I remember sometime back you were saying Russia provided China with nuclear umbrella. Where do you get all these exotic ideas? From Duran or other Russophile websites/blogs?
Chinese Economics Thread
- Thread starter Norfolk
- Start date
I remember sometime back you were saying Russia provided China with nuclear umbrella. Where do you get all these exotic ideas? From Duran or other Russophile websites/blogs?
manqiangrexue
Brigadier
The US doesn't fear a country with 50% higher GDP than itself? LOL The US has a redline of 2/3rds before it goes into panic attack mode; China's already over it. Trade war won. The US has no more cards to play to reverse the trend.
Only in an American's fantasy would you add all those countries together because the US can't win one vs one against China. Those countries GDPs are not American GDP. Those countries have their own needs for their own money; some of them are third world countries with the majority of the population in poverty and others can't even get gas for the winter as they face a recession and shortages on everything. Those problems are what that money is for. When America threatens, they make some half-assed pretend effort with the residual energy they have left as they are largely depleted from all of their woes cus in the end, the vast majority don't have any power to really help the US against China.
Yeah, exactly.
I never understood it either, why bother with adding together the other countries economic output and assume it as part of your own.
It makes no sense, and has no practical value.
There is one secret to economics, actually it is not secret just that people don't know, and that is economics is about practicality.
There is no practical value to type that of random aggregate of random countries.
I keep bringing up the Airbus deal as the example. Airbus got the big China order a couple of months ago, while Boeing got nothing.
Boeing issued a statement, regretting that business could not be done with China, and they were still willing.
If that aggregate of all those countries made any sense, then logically Boeing should have been praising that deal, when they got nothing.
It is a bs too.
The West rose after Enlightenment because there was fierce internal competition inside Europe that pushed the continent ahead (unlike the conundrums we are seeing today).
To put all those countries together as one, lead by the USA, is like saying everyone in Europe will stop competing against each other, and will unite to only compete against China.
I mean, this does not even deserve a rebuttal.
Yet, we always see this talking point come up every month or so.
There are real disinformation proponents on the internet.
Last edited:
manqiangrexue
Brigadier
Because that's Gadgetcool's safe place he hides in. Whenever China beats the US, he retreats to, "Oh, no you have to add the whole world together in America's side! Ahahaaa! Now, you are in trouble!!" LOL If that stupid shit made sense China would never have caught up in the first place.Yeah, exactly.
I never understood it either, why bother with adding together the other countries economic output and assume it as part of your own.
It makes no sense, and has no practical value.
There is one secret to economics, actually it is not secret just that people don't know, and that is economics is about practicality.
There is no practical value to type that of random aggregate of random countries.
I keep bringing up the Airbus deal as the example. Airbus got the big China order a couple of months ago, while Boeing got nothing.
Boeing issued a statement, regretting that business could not be done with China, and they were still willing.
If that aggregate of all those countries made any sense, then logically Boeing should have been praising that deal, when they got nothing.
It is a bs too.
The West rose after Enlightenment because there was fierce internal competition inside Europe that pushed the continent ahead (unlike the conundrums we are seeing today).
To put all those countries together as one, lead by the USA, is like saying everyone in Europe will stop competing against each other, and will unite to only compete against China.
I mean, this does not even deserve a rebuttal.
Yet, we always see this talking point come up every month or so.
There are real disinformation proponents on the internet.
This concept of a safe house I always found interesting.
Not sure why though. It sounds so different. Then again, maybe I had a depraved and brutalized upbringing.
Do you even think through or believe half the things you write here..
China at 12,000 per capita income is already the biggest trading nation in the world. Those so called US allies are economically dependent on China, which is technically a 'developing'.
Forget about China at 30,000 usd per capita, that's a long way to go, just imagine how the world and most importantly those so called US allies will be drawn into China's economic orbit at 20,000 usd per capita.
Of course there is a practical value to aggregating countries that will do whatever the US wants. If the US tells the Netherlands not to allow ASML to ship lithography machines to China, what do you think it is going to do? If it tells France and Italy not to use Huawei 5G, what will they do? If the US tells Canada to arrest Meng Wanzhou, what do you think Canada will do?Yeah, exactly.
I never understood it either, why bother with adding together the other countries economic output and assume it as part of your own.
It makes no sense, and has no practical value.
There is one secret to economics, actually it is not secret just that people don't know, and that is economics is about practicality.
There is no practical value to type that of random aggregate of random countries.
I keep bringing up the Airbus deal as the example. Airbus got the big China order a couple of months ago, while Boeing got nothing.
Boeing issued a statement, regretting that business could not be done with China, and they were still willing.
If that aggregate of all those countries made any sense, then logically Boeing should have been praising that deal, when they got nothing.
It is a bs too.
The West rose after Enlightenment because there was fierce internal competition inside Europe that pushed the continent ahead (unlike the conundrums we are seeing today).
To put all those countries together as one, lead by the USA, is like saying everyone in Europe will stop competing against each other, and will unite to only compete against China.
