu wa Marekani katika masuala mbalimbali hasa kiuchumi. Wasomi, kina Stanley Hoffmann na wengineo walikuwa miongoni mwa wapinzani wakubwa sana wa sera za Marekani miaka ya 80 na walituambia kuhusu habari hiihii ya "anguko la Marekani" huku wakilitumia anguko la USSR kama mfano. Mwaka 1990 na kuendelea, Japan ikaangukia katika mgogoro wa kiuchumi, habari ya Japan ikaishia hapo.

Hivi sasa, wasomi wetu wamehamia kwa Mchina. China sasa inatajwa kama mpinzani mkuu wa Marekani katika muktadha uleule wa kina Japan pamoja na USSR.

Ninachotaka kusema ni kuwa, mjadala huu si jambo geni. Umekuwa ni mjadala wa kujirudia kila baada ya wakati fulani. Wasomi wa miaka ya 50 waliujadili, wasomi wa miaka ya 70-80 wakauendeleza mjadala. Na hivi sasa, wasomi wa miaka hii nao wanajadili kitu kilekile na huenda mjadala ukaendelezwa na wasomi wa miongo kadhaa ijayo na kuendelea. Who knows! Lakini kama ni suala la "weakened America to emerge victorious against communist China" ama kinyume na hapo, muda utatupatia majibu sahihi. Tofauti na hapo, acha tuendelee tu kuuendeleza mjadala.

Asante!

 

[FRANC THE GREAT]

Kama umemfuatilia Samuel P. Huntington vizuri kuna ugumu gani kuniwekea rejea ???
Kuhusu PPP umeongea mambo mengi sana lakini bado maswali yangu hayapatiwa majibu ambayo niliuliza awali.

Nimekwisha weka reference kuhusiana na suala la Samuel Huntington. Haujaiona?

The Big Mac Index ni kipimo kinachotumika katika kulinganisha thamani ya sarafu ya nchi moja dhidi ya zingine kwa kutumia bidhaa ya aina moja pekee ambayo ni Big Mac. Hiyo Big Mac kama bado hujapata kuifahamu ni chakula kinachofahamika kama 'hamburger' ambacho huuzwa katika nchi mbalimbali duniani kupitia migahawa maarafu ya McDonald's.

Kipimo kinahusika katika kuonesha utofauti wa nguvu ya sarafu ya nchi moja dhidi ya nchi nyingine pale sarafu hizo zinapotumika kufanya manunuzi ya hamburger hizo katika nchi zao. Kwa mfano; gharama ya Big Mac moja nchini Marekani ni dola za Kimarekani zipatazo 5. Lakini, katika wakati huohuo gharama ya Big Mac moja nchini Tanzania ni dola 2. Maana yake ni kuwa, sarafu ya Tanzania inaweza kutumika kufanya manunuzi ya hamburger nyingi zaidi za Big Mac kuliko ambavyo sarafu ya Marekani ikitumika katika manunuzi ya bidhaa hiyo nchini Marekani.

Katika mfano huo, unaweza kukokotoa Purchasing Power Parity kama ifuatavyo:

Kanuni ya PPP inasema; Purchasing Power Parity = Cost of good in currency 1 / Cost of the same good in currency 2

Maana yake ni kuwa, ili upate PPP ya nchi moja ukilinganisha na nyingine, yakupasa kuchukuwa bei ya kiasi cha bidhaa (basket of goods) katika nchi husika yenye sarafu yake mahususi, kisha kuigawa (divide) kwa bei ya kiasi cha bidhaa hizohizo katika nchi nyingine yenye sarafu yake mahususi.

Kwa kuzingatia mfano wa Big Mac nilioutoa, yakupasa kuanza kwa kutafuta exchange rate ya nchi hizo mbili.

Exchage rate: dola 1 ya Kimarekani = shilingi 2300 za Kitanzania.

Umepewa bei ya baga moja ya Big Mac ukiwa 'Bongo' in terms of USD ambayo ni dola 2 sawa na shilingi 4600 za Kitanzania. Nafikiri unafahamu jinsi ambavyo hiyo 4600 imepatikana!

Bei ya Big Mac moja nchini Marekani in terms of USD umekwisha pewa pia ambayo ni dola 5.

Mpaka hapo una 'costs' za aina tatu (3) tofauti:
1) Cost of Big Mac in US in US Dollars ambayo ni 5.
2) Cost of Big Mac in Tanzania in US Dollars ambayo ni 2.
3) Cost of Big Mac in Tanzania in Tanzanian Shillings ambayo ni 4600.

Kumbuka kanuni ya PPP kuwa; Purchasing Power Parity = Cost of good in currency 1 / Cost of the same good in currency 2

Hivyo basi, ili kupata PPP ya Tanzania ukilinganisha na Marekani, yakupasa kuchukua cost aina ya 3 kisha kuigawa kwa cost aina ya 1.

Yaani, Purchasing Power Parity = Shilingi 4600 / Dola 5 = 920

Therefore, Purchasing Power Parity = Shilingi 920 kwa Dola 1.

Mpaka hapa nafikiri nimejibu swali lako kuhusu jinsi ya kukokotoa PPP, tena kwa urahisi kabisa.

Sasa, nilisema kuwa Nigeria imezizidi PPP nchi za Scandinavia. Pia, nilisema kuwa Iraq imezizidi PPP nchi zaidi ya kumi (10) za bara la Ulaya. Hapa namaanisha GDP katika kipimo cha Purchasing Power Parity.

Tafuta data za hivi karibuni kutoka IMF ama World Bank kuhusiana na GDP (PPP) za mataifa yote duniani kisha fanya ulinganisho kwa kuzingatia kile nilichokisema. Katika hiyo link uliyoiweka hapa, kuna orodha ya nchi 15 pekee. Kuna nchi kama Indonesia humo ambayo imeorodhesha juu ya mataifa ambayo ni more developed kama Uingereza, Ufaransa, Italia, Spain, South Korea n.k.

Ukitafuta orodha kamili, utakutana na Nigeria ikiwazidi kina Norway, Denmark, Finland, Sweden n.k. Pia utakutana na Iraq nayo ikizizidi nchi zaidi ya kumi (10) za bara la Ulaya zikiwemo Norway, Denmark, Ureno, Ugiriki n.k.

Nami naweka link:

World Bank Open Data

Free and open access to global development data

data.worldbank.org

Pia, umesema kwamba Nigeria haimo kwenye The Big Mac Index ya mwaka 2020. Kumbuka kuwa BMI huzingatia mauzo ya hamburger ya Big Mac katika mataifa mbalimbali. Lakini, kuna nchi ambazo bidhaa hii haipatikani kabisa. Hapa ndipo mapungufu ya hicho kipimo yanapoanza kujionesha. Pia, kuna nchi ambazo bidhaa hii imetengenezwa kuendana na soko la nchi husika lakini in theory, bidhaa hiyo inatambulika kuwa ni sawa (the same) dunia nzima. Inconsistency!

