There are hungry people in all countries, not just in the developing world. Man has never been able to plan for 50 years ahead. 50 years is too long a time for politicians seeking votes, but it is too much for the man in the street as well. I may be a pessimist but I'm not blaming anybody. I consider myself just as guilty as anybody else is.

I find the grandiose words of articles like this one unintentionally comical. The American author appears to live in a completely different world.

"Moreover, despite the horrendous challenges that President Obama faces, he is indisputably the most impressive leader around, more secure, more articulate, more politically savvy than any of the others. British Prime Minister Gordon Brown is being savaged at home and is close to being a lame duck. Japanese Prime Minister Taro Aso is limping toward early elections he has just called for Aug. 30. The German chancellor is also facing an imminent election and has been too vocal in opposing the stimulus the world desperately needs, and France's president is too inconsistent and too mercurial to be effective on the international scene. This leaves only China, where growth is strong and the banks are flush with cash. But President Hu Jintao has no aspiration to be a global leader, and the world is still years away from thinking about a Chinese head of state in that role."

I have nothing against President Obama but I cannot see how any one person could stop the current development. To think that any one person can somehow save the world economy  -  and that the world wants an American in that role  -  is very American. The US economy would be even worse if China didn't lend money to America. What will happen to western economies if for some reason economic progress slows down or stops in China? What happens when a house of cards collapses?

"Despite all the demands for more state intervention to prevent another crisis, and the questioning of the Anglo-Saxon model of capitalism, American leadership and full-throttle Anglo-Saxon-style markets may in fact be just what the world wants."

Not here in Scandinavia, no thank you. We don't want the social problems and inequity that such a system entails. We are too poor to afford the US model anyway. Finland spends just half the percentage of what the USA does on health care, but that covers everybody. To think we should double the expenditure in order to have 15 percent of the population without health insurance is an idea rejected by all, even by the rich.

CB

Ivanhr

“Could you give me a link to that article?”

I had no special article in mind. Everyone familiar with western currency flows knows that. Here is an American article about it.

"In the last five years, China has spent as much as one-seventh of its entire economic output buying foreign debt, mostly American."

- New York Times, January 7, 2009

If you google with the words china united states lend money, you'll get lots of sources.