It will be very unlikely to replace a multi-functional hegemon like the US; the prediction of British historian Eric Hobsbawm for the US holds until ~2050. We can only hope that the economic world system will move towards fairer co-operation, exchange and distribution of living chances (sharing economy/earth sharing). What could really hurt the US, is the ecological footprint, in combination with unreasonable military adventures, which would lead to an other power structure by war and revolutions.

Dear @Aurelio Hess,

I think that EU countries role is underestimated in that issue - 28 countries (still) or about 500 mln people working together under common rules (20 them with one currency - euro) have great potential, haven't they?!

https://europa.eu/european-union/about-eu/history_en

https://europa.eu/european-union/about-eu/eu-in-brief_en

Furthermore, do you think that the R - economy is a competitive one?!

I am afraid that Worldbank forecast (http://www.worldbank.org/en/country/russia) does not take into account too seriously political (and not only) sanctions (from EU+USA) about Annexation of Crimea (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Annexation_of_Crimea_by_the_Russian_Federation) - gross violation of R-USA-EU+UK - nuclear weapon treaty (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Budapest_Memorandum_on_Security_Assurances).

From my point of view there will be a parity in the triangle "USA-BICS-EU".

It will be very unlikely to replace a multi-functional hegemon like the US; the prediction of British historian Eric Hobsbawm for the US holds until ~2050. We can only hope that the economic world system will move towards fairer co-operation, exchange and distribution of living chances (sharing economy/earth sharing). What could really hurt the US, is the ecological footprint, in combination with unreasonable military adventures, which would lead to an other power structure by war and revolutions.

No country follow any other country;s role in their territory whereas if you (country) are growing bigger other big buddy i.e. US will surely have problem. But if this problem increased from 1 or 2 to 10 or 20 countries than there is an alarming signal. Incident of north korea supported by China. In my opinion, UN need to be powerful who can control the international disputes like North Korea issue.

I think the world should be lead by the people rather than countries!

Best Regards

Andreas

Dear Andreas,

Interesting answer. But tell me how would the woorld be lead by people rather than countries?

I´d like to deepen your idea, if you please.

Thanks.

Dear Stephen,

I completely agree with you, when you say " We can only hope that the economic world system will move towards fairer co-operation, exchange and distribution of living chances (sharing economy/earth sharing)."

It´s all that I hope.

Many Thanks.

Dear Zubair,

Indeed, as you wisely said, " So far as defining global trends is concerned China has full competence to do that and sustain as the leader in all economic and technological trends."

I would still complete saying that the transformation promoted in that country in last 65 years is remarkable. The only question that is always in discussion with no accordance is about the morality and ability to lead of China. But talking about morality is very difficult in "so different cultural societies."

Many thanks.

Dear Scientists,

While I work on my research projects, I share some parts with specialists to have some support and critics. I believe that it makes better the quality of my work.

Thank you to have participated actively in the discussions I proposed. Your vision is a very good contribution to me. The best way to make me a better scientist.

All the best for all of you.

AH

In my opinion, the world needs a new review, because more and more countries will need to pay more and more to the people of these countries every day. The world economy is not possible for a country alone.

Ok. and... the specific question is:

which country would you elect to lead the world after US era? Why?