Swali jingine; je, ni sahihi kutegemea kikokotoo cha nominal GDP?

Swali la namna hii nimekwisha kulijibu katika post yangu iliyopita kama ulinisoma kwa makini. Nilisema, kila kipimo huwa na nguvu pale kinapotumika kwa kuzingatia masuala kadhaa ama vipengele fulani pekee au maalumu. Hakuna kipimo cha uchumi ambacho kinaweza ku-stand alone kama kipimo bora cha uchumi katika masuala ama vipengele vyote bila kuzingatia vipimo vingine.

Pia, nilisema kuwa hivi sasa kuna mjadala mkubwa kuhusiana na hivi vipimo. Hapo baadaye, kuna uwezekano mkubwa sana wa baadhi ya vipimo vinavyotumika hivi sasa kuwekwa kando baada ya vipimo vipya kuvumbuliwa. Umezungumzia The Ease of Doing Business Index kwamba ni theoretical. In fact, Purchasing Power Parity pia ni theoretical.

Pia, si kweli kwamba Ease of Doing Business Index haina methodology. Tembelea link ifuatayo (World Bank), utakutana na maelekezo [zikiwemo PDF] kuhusiana na methodologies mbalimbali.
Link: Methodology for Doing Business

Jambo la mwisho; nilisema kwamba Marekani inafanya vizuri zaidi kiuchumi katika kipimo cha GDP (PPP) per capita ukilinganisha na China. Nadhani umeninukuu tofauti. Ni vyema ukarejea katika hiyo post, nimezungumzia GDP per capita (PPP) ama GDP (PPP) per capita.
Takwimu zipo katika link ifuatayo (World Bank):

World Bank Open Data

Free and open access to global development data

data.worldbank.org

Mpaka kufikia hapa, nafikiri nitakuwa nimeyajibu maswali yote ambayo hayakujibiwa hapo awali. Asante!

 

[MALCOM LUMUMBA]

Nimekwisha weka reference kuhusiana na suala la Samuel Huntington. Haujaiona?

Mkuu kwahiyo hiyo rejea ya Samuel P.Huntington iliyoko Foreign Policy ndiyo imetosha kuthibitisha kwamba alizungumzia hii mijadala tokea miaka ya 50's ???

Swali jingine; je, ni sahihi kutegemea kikokotoo cha nominal GDP?
Swali la namna hii nimekwisha kulijibu katika post yangu iliyopita kama ulinisoma kwa makini. Nilisema, kila kipimo huwa na nguvu pale kinapotumika kwa kuzingatia masuala kadhaa ama vipengele fulani pekee au maalumu. Hakuna kipimo cha uchumi ambacho kinaweza ku-stand alone kama kipimo bora cha uchumi katika masuala ama vipengele vyote bila kuzingatia vipimo vingine.

Nashukuru sana umejibu vizuri kuhusu PPP, lakini bado nadhani kupima GDP in terms of PPP kama wanavyofanya IMF ndiyo njia sahihi ya kupata sura nzima ya uchumi wa nchi. Kipimo cha GDP hakitoi picha kamili ya uchumi wa nchi kwasababu hakizingatii bidhaa ambazo hazijauzwa kwenye soko la dunia (Untraded Goods) lakini zinauzwa ndani ya nchi husika. Pia ili tupime GDP vizuri ni lazima tuangalie hizo bidhaa zinazouzwa kwenye soko la dunia zimefanyaje huko, hivyo inategemea sana bei za kimasoko (Market Rates).

Naposema UNTRADED GOODS naangalia zile huduma muhimu kama usafirishaji, mama ntilie, ufundi nywele na chakula (Kama ulivyosema Big Mac Burger) ambazo haziuzwi nje ya nchi au kuingizwa ndani ya nchi, lakini zina sehemu kubwa sana kwenye uchumi wa nchi. Hivyo PPP ni sahihi zaidi kwasababu imeyazingatia hadi haya tena kwa kutumia sarafu za ndani ya nchi husika. Kiufupi IMF wanazingatia GDP lakini wanaipima katika PPP ili kuweza kupata picha sahihi ya uchumi. Wanaangalia kila nchi inafanyaje kwenye manunuzi kwa sarafu yake.

Marekani ndiyo taifa lenye GDP kubwa duniani na sarafu yake (The Dollar) inafanya vizuri sana kwenye soko la dunia. Ili Uchina afike Marekani alipo ni lazima sarafu yake iweze kufanya vizuri kimataifa na kuwa na nguvu kama sarafu ya Marekani, katika sura hii PPP haisaidii kabisa na Marekani yuko mbele zaidi ya Uchina. Lakini sasa katika viwangi vya maisha (standard of living) kati ya Uchina na Marekani PPP inasaidia kwasababu inaipima kila sarafu yake ikizingatia nguvu ya manunuzi huku ikifanya uwiano kati ya sarafu ya Uchina na Marekani: Hapa ndipo likaja suala la The Big Mac Theory measuring The Basket of Goods.

Tukipima hivi Uchina yuko mbele sana ya Marekani kwasababu Uchina atanunua bidhaa nyingi zenye ubora uleule tena kwa wingi kuliko taifa la Marekani. Sasa hapa tunazingatia faida atazozipata Uchina kisiasa ili kushindana na Marekani hasahasa kwenye sekta ya ulinzi japo wachumi wengi huwa hawataki kulihesabu hili. Kama bidhaa ni za bei ndogo uchina hivyo inamaanisha hata uzalishaji wake kiviwanda utakuwa ni wa gharama za chini lakini mkubwa kuliko Marekani. (This is an undeniable fact)

Lakini sasa tukizingatia siasa za kimataifa (Geopolitical Landscape) nchi yenye GDP kubwa ndiyo huwa inakuwa mbele: Marekani yuko mbele kuliko Uchina kwasababu sarafu yake iko juu na hivyo katika uwanja wa siasa za dunia Marekani atatoa fedha chache zenye thamani kubwa kuliko Uchina. Uchina atahitaji kutoa sarafu nyingi ili aweze kushindana na Marekani kwasababu nguvu yake iko ndani ya nchi tu na siyo nje. Hivyo GDP inasaidia kuonyesha Geopolitical Primacy ambayo nchi inayo.

