3 ms·

Just checked, the $12,000 upper bound on the Middle Income Trap is defined in constant 2011 USD (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Middle_income_trap https://en.wik

Just checked, the $12,000 upper bound on the Middle Income Trap is defined in constant 2011 USD (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Middle_income_trap https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Middle_income_trap). That means the bound has moved from $12,000 and is now $15,833.

dirtyid 4y ago
Income classification is defined by World Bank, not extrapolating from wikipedia. For 2022 WB adjusted high income to 12,695 from 12,535. PRC current gdp per capita is 12,556, and with released 2022 GDP of 3% (worst in a while), current per capita is 12,932 (read: high income). Unless World Bank readjust high income above that figure later this year, PRC is already high income. https://blogs.worldbank.org/opendata/new-world-bank-country-classifications-income-level-2021-2022 https://blogs.worldbank.org/opendata/new-world-bank-country-...
- amalgamated_inc 4y ago
  https://datahelpdesk.worldbank.org/knowledgebase/articles/906519-world-bank-country-and-lending-groups https://datahelpdesk.worldbank.org/knowledgebase/articles/90... This World Bank list classifies China as "Upper Middle-Income" which they define as $4,256 to $13,205. On the other hand they classify Taiwan as "China" which is just pure CCP shilling lol. Fun fact: the Communist Chinese are the poorest Chinese in the world. The Chinese are a brilliant and industrious people, and they succeed everywhere - but especially in America, Taiwan, Singapore, and formerly Hong Kong. Only the CCP is holding them back lol.
  - dirtyid 4y ago
    So with readjustment PRC is 2-3% from high income, another year or two. Gap is closing faster than income group adjustment even with zero covid GDP. Fun fact: communist Chinese is the most SUCCESSFUL chinese by virtue of developing every major sector under adverse geopolitical conditions (active US containment), so much so that in the words of state department, "China is the only country with the economic, diplomatic, military, and technological power to seriously challenge" US order. That's, you know, the actual measure of comprehensive power, not some dummy measurement like per capita GDP. Otherwise we'd all be scared of Qatar or Luxembourg. The Other Sinosphere countries did well on easy mode (often with active US support at height of hegemony, i.e. daddy's credit card), meanwhile PRC aced it on hard mode. Like US / TW wouldn't be banning semi talent from working in PRC if conditions in mainland didn't enable Chinese to succeed. Nor Chinese researchers wouldn't be flooding back to PRC for opportunities in the last few years.
    - amalgamated_inc 4y ago
      If by "hard mode" you mean throwing your population into a man-made famine, chasing out or killing all the educated people, decimating the country, and then basically enslaving your entire work force for generations in order to pursue some weird ego trip, then yes.
      - dirtyid 4y ago
        By hard mode I mean, a nascent government, stitching together a huge broken country recovering from 100+ years of instability and a couple world wars, in a post world order with active containment by the US as hyper power with 40% of global GBP. VS other Sinosphere countries being mostly US client states and having resources and beneficial policies directed towards development as payment for doing the containment. AKA hard mode. CCP trades some lives upfront to condense 100s of years of development into a few decades. AKA acing hard mode. Operationally this means trading surplus lives for progress. The great leap forward killed millions, but ensured PRC also had the highest industrial capacity amongst developing peers after. Cultural revolution broke traditional social structures = 90%+ unified polity, speaking one language. Purging intelligentsia was overkill, but still had STEM priorities right, both nukes + first satellite developed in this era. In aggregate, disruptions setup/enabled PRC to exploit mass modernization efforts, established industrial bases, and plenty of fungible bodies. Incidentally this is why pluralism of India and old practices (caste) etc is holding up development, India systemically couldn't destroy to renew, now it’s dragged down by the baggage. Here’s the thing about “ego tripping”, when the destination is to grow comprehensive power, and now CCP tripped their way into near peer power status in 50 years, then perhaps the egos planned the trip successfully.
        amalgamated_inc 4y ago
        Ha, we'll see about that "near peer" status ;) And we'll see if Zeihan is correct about China falling in sub 10 years. I think it might hold on longer, but who knows.
- deleted 4y ago
  [deleted]

