Debating the place of the U.S. in the global economy

August 17, 2010
Back to TopCommentsE-mailPrintBookmark and Share

There’s nothing quite like a good timeline to put things in historical perspective, and The Economist has posted an interesting one about economic powerhouses.

The bar chart contrasts the rise of Western nations against China and India, but also the rapid recovery in recent decades of China with now India. In other words, it shows just how big China and India’s economies were in the past and suggests their economies are headed toward recapturing their former glories—except now we’re all in a global economy.

The United States? It’s a blip. A big blip, certainly, but still a blip in the larger picture.

Looking to the future, where will the United States be positioned in the global economy? The U.S. must work through mind-boggling debt and social obligations, but still has a culture that values creativity and hard work.

In the long term, are you bullish or bearish on the U.S.?
 

ADVERTISEMENT

Post a comment to this blog

COMMENTS POLICY
We reserve the right to remove any post that we feel is obscene, profane, vulgar, racist, sexually explicit, abusive, or hateful.
 
You are legally responsible for what you post and your anonymity is not guaranteed.
 
Posts that insult, defame, threaten, harass or abuse other readers or people mentioned in IBJ editorial content are also subject to removal. Please respect the privacy of individuals and refrain from posting personal information.
 
No solicitations, spamming or advertisements are allowed. Readers may post links to other informational websites that are relevant to the topic at hand, but please do not link to objectionable material.
 
We may remove messages that are unrelated to the topic, encourage illegal activity, use all capital letters or are unreadable.
 

Messages that are flagged by readers as objectionable will be reviewed and may or may not be removed. Please do not flag a post simply because you disagree with it.

Sponsored by
ADVERTISEMENT
  1. In response to Sassafras, I have to ask if you relocated directly from Bloomington to Carmel? First, as you point out, Carmel is 48 square miles. Do you think it’s possible that some areas are more densely developed than others? That might explain traffic density in some places while others are pretty free moving. Second, your comment “have you ever been to Chicago--or just about any city outside of Indiana?” belies your bias. I don’t know, Sassafras, have you never been to Nashville, Columbus, OH, Cincinnati, St. Louis, Kansas City, Denver, Phoenix? They’re not a lot different in density than Indy. One more thing…I understand these comment sections are for expressing opinions, so those of us just looking for facts have to be patient, but you mention “low-density” Indy. How many cities in the US comprise 400 square miles with about 10% of that still being agricultural? Those facts certainly can impact the statistics.

  2. With all the past shady actions of Duke with utility regulators, one wonders do they really need such a huge amount? Concerned regulators not protecting ratepayers from the aggressive Duke monolith.

  3. I thought that had to be the way it was but had to ask because I wasn't sure. Thanks Again!

  4. I could be wrong, but I don't think Butler views the new dorm as mere replacements for Schwitzer and or Ross.

  5. An increase of only 5% is awesome compared to what most consumers face or used to face before passage of the ACA. Imagine if the Medicaid program had been expanded to the 400k Hoosiers that would be eligible, the savings would have been substantial to the state and other policy holders. The GOP predictions of plan death spirals, astronomical premium hikes and shortages of care are all bunk. Hopefully voters are paying attention. The Affordable Care Act (a.k.a Obamacare), where fully implemented, has dramatically reduced the number of uninsured and helped contained the growth in healthcare costs.

ADVERTISEMENT