Nikakutolea mfano wa Marekani na Uingereza mnamo karne za 19 na 20, ambapo Marekani alikuwa na PPP kubwa lakini Uingereza alikuwa na GDP kubwa. Marekani alipata faida sana kwasababu alikuwa na nguvu kubwa ya manunuzi kuliko Muingereza tena kwa bei ya chini, lakini fedha yake (The Dollar) ilikuwa haina thamani ukiipeleka kwenye kufanya manunuzi nje ya nchi yake. Hii ndiyo tofauti iliyopo leo baina ya Uchina na Marekani, Uchina ananunua sana kuliko Marekani tena kwa bei ya chini. (This is an undeniable fact)

Pia, nilisema kuwa hivi sasa kuna mjadala mkubwa kuhusiana na hivi vipimo. Hapo baadaye, kuna uwezekano mkubwa sana wa baadhi ya vipimo vinavyotumika hivi sasa kuwekwa kando baada ya vipimo vipya kuvumbuliwa. Umezungumzia The Ease of Doing Business Index kwamba ni theoretical. In fact, Purchasing Power Parity pia ni theoretical.

Pia, si kweli kwamba Ease of Doing Business Index haina methodology. Tembelea link ifuatayo (World Bank), utakutana na maelekezo [zikiwemo PDF] kuhusiana na methodologies mbalimbali.
Link: Methodology for Doing Business

Jambo la mwisho; nilisema kwamba Marekani inafanya vizuri zaidi kiuchumi katika kipimo cha GDP (PPP) per capita ukilinganisha na China. Nadhani umeninukuu tofauti. Ni vyema ukarejea katika hiyo post, nimezungumzia GDP per capita (PPP) ama GDP (PPP) per capita.
Takwimu zipo katika link ifuatayo (World Bank):

World Bank Open Data

Free and open access to global development data

data.worldbank.org

Bwana mkubwa, mimi natumai umefanya tafiti (Research), kuhusu DBI kuna walakini mkubwa na nimesoma link zote ulizoniwekea nilichokiona sehemu zote ni Questionnaire na baadhi ya makadirio. Kiufupi haina methodology inayoeleweka kwasababu haiko sawia (Not Uniform) kwa nchi zote za dunia. Kuna nchi wamefanya tafiti kwa kuwahoji watawala na wanazuoni tu lakini nchi kama Marekani wameangalia zaidi ya watawala na wanazuoni: Wamewahoji hadi wafanya biashara wadogo wadogo. Huwezi kusema hii ni Appropriate Research Methodology !!!!! Never

Pili, tuseme DBI ina methodology basi mimi napinga kwa kusema hatuwezi kuitegemea kwasababu iko Theoretical na siyo Empirical kama ambavyo tunapima data za GDP na PPP bila kuwa na nadharia fulani kichwani.

 

[FRANC THE GREAT]

Mkuu kwahiyo hiyo rejea ya Samuel P.Huntington iliyoko Foreign Policy ndiyo imetosha kuthibitisha kwamba alizungumzia hii mijadala tokea miaka ya 50's ???

Hiyo rejea inatosha kabisa kuthibitisha hilo, kama umelisoma hilo chapisho kwa ukamilifu wake. Isitoshe, hilo chapisho linatumika sana na wanazuoni wa hivi sasa pamoja na mashirika mbalimbali ya utafiti kama rejea kuhusiana na masuala la "declinism".

Pia, wapo wanazuoni wengine wanaothibitisha kuwa mijadala hii ilikwisha zungumziwa tangu miaka ya 50. Mmojawapo ni Joseph S. Nye ambaye tumekwisha mzungumzia hapa. Ushahidi wa huyu pia unatosha kabisa kuthibitisha hilo na kutufungia huu mjadala.

Joseph Nye kupitia shirika la utafiti (think tank) la masuala ya kimataifa Atlantic Council anasema kuwa, namnukuu;

Americans have a long history of incorrectly estimating their power. In the 1950's and 1960's, after Sputnik, many thought that the Soviets might get the better of America; in the 1980's, it was the Japanese.

Mwisho wa kunukuu.

Tembelea link ifuatayo utakutana na hilo andiko la Joseph Nye kwa ukamilifu wake:

The Decline and Fall of America’s Decline and Fall

The United States is going through difficult times. Its post-2008 recovery has slowed, and some observers fear that Europe’s financial problems could tip

www.atlanticcouncil.org

Tukipima hivi Uchina yuko mbele sana ya Marekani kwasababu Uchina atanunua bidhaa nyingi zenye ubora uleule tena kwa wingi kuliko taifa la Marekani. Sasa hapa tunazingatia faida atazozipata Uchina kisiasa ili kushindana na Marekani hasahasa kwenye sekta ya ulinzi japo wachumi wengi huwa hawataki kulihesabu hili. Kama bidhaa ni za bei ndogo uchina hivyo inamaanisha hata uzalishaji wake kiviwanda utakuwa ni wa gharama za chini lakini mkubwa kuliko Marekani. (This is an undeniable fact)

Hicho ulichokisema sio fact bali ni assumption. Ume-assume kuhusu ubora kwamba China itanunua bidhaa nyingi zenye ubora uleule. That's not the case! Na hapa ndipo kipimo cha PPP kinapoleta mashaka.

China inaweza kuzalisha 10 passenger planes kupitia viwanda vyake vya ndani, lakini kwa gharama hiyohiyo iliyotumika na China, Marekani inaweza isizalishe zaidi ya ndege 3. Unaweza kusema kuwa uzalishaji wa China ni wa gharama nafuu lakini, unataka kuniambia kuwa ndege za Kichina zinazozalishwa China zitakuwa na ubora uleule uliopo katika ndege za Kimarekani zinazozalishwa nchini Marekani? Au umefanya tu assumption?

Hata katika hizo huduma muhimu unazosema: usafirishaji, migahawa ya chakula, salon/barbershop n.k. pia kuna suala la quality of services. Gharama za usafiri zinaweza kuwa nafuu katika nchi moja kuliko nchi nyingine katika vyombo vya usafiri na umbali unaofanana. Lakini, tukija katika suala la utofauti katika ubora wa huduma kwa uhalisia wake kati ya nchi mbalimbali, ni kitu ambacho PPP haikizingatii.

Gharama ya kumlipa kinyozi katika jiji kubwa la China mfano Shanghai yaweza kuwa nafuu zaidi kuliko katika jiji la New York tuki-assume kuwa ubora ni uleule. Lakini, kumbuka kuwa hali ya kimaisha na vipato vya watu katika hayo majiji mawili ni tofauti. Gharama za maisha katika jiji la New York ni kubwa lakini vipato vya wakazi (New Yorkers) pia ni vikubwa zaidi ukilinganisha na Shanghai hivyo wanaweza kuyamudu maisha. Wachina nao watakapofikia katika kiwango cha kipato kinachoshabihiana na kile cha Wamarekani, gharama za maisha na zile za uzalishaji automatically zitapanda.

