Chinese Economics Thread

[solarz]

We talking about creative problem solver. Is Li Bai a creative problem solver? He is a poet.

Poetry is one of the greatest creative problems known to mankind. Everyone can write words, but only poets can arrange them in a way that is both elegant and expressive.

NO, but China and many asian countries take it to a whole different level. They drill you into memorizing way too many formulaes that are many times unexplained as they are shortcuts for solutions. It is expected you need to memorize these formulaes and more for the exams while in the west even the BASIC formulaes are sometimes PROVIDED for you in the exam. In fact many exams are OPEN BOOK exams. The mindset is completely different from this standpoint - that one is to want the student understand how the formulaes was derived from and the fundamental principles behind it and how to best utilize it and why, while the asian approach is just rote learning and forcing student think like mechnical robot through endless repetition and memorizations.

Fundamentally, western education emphasize understanding, while asian/chinese education understanding is not required.

You are confusing method with intention. Chinese learning may be based on rote, but it is rote learning with the goal of understanding. It is a mistake many parents and educators make, East or West. In the West, parents and poor educators believe it is enough to let children learn at their own pace, neglecting the fact that children need to be pushed to challenge their own limits. This is the same as Chinese parents and educators who believe that a child regurgitating material is enough. Neither achieves good quality education.

One reason I believe why there are far too little creative endeavor by the asian society is the same reason why the Chinese parents force their kids to go into one of the STEMS streams - engineers, doctors, accountants, lawyers, architects. Many kids were forced into these professions when they have little to no interest in the subject. With no interest there is no passion and they become just zombies at work. While in the west the parents and teachers cultivate the children's passion for the subject they are interested in. My friends are all passionate about their own work and actually doing projects outside of work as hobby because they are just so passionate about their own work. I have rarely (or ever!) seen asian do anything outside of work that's related to work. The Japanese has a word for it : the "salaryman" and Nietzsche describes it as the "Last Man".

Please, Log in or Register to view URLs content!

You are judging kids in China based on Chinese kids abroad. Overseas Chinese are limited in their career choices because they do not have the kind of network or connections needed for a career in arts or business management.

In China, they are not limited in such ways. Plenty of parents encourage their kids to go into arts. Ever heard of Lang Lang?

Do I? Really?
The supercomputer you talk about, is only a incremental improvement over the existing - not a fundamental quantum leap like the west is seeking. Now, coldfusion I didn't know China actually solve that problem and invented a coldfusion reactor that works. LOL.

Sounds like you're unable to recognize creativity even when shown.

First, you might want to look up the difference between fusion and cold fusion. Fusion is what happens in stars. Cold fusion is a theoretical concept of fusion at room temperature. The former is science, the latter is science fiction, at least for now.

As for supercomputers, you only think it's an incremental improvement because you don't understand what is involved is creating the next generation of supercomputers. It's not just making CPUs go faster, it's about coming up with solutions to existing problems in miniaturization, heat management, and parallelization. Supercomputers are as much an incremental improvement as the F-22 is an incremental improvement over the bi-plane.

If Chinese education system is truely superior, or at least equal to the west in that regard, shouldn't we be seeing at least 4 to 10 times more scientific, technological creative output out of China? Why is there so little coming out ??

I did not say the Chinese education system is superior. I said the culture of education is better. Education, although an important and essential component, is not the only factor in scientific advancement. Economics is the main determining factor. Scientific and technological output is closely in line with economic size. China is the second largest economy in the world, and its scientific and technological output is in line with that reality.

 

[Equation]

Looks like Brexit is starting to take effect for the Chinese economy.

UK explores multi-billion pound free trade deal with China
By Kamal AhmedEconomics editor

Chancellor Philip Hammond has begun discussions with China on an ambitious free trade deal which could see greater access for major Chinese banks and businesses to the UK economy.

The Chancellor told the BBC it was time to explore "new opportunities" across the world, including with China, one of the UK's biggest inward investors.

That is despite a short term economic shock from leaving the European Union.

He added that the EU is not in "punishment mode" over the Brexit vote.

