5 ms·

Pentagon: China Now Has World’s Largest Navy

Lio 6y ago
Instead of endlessly rehashing Blade Runner and ripping off Neuromancer, it would be nice to see film and TV execs produce something about the what the future world will look like when it’s dominated by the Chinese Communist Party. They won’t though because the Chinese Communist Party is fucking scary and doesn’t take to being commented on. All those little plastic widgets and cheap clothes we import are paying for this navy.
- luckylion 6y ago
  Don't we have that already? Star Wars has always been the story of authoritarian governments, hasn't it? A lot of the aesthetics looked like they are meant to portray the Nazis, but the empire lacks (to my knowledge, I'm not really into it) the "we must exterminate the undesirables" part and feels much closer like an authoritarian power that branches out and suppresses dissent, classical empire stuff, but without the crazy. That sounds about right for the CCP.
  - OpossumMinister 6y ago
    A science-fantasy story like Star Wars is about as far away from speculative scifi like Neuromancer and Blade Runner as you can get.
  - Lio 6y ago
    Star Wars is fantasy. It lacks the bite of hard speculative fiction. To quote William Gibson “the future is already here it’s just not well diffused yet”. So what will our world really look like if we extrapolate from now? I’ll bet it’s less neon and flying cars and more boarded up retail shops and government sponsored troll farms. The CCP isn’t building this navy for fun. Does anything China’s done recently make you think they lack ambition? Just look at the extent of their fishing operations. https://www.theguardian.com/environment/2020/jul/27/chinese-fishing-vessels-galapagos-islands https://www.theguardian.com/environment/2020/jul/27/chinese-...
    - luckylion 6y ago
      > I’ll bet it’s less neon and flying cars and more boarded up retail shops and government sponsored troll farms. No technological advancement? Has the CCP indicated that they'd prefer a stand still on that front? I'm sure the future will be different as is expected when a large power claims its place. Whether the losses will be in the West or primarily in the Third World will be a major question. So far, the Chinese seem not too much into large scale empire building, but primarily exercising control over "their backyard", similar to Russia in Ukraine etc and the US in Latin America. But that might change, of course, if they ever become the most powerful nation with a similar margin over the rest as the US has enjoyed for the last decades.
- chrisco255 6y ago
  They won't because they love money and they generate significant revenue in that market. Same reason nobody is calling China out for imprisoning a million Muslims in a concentration camp.
  - stann 6y ago
    China is NOT 'imprisoning a million Muslims in a concentration camp'. Dig a little deeper. Hyperbole does not help anybody.
    - onetimemanytime 6y ago
      You are right, they re-educating them: Removing the impure things they learned or were born with, and instilling the Party ideals in them.
    - threeseed 6y ago
      You are correct in that they have not imprisoned a million Uyghur muslims. But it is cultural genocide with widespread, systemic rape, torture and murder. Also it is questionable about whether they are free to leave the Xinjiang area.
      - DarthGhandi 6y ago
        > genocide That's a big word do you have any proof other than military thinktanks rehashing the same old nonsense? What's a good estimate on how many have been tortured, raped and murdered? (To use your words) When the US still has more people in prison predominantly of one race (not per capita either, gross numbers) it's perhaps a good time to talk about the systemic imprisonment of black people that no one seems to flinch about. For all the talk of Uyghurs literally no Western country is taking them in, do you see the UK or US lining up to take in a million Muslim separatists? It's yellow peril all over again. Why is the UN human rights commissioner repeatedly refusing to visit the region despite getting numerous requests? Why are Muslim Western allies visiting and finding nothing extreme that matches the constant media bombardment we receive in the West? Our Western aligned Muslim allies are literally signing multicountry letters to the UNHRC saying that it's all a media beatup and yet no one here really wants to talk about that. Are we really going to base all this on evidence from the people that insisted Saddam had weapons of Mass Destruction and that justified a 20 year war that resulted in millions of deaths mostly civilian? Do you honestly trust them this time aroundor is it _different_ this time? https://medium.com/@jerry_grey2002/abc-four-corners-tell-the-world-analysis-1529e8aaf316 https://medium.com/@jerry_grey2002/abc-four-corners-tell-the... Here's a solid read from an Australian policeman who cycled through Xinjiang province, nothing he sees lines up with the rhetoric you'll find from internet commentators who have never been to China.
- dwd 6y ago
  Do we need a modern version of 1984? WestWorld (season 3) comes to mind but doesn't have the communist structure; but any future dystopia would likely see the party replaced by algorithms leaving just the inner circle and the proles.
- p2t2p 6y ago
  There's. It's called Firefly
- seer 6y ago
  The venerable “Firefly” series explored this a bit way back in 2002. The idea was that since china is _the_ superpower even the lowliest scum would know a curse word or two in chinese. Was quite an interesting concept back then.