Unasema kuwa katika Ease of Doing Business Index kuna walakini mkubwa. Lakini, vipi kuhusu PPP hususani Big Mac Index?

Big Mac Index vilevile ina walakini mkubwa.
Assumption namba moja, bidhaa ya Big Mac ni sawa (the same) na yenye ubora uleule dunia nzima. In reality, that's not the case! Katika mataifa mengi, Big Mac zimetengenezwa kuendana na soko la sehemu husika. Kuna nchi ambazo Big Mac zimepatiwa ingredients tofauti na nchi zingine ili kuendana na mahitaji ya wateja katika soko hilo.

Kuna nchi ambazo raia wake kuingia tu katika mgahawa wa McDonald's ni shughuli pevu kifedha achilia mbali nchi ambazo bidhaa hii haipo kabisa. Watu wanamalizia shida zao mitaani, kwa mama lishe n.k. Wengine hata hizo hamburger hawazijui achilia mbali kuzionja ama kuzila. Maana yake ni kuwa, demand ya hicho chakula katika hizo nchi ni ndogo sana hivyo kipimo hicho hakiwezi kusimama na kukubalika kiviwango dunia nzima.

 

[MALCOM LUMUMBA]

Hiyo rejea inatosha kabisa kuthibitisha hilo, kama umelisoma hilo chapisho kwa ukamilifu wake. Isitoshe, hilo chapisho linatumika sana na wanazuoni wa hivi sasa pamoja na mashirika mbalimbali ya utafiti kama rejea kuhusiana na masuala la "declinism".

Pia, wapo wanazuoni wengine wanaothibitisha kuwa mijadala hii ilikwisha zungumziwa tangu miaka ya 50. Mmojawapo ni Joseph S. Nye ambaye tumekwisha mzungumzia hapa. Ushahidi wa huyu pia unatosha kabisa kuthibitisha hilo na kutufungia huu mjadala.

Joseph Nye kupitia shirika la utafiti (think tank) la masuala ya kimataifa Atlantic Council anasema kuwa, namnukuu;

Americans have a long history of incorrectly estimating their power. In the 1950's and 1960's, after Sputnik, many thought that the Soviets might get the better of America; in the 1980's, it was the Japanese.

Tumehama kwa Samuel Huntington tumeenda kwa Joseph Nye, well and good!
Ina maana maandiko ya Samuel Huntington kuhusu Declinism unalo moja tu.

Hicho ulichokisema sio fact bali ni assumption. Ume-assume kuhusu ubora kwamba China itanunua bidhaa nyingi zenye ubora uleule. That's not the case! Na hapa ndipo kipimo cha PPP kinapoleta mashaka.

China inaweza kuzalisha 10 passenger planes kupitia viwanda vyake vya ndani, lakini kwa gharama hiyohiyo iliyotumika na China, Marekani inaweza isizalishe zaidi ya ndege 3. Unaweza kusema kuwa uzalishaji wa China ni wa gharama nafuu lakini, unataka kuniambia kuwa ndege za Kichina zinazozalishwa China zitakuwa na ubora uleule uliopo katika ndege za Kimarekani zinazozalishwa nchini Marekani? Au umefanya tu assumption?

Umeona sasa shida yako ilipo mkuu !!! Unabisha kwasababu umetaka tu kubisha: Siyo lazima kila kinachozalishwa uchina kiwe ni mali ya Uchina. Kiuchumi kuna suala zima la The Comparative Advantage kama ambavyo alisema David Ricardo. Viwanda vingi vikubwa ambavyo viko Uchina ni vya kutoka Ulaya na Marekani: Lengo kubwa ya kuvipeleka kule ni Corporate Inversion, Tax Avoidance and Cheap Labor. Jawabu ni NDIYO, bidhaa ambazo zinazalishwa Uchina kwa bei ndogo zina ubora sawa na zile za Marekani.

Ambacho unanishangaza ni kwamba The Big Mac Index inachofanya inatoa Benchmark kulinganisha bidhaa na huduma zenye viwango na ubora sawa baina ya nchi mbili zikinunuliwa katika sarafu za nchi zao. Unapotaka kusema kwamba bidhaa hazina ubora sawa wakati kanuni ya The Big Mac Theory inasema tunalinganisha bidhaa zenye ubora sawa unataka nikueleweje mkuu ???

Gideon Rachman wa The Economist kwenye andiko lake maarafu kabisa la Easternization: Asia's Rise and Decline From Obama to Trump and Beyond. Ameandika utafiti wa baadhi ya bidhaa kama Apple Iphone na kuangalia gharama za ubora wa bidhaa kama ingezalishwa Uchina na Marekani: Unajua amegundua nini ??? BIDHAA ZENYE UBORA ULEULE NCHINI UCHINA ZINA GHARAMA NDOGO KULIKO MAREKANI.

Zaidi ya hayo, mfano wako kuhusu ndege za kiraia (Civilian Aircrafts) umenishangaza zaidi kwa maana mimi sikuongelea ndege za raia bali The Military Industry. Kiuhalisia ndege za raia (Civilian Aircrafts) zinazotumika nchini Uchina ni zile za Marekani kama Boeing na hii ndiyo maana nzima ya The Comparative Advantage Theory. Kukupasha zaidi, gharama za uzalishaji wa Boeing Max 737 kule Zhoushan ni ndogo kuliko Chicago: Huu ndiyo uhalisia nadhani kwenye hili suala zima mjadala utaisha sasa.

Hata katika hizo huduma muhimu unazosema: usafirishaji, migahawa ya chakula, salon/barbershop n.k. pia kuna suala la quality of services. Gharama za usafiri zinaweza kuwa nafuu katika nchi moja kuliko nchi nyingine katika vyombo vya usafiri na umbali unaofanana. Lakini, tukija katika suala la utofauti katika ubora wa huduma kwa uhalisia wake kati ya nchi mbalimbali, ni kitu ambacho PPP haikizingatii.

Mkuu kwani kikokotoo cha GDP kinazingatia ubora wa huduma (Quality of Services ) ???
Hebu tusaidiane kueleweshana maana naona hapa umeongea kitu kipya kabisa.

Unasema kuwa katika Ease of Doing Business Index kuna walakini mkubwa. Lakini, vipi kuhusu PPP hususani Big Mac Index?

Ndiyo ina walakini mkubwa kwasababu ni THEORETICAL na Siyo EMPIRICAL kama PPP na GDP.
Uliponiwekea zile rejea sikuona Uniform Methodology kama ambavyo zipo kwenye PPP na GDP.
Zaidi ulichoniletea hapa ni Research Tools like Questionnaires ambazo hazijathibitisha chochote.

