5 ms·

It's nice that we have freer enterprise and I'm happy to see SpaceX doing well, but China is pivoting hard. It's not a zero-sum game so it doesn't really matter

by mousa 15y ago

It's nice that we have freer enterprise and I'm happy to see SpaceX doing well, but China is pivoting hard. It's not a zero-sum game so it doesn't really matter who wins but they're not planning on being just the manufacturers forever. We have freer markets, but they have a big edge too in that they value education a lot more, especially now with the one child policy.

tel 15y ago
I'm going to keep that line in hand for the next 20 years: "China is pivoting hard". Anyone who's thinking of them as merely cheap labor for much longer is going to be very surprised.
protomyth 15y ago
I'm not sure valuing education is enough. Japan didn't pass the US and it surely valued education more than the US. It is the combination of virtues and the chaos of individuals that allows the US to work. If the US gets its debt under control, I don't really see the "win" being China's. China is chaos adverse.
- deleted 15y ago
  [deleted]
- Retric 15y ago
  China has a significant population advantage and the US has a huge physical and social infrastructure advantage, but who is on top nominally is far less important than avoiding a Russia or Japan style collapse. The US and China are both having issues with letting their well connected elites fail. Taking risks is good for society but trying to get state support for risk taking causes huge market inefficiency and eventual failure. PS: The specific US issues like healthcare, ridiculous military spending, and debt are still easily fixable as are China's corruption and Pollution issues the problem is forcing people who benefit and influence the current system to suffer. EX: Removing the mortgage interest subsidy would be a huge long term boon to the US but good luck getting that passed.
  - karamazov 15y ago
    Physical infrastructure in the US has not been heavily invested in for decades. China, on the other hand, is aggressively building up its infrastructure. If the US waits until China's advantage from this becomes apparent, it'll probably be too late to catch up.
    - nostromo 15y ago
      Yes, but the US infrastructure is largely intact and well maintained. We can keep building roads and bridges, but we don't need any more. We could rebuild our airports/seaports, but the impact there would be more efficient air travel, not the economic boom you get from the original port. Commuter rail is a pretty good option, but only in certain regional areas and perhaps some municipal areas. Libraries, jails, courthouses, schools -- maybe there are some projects there, but again I don't see those as leading to an economic boom. I really don't see as many good options for infrastructure spending as a country like China has (who, let's be honest, is playing catch-up). Perhaps we could do something real crazy, like build a space elevator, to create new markets rather than trying to build stuff for the sake of building stuff.
      - coenhyde 15y ago
        First a little bit of anecdotal evidence: I'm from Australia and I just finished a 10,000 mile road trip around your nation with some mates. I can assure you your road network is falling apart. A lot of the time I felt like I was driving in a 3rd world country. While it is evident that the US has invested a lot in infrastructure in the past they are certainly not well maintained. From my limited experience Illinois had the worse road conditions and New Mexico and Texas has the best. Here's what the economist has to say: "Total public spending on transport and water infrastructure has fallen steadily since the 1960s and now stands at 2.4% of GDP. Europe, by contrast, invests 5% of GDP in its infrastructure, while China is racing into the future at 9%." and "In 2008 the commission (National Surface Transportation Policy and Revenue Study Commission) reckoned that America needed at least $255 billion per year in transport spending over the next half-century to keep the system in good repair and make the needed upgrades. Current spending falls 60% short of that amount." You can read more here: http://www.economist.com/node/18620944?story_id=18620944 http://www.economist.com/node/18620944?story_id=18620944
- forgottenpaswrd 15y ago
  What makes the US to work is too: 1)That USA is enormously resource rich, like natural gas,helium, oil, coal, enormous extensions with wood,cotton, cattle... while Japan has no resources at all. 2)That USA has an enormous population that is mobile(could move from west coast to east coast) speaking only one language while places like Europe or India has every country(or subcountry state) speaking its language and making not so easy the people to move(protectionism). 3) That USA got the world hegemony since WWII and everybody in the world needs dollars to buy oil, so USA can live from other countries work, just printing dollars. While 1,and 2 will continue, 3 could end soon, because USA had abused so much it and is abusing it that things could change.
  - bzbarsky 15y ago
    You may have #3 backwards (and also have the reason people want dollars backwards; it has very little to do with nominal oil pricing). I suggest reading http://mpettis.com/2011/05/is-it-time-for-the-us-to-disengage-the-world-from-the-dollar/ http://mpettis.com/2011/05/is-it-time-for-the-us-to-disengag... for the former and any competent explanation of international trade mechanisms for the latter.
techiferous 15y ago
I see a black cloud looming for China. The "One Child" policy is making their age distribution very top-heavy (much more so that the U.S. "Baby Boomer" phenomenon). Also, two-thirds of men in China smoke (and over half of male doctors). Furthermore, as a populace gets richer, its diet tends toward eating more animal-based products and obesity and cancer rates rise. I see a very large health-care problem in China's future that will certainly slow down their economy.
- stcredzero 15y ago
  Furthermore, as a populace gets richer, its diet tends toward eating more animal-based products and obesity and cancer rates rise. I see a very large health-care problem in China's future that will certainly slow down their economy. Is this going to be a competitive advantage for India, with its high population of vegetarians?
  - acgourley 15y ago
    At least in the obesity case, the larger problem is sugar not animal fat.
    - stcredzero 15y ago
      An American-style diet will bring that as well. However, China's system is well positioned to avoid the subsidies which caused the American obesity disaster.
      - nostromo 15y ago
        China also has farm subsidies -- and like the US not always for the most healthy of foods. (http://online.wsj.com/article/SB10001424052748703716904576133961987047574.html http://online.wsj.com/article/SB1000142405274870371690457613...) However, your point still stands because I'm not sure (and doubt) they subsidize corn to the extent the US does.
    - pradocchia 15y ago

by mousa 15y ago

tel 15y ago

I'm going to keep that line in hand for the next 20 years: "China is pivoting hard". Anyone who's thinking of them as merely cheap labor for much longer is going to be very surprised.