  - Lio 6y ago
    It’s an interesting programme but I don’t really think life in the next 100 years will resemble Firefly. It’s probably closer to the truth to imagine a world with no Western intellectual property or manufacturing. That will mean “interesting” changes. For example, what would it mean if most western pharmaceutical companies fail and access to cutting edge medicine was only available through China? What power would that give the CCP and what would they do with that considering their current ambition? Look at their expanding South American fishing fleet and naval action in the South China Sea for clues.
- Animats 6y ago
  China's plans aren't a big secret. There's Made In China 2025.[1] The 14th Five Year Plan is being drafted now. Unlike the USSR, China was reasonably successful in meeting the goals of the 13 Five Year Plans so far, with the notable exception of the Great Leap Forward fiasco of the 1960s. The Made In China 2025 plan focuses on pharmaceutical, automotive, aerospace, semiconductor, IT and robotics manufacturing. The goal is to have a state of the art position in all those fields by 2025. [1] https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Made_in_China_2025 https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Made_in_China_2025
  - Lio 6y ago
    That’s my point. It’s not secret but Netflix and Amazon aren’t exactly rushing to layout what the future will look like when the Chinese achieve these goals.
  - ArkVark 6y ago
    China also has a higher average IQ than much of the rest of the world: 104, vs 98 for the USA: https://www.worlddata.info/iq-by-country.php https://www.worlddata.info/iq-by-country.php China is also pursuing eugenic strategies with the one-child policy, and controlled migration into cities (which encourages assortative mating). The Fertility Rate of 1.6 is reasonable. By contrast many Western countries are pursuing dysgenic strategies through the provision of mass-welfare, and the intake of migrants from lower-IQ countries. China just needs to sit back for 30-50 years and wait for these trends to play out, if it has the patience. We're already seeing the first reports of IQ declines: https://www.nbcnews.com/think/opinion/iq-rates-are-dropping-many-developed-countries-doesn-t-bode-ncna1008576 https://www.nbcnews.com/think/opinion/iq-rates-are-dropping-...
    - CraigJPerry 6y ago
      This seems more like a dumb conspiracy, the kind of pseudoscience BS you’d feed to QANON’s. Let’s go through it piece by piece: 1. Doesn’t define how IQ was measured in each country 2. Doesn’t state when for each country 3. Doesn’t define how the average was calculated 4. Doesn’t provide any data on rate of change of IQ - this is important, for those not aware IQ tests are reframed every few years to keep most people on the 85-115 range. The revision trend is always upwards so far - it’s arguable that we’re getting smarter because of flaws in IQ as a concept but we’re certainly becoming more capable in the modern world which is not controversial Enough about IQ we could bang on more about statistical significance and anything between 85 - 115 is average but lets move on to the real meat to be refuted. 6. China’s one-child policy formally ended 5 years ago after many years of gradual reductions in restrictions 7. China is actively trying to walk back the damage of its 1 child policies and is incentivising married couples to have more than 1 child (and somewhat confusingly, has actually been doing this since before the end of the 1 child policy) Now the real BS part 8. No country anywhere is pursuing dysgenic strategy 9. Welfare - help given to people who need it. I am intrigued what you actually mean here, are you suggesting we should let people die who can Otherwise be saved by provision of assistance? 10. Intake of migrants from “lower iq” countries - are these doctors and engineers on Visas or asylum seekers and refugees from areas rendered uninhabitable by war, climate or lawlessness?
- jayd16 6y ago
  People write about what they know so I don't really expect US media to really come up with something like that. That said, maybe we're due for an Escape from Honk Kong.
- lenkite 6y ago
  China is well on its way to being a super-power and will likely be the sole global superpower by 2040, fully capable of enforcing their will and policies on all nations of the world. They have already successfully infiltrated most international and political organisations as well as the international press to ensure there is no consensual united stand taken against them. They can successfully carry out mass sterilisation and genocide campaigns with little or no blow-back from anyone. What amazes me is how few recognise the extraordinary threat they pose to the world today.
Leary 6y ago
The new missile gap [1] [1]https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Missile_gap https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Missile_gap I thought Obama already refuted this in 2012[2] [2]https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=GK3ORgw-h_4 https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=GK3ORgw-h_4
- rich_sasha 6y ago
  This. Also, the us military has a record of overplaying foreign military power, be it out of caution, keeping a low profile, or angling for more budget.
- manquer 6y ago
