China Ballistic Missiles and Nuclear Arms Thread

[Engineer]

That's where you are wrong. Chinese economy is decelerating. It is an undeniable fact. It was running at 10%, then down to 8%, then 7%, now sitting at 6.8% GDP growth rate. It will continue to decelerate like every other industrialized country until it stablized in around 2%.

Growth rate may be falling, but having a positive growth rate means the economy is still accelerating. I'm afraid you are the one who is wrong here.

India on the other hand just started to accelerate. It will soon go up to 8%, and probably even 10% and keep going at that for the foreseeable future. It is a familiar history that's been repeated many many times before in many countries around the world. India is like what China is like back in 1988, while China is like Japan is like back 1988. One is peaking and one is just starting.

China's economy is almost 2.5X that of India, according to

Please, Log in or Register to view URLs content!

. That means when China has a growth of 6.8%, India has to have 16.5% growth just for the gap between the two countries to not widen. You said India is growing at 8% this year? That's not even half of 16.5%, so India is still falling behind.

And you are very wrong, I am pretty certain India will catch up with China in the next 2 decades or maybe sooner. That's a fact, not if but when. When China's economy decelerate to around 2% while India's accelerate to over 10%, the effect will be very apparent. Couple with the fact of demographic shift in population, China will soon be more like the aging Japan of now, stagnant and not able to move forward, while India will look like the China of early 80s, young and charging forward.

I am afraid you are the one who is very wrong here. See above for definition of acceleration versus deceleration, and for why India is falling behind.

Now, about robotics, don't expect robotics to offset any manual labor advantage. They been talking about robotics since 30-40 years ago. The Japanese pinned their hopes on robotics decades ago to offset the Chinese labour advantage. Guess where it got them. NOWHERE.

The robotics is not the elixir China is hoping for to sustain their economy. The development cost, the setup cost and will never offset the cheap and versatile human labour. When you can pay $1 a day for an indian labourer to make anything they been train for in a few days, compare to the long design, development, manufacturing and setup cost for a robotic factory that requires a large amount of electricity the robotic advantage quickly evaporated.

Japan was once the world's powerhouse for electronics. You could also ask "guess where it got them" then proceed to answer "no where". That doesn't mean electronics industry did not provide an advantage, it just means the Japanese are not good at capitalizing on it. After all, Silicon Valley had no problems converting electronics into computers, and later on converting computers into the Internet.

The problem with Japan is that it is actually not good at doing anything other than several niches. The typical outcomes are that the niche is impractical to turn into production, or an application is found whereby the Japanese proceed to camp on the niche which eventually becomes obsolete.

I remember several years ago, one Japanese member on this forum touted about how Japan is "light year" ahead of China in robotics. Several weeks later, the Fukushima disaster happened, and Japan had to import clean-up robots. If Japan is so ahead in robotics, why would it need to import? Well, it appears that the Japanese are much more interested in adding feminine face to mechatronics, making bipedal robots, and other not so productive endeavour.

Chinese have a much more practical mindset, focusing on making an idea work then proceed to capitalize on the result as soon as possible. That's one of the reasons why there is a stigma on quality-issue associated with Chinese products, and why China is often accused of copying. However, the same reason contributes to China's lead in 3-D printing, and DJI being the leading manufacturer for drones, to name just two examples.

You tried to draw parallel between China and Japan, but the reality is that the two countries have little similarities.

 

[solarz]

China's economy is almost 2.5X that of India, according to

Please, Log in or Register to view URLs content!

. That means when China has a growth of 6.8%, India has to have 16.5% growth just for the gap between the two countries to not widen. You said India is growing at 8% this year? That's not even half of 16.5%, so India is still falling behind.

I found this site:

Please, Log in or Register to view URLs content!

If we look at projections from 2015 to 2020, we see that Chinese GDP growth drop from 6.76 to 6.33, and Indian GDP growth rise from 7.46 to 7.75.

Now if we look at total GDP, in 2015, China is at 11,211.928 (billions of $) and India is at 2,308.018. By 2020, China would be at 16,157.105 while India would be at 3,639.804.

If we do the math, we can see that the gap in 2015 is 8,903.910, while the gap in 2020 would be 12,517.301!

So clearly, even projecting a slowing Chinese growth and a rising Indian growth, we can see that India would still be falling even more behind.

