3 ms·

"It makes sense that China (and Korea) have leaped ahead. They have relatively high average IQ populations. They have cultures that celebrate education, intelli

"It makes sense that China (and Korea) have leaped ahead. They have relatively high average IQ populations. They have cultures that celebrate education, intelligence, and hard work (not sports and broism)" How ridiculous and bigoted on every front. China values 'hard work' and 'intelligence'? It would seem you could also say they value oppression, poverty, pollution and copying everything. But that wouldn't be fair. Some places in China have done well in infrastructure, as has most of S Korea, but there are two primary differences: A) China / Korean built up their infrastructure nearly from scratch in the modern era. Totalitarian or near totalitarian governments actually can do well when their are obvious investments to make. B) Their populations are closer. This is a big one for transport, in particular. China is what China is, and I see it being a little bit more than that for 2 more decades, but the only long term difference will come as they bring more people out of poverty = more consumers. By that time, they will have their own demographic problems. I believe that most of the geopolitical shift has already happened. The 'next 50 years' will be driven not by China, so much as 3 billion people in other places, currently living on $2 a day, coming into living on $50 a day. That will be huge, and more spread out. Hopefully, it comes without too much tension. I'll bet in 50 years the 'leaders' in various fields will generally still be the leaders in those fields, for the most part.

erdevs 10y ago
You seem to have conveniently removed from the quote you cited the following sentence in the very same paragraph, which says, "They have heavy governmental investment in infrastructure (eg internet, cell networks) and they heavily regulate industries so as not to stymie utilities such as the internet." Doesn't that address the points you made about the benefit of government intervention and infrastructure build up? > B) Their populations are closer. This is a big one for transport, in particular You realize that S.Korea is ~3-4x as dense as China, that China is only about as dense as the UK, and the distance between major cities in China is comparable to distances between major cities in the US, right? I could agree with some of the latter part of your post. Could have done without the glib rudeness at the beginning. I don't mean anything "bigoted" whatsoever and I'm curious what exactly came across that way.
saiya-jin 10y ago
my friend, 50 usd/day in current value is an unrealistic dream for poor of this world. that is high above world average, and if that happens, then high salaries will rise appropriately and those 50$ will have a value of maybe a cup of coffee. I cannot see undeveloped parts of Africa, Asia and South America being much better-off in 50 years, just because time passes. They will all have super cheap phones, and their own version of poverty. Plus many places can actually spiral down due to continuous wars (ie middle east)

erdevs 10y ago

You seem to have conveniently removed from the quote you cited the following sentence in the very same paragraph, which says, "They have heavy governmental investment in infrastructure (eg internet, cell networks) and they heavily regulate industries so as not to stymie utilities such as the internet." Doesn't that address the points you made about the benefit of government intervention and infrastructure build up? > B) Their populations are closer. This is a big one for transport, in particular You realize that S.Korea is ~3-4x as dense as China, that China is only about as dense as the UK, and the distance between major cities in China is comparable to distances between major cities in the US, right? I could agree with some of the latter part of your post. Could have done without the glib rudeness at the beginning. I don't mean anything "bigoted" whatsoever and I'm curious what exactly came across that way.

saiya-jin 10y ago

my friend, 50 usd/day in current value is an unrealistic dream for poor of this world. that is high above world average, and if that happens, then high salaries will rise appropriately and those 50$ will have a value of maybe a cup of coffee. I cannot see undeveloped parts of Africa, Asia and South America being much better-off in 50 years, just because time passes. They will all have super cheap phones, and their own version of poverty. Plus many places can actually spiral down due to continuous wars (ie middle east)