  If you mean that vastly over estimated potential and politics from the Kennedy era, to keep increasing / justify spends on difference, yes I guess. U.S. navy has more aircraft carriers than rest of the world combined. I don't see how any objective sense metric how China is even close to "largest" Navy. Sure if you count every boat/warship each navy has they might be larger. Just like Iraq had the largest army just by number of soldiers.
lazyeye 6y ago
I wonder how much of the hundreds millions (billions?) of dollars China was able to save due its status as a "developing economy" contributed to its massive military buildup. Or for that matter, that high priority for all developing economies, putting a lander on the moon. https://www.scmp.com/economy/china-economy/article/3004873/china-refuses-give-developing-country-status-wto-despite-us https://www.scmp.com/economy/china-economy/article/3004873/c...
- onetimemanytime 6y ago
  USA has thrown and will continue to throw trillions at Covid, and has spent trillions in Afghanistan and Iraqi war. So the money is/was there
  - smabie 6y ago
    As long as there's an appetite for Treasuries and inflation is held in check, the money to spend will always be "there"
- Areading314 6y ago
  China surpassed the US in GDP normalized to PPP in 2014, which is the statistic that captures the power of their economy to manufacture and employ military force. Given current trends, it is inevitable that China's military will surpass the US's military power based on their economic prowess and manufacturing capability.
  - logicchains 6y ago
    >China surpassed the US in GDP normalized to PPP in 2014 Non-PPP-normalized GDP is a better metric than normalized GDP in this case, as it also captures the ability of their economy to purchase things on the international market. China doesn't make all its military technology internally (and couldn't given it still hasn't caught up to the state of the art in e.g. semiconductors).
  - rich_sasha 6y ago
    There was a strongly held belief that Japan will dwarf the US at one point too. And true, Japan has massively developed but is nowhere near a superpower. Also, IIRC the EU as a block has a bigger GDP than the US by some margin, and yet isn’t a “joint superpower”. Money is a necessary, but not sufficient condition.
DyslexicAtheist 6y ago
whether this navy is effective in a theater of war _today_ is a good question. They tend to be sub-optimal in a time dominated by PMC's and asymmetric warfare. Having a highly complex, maintenance-intensive fleet is nice for show and maybe to scare the odd South East Asian country into submission during disputes in the South China Sea. But for it to be effective it needs to be exercised in real life (kinetic) conditions. I think the PRC would get more bang for their buck by sending their troops to Africa (as they already do[1]) for them to get battle experience. [1] https://defaakto.com/2020/07/18/chinas-other-presence-in-africa/ https://defaakto.com/2020/07/18/chinas-other-presence-in-afr... edit: I personally don't support any of their current & future war mongering and naval ambitions. The right foreign policy for the US would be maximum pressure and if they don't play by Western rules we should go to war with them immediately (we should have done so the moment they said Taiwan belongs to the PLC or when the news of the Uyghurs broke). Not doing so means we're only postponing this for a later point (when they are even stronger and when the damage will be even bigger on both sides).
- rmrfstar 6y ago
  Andy Grove was right in 2010 [1], as he often was. [1] https://www.bloomberg.com/news/articles/2010-07-01/andy-grove-how-america-can-create-jobs https://www.bloomberg.com/news/articles/2010-07-01/andy-grov...
- timwaagh 6y ago
  China already went to war with the us over korea. not unsuccesfully and in times when China wasn't considered a threat. I'd say the US needs to treat the prospect of war with China with extreme caution. Why not shore up your own alliances first before attempting to undertake such a massive project?
  - DyslexicAtheist 6y ago
    yes timing right now would be terrible. if those alliances would be solid however then maybe there would be less reason to escalate things (because soft power and sanctions would be more effective?).
dwd 6y ago
Number of warships is meaningless, given the US probably doesn't even bother including patrol boats in the count. Gross tonnage or number of capital ships over a specific tonnage would be a better comparison.
- raxxorrax 6y ago
  True, but I doubt that is a good measure either. Production and logistical capabilities of missiles is probably more important. Large ships like carriers are very vulnerable and heavy pieces of metal to direct missile attacks or modern subs.
  - dwd 6y ago
    "My logisticians are a humorless lot - they know if my campaign fails, they are the first ones I will slay." attributed to Alexander the Great
camillomiller 6y ago
China Military spending 2019: $261 billion, or 1.9% GDP US Military spending in 2019: $732 billion, or 3.4% GDP China leapfrogged the U.S. by spending a little less than one third of what the US squandered. Just let that sink in. Oh and you know what China really is spending its money on, instead of militarized local police forces? Research. China R&D spending in 2018: 4.11% of GDP. U.S. R&D spending in 2016 and max ever spent: 2.7% GDP
- oefrha 6y ago
  “China leapfrogged the U.S. ...” Or maybe not and this is just pentagon propaganda to suck up more funding.
  - mschuster91 6y ago