 

[hlcc]

And you are very wrong, I am pretty certain India will catch up with China in the next 2 decades or maybe sooner. That's a fact, not if but when. When China's economy decelerate to around 2% while India's accelerate to over 10%, the effect will be very apparent. Couple with the fact of demographic shift in population, China will soon be more like the aging Japan of now, stagnant and not able to move forward, while India will look like the China of early 80s, young and charging forward.

I'm not as optimistic as you toward India. The only way India can catch up to China in the next 2 decades is if the Chinese economy stop growing completely & India manages to sustain unprecedented (for India) growth levels for the entire period. Do I think India is capable of catching up to China? Sure, but definitely not in 2 or 3 decades.

Yes India does have a very young demographics, but when compared to South Korea, China, Japan etc back in the day when they also had a very young demographics the Indian youth are very poorly educated &unskilled in comparison. A young demographics is only a demographic dividend if they are well educated/skilled & the economy is capable to generating enough new jobs every year. So far India have not met either of those criteria. In fact, despite the somewhat rosy GDP growth figures, job creation in India is actually declining. In addition, only a very small percentage of Indians (less than 10%) work in the "formal economy" (government jobs, jobs in registered companies, factories etc) the vast majority of Indians work in the informal sector (day laborers, street vendors, handicraft makers, farmers etc).

Please, Log in or Register to view URLs content!

 

[solarz]

I'm not as optimistic as you toward India. The only way India can catch up to China in the next 2 decades is if the Chinese economy stop growing completely & India manages to sustain unprecedented (for India) growth levels for the entire period. Do I think India is capable of catching up to China? Sure, but definitely not in 2 or 3 decades.

Yes India does have a very young demographics, but when compared to South Korea, China, Japan etc back in the day when they also had a very young demographics the Indian youth are very poorly educated &unskilled in comparison. A young demographics is only a demographic dividend if they are well educated/skilled & the economy is capable to generating enough new jobs every year. So far India have not met either of those criteria. In fact, despite the somewhat rosy GDP growth figures, job creation in India is actually declining. In addition, only a very small percentage of Indians (less than 10%) work in the "formal economy" (government jobs, jobs in registered companies, factories etc) the vast majority of Indians work in the informal sector (day laborers, street vendors, handicraft makers, farmers etc).

Please, Log in or Register to view URLs content!

Just want to point out that it is a common mistake to use a snapshot in time to project future trends, without taking into account the underlying dynamics that shaped this snapshot.

I don't know much about India, but the Chinese demographic is not going to remain the same now that the one-child limit has been lifted.

 

[Engineer]

I don't know much about India, but the Chinese demographic is not going to remain the same now that the one-child limit has been lifted.

People could simply get around the "one" child limit by not reporting extra births. No report means the birth does not appear on census. As with all problems in China, the Western media blew the demographic problem in China out of proportion.

 

[Ultra]

Growth rate may be falling, but having a positive growth rate means the economy is still accelerating. I'm afraid you are the one who is wrong here.


China's economy is almost 2.5X that of India, according to

Please, Log in or Register to view URLs content!

. That means when China has a growth of 6.8%, India has to have 16.5% growth just for the gap between the two countries to not widen. You said India is growing at 8% this year? That's not even half of 16.5%, so India is still falling behind.


I am afraid you are the one who is very wrong here. See above for definition of acceleration versus deceleration, and for why India is falling behind.


Japan was once the world's powerhouse for electronics. You could also ask "guess where it got them" then proceed to answer "no where". That doesn't mean electronics industry did not provide an advantage, it just means the Japanese are not good at capitalizing on it. After all, Silicon Valley had no problems converting electronics into computers, and later on converting computers into the Internet.

The problem with Japan is that it is actually not good at doing anything other than several niches. The typical outcomes are that the niche is impractical to turn into production, or an application is found whereby the Japanese proceed to camp on the niche which eventually becomes obsolete.

I remember several years ago, one Japanese member on this forum touted about how Japan is "light year" ahead of China in robotics. Several weeks later, the Fukushima disaster happened, and Japan had to import clean-up robots. If Japan is so ahead in robotics, why would it need to import? Well, it appears that the Japanese are much more interested in adding feminine face to mechatronics, making bipedal robots, and other not so productive endeavour.