"What we now need to do is get on with it in a way that minimises the economic impact on the UK economy in the short term and maximises the benefit in the long term," Mr Hammond said, admitting that there had been "global disappointment" about the Brexit vote.

Chinese state media reported earlier in the month that the Chinese Ministry of Commerce wants to do a UK free trade deal.

Mr Hammond has now revealed that Britain is also keen.

It will be the first time the UK has embarked on such a major project with the second largest economy in the world.

And will raise concerns about cheap manufactured goods entering the UK more easily.

'More opportunity'
In return for greater access to the UK for its manufactured products and investment, China would reduce barriers to Britain's service industries like banking and insurance as well as UK goods.

That would be an important source of export income for Britain.

"The mood music that I have heard here is very much that this will mean more opportunity for countries like China that are outside the European Union to do business with Britain," Mr Hammond said.

"And as Britain leaves the European Union and is not bound by the rules of the European Union perhaps it will be easier to do deals with Britain in the future."

Image copyrightAFP/GETTY IMAGES
Image captionPhilip Hammond met Chinese vice premier Ma Kai in Beijing before the G20 summit
I asked if that could mean a free trade deal, bilaterally agreed with China which invested over $5bn (£3.8bn) in the UK in 2014.

"Definitely I could see such a thing," Mr Hammond told me at the

Please, Log in or Register to view URLs content!

in Chengdu, China.

"We already have a strategic partnership with China.

"We have hugely increased our trade with China, investment both by British companies into China and by Chinese entities into the UK.

"That's about as far as we can go while we are members of the European Union.

"But once we are out of the European Union then I have no doubt on both sides we will want to cement that relationship into a firmer structure in a bilateral way that's appropriate.

"That's something we will have to explore in the future."

'Steel dumping'
Mr Hammond said it would be "certainly appropriate" to start discussing a new deal over the next "couple of years" and the issue was raised here at Chengdu.

What might a deal - which could only come after Britain had officially left the EU - look like?

Senior government sources have told me that officials are looking at New Zealand's free trade agreement with China which took four years to negotiate and came into effect in 2008.

Care would have to be taken over security concerns and the possibility of China "dumping" cheap imports in the UK - for example steel.

'Punishment mode'
As well as a positive reaction from China, Mr Hammond said that he did not believe that the EU was trying to teach the UK a lesson over the Brexit vote by making negotiations over trade difficult.

"I don't think they are in punishment mode," he said.

"This is a meeting of finance ministers and central bank governors and, as you would expect, they are very much focused on the economic challenges and the economic prizes available.

"I have no doubt that everyone would want to see a very close relationship between the UK and the EU going forward because that will be good for the economies of the European Union and the economy of the UK.

"The challenge for us is to make sure that other politicians who are not so narrowly focused on the economic agenda also share that view and recognise that it is important not just for Britain but for Europe as well that we continue working closely together."

Image copyrightPA
Image captionThe government hopes a final deal for the new Hinkley Point nuclear plant will be ready soon
No project better sums up how investment in major infrastructure projects is now a global issue than Hinkley Point, the £18bn plan for a new nuclear power station in Somerset backed by France's EDF energy company and one of China's main nuclear suppliers.

Mr Hammond said that the government still supported the project, and that a final agreement would be signed "hopefully over the next few days" after

Please, Log in or Register to view URLs content!

to agree the details.

At the G20 many countries are now moving into practical mode - the Chancellor campaigned against leaving the EU and China argued against it, but Mr Hammond has clearly signalled that is now a matter for the history books.

The British public have spoken.

The present challenge is seeing how the fifth largest economy in the world can take advantage of that decision, rebuilding a "close" trading relationship with the EU and new economic relationships with countries, like China, which, it should be remembered, has never had a free trade agreement with any EU country.

 

[Ultra]

You really don't know anything about supercomputers. China's supercomputer program had no entries in the top 500 in 2000 and now it has more than the US. In this regard, China has made "quantum leaps" while the West has remained relatively stagnant. There are no technologies in supercomputing that the west seeks that China does not. As a matter of fact, all are now seeking to enter the exascale range and China draws first blood by creating not 1 but 3 alternate architectures under parallel exploration to reach it. The West is just playing catch up in a game they dominated half a decade ago.