    The US army doesn't need more funding, it needs less waste, and so do the European armies. The inefficiencies in how armaments are produced and procured are a large part of that: due to political pressure (every state wants a slice of the pie) the manufacture of the Eurofighter (and all other Airbus/EADS products) is spread across the continent instead of one place.
- nickff 6y ago
  China has not “leapfrogged the US military”, you are comparing dissimilar numbers. If you want to compare the real power of a navy, you’re better off comparing warship tonnages, while taking into account the force-multiplier effect of forward operating bases. China has many, smaller ships than the USA, and far less power projection capability, especially when it comes to naval aviation.
  - throwaway4good 6y ago
    "Far less power projection capability" That is an important point. It is a strategic objective of the US to be able project massive military power any place in the world. However that is not the case for China (as it is now). China's main strategic goal is secure access to the pacific ocean (even if it is met with an American naval blockade). It is obvious to me that that goal is much cheaper than the American goal.
deleted 6y ago
[deleted]
NiceWayToDoIT 6y ago
US has 11 aircraft carriers China only 2, US spends aprox. 3 times more money on military, is this announcement of a new military race?
roenxi 6y ago
This is probably just the US Navy making an indirect play for a bigger budget. The Chinese navy and US navy are not comparable. But there is a real change afoot, it seems likely that the Chinese will master making battleships if they put their mind to it. It seems likely they have the industrial supply chains to sustain a real military build-up if they want to. Their manufacturing capacity is a very real thing and they're are no shortage of brilliant, well educated and respectable Chinese engineers, scientists and workers. It is notable that they probably have cutting edge capabilities in nuclear engineering, software engineering and manufacturing engineering. They definitely know how to build drones better than everyone else. Hopefully the future of warfare doesn't involve drones.
- eunos 6y ago
  They already have a sufficient mastery in making surface fleet, mainly because they also have a robust and massive civilian shipbuilding industry (neck-to-neck with South Korea). Their next target probably is to master making submarine and nuclear propulsion. What I am looking forward is that assuming Chinese battery maker managed to lead the world both in research and manufacturing because massive Chinese Electric Vehicle growth, will it helps Chinese's submarine and drone development?
  - Temasik 6y ago
    mandarin is a hard language and hangyupinyi is lame also aging rapidly china will be another japan in a few decades
  - quantaum_dot 6y ago
    China already has nuclear powered submarines
    - eunos 6y ago
      I'm thinking of raising the quality so that their next gen submarine will be on par with Russian submarine or even American.
thetechimist 6y ago
I don’t know how these things wind up on Hacker News, but I oddly appreciate the break from things like “Use Vim to wash your clothes”. 1. There are websites to foster fears of warmongering (or to assure oneself that Red Dawn can never happen) such as Global Firepower. Here is the USA vs China. When I’m feeling unpatriotic, it can be fun to play with this website and imagine the torment we could cause our enemies, despite us not being able to regulate ride-sharing companies. 2. I’m not sure why military expenditures should matter so starkly. If I buy a 10 laser cannons for $1 million, and you spend $50 million on 5 million rifles, I might still beat you with my Stormtrooper weapon. Point is, it matters more on what you’re buying and building - and how you manage projects - than raw costs. 3. This article is not really new. The NY Times made a similar clickbait headline a few years back. The Brookings Institute rebutted it then. 4. The IQ arguments are specious. If IQ won wars, we wouldn’t have any. Also, I’ll take Patton, Lincoln, and Washington over their adversaries of the time, despite their adversaries being noted for their intellect. Lastly, what’s IQ got to do with anything in regards to China, a country that doesn’t reward innovative free enterprise. Their best and brightest aren’t at liberty to try their hand in the marketplace of ideas, but are forced to build what the Party says must be built. And those are just the ones that get found out. I imagine the truly bright minds of China stay in academia, escape, or humbly work the rice fields and keep their head down. I would. Why risk notoriety? 1. https://www.globalfirepower.com/countries-comparison-detail.asp?form=form&country1=united-states-of-america&country2=china&Submit=COMPARE https://www.globalfirepower.com/countries-comparison-detail.... 2. https://www.brookings.edu/blog/order-from-chaos/2018/09/10/why-china-isnt-ahead-of-the-us-navy-even-with-more-ships/ https://www.brookings.edu/blog/order-from-chaos/2018/09/10/w...
lakis 6y ago
Although the China Navy has more ships, the USA navy is the biggest by tonnage by a huge margin https://www.globalsecurity.org/military/world/links-navy.htm https://www.globalsecurity.org/military/world/links-navy.htm USA 6.2m tons China 2.1m tons Russia 1.9m tons UK 0.7m tons India 0.5m tons ..... To put into perspective, according to https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/United_States_Navy https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/United_States_Navy "[The USN] is larger than the next 13 navies combined, which includes 11 U.S. allies or partner nations"

