8 ms·

> A large chunk of experts see China as the likely next world superpower. The USA, current world superpower, probably can't prevent that happening, but they can

> A large chunk of experts see China as the likely next world superpower. The USA, current world superpower, probably can't prevent that happening, but they can make moves to delay it. We'll see. Lots of people thought Japan would overtake the US as well, and that didn't exactly pan out. China has some real problems between the legacy of their one child policy and their current real estate investment crisis. It's certainly possible that they overcome those issues, but it's far from guaranteed.

victor106 4y ago
I agree. I was of the view that China could be the next super power and overtake the US. But two things changed my view:- 1. COVID and their response to it. China still does not have a good vaccine and they still rely on lockdowns. That speaks a lot to how backward China is in basic sciences. 2. The move to remove term limits for the president. History tells us that one person can’t be relied on to make good long term decisions for a country specially a communist country. https://www.npr.org/sections/thetwo-way/2018/03/11/592694991/china-removes-presidential-term-limits-enabling-xi-jinping-to-rule-indefinitely https://www.npr.org/sections/thetwo-way/2018/03/11/592694991...
- londons_explore 4y ago
  > COVID and their response to it. China still does not have a good vaccine and they still rely on lockdowns. That speaks a lot to how backward China is in basic sciences. I think this was a policy move more than a lack of science understanding. In fact, leadership in China is very science-heavy. Time will tell, but it's actually looking like possibly a good move, now that 5% of the UK population is not working due to long term sickness, the highest ever[1], and covid is looking like a contributory factor. I could even imagine China extending their lockdown policy to other diseases which might have long term population-wide effects, like influenza. The main downside of such a policy is you need to have effectively closed borders forever, otherwise travellers re-introduce diseases from other countries into yours. [1]: https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/business-63204333 https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/business-63204333
- rjzzleep 4y ago
  China's covid response was extremely damaging to China, but thanks to the US and their allies response to Russia, China has received plenty of intermediary free money to add to their economy. Cheaper energy, and arbitration returns from Russian goods to western economies for a premium. Ultimately China will find a way to cope without the products from the west. Europe however cannot cope without the cheap goods from China and the cheap energy from Russia. India is by the way the only major economy that is projected to grow over 6% next year. That's largely due to profiting off of resell of Russian goods. The problem is that people conflate their own moral standing with actual factual realities and unfortunately it will cost _us_ dearly.
  - adventured 4y ago
    India isn't growing (projected, un huh) at 6% due to profiting from Russian exports, that's a joke. Russia's economy is trivial in size, as are their non-energy exports. A $20-$30 gap in the price of oil via artificially cheap Russian oil isn't the difference between India's large economy (3x larger than Russia, nearly the size of Germany) growing at -3% vs growing at +6%. We need to put the hammer down far harder on Russia than we have so far.
pweezy 4y ago
China overtaking the US seems a lot more likely based on sheer numbers. China’s population is over 4x larger than that of the US. So China “just” needs to reach a GDP per capita of 25% to have a larger economy than the US. This metric has been growing rapidly in the past decade or two and from a rough search, seems to currently stand around 17-18% of the US’s figure. Of course GDP isn’t the only factor in world power status, but it sure is a big one. Compared to the US, China also has a far larger labor force, a greater ability to manufacture things, and greater government control over its population. Access to natural resources is similar for many things, less for some (like oil and gas) but greater for others (like rare earth minerals).
- londons_explore 4y ago
  > less for some (like oil and gas) If worldwide carbon caps and tariffs become a thing, the oil and gas in the ground suddenly becomes nearly worthless if you can't use it. Whereas China has a huge amount of not-good-for-much desert and mountains which could become a solar powerhouse.
  - nordsieck 4y ago
    > If worldwide carbon caps and tariffs become a thing, the oil and gas in the ground suddenly becomes nearly worthless if you can't use it. It may be worth less, but it won't be worthless. I have a hard time seeing another fuel source for long distance aviation (although we may move to synthesized fuel in the future). Companies will also need feedstock for plastics - that use won't be affected by carbon caps at all.
    - rjzzleep 4y ago
      Those tariffs are also a joke in and of itself. As we can already from the oil price cap idea you can only enforce things when the world plays along, but looks increasingly like the global south is fed up by these dictates. So good luck enforcing carbon caps and tariffs when the majority of the world population doesn't play along. You can still have them, but ultimately it's the people in western societies that will pay the price with their own pensions and social services gradually degrading.
ren_engineer 4y ago
>Lots of people thought Japan would overtake the US as well, and that didn't exactly pan out. not even comparable situations, Japan has a fraction of the population, natural resources, isn't a nuclear power, and is effectively militarily occupied by the US to this day. People using Japan as a comparison to China are either naive or just coping with reality to comfort themselves