Big Mac Index vilevile ina walakini mkubwa.
Assumption namba moja, bidhaa ya Big Mac ni sawa (the same) na yenye ubora uleule dunia nzima. In reality, that's not the case! Katika mataifa mengi, Big Mac zimetengenezwa kuendana na soko la sehemu husika. Kuna nchi ambazo Big Mac zimepatiwa ingredients tofauti na nchi zingine ili kuendana na mahitaji ya wateja katika soko hilo.

Now I see the problem and root of our disagreement, Big Mac Index is not all about McDonalds Hamburgers.
Big Macs are used as a Benchmark for a comparisson of goods and services between two countries. Hapa ili hii kanuni ifanye kazi ni lazima tuweke bidhaa na huduma zenye viwango sawa.

Lakini pia nashangaa sana unapong'ang'ania suala zima la ubora wa bidhaa bila kuzingatia uhalisia wa kinachoendelea baina ya Marekani na Uchina. Iko hivi bwana mkubwa, Uchina na Marekani wana kitu kinachoitwa The BILLATERAL INVESTMENT AGREEMENT (BIT) ambazo ziko chini ya Framework ya Umoja wa Mataifa. Katika sheria za kimataifa hizi BIT's huwa zinataka katika uwekezaji lazima bidhaa baina ya hizi nchi mbili ziwe na viwango na ubora fulani ambao utanufaisha raia wa nchi zote mbili. Hivyo huwezi kuniambia kwamba bidhaa za Kimarekani ambazo ziko nchini Uchina zina kiwango cha chini, hapa nakukutalia na ntakusihia fanya tafiti zaidi.

Pia kukupasha zaidi, chini ya mfumo wa WTO kuna kitu kinaitwa The WTO Rules ambazo zinazungumzia sana kuhusiana na viwango na ubora wa bidhaa. Uhalisia uko tofauti kabisa na ukisemacho wewe, kwamba ubora wa bidhaa hauwezi kuwa sawa hata baina ya nchi za ulimwengu wa kwanza kama Uingereza na Ujerumani. Wanachofanya WTO ni kutengeneza The Minimum Standards for goods and services: Hivyo nchi inayozalisha kwa kufuata viwango fulani hata kama havitakuwa sawa na vile vya ulimwengu wa kwanza basi itauza hivyo vitu.

Uchina na Marekani ni wanachama wa WTO na hizo sheria ndizo wanazitumia kwenye kuendesha biashara na uwekezaji baina ya nchi zao. Kihistoria ili uweze kuuza bidhaa na huduma kwenye nchi za nje hasa mataifa ya Magharibi ni lazima uwe kwenye BIT, MIT na uwe mdau wa WTO Rules. Sasa unaposema kuhusu ubora wa bidhaa baina ya Marekani na Uchina nashindwa kukuelewa kabisa, labda unieleweshe zaidi.

Kuna nchi ambazo raia wake kuingia tu katika mgahawa wa McDonald's ni shughuli pevu kifedha achilia mbali nchi ambazo bidhaa hii haipo kabisa. Watu wanamalizia shida zao mitaani, kwa mama lishe n.k. Wengine hata hizo hamburger hawazijui achilia mbali kuzionja ama kuzila. Maana yake ni kuwa, demand ya hicho chakula katika hizo nchi ni ndogo sana hivyo kipimo hicho hakiwezi kusimama na kukubalika kiviwango dunia nzima.

Ungetaka kupitia vizuri The Big Mac Theory na kuilewa nadhani tusingefika huku mkuu: Kama nilivyosema hapo juu Bic Macs are only used as a Benchmark for comparissons of goods and services between two countries purchased in their respective currencies. Hivyo watu kutokula Burgers za Big Mac haimaanishi kwamba hichi kipimo kina walakini kwasababu hapa tunapima nchi mbili tu (Marekani na Uchina).

 

[FRANC THE GREAT]

Tumehama kwa Samuel Huntington tumeenda kwa Joseph Nye, well and good!
Ina maana maandiko ya Samuel Huntington kuhusu Declinism unalo moja tu.

Shida yako kubwa ilikuwa ni kupata uthibitisho kuhusu mjadala kujadiliwa miaka ya 50. Mjadala kuhusu Huntington umekwisha malizika maana kama ni suala la uthibitisho, tayari nimekwisha weka hapa, tena kutoka wa watu na vyanzo tofauti.

Nina imani kuwa utakuwa imelisoma hilo andiko la Joseph Nye kwa makini sana na kulielewa.

Tuendelee na mjadala!

Tunapozungumzia Big Mac Index tunazungumzia common standard inayotumiwa na The Economist ambayo ni Big Mac hamburger pekee, unachanganya mambo katika hili. Hapa tunazungumzia aina moja ya bidhaa inayofahamika (Big Mac). Hiyo common standard ndicho kitu ambacho mimi nimekikosoa kuwa kina walakini. Unapotumia common standard kama Big Mac hamburger inayotumiwa na The Economist ambayo haipatikani nje ya MacDonald's network duniani, pia demand yake ni ndogo katika baadhi ya maeneo kutokana na sababu mbalimbali huwezi kusema kuwa hicho kipimo hakina walakini.

Hata ukichukua common standard tofauti na Big Mac kitu ambacho wengine tofauti na The Ecomomist wamekwisha jaribu, bado vipimo vimekuwa na walakini. Australia iliwahi kuja na kipimo kinachoshabihiana na Big Mac Index kinachofahamika kama iPod Index kwa kuzingatia mauzo ya dunia nzima ya common product ambayo ni iPod, kipimo kikawa critisized vilevile kutokana na kushindwa kuzingatia masuala kadha wa kadha muhimu ukiwemo utofauti wa gharama za usafirishaji wa bidhaa husika kutoka mahali ambapo bidhaa hii imekuwa ikizalishwa.

Umeona sasa shida yako ilipo mkuu !!! Unabisha kwasababu umetaka tu kubisha: Siyo lazima kila kinachozalishwa uchina kiwe ni mali ya Uchina. Kiuchumi kuna suala zima la The Comparative Advantage kama ambavyo alisema David Ricardo. Viwanda vingi vikubwa ambavyo viko Uchina ni vya kutoka Ulaya na Marekani: Lengo kubwa ya kuvipeleka kule ni Corporate Inversion, Tax Avoidance and Cheap Labor. Jawabu ni NDIYO, bidhaa ambazo zinazalishwa Uchina kwa bei ndogo zina ubora sawa na zile za Marekani.

Hili suala la viwanda vya Wamarekani kufanya kazi nchini China na sababu zake limekwisha zungumziwa humu na wachangiaji wengine. Umeongelea military industry hapo awali which is the same kama ambavyo nami nimetumia angle hiyohiyo kuzungumzia civil aerospace industry ya China ukiilinganisha na ile ya Marekani. Ninajibu hoja kuendana na kile ambacho unakisema, kama mpaka hapo anaona kuna shida basi hiyo shida imeanzia kwako!