Lio 6y ago

Instead of endlessly rehashing Blade Runner and ripping off Neuromancer, it would be nice to see film and TV execs produce something about the what the future world will look like when it’s dominated by the Chinese Communist Party. They won’t though because the Chinese Communist Party is fucking scary and doesn’t take to being commented on. All those little plastic widgets and cheap clothes we import are paying for this navy.

luckylion 6y ago
Don't we have that already? Star Wars has always been the story of authoritarian governments, hasn't it? A lot of the aesthetics looked like they are meant to portray the Nazis, but the empire lacks (to my knowledge, I'm not really into it) the "we must exterminate the undesirables" part and feels much closer like an authoritarian power that branches out and suppresses dissent, classical empire stuff, but without the crazy. That sounds about right for the CCP.
- OpossumMinister 6y ago
  A science-fantasy story like Star Wars is about as far away from speculative scifi like Neuromancer and Blade Runner as you can get.
- Lio 6y ago
  Star Wars is fantasy. It lacks the bite of hard speculative fiction. To quote William Gibson “the future is already here it’s just not well diffused yet”. So what will our world really look like if we extrapolate from now? I’ll bet it’s less neon and flying cars and more boarded up retail shops and government sponsored troll farms. The CCP isn’t building this navy for fun. Does anything China’s done recently make you think they lack ambition? Just look at the extent of their fishing operations. https://www.theguardian.com/environment/2020/jul/27/chinese-fishing-vessels-galapagos-islands https://www.theguardian.com/environment/2020/jul/27/chinese-...
  - luckylion 6y ago
    > I’ll bet it’s less neon and flying cars and more boarded up retail shops and government sponsored troll farms. No technological advancement? Has the CCP indicated that they'd prefer a stand still on that front? I'm sure the future will be different as is expected when a large power claims its place. Whether the losses will be in the West or primarily in the Third World will be a major question. So far, the Chinese seem not too much into large scale empire building, but primarily exercising control over "their backyard", similar to Russia in Ukraine etc and the US in Latin America. But that might change, of course, if they ever become the most powerful nation with a similar margin over the rest as the US has enjoyed for the last decades.
chrisco255 6y ago
They won't because they love money and they generate significant revenue in that market. Same reason nobody is calling China out for imprisoning a million Muslims in a concentration camp.
- stann 6y ago
  China is NOT 'imprisoning a million Muslims in a concentration camp'. Dig a little deeper. Hyperbole does not help anybody.
  - onetimemanytime 6y ago
    You are right, they re-educating them: Removing the impure things they learned or were born with, and instilling the Party ideals in them.
  - threeseed 6y ago
    You are correct in that they have not imprisoned a million Uyghur muslims. But it is cultural genocide with widespread, systemic rape, torture and murder. Also it is questionable about whether they are free to leave the Xinjiang area.
    - DarthGhandi 6y ago
      > genocide That's a big word do you have any proof other than military thinktanks rehashing the same old nonsense? What's a good estimate on how many have been tortured, raped and murdered? (To use your words) When the US still has more people in prison predominantly of one race (not per capita either, gross numbers) it's perhaps a good time to talk about the systemic imprisonment of black people that no one seems to flinch about. For all the talk of Uyghurs literally no Western country is taking them in, do you see the UK or US lining up to take in a million Muslim separatists? It's yellow peril all over again. Why is the UN human rights commissioner repeatedly refusing to visit the region despite getting numerous requests? Why are Muslim Western allies visiting and finding nothing extreme that matches the constant media bombardment we receive in the West? Our Western aligned Muslim allies are literally signing multicountry letters to the UNHRC saying that it's all a media beatup and yet no one here really wants to talk about that. Are we really going to base all this on evidence from the people that insisted Saddam had weapons of Mass Destruction and that justified a 20 year war that resulted in millions of deaths mostly civilian? Do you honestly trust them this time aroundor is it _different_ this time? https://medium.com/@jerry_grey2002/abc-four-corners-tell-the-world-analysis-1529e8aaf316 https://medium.com/@jerry_grey2002/abc-four-corners-tell-the... Here's a solid read from an Australian policeman who cycled through Xinjiang province, nothing he sees lines up with the rhetoric you'll find from internet commentators who have never been to China.
dwd 6y ago
Do we need a modern version of 1984? WestWorld (season 3) comes to mind but doesn't have the communist structure; but any future dystopia would likely see the party replaced by algorithms leaving just the inner circle and the proles.
