3 ms·
They are obviously playing by a totally different set of rules than we were. This is starting to even the playing field a little bit which we must do or get tot
by solotronics 7y ago
They are obviously playing by a totally different set of rules than we were. This is starting to even the playing field a little bit which we must do or get totally overtaken by China.
- mytailorisrich 7y agoIf you look at how the world is currently "overtaken" by the USA then realise that China has about the same land resources but 4+ times the population, then the unescapable conclusion is that China is bound to absolutely overtake the USA and the world. India probably is, too.
- solotronics 7y agoI think there may be some parallels to draw here with the USSR. The CCP is another top down model that has some advantages and some disadvantages compared with western liberal democracy. Can China convince countries to align with its goals? If they can do this better than the US then they will win.
- mytailorisrich 7y agoThe USSR had a comparable (corrected: not small as I first wrote) population and a small economy compared to the USA's. Moreover their economy was highly disfunctional. It's a bit like all the fear mongering about Japan in the 80s. The hard truth is that Japan was way too small to be a threat. China, on the other hand, is much bigger than the USA. The fact that the USA are currently so much stronger than China is therefore the anomaly in a historical perspective.
- wil421 7y agoThe USSR was the 3rd most populated country in 1990, ahead of the US. The US census calculated 248 million in 1990 vs 286 million for the USSR in 1989. https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/1990_United_States_Census https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/1990_United_States_Census https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Soviet_Census_(1989) https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Soviet_Census_(1989)
- brobinson 7y agoConsidering their population has already stopped growing and will start to shrink starting in ~10 years and the US has population growth projected through at least 2050, I don't think that outcome is likely. China has still yet to escape the "Middle Income Trap". Their GDP per capita is terrible. The PRC as a state is wealthy, but the wealth per citizen is quite poor.
- mytailorisrich 7y agoChina's population is more than 1 billion larger than the USA's. Relative growth rates until the end of the century are irrelevant. The fact that China is still relatively poor per capita while already being the 2nd largest economy overall shows the potential they have left to become the world's central economy (along with India's) Squabbles about postage rates are distractions.
- DuskStar 7y agoPopulation growth rates aren't irrelevant, as Japan's example should show. As the demographic pyramid stops being a pyramid and the retirees start outnumbering the 20-somethings, burdens to health care and other systems start to add up fast. If your population keeps growing, you can keep some semblance of a pyramid shape. But if it's stagnant, and your people reliably survive into old age...
- mytailorisrich 7y agoWhat's important here is the overall size of the country and its economy, not really its relative growth. Switzerland's population might grow faster than the US's at some point, for example, but that'd be irrelevant because it is way too small in any case to threaten the US's position.
- DuskStar 7y agoMy point was that population demographics, which are related to growth rates, impact the efficiency of an economy, or at least the fraction that can be directed towards external ends and not health care for unproductive segments of society.