4 ms·
You need to take into account the population of these countries. US is 319 million people, Japan 127 and China 1,368 (figures from 2014). South Korea and Taiwan
by Xixi 11y ago
You need to take into account the population of these countries. US is 319 million people, Japan 127 and China 1,368 (figures from 2014). South Korea and Taiwan are even smaller at 50 million and 23 million inhabitants.
For China to be as developed as Korea, Taiwan or Japan would mean for its GDP per capita to be roughly on par. A quick calculation shows that if China GDP per capita were to be on par with that of Japan, its overall GDP would be 3.5x bigger than that of US! Which mean the ability (for instance) to spend 3.5x more on the PLA than the US on its army without impacting other budgets.
China still has a long way to go, but it actually has a shot at getting there (contrary to Japan). I think (very personal theory) that the US managed to become the de facto only superpower standing simply by virtue of being the biggest developped country in the world, by far: France, UK, Germany or even Russia are very small (population wise) compared to it. Hell: France, UK and Germany put together are still small compared to the US.
- ryanx435 11y agopopulation size was certainly a factor, but the main reason the us became the largest super power was that it was the only major developed country that was not bombed to crap during world War ii. being isolated by two large oceans is a great advantage.
- Xixi 11y agoI don't think Germany is less developed than US today by any meaningful measure, despite having been essentially destroyed and then cut in two for half a century. I would even argue that most of Northern Europe (Netherlands, Denmark, Sweden, Norway, etc.) is more advanced than US, at least for things I care about: affordable healthcare and education, low criminality, etc. But all in all when it comes to "might", to being a superpower, it just doesn't add up. Size does matter. The EU is in the correct league, but in my opinion it's not heading in the right direction: I'd rather a much smaller, much more integrated EU, with unified defense, budget, administration, etc. The United States of Europe, in short. On the other hand you could argue that without WWI and WWII, France and UK could have kept their respective empires united. I'll readily admit that I'm not particularly fond of colonization (unless we are talking about the video game, the first one), but you could certainly make the numbers add up.
- vacri 11y agoThe US spends $600B annually on defence, and China spends $130B. Multiplying by 3.5 still doesn't close the gap...
- seanmcdirmid 11y agoChina's security concerns are also focused inwards (protecting the party from rebellion, unhappy minorities in the west, semi-hostile neighbors), preventing it from projecting much power outside of China.
- westiseast 11y agoThey're starting to realize now that by projecting power externally you can keep all the minorities and malcontents placated with nationalism </cynicism>
- seanmcdirmid 11y agoNationalism doesn't work well for Uighurs or Tibetans. Nationalism plays more to the poorer Han majority in the east.
- dm2 11y agoThey got trillions worth of defense for free by hacking the US also. You can't blame them at all for doing that though, if someone or another country has some technology or information that the US wants and can't access then I'm sure we would employ similar (or much more devastating) techniques to acquire it.
- Xixi 11y agoI didn't explain myself clearly: if China had a comparable GDP per capita as Japan, its GDP would be 3.5x bigger than that of US. But currently China GDP per capita is 10x smaller than that of Japan ($3600 vs $37500). $130B times ten would bring China defense budget to a staggering $1300B. $1300B is quite a bit more than $600B, but indeed not 3.5x more. Two factors are at play: US defense budget is larger in scope than that of China (for instance, if I remember correctly, most rocketry stuff fall under defense budget in US, but not in China), and China just doesn't spend as much (as a percentage of GDP) as US for its defense. Again, China has a very very long way to go.