p2t2p 6y ago
There's. It's called Firefly
seer 6y ago
The venerable “Firefly” series explored this a bit way back in 2002. The idea was that since china is _the_ superpower even the lowliest scum would know a curse word or two in chinese. Was quite an interesting concept back then.
- Lio 6y ago
  It’s an interesting programme but I don’t really think life in the next 100 years will resemble Firefly. It’s probably closer to the truth to imagine a world with no Western intellectual property or manufacturing. That will mean “interesting” changes. For example, what would it mean if most western pharmaceutical companies fail and access to cutting edge medicine was only available through China? What power would that give the CCP and what would they do with that considering their current ambition? Look at their expanding South American fishing fleet and naval action in the South China Sea for clues.
Animats 6y ago
China's plans aren't a big secret. There's Made In China 2025.[1] The 14th Five Year Plan is being drafted now. Unlike the USSR, China was reasonably successful in meeting the goals of the 13 Five Year Plans so far, with the notable exception of the Great Leap Forward fiasco of the 1960s. The Made In China 2025 plan focuses on pharmaceutical, automotive, aerospace, semiconductor, IT and robotics manufacturing. The goal is to have a state of the art position in all those fields by 2025. [1] https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Made_in_China_2025 https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Made_in_China_2025
- Lio 6y ago
  That’s my point. It’s not secret but Netflix and Amazon aren’t exactly rushing to layout what the future will look like when the Chinese achieve these goals.
- ArkVark 6y ago
  China also has a higher average IQ than much of the rest of the world: 104, vs 98 for the USA: https://www.worlddata.info/iq-by-country.php https://www.worlddata.info/iq-by-country.php China is also pursuing eugenic strategies with the one-child policy, and controlled migration into cities (which encourages assortative mating). The Fertility Rate of 1.6 is reasonable. By contrast many Western countries are pursuing dysgenic strategies through the provision of mass-welfare, and the intake of migrants from lower-IQ countries. China just needs to sit back for 30-50 years and wait for these trends to play out, if it has the patience. We're already seeing the first reports of IQ declines: https://www.nbcnews.com/think/opinion/iq-rates-are-dropping-many-developed-countries-doesn-t-bode-ncna1008576 https://www.nbcnews.com/think/opinion/iq-rates-are-dropping-...
  - CraigJPerry 6y ago
    This seems more like a dumb conspiracy, the kind of pseudoscience BS you’d feed to QANON’s. Let’s go through it piece by piece: 1. Doesn’t define how IQ was measured in each country 2. Doesn’t state when for each country 3. Doesn’t define how the average was calculated 4. Doesn’t provide any data on rate of change of IQ - this is important, for those not aware IQ tests are reframed every few years to keep most people on the 85-115 range. The revision trend is always upwards so far - it’s arguable that we’re getting smarter because of flaws in IQ as a concept but we’re certainly becoming more capable in the modern world which is not controversial Enough about IQ we could bang on more about statistical significance and anything between 85 - 115 is average but lets move on to the real meat to be refuted. 6. China’s one-child policy formally ended 5 years ago after many years of gradual reductions in restrictions 7. China is actively trying to walk back the damage of its 1 child policies and is incentivising married couples to have more than 1 child (and somewhat confusingly, has actually been doing this since before the end of the 1 child policy) Now the real BS part 8. No country anywhere is pursuing dysgenic strategy 9. Welfare - help given to people who need it. I am intrigued what you actually mean here, are you suggesting we should let people die who can Otherwise be saved by provision of assistance? 10. Intake of migrants from “lower iq” countries - are these doctors and engineers on Visas or asylum seekers and refugees from areas rendered uninhabitable by war, climate or lawlessness?
jayd16 6y ago
People write about what they know so I don't really expect US media to really come up with something like that. That said, maybe we're due for an Escape from Honk Kong.
lenkite 6y ago
China is well on its way to being a super-power and will likely be the sole global superpower by 2040, fully capable of enforcing their will and policies on all nations of the world. They have already successfully infiltrated most international and political organisations as well as the international press to ensure there is no consensual united stand taken against them. They can successfully carry out mass sterilisation and genocide campaigns with little or no blow-back from anyone. What amazes me is how few recognise the extraordinary threat they pose to the world today.