Mimi sizungumzii kuhusu bidhaa za Marekani zinazozalishwa nchini China bali nazungumzia comparison kati ya hizo nchi mbili katika industry moja specific kama ambavyo umeitaja military industry. Kwamba, military industry ya China unayoisema inaweza kuzalisha products kwa gharama nafuu ambazo ni zenye ubora unaolingana na zile zinazozalishwa nchini Marekani? Umefanya utafiti wa kiasi gani kuhusiana na suala hili la ubora katika sekta hii zaidi ya kufanya tu assumption?

Mkuu kwani kikokotoo cha GDP kinazingatia ubora wa huduma (Quality of Services ) ???
Hebu tusaidiane kueleweshana maana naona hapa umeongea kitu kipya kabisa.

Kupitia hilo swali lako, nami nakuuliza swali; kipimo cha PPP huwa kinatumika kwa sababu gani?

Tunapotumia PPP tunatumia bei za bidhaa mahususi ili kufanya ulinganisho (comparison) wa purchasing power za sarafu zinazotumika katika nchi mbalimbali. Tunapotaka kufanya ulinganisho, ili kutambua kuwa bidhaa husika zinazozalishwa katika mataifa hayo tofauti zina ubora na viwango vinavyofanana ili kusiwe na athari katika bei halisi ya bidhaa husika inatupasa kuzingatia masuala gani?

Now I see the problem and root of our disagreement, Big Mac Index is not all about McDonalds Hamburgers.
Big Macs are used as a Benchmark for a comparisson of goods and services between two countries. Hapa ili hii kanuni ifanye kazi ni lazima tuweke bidhaa na huduma zenye viwango sawa.

The Economist wametumia Big Mac hamburger kama common standard katika kipimo chao kwamba viwango vya product hiyo ni vilevile dunia nzima lakini jambo la kushangaza ukija katika uhalisia unakutana na kitu tofauti. Hiyo sio assumption?

Kuna nchi ambazo hiyo bidhaa haipo ama haipatikani kabisa, sehemu nyinginezo, bidhaa hiyo ipo katika baadhi ya migahawa huku sehemu zingine demand ikiwa ni ndogo sana hasa kutokana na gharama zake kuwa kubwa. Je, huo sio walakini katika kipimo?

Unasema kuwa Big Mac Index is not all about hamburgers, lakini unashindwa kufahamu kuwa hizo hamburgers ndiyo common standard inayotumika katika kulinganisha na kupima thamani ya sarafu za nchi mbalimbali kupitia kipimo hicho (Big Mac Index).

Ungetaka kupitia vizuri The Big Mac Theory na kuilewa nadhani tusingefika huku mkuu: Kama nilivyosema hapo juu Bic Macs are only used as a Benchmark for comparissons of goods and services between two countries purchased in their respective currencies. Hivyo watu kutokula Burgers za Big Mac haimaanishi kwamba hichi kipimo kina walakini kwasababu hapa tunapima nchi mbili tu (Marekani na Uchina).

Hapa mwishoni unasema kuwa hapa tunazipima nchi mbili tu [Marekani na China] kwa kutumia Big Mac Index lakini mimi nilipozipima nchi hizohizo mbili kwa kutumia Ease of Doing Business Index ukaishia kupinga kuwa kipimo hakiko empirical na kwamba PPP ndio iliyo empirical. Hivi una ufahamu wa kiasi gani kuhusiana na empirical researches? Tuanzie hapa kwanza! Ni vyema kuzifahamu kwanza jinsi empirical researches zilivyo kabla ya kupinga kuhusu kipimo hiko kwamba sio empirical.

Asante!

 

[MALCOM LUMUMBA]

Shida yako kubwa ilikuwa ni kupata uthibitisho kuhusu mjadala kujadiliwa miaka ya 50. Mjadala kuhusu Huntington umekwisha malizika maana kama ni suala la uthibitisho, tayari nimekwisha weka hapa, tena kutoka wa watu na vyanzo tofauti.

Nina imani kuwa utakuwa imelisoma hilo andiko la Joseph Nye kwa makini sana na kulielewa.

Tuendelee na mjadala!

Tunapozungumzia Big Mac Index tunazungumzia common standard inayotumiwa na The Economist ambayo ni Big Mac hamburger pekee, unachanganya mambo katika hili. Hapa tunazungumzia aina moja ya bidhaa inayofahamika (Big Mac). Hiyo common standard ndicho kitu ambacho mimi nimekikosoa kuwa kina walakini. Unapotumia common standard kama Big Mac hamburger inayotumiwa na The Economist ambayo haipatikani nje ya MacDonald's network duniani, pia demand yake ni ndogo katika baadhi ya maeneo kutokana na sababu mbalimbali huwezi kusema kuwa hicho kipimo hakina walakini.

Hata ukichukua common standard tofauti na Big Mac kitu ambacho wengine tofauti na The Ecomomist wamekwisha jaribu, bado vipimo vimekuwa na walakini. Australia iliwahi kuja na kipimo kinachoshabihiana na Big Mac Index kinachofahamika kama iPod Index kwa kuzingatia mauzo ya dunia nzima ya common product ambayo ni iPod, kipimo kikawa critisized vilevile kutokana na kushindwa kuzingatia masuala kadha wa kadha muhimu ukiwemo utofauti wa gharama za usafirishaji wa bidhaa husika kutoka mahali ambapo bidhaa hii imekuwa ikizalishwa.


Hili suala la viwanda vya Wamarekani kufanya kazi nchini China na sababu zake limekwisha zungumziwa humu na wachangiaji wengine. Umeongelea military industry hapo awali which is the same kama ambavyo nami nimetumia angle hiyohiyo kuzungumzia civil aerospace industry ya China ukiilinganisha na ile ya Marekani. Ninajibu hoja kuendana na kile ambacho unakisema, kama mpaka hapo anaona kuna shida basi hiyo shida imeanzia kwako!

Mimi sizungumzii kuhusu bidhaa za Marekani zinazozalishwa nchini China bali nazungumzia comparison kati ya hizo nchi mbili katika industry moja specific kama ambavyo umeitaja military industry. Kwamba, military industry ya China unayoisema inaweza kuzalisha products kwa gharama nafuu ambazo ni zenye ubora unaolingana na zile zinazozalishwa nchini Marekani? Umefanya utafiti wa kiasi gani kuhusiana na suala hili la ubora katika sekta hii zaidi ya kufanya tu assumption?


Kupitia hilo swali lako, nami nakuuliza swali; kipimo cha PPP huwa kinatumika kwa sababu gani?

