5 ms·

Depends on the law. Chinese style surveillance laws are probably a hindrance. Also, space doesn't really belong to any one country. It belongs to all of us, and

Depends on the law. Chinese style surveillance laws are probably a hindrance. Also, space doesn't really belong to any one country. It belongs to all of us, and will probably be dominated by whoever has most guns and is willing to use them.

Cthulhu_ 7y ago
Devil's advocate: And yet, even with strict surveillance and (internet) filtering / propaganda, China's economy is booming and if they manage to continue this growth, their GDP will overtake that of Europe and the US within the forseeable future. Their internet companies already handle a multiple of what their US counterparts do, for example. But the humanitarian cost is high. The US is a bit better, maybe, but is also severely lacking on the humanitarian front (think poverty, homelessness, crime, substance abuse, suppression / lack of democracy, health care, education, debts, etc). The US could be doing so much better for their own people but because they choose to spend so much on the military and have tax laws that prevent the rich people and businesses from contributing, nothing is left for their own people. Mid- to long-term it means the country will be left behind. (disclaimer: I'm no economist nor an American, I'm sure someone else knows all the nuances)
- raxxorrax 7y ago
  There are 1,3 billion people in China so the overtaking of the GDP would be expected if they reach a certain developmental level. If often hear the economic growth must be due to surveillance and an autocratic regime, a laughable suggestion, although often shared by my unimaginitive government (Europe). The third reich also had a booming economy. War creates massive economic opportunity. Slavery too. But somehow increased governmental control is the key for economic success? Doubtful at least. The success of China is pretty straight forward. They had very cheap workers and hungry foreign consumers. I don't see how you wouldn't get any profit out of that situation. But no, it certainly must be due to complete systemic differences instead of economical ones.
  - friendlybus 7y ago
    The Chinese gov did play a big part in keeping the economic boom going. They continually propped up the housing bubble even though it was generating new construction well over demand and could have crashed multiple times. They did a bunch of currency manipulation to keep exports going. Whatever that was keeping shipping costs in and out of China so low worked very well. I don't think you can rule out the government as a factor, there's plenty of cheap workers in the world that want money.
    - raxxorrax 7y ago
      True, but I doubt that creating bubbles will create long time economic growth. And that there are indeed are cheaper workers elsewhere has already become a problem for China. Still, you cannot say they didn't grab the opportunities and have indeed build up significant industrial infrastructure. Maybe a strong central government is currently required to keep the peace for so many different people, but the tendency to see Chinas governmental system as some form of panacea for all problems is a bit off in my opinion. Given more time to develop, I believe the authority will decrease and that this process actually gives more room for even more opportunities.
    - eru 7y ago
      A reasonable monetary policy will avoid recessions, yes. Currency manipulation is not really a useful concept.
    - ClumsyPilot 7y ago
      It's a bit rich to criticise China's approach to currency after 2008. Their government should be given credit for basic competence, which our leaders don't seem to have. Their government has consistently put major support behind key industrial sectors and built out infrastructure that enabled industrial growth. Just as an example, China now has more high-speed rail than the rest of the world combined. They are the world's leading manufacturer of solar panels, electric vehicles, etc. There are several countries with equal or better starting positions, yet no achieving equivalent economic growth. Meanwhile holders of the highest office in US/UK are busy with Brexit, building a wall, and denying climate change exists.
- monkeycantype 7y ago
  I think you can get away with saying that for most of recorded history, China has been the centre of human civilisation, technically, politically and culturally, and we may return to that state. I don't think you can get away with claiming that the extraordinary transformation of China since 1982 demonstrates Chinese government policies better promote economic development than the policies of western governments - I think it can only be used to argue that they are better than the Chinese government policies prior to 1982. I don't think it's sensible to make claims about what is making China rich, without examining what made it poor.
- eloff 7y ago
  It's not guaranteed that they catch up to the US, even with such a massive population. Although they're growing at a faster pace the US economy is much larger, so that in absolute terms they're not currently gaining ground. Then you look at the US population which is still growing and closing that population gap slowly, while China will shrink 30 million in the next 30 years. At which point their demographic nightmare will be fully settled in with a very large retired population and a much smaller working class, worse than Japan currently is dealing with. But the elephant in the room is does real innovation require freedom? So far China had been unable to come any where close to the US in innovation, and that's the major driver of growth for a developed nation. At some point they may just hit the wall.
  - friendlybus 7y ago
    The demographic argument has been played out for decades in regards to china. Does china need to innovate? They have very well oiled structures for 'borrowing' other countries' ip. That was all fun and games when their military was not so great, but we're back to competing with them. They can also research in areas that seem ethically and morally dubious to the west, they will always have the edge there.
    - scottlocklin 7y ago
      > ... we're back to competing with them. I don't remember the US competing with China at any point in its history. China's been a wreck since 1800 or so. China not being a wreck is a fairly new thing, and China being a player on the world stage is unique. In my lifetime, people used the expression "starving kids in China" to denote incredibly poor people. Demographics... pretty much all civilized peoples have experienced demographic collapse. The US is no different.
    - eloff 7y ago
      You can't just dismiss the demographic argument. The beautiful thing about demographic arguments, unlike just about everything in macroeconomics is it's predictable decades in advance in its magnitude. China really fucked themselves with their one-child policy, there's no way to fix that aside from mass immigration and I don't see that happening, do you? So demographics will eat them in the end. The US have had enough immigration, legal and illegal, that the aging baby-boomers (much milder than what China has to face to begin with) won't be as bad.
- LargoLasskhyfv 7y ago
  Funny, just saw a documentary about food safety where 'whistleblowers/dissidents' stated that about 70% of their soil is contaminated, control and enforcement of environmental, food protection laws is lacking, and they even made a law which forbids everyone to discuss this in public. Do you think they manage to build enough vertical farms with LED lighting in time?