Leary 6y ago

The new missile gap [1] [1]https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Missile_gap https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Missile_gap I thought Obama already refuted this in 2012[2] [2]https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=GK3ORgw-h_4 https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=GK3ORgw-h_4

rich_sasha 6y ago
This. Also, the us military has a record of overplaying foreign military power, be it out of caution, keeping a low profile, or angling for more budget.
manquer 6y ago
If you mean that vastly over estimated potential and politics from the Kennedy era, to keep increasing / justify spends on difference, yes I guess. U.S. navy has more aircraft carriers than rest of the world combined. I don't see how any objective sense metric how China is even close to "largest" Navy. Sure if you count every boat/warship each navy has they might be larger. Just like Iraq had the largest army just by number of soldiers.

lazyeye 6y ago

I wonder how much of the hundreds millions (billions?) of dollars China was able to save due its status as a "developing economy" contributed to its massive military buildup. Or for that matter, that high priority for all developing economies, putting a lander on the moon. https://www.scmp.com/economy/china-economy/article/3004873/china-refuses-give-developing-country-status-wto-despite-us https://www.scmp.com/economy/china-economy/article/3004873/c...

onetimemanytime 6y ago
USA has thrown and will continue to throw trillions at Covid, and has spent trillions in Afghanistan and Iraqi war. So the money is/was there
- smabie 6y ago
  As long as there's an appetite for Treasuries and inflation is held in check, the money to spend will always be "there"
Areading314 6y ago
China surpassed the US in GDP normalized to PPP in 2014, which is the statistic that captures the power of their economy to manufacture and employ military force. Given current trends, it is inevitable that China's military will surpass the US's military power based on their economic prowess and manufacturing capability.
- logicchains 6y ago
  >China surpassed the US in GDP normalized to PPP in 2014 Non-PPP-normalized GDP is a better metric than normalized GDP in this case, as it also captures the ability of their economy to purchase things on the international market. China doesn't make all its military technology internally (and couldn't given it still hasn't caught up to the state of the art in e.g. semiconductors).
- rich_sasha 6y ago
  There was a strongly held belief that Japan will dwarf the US at one point too. And true, Japan has massively developed but is nowhere near a superpower. Also, IIRC the EU as a block has a bigger GDP than the US by some margin, and yet isn’t a “joint superpower”. Money is a necessary, but not sufficient condition.

DyslexicAtheist 6y ago

whether this navy is effective in a theater of war _today_ is a good question. They tend to be sub-optimal in a time dominated by PMC's and asymmetric warfare. Having a highly complex, maintenance-intensive fleet is nice for show and maybe to scare the odd South East Asian country into submission during disputes in the South China Sea. But for it to be effective it needs to be exercised in real life (kinetic) conditions. I think the PRC would get more bang for their buck by sending their troops to Africa (as they already do[1]) for them to get battle experience. [1] https://defaakto.com/2020/07/18/chinas-other-presence-in-africa/ https://defaakto.com/2020/07/18/chinas-other-presence-in-afr... edit: I personally don't support any of their current & future war mongering and naval ambitions. The right foreign policy for the US would be maximum pressure and if they don't play by Western rules we should go to war with them immediately (we should have done so the moment they said Taiwan belongs to the PLC or when the news of the Uyghurs broke). Not doing so means we're only postponing this for a later point (when they are even stronger and when the damage will be even bigger on both sides).

rmrfstar 6y ago
Andy Grove was right in 2010 [1], as he often was. [1] https://www.bloomberg.com/news/articles/2010-07-01/andy-grove-how-america-can-create-jobs https://www.bloomberg.com/news/articles/2010-07-01/andy-grov...
timwaagh 6y ago
China already went to war with the us over korea. not unsuccesfully and in times when China wasn't considered a threat. I'd say the US needs to treat the prospect of war with China with extreme caution. Why not shore up your own alliances first before attempting to undertake such a massive project?
- DyslexicAtheist 6y ago
  yes timing right now would be terrible. if those alliances would be solid however then maybe there would be less reason to escalate things (because soft power and sanctions would be more effective?).

dwd 6y ago

Number of warships is meaningless, given the US probably doesn't even bother including patrol boats in the count. Gross tonnage or number of capital ships over a specific tonnage would be a better comparison.

raxxorrax 6y ago
True, but I doubt that is a good measure either. Production and logistical capabilities of missiles is probably more important. Large ships like carriers are very vulnerable and heavy pieces of metal to direct missile attacks or modern subs.
- dwd 6y ago
  "My logisticians are a humorless lot - they know if my campaign fails, they are the first ones I will slay." attributed to Alexander the Great

camillomiller 6y ago

China Military spending 2019: $261 billion, or 1.9% GDP US Military spending in 2019: $732 billion, or 3.4% GDP China leapfrogged the U.S. by spending a little less than one third of what the US squandered. Just let that sink in. Oh and you know what China really is spending its money on, instead of militarized local police forces? Research. China R&D spending in 2018: 4.11% of GDP. U.S. R&D spending in 2016 and max ever spent: 2.7% GDP