Tunapotumia PPP tunatumia bei za bidhaa mahususi ili kufanya ulinganisho (comparison) wa purchasing power za sarafu zinazotumika katika nchi mbalimbali. Tunapotaka kufanya ulinganisho, ili kutambua kuwa bidhaa husika zinazozalishwa katika mataifa hayo tofauti zina ubora na viwango vinavyofanana ili kusiwe na athari katika bei halisi ya bidhaa husika inatupasa kuzingatia masuala gani?


The Economist wametumia Big Mac hamburger kama common standard katika kipimo chao kwamba viwango vya product hiyo ni vilevile dunia nzima lakini jambo la kushangaza ukija katika uhalisia unakutana na kitu tofauti. Hiyo sio assumption?

Kuna nchi ambazo hiyo bidhaa haipo ama haipatikani kabisa, sehemu nyinginezo, bidhaa hiyo ipo katika baadhi ya migahawa huku sehemu zingine demand ikiwa ni ndogo sana hasa kutokana na gharama zake kuwa kubwa. Je, huo sio walakini katika kipimo?

Unasema kuwa Big Mac Index is not all about hamburgers, lakini unashindwa kufahamu kuwa hizo hamburgers ndiyo common standard inayotumika katika kulinganisha na kupima thamani ya sarafu za nchi mbalimbali kupitia kipimo hicho (Big Mac Index).


Hapa mwishoni unasema kuwa hapa tunazipima nchi mbili tu [Marekani na China] kwa kutumia Big Mac Index lakini mimi nilipozipima nchi hizohizo mbili kwa kutumia Ease of Doing Business Index ukaishia kupinga kuwa kipimo hakiko empirical na kwamba PPP ndio iliyo empirical. Hivi una ufahamu wa kiasi gani kuhusiana na empirical researches? Tuanzie hapa kwanza! Ni vyema kuzifahamu kwanza jinsi empirical researches zilivyo kabla ya kupinga kuhusu kipimo hiko kwamba sio empirical.

Asante!

Aiseeeeeeeh.......

 

[Muuza viatu]

Aiseeeeeeeh.......

Wasomaji tunasubir mrejesho mkuu

 

[TUJITEGEMEE]

Marekani wameishachemsha tayari kushindana na China!!!

Baada ya gharama za mafuta kupanda anataka kuiondolea vikwazo vya ushuru China ili iwauzie baiskeli. US inataka "kutuabisha". Ha ha haaaa!
===
US President Joe Biden has instructed his administration to look into lifting some tariffs on imports from China in an effort to curb record-breaking inflation, Commerce Secretary Gina Raimondo said on Sunday in an interview with CNN.

“We are looking at it. In fact, the president has asked us on his team to analyze that. And so we are in the process of doing that for him and he will have to make that decision,” the official stated.

Raimondo said Washington plans to keep some of the tariffs on steel and aluminum to protect the domestic steel industry, but noted that “it may make sense” to lift tariffs on other products, like household goods and bicycles.
RT.com

 

[Muuza viatu]

Marekani wameishachemsha tayari kushindana na China!!!

Baada ya gharama za mafuta kupanda anataka kuiondolea vikwazo vya ushuru China ili iwauzie baiskeli. US inataka "kutuabisha". Ha ha haaaa!
===
US President Joe Biden has instructed his administration to look into lifting some tariffs on imports from China in an effort to curb record-breaking inflation, Commerce Secretary Gina Raimondo said on Sunday in an interview with CNN.

“We are looking at it. In fact, the president has asked us on his team to analyze that. And so we are in the process of doing that for him and he will have to make that decision,” the official stated.

Raimondo said Washington plans to keep some of the tariffs on steel and aluminum to protect the domestic steel industry, but noted that “it may make sense” to lift tariffs on other products, like household goods and bicycles.
RT.com

Balaaaa

 

[mbingunikwetu]

I recently watched a Symposium hosted by Central European University, and the speaker was none other than the eminent and legendary Joseph Nye from Harvard Kennedy School of Government.

The topic was about a new cloud in the horizon, a potential storm, The Rising China and the fate of the United States led global order established right after 1945.

He succinctly assured his audience that, despite all the setbacks and challenges cascading the Western World, America will eventually emerge as an undisputed master of the 21st Century ahead of China. But is it so ??? Well, let's delve into the corridors of history.

Professor Nye reiterated a position held dearly by typical American liberals, bureaucrats and technocrats: America is not only scientifically ahead of both China and Russia in terms of GDP, but also a custodian of all the cutting edge technologies that may prove disruptive, yet revolutionize mankind for centuries to come.

He boasted of America being ahead in critical research and nascent fields like Nano-technology, biotechnology, artificial intelligence, space technology and medicine.

To an avid student of foreign relations, the statement sounds too familiar thou often under-looked by the Mainstream Media: President Xi Jinping on his "Chinese Rejuvenation Speech" of 2012 assured the Communist Party of China that by 2035 China will be a technological behemoth.

And really they have put up an effort in this thou abysmally low compared to that of the United States. In 2018 China scholars published more scientific works than the United States.

We may blush and shun these statistic, but the figures are enough to startle an ordinary thinking individual. Technology is pivotal to the development of any civilized society, let alone sustains the very fabric of the socio-economic and socio-political tenets of the modern state. It was technology that made morphed the 300 Germanic states led by Prussia into what came to be known as Imperial Germany in 1871.

Notable historians state that up until 1914 Great Britain and USA had 6000 and 20000 notable engineers respectively, while Imperial Germany had 60000 notable engineers.

Making a dialectical progression reflecting what I wrote, critics would argue and even some castigate my analogy, that China is not Imperial Germany which was a more democratic and a civilized state in the heart of Europe.

Such intellectuals are in open denial against the harsh realities of history: The Soviet Union being an authoritarian nation it was, used technology to transform a once ramshackle plutocracy headed by the Romanovs into a nuclear state that manhandled The dreaded Nazi War Machine (The Wehrmacht) during the Second World War.

The worse part is, Prof Michio Kaku says that unlike China, 50% of American Intellectuals with PhD's are foreign born, most of whom bear Green-Cards. All this being said and done, one point remains: Technology pays off.

More often than not, intellectuals like John Mearsheimer would make normally exclaim that America's role of throwing global powers like Imperial Germany, Imperial Japan, The Former Soviet Union, Nazi Germany and The British Empire into the scrap heaps of history.

And like his counterpart Joseph Nye, he believes that America would sink deep into unprecedented levels to ensure that China is also thrown into a dustbin of history.

Kishore Mahbubani disagrees with such assurances, he reminds Americans like John Mearsheimer what George F Kenan (One of the architects of Containment Policy) used say: The success of America's foreign policy depends much on domestic spiritual vitality, reliable alliances and attitude of America as a superpower towards other nations. Kenan's advice is an anathema to Washington's political establishment, being precise to people like Donald J Trump.