I mean, this does not even deserve a rebuttal.
Yet, we always see this talking point come up every month or so.
There are real disinformation proponents on the internet.
I think we know the answer to that. They will listen to their masters. They always have. Nothing has changed since the days of the Eight-Nation Alliance. Only now it's the 33-nation alliance (NATO + Japan + Australia + India)
The US is an empire, not a nation state. When you go against the US, you go against the entire empire.
"1 on 1" comparison is meaningless.
Last edited:
bro partially BUT what I learned among peer power there is an understanding or a protocol, IF those protocol are not meet then the MAD principle apply.
@gadgetcool5
FINANCIAL REVIEW
The economic ties that bind us to China
Efforts to reduce trade reliance on Beijing are failing, with interdependence actually increasing for the US, its allies and the global community.
The US and China are now engaged in policies of technology decoupling in the latest phase of their trade war. Japan is enacting economic security laws aimed at China, to avoid becoming collateral damage. Australia, too, has seemingly chosen to side with America in its attempt to diversify trade away from China, after being the target of trade coercion.
None of this, however, has made much material difference: interdependence with China is actually increasing for the US, its allies and the global community.
"China is the world’s largest trading nation and becoming more important. Total US goods trade fell to $US3.8 trillion in 2020 from $US4.2 trillion in 2019, before recovering to $US4.7 trillion last year. But total Chinese trade in goods increased from $US4.6 trillion in 2019 to $US4.7 trillion in 2020 and grew to a staggering $US6 trillion last year."
Despite perceptions, China’s trade is mostly market, not state driven. The private sector accounts for roughly 92 per cent of the country’s exports, of which 42 per cent are from foreign-invested firms. That is a huge constraint on policymakers.
Trade in goods between China and the US grew 19 per cent to $US693 billion last year, according to US data, even though China’s purchases of US goods fell short under the trade deal forged between Donald Trump’s administration and Beijing in 2020.
American companies also expanded their operations in China, with $US38 billion of new investment last year, bringing the US stock of direct investment in China to $US118 billion. This mutually beneficial economic relationship appears to contradict the rhetoric from Washington about containing Chinese interest globally. The zero-sum approach to China dusts off the Cold War template.
As in the case of America, Japanese investment in China has also continued to increase, further integrating their economies. Total direct investment flows into China rose by a third last year to a record $US334 billion for the year. That’s a lot of businesses committing to the Chinese market, with new factories and operations, even with Chinese borders closed and zero-COVID policies in place.
China is searching for economic and political security. Its domestic challenges and the West’s futile containment efforts are fanning its insecurities. China’s economic security in a multilateral system is still a major guarantor of economic and political security to the rest of the world.
FINANCIAL REVIEW
The economic ties that bind us to China
Efforts to reduce trade reliance on Beijing are failing, with interdependence actually increasing for the US, its allies and the global community.
The US and China are now engaged in policies of technology decoupling in the latest phase of their trade war. Japan is enacting economic security laws aimed at China, to avoid becoming collateral damage. Australia, too, has seemingly chosen to side with America in its attempt to diversify trade away from China, after being the target of trade coercion.
None of this, however, has made much material difference: interdependence with China is actually increasing for the US, its allies and the global community.
"China is the world’s largest trading nation and becoming more important. Total US goods trade fell to $US3.8 trillion in 2020 from $US4.2 trillion in 2019, before recovering to $US4.7 trillion last year. But total Chinese trade in goods increased from $US4.6 trillion in 2019 to $US4.7 trillion in 2020 and grew to a staggering $US6 trillion last year."
Despite perceptions, China’s trade is mostly market, not state driven. The private sector accounts for roughly 92 per cent of the country’s exports, of which 42 per cent are from foreign-invested firms. That is a huge constraint on policymakers.
Trade in goods between China and the US grew 19 per cent to $US693 billion last year, according to US data, even though China’s purchases of US goods fell short under the trade deal forged between Donald Trump’s administration and Beijing in 2020.
American companies also expanded their operations in China, with $US38 billion of new investment last year, bringing the US stock of direct investment in China to $US118 billion. This mutually beneficial economic relationship appears to contradict the rhetoric from Washington about containing Chinese interest globally. The zero-sum approach to China dusts off the Cold War template.
As in the case of America, Japanese investment in China has also continued to increase, further integrating their economies. Total direct investment flows into China rose by a third last year to a record $US334 billion for the year. That’s a lot of businesses committing to the Chinese market, with new factories and operations, even with Chinese borders closed and zero-COVID policies in place.
China is searching for economic and political security. Its domestic challenges and the West’s futile containment efforts are fanning its insecurities. China’s economic security in a multilateral system is still a major guarantor of economic and political security to the rest of the world.
antiterror13
Brigadier
Chinese nominal GDP is at $14K per capita this year and $30K won't be long, I think within 10 yrs .. remember the Yuan will appreciate to add to the nominal GDP
Note: Chinese PPP GDP per capita is over $21K