dirtyid 4y ago

Income classification is defined by World Bank, not extrapolating from wikipedia. For 2022 WB adjusted high income to 12,695 from 12,535. PRC current gdp per capita is 12,556, and with released 2022 GDP of 3% (worst in a while), current per capita is 12,932 (read: high income). Unless World Bank readjust high income above that figure later this year, PRC is already high income. https://blogs.worldbank.org/opendata/new-world-bank-country-classifications-income-level-2021-2022 https://blogs.worldbank.org/opendata/new-world-bank-country-...

amalgamated_inc 4y ago
https://datahelpdesk.worldbank.org/knowledgebase/articles/906519-world-bank-country-and-lending-groups https://datahelpdesk.worldbank.org/knowledgebase/articles/90... This World Bank list classifies China as "Upper Middle-Income" which they define as $4,256 to $13,205. On the other hand they classify Taiwan as "China" which is just pure CCP shilling lol. Fun fact: the Communist Chinese are the poorest Chinese in the world. The Chinese are a brilliant and industrious people, and they succeed everywhere - but especially in America, Taiwan, Singapore, and formerly Hong Kong. Only the CCP is holding them back lol.
- dirtyid 4y ago
  So with readjustment PRC is 2-3% from high income, another year or two. Gap is closing faster than income group adjustment even with zero covid GDP. Fun fact: communist Chinese is the most SUCCESSFUL chinese by virtue of developing every major sector under adverse geopolitical conditions (active US containment), so much so that in the words of state department, "China is the only country with the economic, diplomatic, military, and technological power to seriously challenge" US order. That's, you know, the actual measure of comprehensive power, not some dummy measurement like per capita GDP. Otherwise we'd all be scared of Qatar or Luxembourg. The Other Sinosphere countries did well on easy mode (often with active US support at height of hegemony, i.e. daddy's credit card), meanwhile PRC aced it on hard mode. Like US / TW wouldn't be banning semi talent from working in PRC if conditions in mainland didn't enable Chinese to succeed. Nor Chinese researchers wouldn't be flooding back to PRC for opportunities in the last few years.
  - amalgamated_inc 4y ago
    If by "hard mode" you mean throwing your population into a man-made famine, chasing out or killing all the educated people, decimating the country, and then basically enslaving your entire work force for generations in order to pursue some weird ego trip, then yes.
    - dirtyid 4y ago
      By hard mode I mean, a nascent government, stitching together a huge broken country recovering from 100+ years of instability and a couple world wars, in a post world order with active containment by the US as hyper power with 40% of global GBP. VS other Sinosphere countries being mostly US client states and having resources and beneficial policies directed towards development as payment for doing the containment. AKA hard mode. CCP trades some lives upfront to condense 100s of years of development into a few decades. AKA acing hard mode. Operationally this means trading surplus lives for progress. The great leap forward killed millions, but ensured PRC also had the highest industrial capacity amongst developing peers after. Cultural revolution broke traditional social structures = 90%+ unified polity, speaking one language. Purging intelligentsia was overkill, but still had STEM priorities right, both nukes + first satellite developed in this era. In aggregate, disruptions setup/enabled PRC to exploit mass modernization efforts, established industrial bases, and plenty of fungible bodies. Incidentally this is why pluralism of India and old practices (caste) etc is holding up development, India systemically couldn't destroy to renew, now it’s dragged down by the baggage. Here’s the thing about “ego tripping”, when the destination is to grow comprehensive power, and now CCP tripped their way into near peer power status in 50 years, then perhaps the egos planned the trip successfully.
      - amalgamated_inc 4y ago
        Ha, we'll see about that "near peer" status ;) And we'll see if Zeihan is correct about China falling in sub 10 years. I think it might hold on longer, but who knows.
deleted 4y ago
[deleted]