From Kenan's assessment America would be sailing into uncharted waters when her domestic spiritual vitality has fallen short.

America has to be united both at home and across the Atlantic if she is to emerge victorious in The Great Game against China. Counter to this, some would argue that America has a very resilient political system which has taken lots of deadly blows in her 245 years life span.

The 19th and 20th Centuries American politics were haunted by an awful specter manifesting through surreal events like wars , slavery, assassinations and economic depressions.

Through it all even when divided at home as it is now, America dared to obliterate the Spanish-Empire in 1898 and made concessions to acquire Cuba and the Philippines from a declining European power.

But can a divided America, diminishing allies and vanishing economic prowess still stand tall against the Chinese Colossus ??? American Intellectuals like Graham T. Allison also from The Harvard Kennedy School of Government thinks not. Graham believes that China has already undertaken America in many aspects of development like infrastructure and international trade.

In his famous book Destined For War: Can America and China Escape the Thucydides Trap he makes a great point that, China may be ahead of America but that may not herald the fall of America.

Reinforcing this argument Kishore Mahbubani says China will win against America only in some aspects, because this world is multipolar and interdependent.

Graham goes further to advice both America and China to make painful adjustments in order to avert the possibility of a looming war.

One Graham's visible point from the entire book is The Thucydides Trap: A theory which explains that when a new nation arises to prominence threatening the status quo of the predominant power, then war is inevitable.

In our case the rising power is China and the predominant power is the USA, and the war will be The Third World War. Supporting his theory he gave historical example of this between Imperial Germany VS The British Empire, The Soviet Union Vs The United States, The British Empire Vs The United States, The Spanish Empire Vs England.

So to finish this piece, the late Prof Stephen Cohen said that a country's greatness is measured on how it responds to chaos within it's borders.

Things like outbreaks of disease, wars, natural disasters and economic shocks. Recently, the world borne witness of how America's ability to handle chaos has diminished, while some says it's Trump's fault but the reality is grin. Just look at Corona Outbreak, The raiding of the Capital, breakouts at Texas etc.

Saying America will still emerge a the undisputed master of the 21th Century is an overstatement that's in vogue.

Yet, realities paint a different picture: This global power struggle will adversely affect the position of Africa, but that's a topic for another day.

China will be no march for any country in five years from now!! USA knows this!!

 

[manning]

Marekani wameishachemsha tayari kushindana na China!!!

Baada ya gharama za mafuta kupanda anataka kuiondolea vikwazo vya ushuru China ili iwauzie baiskeli. US inataka "kutuabisha". Ha ha haaaa!
===
US President Joe Biden has instructed his administration to look into lifting some tariffs on imports from China in an effort to curb record-breaking inflation, Commerce Secretary Gina Raimondo said on Sunday in an interview with CNN.

“We are looking at it. In fact, the president has asked us on his team to analyze that. And so we are in the process of doing that for him and he will have to make that decision,” the official stated.

Raimondo said Washington plans to keep some of the tariffs on steel and aluminum to protect the domestic steel industry, but noted that “it may make sense” to lift tariffs on other products, like household goods and bicycles.
RT.com

Mkuu mpaka Sasa USA IKO CHALI KABISA kiuchumi a kijeshi, imebaki kuwa juu kipropaganda.

 

[Aleyn]

Huu mjadala kuhusu "weakened America" sanjari na mijadala mingine inayofanana na huu haijaanza leo. Wamarekani na wasomi/wanazuoni mashuhuri wakiwemo kina Samuel Huntington walikuwa wakijadili kuhusu "kudhoofika kwa Marekani" tangu miaka ya 50. Kama mitandao ya kijamii ingekuwepo kuanzia kipindi hicho ikiwemo JamiiForums yetu, ni dhahiri nasi tungekuwa tumekwisha jadili humu muda mrefu sana kuhusiana na suala hili.

Mjadala huu umekuwa sasa kama utamaduni wa mara kwa mara wa Wamarekani. Tangu kipindi cha uimara wa Umoja wa Kisovieti (USSR) uliochochea mapinduzi makubwa ya kiyasayansi zikiwemo operesheni mbalimbali za anga za mbali, kuwepo kwa migogoro mbalimbali ukiwemo ule wa mafuta wa mwaka 73 pamoja na kuwepo kwa vita mbalimbali zilizoihusisha Marekani tangu miaka ya 50, mjadala huu na mingine inayofanana na huu imekuwa ikishamiri.

Katika kipindi chote hicho, wanazuoni walikuwa wakiutazama mwenendo wa utawala wa Marekani katika masuala mbalimbali ya kidunia na kuilinganisha nchi hiyo na mataifa mengine duniani. Leo hii tunaizungumzia China kama mpinzani mkuu wa Marekani katika masuala mbalimbali ya kidunia. Lakini, kipindi cha miaka ya 50 mpaka miaka ya 70 mwishoni, Umoja wa Kisovieti ama USSR ndiyo nchi iliyokuwa akitazamwa kama mpinzani mkuu atakaye pelekea "anguko la Marekani" kwa miaka kadhaa ijayo.

Baada ya USSR kuanza kudhoofika miaka ya 80, wasomi wetu haohao wakahamia kwa Mjapani na kumtaja kama mpinzani mkuu wa Marekani katika masuala mbalimbali hasa kiuchumi. Wasomi, kina Stanley Hoffmann na wengineo walikuwa miongoni mwa wapinzani wakubwa sana wa sera za Marekani miaka ya 80 na walituambia kuhusu habari hiihii ya "anguko la Marekani" huku wakilitumia anguko la USSR kama mfano. Mwaka 1990 na kuendelea, Japan ikaangukia katika mgogoro wa kiuchumi, habari ya Japan ikaishia hapo.

Hivi sasa, wasomi wetu wamehamia kwa Mchina. China sasa inatajwa kama mpinzani mkuu wa Marekani katika muktadha uleule wa kina Japan pamoja na USSR.

Ninachotaka kusema ni kuwa, mjadala huu si jambo geni. Umekuwa ni mjadala wa kujirudia kila baada ya wakati fulani. Wasomi wa miaka ya 50 waliujadili, wasomi wa miaka ya 70-80 wakauendeleza mjadala. Na hivi sasa, wasomi wa miaka hii nao wanajadili kitu kilekile na huenda mjadala ukaendelezwa na wasomi wa miongo kadhaa ijayo na kuendelea. Who knows! Lakini kama ni suala la "weakened America to emerge victorious against communist China" ama kinyume na hapo, muda utatupatia majibu sahihi. Tofauti na hapo, acha tuendelee tu kuuendeleza mjadala.

Asante!

Jf ina watu makini sana.