protomyth 15y ago

I'm not sure valuing education is enough. Japan didn't pass the US and it surely valued education more than the US. It is the combination of virtues and the chaos of individuals that allows the US to work. If the US gets its debt under control, I don't really see the "win" being China's. China is chaos adverse.

deleted 15y ago
[deleted]
Retric 15y ago
China has a significant population advantage and the US has a huge physical and social infrastructure advantage, but who is on top nominally is far less important than avoiding a Russia or Japan style collapse. The US and China are both having issues with letting their well connected elites fail. Taking risks is good for society but trying to get state support for risk taking causes huge market inefficiency and eventual failure. PS: The specific US issues like healthcare, ridiculous military spending, and debt are still easily fixable as are China's corruption and Pollution issues the problem is forcing people who benefit and influence the current system to suffer. EX: Removing the mortgage interest subsidy would be a huge long term boon to the US but good luck getting that passed.
- karamazov 15y ago
  Physical infrastructure in the US has not been heavily invested in for decades. China, on the other hand, is aggressively building up its infrastructure. If the US waits until China's advantage from this becomes apparent, it'll probably be too late to catch up.
  - nostromo 15y ago
    Yes, but the US infrastructure is largely intact and well maintained. We can keep building roads and bridges, but we don't need any more. We could rebuild our airports/seaports, but the impact there would be more efficient air travel, not the economic boom you get from the original port. Commuter rail is a pretty good option, but only in certain regional areas and perhaps some municipal areas. Libraries, jails, courthouses, schools -- maybe there are some projects there, but again I don't see those as leading to an economic boom. I really don't see as many good options for infrastructure spending as a country like China has (who, let's be honest, is playing catch-up). Perhaps we could do something real crazy, like build a space elevator, to create new markets rather than trying to build stuff for the sake of building stuff.
    - coenhyde 15y ago
      First a little bit of anecdotal evidence: I'm from Australia and I just finished a 10,000 mile road trip around your nation with some mates. I can assure you your road network is falling apart. A lot of the time I felt like I was driving in a 3rd world country. While it is evident that the US has invested a lot in infrastructure in the past they are certainly not well maintained. From my limited experience Illinois had the worse road conditions and New Mexico and Texas has the best. Here's what the economist has to say: "Total public spending on transport and water infrastructure has fallen steadily since the 1960s and now stands at 2.4% of GDP. Europe, by contrast, invests 5% of GDP in its infrastructure, while China is racing into the future at 9%." and "In 2008 the commission (National Surface Transportation Policy and Revenue Study Commission) reckoned that America needed at least $255 billion per year in transport spending over the next half-century to keep the system in good repair and make the needed upgrades. Current spending falls 60% short of that amount." You can read more here: http://www.economist.com/node/18620944?story_id=18620944 http://www.economist.com/node/18620944?story_id=18620944
forgottenpaswrd 15y ago
What makes the US to work is too: 1)That USA is enormously resource rich, like natural gas,helium, oil, coal, enormous extensions with wood,cotton, cattle... while Japan has no resources at all. 2)That USA has an enormous population that is mobile(could move from west coast to east coast) speaking only one language while places like Europe or India has every country(or subcountry state) speaking its language and making not so easy the people to move(protectionism). 3) That USA got the world hegemony since WWII and everybody in the world needs dollars to buy oil, so USA can live from other countries work, just printing dollars. While 1,and 2 will continue, 3 could end soon, because USA had abused so much it and is abusing it that things could change.
- bzbarsky 15y ago
  You may have #3 backwards (and also have the reason people want dollars backwards; it has very little to do with nominal oil pricing). I suggest reading http://mpettis.com/2011/05/is-it-time-for-the-us-to-disengage-the-world-from-the-dollar/ http://mpettis.com/2011/05/is-it-time-for-the-us-to-disengag... for the former and any competent explanation of international trade mechanisms for the latter.

techiferous 15y ago

I see a black cloud looming for China. The "One Child" policy is making their age distribution very top-heavy (much more so that the U.S. "Baby Boomer" phenomenon). Also, two-thirds of men in China smoke (and over half of male doctors). Furthermore, as a populace gets richer, its diet tends toward eating more animal-based products and obesity and cancer rates rise. I see a very large health-care problem in China's future that will certainly slow down their economy.

stcredzero 15y ago
Furthermore, as a populace gets richer, its diet tends toward eating more animal-based products and obesity and cancer rates rise. I see a very large health-care problem in China's future that will certainly slow down their economy. Is this going to be a competitive advantage for India, with its high population of vegetarians?
- acgourley 15y ago
  At least in the obesity case, the larger problem is sugar not animal fat.
  - stcredzero 15y ago
    An American-style diet will bring that as well. However, China's system is well positioned to avoid the subsidies which caused the American obesity disaster.
    - nostromo 15y ago
      China also has farm subsidies -- and like the US not always for the most healthy of foods. (http://online.wsj.com/article/SB10001424052748703716904576133961987047574.html http://online.wsj.com/article/SB1000142405274870371690457613...) However, your point still stands because I'm not sure (and doubt) they subsidize corn to the extent the US does.
  - pradocchia 15y ago