victor106 4y ago

I agree. I was of the view that China could be the next super power and overtake the US. But two things changed my view:- 1. COVID and their response to it. China still does not have a good vaccine and they still rely on lockdowns. That speaks a lot to how backward China is in basic sciences. 2. The move to remove term limits for the president. History tells us that one person can’t be relied on to make good long term decisions for a country specially a communist country. https://www.npr.org/sections/thetwo-way/2018/03/11/592694991/china-removes-presidential-term-limits-enabling-xi-jinping-to-rule-indefinitely https://www.npr.org/sections/thetwo-way/2018/03/11/592694991...

londons_explore 4y ago
> COVID and their response to it. China still does not have a good vaccine and they still rely on lockdowns. That speaks a lot to how backward China is in basic sciences. I think this was a policy move more than a lack of science understanding. In fact, leadership in China is very science-heavy. Time will tell, but it's actually looking like possibly a good move, now that 5% of the UK population is not working due to long term sickness, the highest ever[1], and covid is looking like a contributory factor. I could even imagine China extending their lockdown policy to other diseases which might have long term population-wide effects, like influenza. The main downside of such a policy is you need to have effectively closed borders forever, otherwise travellers re-introduce diseases from other countries into yours. [1]: https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/business-63204333 https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/business-63204333
rjzzleep 4y ago
China's covid response was extremely damaging to China, but thanks to the US and their allies response to Russia, China has received plenty of intermediary free money to add to their economy. Cheaper energy, and arbitration returns from Russian goods to western economies for a premium. Ultimately China will find a way to cope without the products from the west. Europe however cannot cope without the cheap goods from China and the cheap energy from Russia. India is by the way the only major economy that is projected to grow over 6% next year. That's largely due to profiting off of resell of Russian goods. The problem is that people conflate their own moral standing with actual factual realities and unfortunately it will cost _us_ dearly.
- adventured 4y ago
  India isn't growing (projected, un huh) at 6% due to profiting from Russian exports, that's a joke. Russia's economy is trivial in size, as are their non-energy exports. A $20-$30 gap in the price of oil via artificially cheap Russian oil isn't the difference between India's large economy (3x larger than Russia, nearly the size of Germany) growing at -3% vs growing at +6%. We need to put the hammer down far harder on Russia than we have so far.

pweezy 4y ago

China overtaking the US seems a lot more likely based on sheer numbers. China’s population is over 4x larger than that of the US. So China “just” needs to reach a GDP per capita of 25% to have a larger economy than the US. This metric has been growing rapidly in the past decade or two and from a rough search, seems to currently stand around 17-18% of the US’s figure. Of course GDP isn’t the only factor in world power status, but it sure is a big one. Compared to the US, China also has a far larger labor force, a greater ability to manufacture things, and greater government control over its population. Access to natural resources is similar for many things, less for some (like oil and gas) but greater for others (like rare earth minerals).

londons_explore 4y ago
> less for some (like oil and gas) If worldwide carbon caps and tariffs become a thing, the oil and gas in the ground suddenly becomes nearly worthless if you can't use it. Whereas China has a huge amount of not-good-for-much desert and mountains which could become a solar powerhouse.
- nordsieck 4y ago
  > If worldwide carbon caps and tariffs become a thing, the oil and gas in the ground suddenly becomes nearly worthless if you can't use it. It may be worth less, but it won't be worthless. I have a hard time seeing another fuel source for long distance aviation (although we may move to synthesized fuel in the future). Companies will also need feedstock for plastics - that use won't be affected by carbon caps at all.
  - rjzzleep 4y ago
    Those tariffs are also a joke in and of itself. As we can already from the oil price cap idea you can only enforce things when the world plays along, but looks increasingly like the global south is fed up by these dictates. So good luck enforcing carbon caps and tariffs when the majority of the world population doesn't play along. You can still have them, but ultimately it's the people in western societies that will pay the price with their own pensions and social services gradually degrading.

ren_engineer 4y ago

>Lots of people thought Japan would overtake the US as well, and that didn't exactly pan out. not even comparable situations, Japan has a fraction of the population, natural resources, isn't a nuclear power, and is effectively militarily occupied by the US to this day. People using Japan as a comparison to China are either naive or just coping with reality to comfort themselves