oefrha 6y ago
“China leapfrogged the U.S. ...” Or maybe not and this is just pentagon propaganda to suck up more funding.
- mschuster91 6y ago
  The US army doesn't need more funding, it needs less waste, and so do the European armies. The inefficiencies in how armaments are produced and procured are a large part of that: due to political pressure (every state wants a slice of the pie) the manufacture of the Eurofighter (and all other Airbus/EADS products) is spread across the continent instead of one place.
nickff 6y ago
China has not “leapfrogged the US military”, you are comparing dissimilar numbers. If you want to compare the real power of a navy, you’re better off comparing warship tonnages, while taking into account the force-multiplier effect of forward operating bases. China has many, smaller ships than the USA, and far less power projection capability, especially when it comes to naval aviation.
- throwaway4good 6y ago
  "Far less power projection capability" That is an important point. It is a strategic objective of the US to be able project massive military power any place in the world. However that is not the case for China (as it is now). China's main strategic goal is secure access to the pacific ocean (even if it is met with an American naval blockade). It is obvious to me that that goal is much cheaper than the American goal.

deleted 6y ago

[deleted]

NiceWayToDoIT 6y ago

US has 11 aircraft carriers China only 2, US spends aprox. 3 times more money on military, is this announcement of a new military race?

roenxi 6y ago

This is probably just the US Navy making an indirect play for a bigger budget. The Chinese navy and US navy are not comparable. But there is a real change afoot, it seems likely that the Chinese will master making battleships if they put their mind to it. It seems likely they have the industrial supply chains to sustain a real military build-up if they want to. Their manufacturing capacity is a very real thing and they're are no shortage of brilliant, well educated and respectable Chinese engineers, scientists and workers. It is notable that they probably have cutting edge capabilities in nuclear engineering, software engineering and manufacturing engineering. They definitely know how to build drones better than everyone else. Hopefully the future of warfare doesn't involve drones.

eunos 6y ago
They already have a sufficient mastery in making surface fleet, mainly because they also have a robust and massive civilian shipbuilding industry (neck-to-neck with South Korea). Their next target probably is to master making submarine and nuclear propulsion. What I am looking forward is that assuming Chinese battery maker managed to lead the world both in research and manufacturing because massive Chinese Electric Vehicle growth, will it helps Chinese's submarine and drone development?
- Temasik 6y ago
  mandarin is a hard language and hangyupinyi is lame also aging rapidly china will be another japan in a few decades
- quantaum_dot 6y ago
  China already has nuclear powered submarines
  - eunos 6y ago
    I'm thinking of raising the quality so that their next gen submarine will be on par with Russian submarine or even American.

thetechimist 6y ago

I don’t know how these things wind up on Hacker News, but I oddly appreciate the break from things like “Use Vim to wash your clothes”. 1. There are websites to foster fears of warmongering (or to assure oneself that Red Dawn can never happen) such as Global Firepower. Here is the USA vs China. When I’m feeling unpatriotic, it can be fun to play with this website and imagine the torment we could cause our enemies, despite us not being able to regulate ride-sharing companies. 2. I’m not sure why military expenditures should matter so starkly. If I buy a 10 laser cannons for $1 million, and you spend $50 million on 5 million rifles, I might still beat you with my Stormtrooper weapon. Point is, it matters more on what you’re buying and building - and how you manage projects - than raw costs. 3. This article is not really new. The NY Times made a similar clickbait headline a few years back. The Brookings Institute rebutted it then. 4. The IQ arguments are specious. If IQ won wars, we wouldn’t have any. Also, I’ll take Patton, Lincoln, and Washington over their adversaries of the time, despite their adversaries being noted for their intellect. Lastly, what’s IQ got to do with anything in regards to China, a country that doesn’t reward innovative free enterprise. Their best and brightest aren’t at liberty to try their hand in the marketplace of ideas, but are forced to build what the Party says must be built. And those are just the ones that get found out. I imagine the truly bright minds of China stay in academia, escape, or humbly work the rice fields and keep their head down. I would. Why risk notoriety? 1. https://www.globalfirepower.com/countries-comparison-detail.asp?form=form&country1=united-states-of-america&country2=china&Submit=COMPARE https://www.globalfirepower.com/countries-comparison-detail.... 2. https://www.brookings.edu/blog/order-from-chaos/2018/09/10/why-china-isnt-ahead-of-the-us-navy-even-with-more-ships/ https://www.brookings.edu/blog/order-from-chaos/2018/09/10/w...

lakis 6y ago

Although the China Navy has more ships, the USA navy is the biggest by tonnage by a huge margin https://www.globalsecurity.org/military/world/links-navy.htm https://www.globalsecurity.org/military/world/links-navy.htm USA 6.2m tons China 2.1m tons Russia 1.9m tons UK 0.7m tons India 0.5m tons ..... To put into perspective, according to https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/United_States_Navy https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/United_States_Navy "[The USN] is larger than the next 13 navies combined, which includes 11 U.S. allies or partner nations"