3 ms·

> In many respects, if you use the older metrics China has long surpassed America on its GDP output but with the constant revision America still is "number 1".

> In many respects, if you use the older metrics China has long surpassed America on its GDP output but with the constant revision America still is "number 1". Maybe, but the Economist is a UK publication. What incentive would they have to prop up the identity of America as number 1?

freitzkriesler2 3y ago
When I say economists I mean the professionals, not the publication. Apologies if that wasn't clear.
- eatonphil 3y ago
  Sure, but it's The Economist saying this in the article as well: > The Economist now claims that China might never catch up with the US
  - jandrese 3y ago
    Fundamentally China’s huge population means they will overtake the US. Government mismanagement, corruption, and capital imbalances can slow it down but the march of progress is inevitable.
    - JumpCrisscross 3y ago
      > Fundamentally China’s huge population means they will overtake the US On one hand, we have reversion to the mean in terms of productivity per capita. On the other hand, we have (a) empirical evidence of the middle-income trap [1] and (b) theoretical underpinning for compounding economic gains as a corollary of economies of scale. In essence, China's dominance is inevitable only if they've solved the middle-income trap problem and either (x) economies of scale cease to matter or (y) the U.S. is destined to failing to capitalize on its own economies of scale. In summary, it's far from certain (though also far from impossible). Also, China's population is shrinking [2]. It's forecasted to drop from over a 4x population advantage over America to less than 2x by 2100 [3]. By that point, Nigeria, Pakistan and the Democratic Republic of the Congo are forecasted to have larger populations than America. Any theory of population determinism must explain how Pakistan will come to dominate America while India dominates China. [1] https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Middle_income_trap https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Middle_income_trap [2] https://www.reuters.com/world/china/chinas-population-shrinks-first-time-since-1961-2023-01-17/ https://www.reuters.com/world/china/chinas-population-shrink... [3] https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Projections_of_population_growthhttps://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Projections_of_population_growth https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Projections_of_population_grow...
    - nonethewiser 3y ago
      Presumably you think India will overtake China then. Is that accurate? Their population is already larger and is expected to grow further while China’s is declining rapidly.
      - jandrese 3y ago
        They are in a slightly worse place due to even worse governance, but yes, there is an enormous amount of untapped potential primed to explode. India also has a more serious global warming headwind to fight.
okasaki 3y ago
I don't think you can be hired by the Economist if you don't believe in American Exceptionalism + The International Rules-Based Order[0] + America World Police. Plus here in the UK we're obsessed/in love with the US. Endlessly pining for their approval (trade deals, FOM deals, etc), willing to support anything they ask for, invasions, war-mongering, censorship, propaganda, "decoupling", privatization, austerity, etc. Actually we often do much more than what they presumably are asking for. It's a sad and deeply abusive relationship. [0] Whatever the state department decides it wants today.
- eatonphil 3y ago
  > Plus here in the UK we're obsessed/in love with the US. Well the state department didn't support brexit [0], as one sort-of counterpoint. However, The Economist didn't either [1]. So this doesn't disprove your overall point. [0] https://carnegieendowment.org/2018/11/28/limitations-of-u.s.-approach-to-brexit-pub-77820 https://carnegieendowment.org/2018/11/28/limitations-of-u.s.... [1] https://www.economist.com/sites/default/files/EconomistBrexitBriefs16.pdf https://www.economist.com/sites/default/files/EconomistBrexi...

freitzkriesler2 3y ago

When I say economists I mean the professionals, not the publication. Apologies if that wasn't clear.

eatonphil 3y ago
Sure, but it's The Economist saying this in the article as well: > The Economist now claims that China might never catch up with the US
- jandrese 3y ago
  Fundamentally China’s huge population means they will overtake the US. Government mismanagement, corruption, and capital imbalances can slow it down but the march of progress is inevitable.
  - JumpCrisscross 3y ago
    > Fundamentally China’s huge population means they will overtake the US On one hand, we have reversion to the mean in terms of productivity per capita. On the other hand, we have (a) empirical evidence of the middle-income trap [1] and (b) theoretical underpinning for compounding economic gains as a corollary of economies of scale. In essence, China's dominance is inevitable only if they've solved the middle-income trap problem and either (x) economies of scale cease to matter or (y) the U.S. is destined to failing to capitalize on its own economies of scale. In summary, it's far from certain (though also far from impossible). Also, China's population is shrinking [2]. It's forecasted to drop from over a 4x population advantage over America to less than 2x by 2100 [3]. By that point, Nigeria, Pakistan and the Democratic Republic of the Congo are forecasted to have larger populations than America. Any theory of population determinism must explain how Pakistan will come to dominate America while India dominates China. [1] https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Middle_income_trap https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Middle_income_trap [2] https://www.reuters.com/world/china/chinas-population-shrinks-first-time-since-1961-2023-01-17/ https://www.reuters.com/world/china/chinas-population-shrink... [3] https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Projections_of_population_growthhttps://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Projections_of_population_growth https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Projections_of_population_grow...
  - nonethewiser 3y ago
    Presumably you think India will overtake China then. Is that accurate? Their population is already larger and is expected to grow further while China’s is declining rapidly.
    - jandrese 3y ago
      They are in a slightly worse place due to even worse governance, but yes, there is an enormous amount of untapped potential primed to explode. India also has a more serious global warming headwind to fight.

okasaki 3y ago

I don't think you can be hired by the Economist if you don't believe in American Exceptionalism + The International Rules-Based Order[0] + America World Police. Plus here in the UK we're obsessed/in love with the US. Endlessly pining for their approval (trade deals, FOM deals, etc), willing to support anything they ask for, invasions, war-mongering, censorship, propaganda, "decoupling", privatization, austerity, etc. Actually we often do much more than what they presumably are asking for. It's a sad and deeply abusive relationship. [0] Whatever the state department decides it wants today.

eatonphil 3y ago
> Plus here in the UK we're obsessed/in love with the US. Well the state department didn't support brexit [0], as one sort-of counterpoint. However, The Economist didn't either [1]. So this doesn't disprove your overall point. [0] https://carnegieendowment.org/2018/11/28/limitations-of-u.s.-approach-to-brexit-pub-77820 https://carnegieendowment.org/2018/11/28/limitations-of-u.s.... [1] https://www.economist.com/sites/default/files/EconomistBrexitBriefs16.pdf https://www.economist.com/sites/default/files/EconomistBrexi...