Cthulhu_ 7y ago

Devil's advocate: And yet, even with strict surveillance and (internet) filtering / propaganda, China's economy is booming and if they manage to continue this growth, their GDP will overtake that of Europe and the US within the forseeable future. Their internet companies already handle a multiple of what their US counterparts do, for example. But the humanitarian cost is high. The US is a bit better, maybe, but is also severely lacking on the humanitarian front (think poverty, homelessness, crime, substance abuse, suppression / lack of democracy, health care, education, debts, etc). The US could be doing so much better for their own people but because they choose to spend so much on the military and have tax laws that prevent the rich people and businesses from contributing, nothing is left for their own people. Mid- to long-term it means the country will be left behind. (disclaimer: I'm no economist nor an American, I'm sure someone else knows all the nuances)

raxxorrax 7y ago
There are 1,3 billion people in China so the overtaking of the GDP would be expected if they reach a certain developmental level. If often hear the economic growth must be due to surveillance and an autocratic regime, a laughable suggestion, although often shared by my unimaginitive government (Europe). The third reich also had a booming economy. War creates massive economic opportunity. Slavery too. But somehow increased governmental control is the key for economic success? Doubtful at least. The success of China is pretty straight forward. They had very cheap workers and hungry foreign consumers. I don't see how you wouldn't get any profit out of that situation. But no, it certainly must be due to complete systemic differences instead of economical ones.
- friendlybus 7y ago
  The Chinese gov did play a big part in keeping the economic boom going. They continually propped up the housing bubble even though it was generating new construction well over demand and could have crashed multiple times. They did a bunch of currency manipulation to keep exports going. Whatever that was keeping shipping costs in and out of China so low worked very well. I don't think you can rule out the government as a factor, there's plenty of cheap workers in the world that want money.
  - raxxorrax 7y ago
    True, but I doubt that creating bubbles will create long time economic growth. And that there are indeed are cheaper workers elsewhere has already become a problem for China. Still, you cannot say they didn't grab the opportunities and have indeed build up significant industrial infrastructure. Maybe a strong central government is currently required to keep the peace for so many different people, but the tendency to see Chinas governmental system as some form of panacea for all problems is a bit off in my opinion. Given more time to develop, I believe the authority will decrease and that this process actually gives more room for even more opportunities.
  - eru 7y ago
    A reasonable monetary policy will avoid recessions, yes. Currency manipulation is not really a useful concept.
  - ClumsyPilot 7y ago
    It's a bit rich to criticise China's approach to currency after 2008. Their government should be given credit for basic competence, which our leaders don't seem to have. Their government has consistently put major support behind key industrial sectors and built out infrastructure that enabled industrial growth. Just as an example, China now has more high-speed rail than the rest of the world combined. They are the world's leading manufacturer of solar panels, electric vehicles, etc. There are several countries with equal or better starting positions, yet no achieving equivalent economic growth. Meanwhile holders of the highest office in US/UK are busy with Brexit, building a wall, and denying climate change exists.
monkeycantype 7y ago
I think you can get away with saying that for most of recorded history, China has been the centre of human civilisation, technically, politically and culturally, and we may return to that state. I don't think you can get away with claiming that the extraordinary transformation of China since 1982 demonstrates Chinese government policies better promote economic development than the policies of western governments - I think it can only be used to argue that they are better than the Chinese government policies prior to 1982. I don't think it's sensible to make claims about what is making China rich, without examining what made it poor.
eloff 7y ago
It's not guaranteed that they catch up to the US, even with such a massive population. Although they're growing at a faster pace the US economy is much larger, so that in absolute terms they're not currently gaining ground. Then you look at the US population which is still growing and closing that population gap slowly, while China will shrink 30 million in the next 30 years. At which point their demographic nightmare will be fully settled in with a very large retired population and a much smaller working class, worse than Japan currently is dealing with. But the elephant in the room is does real innovation require freedom? So far China had been unable to come any where close to the US in innovation, and that's the major driver of growth for a developed nation. At some point they may just hit the wall.
- friendlybus 7y ago
  The demographic argument has been played out for decades in regards to china. Does china need to innovate? They have very well oiled structures for 'borrowing' other countries' ip. That was all fun and games when their military was not so great, but we're back to competing with them. They can also research in areas that seem ethically and morally dubious to the west, they will always have the edge there.
  - scottlocklin 7y ago
    > ... we're back to competing with them. I don't remember the US competing with China at any point in its history. China's been a wreck since 1800 or so. China not being a wreck is a fairly new thing, and China being a player on the world stage is unique. In my lifetime, people used the expression "starving kids in China" to denote incredibly poor people. Demographics... pretty much all civilized peoples have experienced demographic collapse. The US is no different.
  - eloff 7y ago
    You can't just dismiss the demographic argument. The beautiful thing about demographic arguments, unlike just about everything in macroeconomics is it's predictable decades in advance in its magnitude. China really fucked themselves with their one-child policy, there's no way to fix that aside from mass immigration and I don't see that happening, do you? So demographics will eat them in the end. The US have had enough immigration, legal and illegal, that the aging baby-boomers (much milder than what China has to face to begin with) won't be as bad.
LargoLasskhyfv 7y ago
Funny, just saw a documentary about food safety where 'whistleblowers/dissidents' stated that about 70% of their soil is contaminated, control and enforcement of environmental, food protection laws is lacking, and they even made a law which forbids everyone to discuss this in public. Do you think they manage to build enough vertical farms with LED lighting in time?