Chinese have a much more practical mindset, focusing on making an idea work then proceed to capitalize on the result as soon as possible. That's one of the reasons why there is a stigma on quality-issue associated with Chinese products, and why China is often accused of copying. However, the same reason contributes to China's lead in 3-D printing, and DJI being the leading manufacturer for drones, to name just two examples.

You tried to draw parallel between China and Japan, but the reality is that the two countries have little similarities.

By your definition, China shouldn't be able to catch up to America or Japan or Germany. To catch up OVER TIME, one only has to accelerate faster than the other. This is like India is accelerating at 7m/s while China is accelerating at 6m/s, no matter how much lead China has eventually India will catch up. And on top of that India is increasing its speed of acceleration, while China is decelerating from 6m/s down to potentially 2m/s.

Is this making it clear for you? I find it hard to believe for an engineer like you you can't understand such simple concept. Which school did you graduated from?

 

[solarz]

By your definition, China shouldn't be able to catch up to America or Japan or Germany. To catch up OVER TIME, one only has to accelerate faster than the other. This is like India is accelerating at 7m/s while China is accelerating at 6m/s, no matter how much lead China has eventually India will catch up. And on top of that India is increasing its speed of acceleration, while China is decelerating from 6m/s down to potentially 2m/s.

Is this making it clear for you? I find it hard to believe for an engineer like you you can't understand such simple concept. Which school did you graduated from?

So were you a product of western or eastern education? I ask because apparently you're not very strong on math and logic.

GDP growth rate is expressed in PERCENTAGES. Your acceleration analogy is using absolute values. Can you not see the absurdity of your comparison?

A more accurate analogy would be China driving at 100 km/h and India driving at 20 km/h. India accelerates at a rate of 8% per hour and China accelerates at a rate of 6% per hour.

After one hour, China would be driving at 106 km/h, while India is driving at 21.6 km/h. In absolute values, China accelerated by 6 km/h while India accelerated by 1.6 km/h.

 

[Engineer]

By your definition, China shouldn't be able to catch up to America or Japan or Germany.

By my definition, China could, and reality proved that she did.

To catch up OVER TIME, one only has to accelerate faster than the other. This is like India is accelerating at 7m/s while China is accelerating at 6m/s, no matter how much lead China has eventually India will catch up. And on top of that India is increasing its speed of acceleration, while China is decelerating from 6m/s down to potentially 2m/s.

Your example is flawed because growth rate is expressed as a percentage, not an absolute value. Not only that, your example incorrectly used unit of m/s for acceleration, whereas the correct unit should be m/s².

Suppose China is moving at 100 m/s. Growth of 6.8% on 100 m/s is an additional 6.8 m/s.
Suppose India is at 40 m/s. Supposing a growth of 10% translates to an additional 4 m/s.

As you see, India with higher percentage of growth sees less increase than China, even though China has lower percentage of growth. So the gap between the two countries is still widening.

A simpler example for you is this: a millionaire growing his wealth 1% per year makes more money than the average Joe growing $1000 at 10% per year. By the end of the year, the millionaire has an extra $1000. The average Joe only got an extra $100.

Is this making it clear for you? I find it hard to believe for an engineer like you you can't understand such simple concept. Which school did you graduated from?

Don't worry about me, I am pretty certain I am better in Finance, Math and Physics than you after this reply of yours. You should be more worried about yourself.

 

[manqiangrexue]

"And you are very wrong, I am pretty certain India will catch up with China in the next 2 decades or maybe sooner. That's a fact, not if but when. When China's economy decelerate to around 2% while India's accelerate to over 10%, the effect will be very apparent."

Ultra, how are you so sure about these crazy predictions 20 years into the future? It's always the craziest people who make the predictions farthest out into the future; SamuraiBlue predicted that Japan would lead the world in energy by 20 years when we're near 2100, and Ultra here actually starts out by saying that he's "pretty certain," and by the very next sentence, he's already declaring it a hard fact! Predicting that China will fall to 2%?? Do you even have any idea about anything? Try to be slightly sane when making predictions and keep them to foreseeable time spans, jeeze!

 

[AndrewS]

Whilst Chinese growth dropping to 2% is possible, it is highly unlikely given what we see in China.

If China follows the path of Korea, Japan, Taiwan, Singapore, Hong Kong - a sustained 6% over the next 12 years will see the Chinese economy double in size. Yet China will still not be a developed country.