And no, having 4-10 times more scientists of equal value does not mean 4-10 times greater progress. You have scientific exploration confused with carrying bricks up a hill. 2 points that you don't seem to understand are as follows:

1. Scientific progress is more akin to finding ways up a mountain. If you have 3 paths up a mountain and I have 30 paths, does that mean I travel up 10x faster? No. If you have fewer scientists, you have less mental resource to explore paths up a mountain. You may have found 3 paths and selected the best to be 2 km long. If I have 10 times more scientists of equal calibur, they may find 30 paths, and the best may be 1.7 km long. So it is faster scientific innovation but not on the direct additive order that would result in a 10 fold increase.

2. Scientific innovation builds on a base of knowledge and resources. The West has a huge head start on China so it had a much larger base to draw and build from. So while Chinese knowledge may expand more rapidly as a percent of its currently knowledge (and it certainly does), when starting out, that may equate to a lower total yield compared to the West, which may be growing slower relative to its base, but has a much larger base. This is just like the economy, where you may have a $1 trillion economy growing at 10% vs a $10 trillion economy growing at 3%; at first, the smaller one is growing slower even by direct measures but it picks up steam faster and is, in fact, set to overtake the larger economy.

It is undeniable that China's scientific progress, in recent times, has grown more swiftly than any other nation.

Scientific progress is proportional (maybe not directly proportional, but it is proportional) to the investment you put in, be it talent, manpower, or financial investment. China is investing heavily, but it doesn't seem to have any seismic shift outcome. So it all comes down to the "quality" of the manpower. Graduating millions of rigid thinking copycats aren't going to make China go ahead. China needs creative problem solvers.

And about supercomputers, let me ask you, did China invented any of the fundamental technology in their supercomputers? The chips runs on RISC, based on the DEC Alpha, then memory and network architectures are all nothing new, even the idea of of the newest champion Sunway TaihuLight is something Intel explored 9 years ago with their

Please, Log in or Register to view URLs content!

(prototype unveiled 2007 - is an experimental 80-core chip) which eventually evolves into commercially available The Knight's Landing (many-multicore). China made some incremental improvements by combining many of the existing technology into the current champion - Sunway TaihuLight.

On the other hand, the US is already investing heavily on the next generation supercomputing, namely the Quantum computing.

In almost every area of science and technology, China is STILL playing the catchup, not as technology leader.

 

[solarz]

Scientific progress is proportional (maybe not directly proportional, but it is proportional) to the investment you put in, be it talent, manpower, or financial investment. China is investing heavily, but it doesn't seem to have any seismic shift outcome. So it all comes down to the "quality" of the manpower. Graduating millions of rigid thinking copycats aren't going to make China go ahead. China needs creative problem solvers.

And about supercomputers, let me ask you, did China invented any of the fundamental technology in their supercomputers? The chips runs on RISC, based on the DEC Alpha, then memory and network architectures are all nothing new, even the idea of of the newest champion Sunway TaihuLight is something Intel explored 9 years ago with their

Please, Log in or Register to view URLs content!

(prototype unveiled 2007 - is an experimental 80-core chip) which eventually evolves into commercially available The Knight's Landing (many-multicore). China made some incremental improvements by combining many of the existing technology into the current champion - Sunway TaihuLight.

On the other hand, the US is already investing heavily on the next generation supercomputing, namely the Quantum computing.

In almost every area of science and technology, China is STILL playing the catchup, not as technology leader.

Again, more subjective claims without any basis of evidence.

Please, Log in or Register to view URLs content!

Please, Log in or Register to view URLs content!

Please, Log in or Register to view URLs content!

 

[manqiangrexue]

Scientific progress is proportional (maybe not directly proportional, but it is proportional) to the investment you put in, be it talent, manpower, or financial investment. China is investing heavily, but it doesn't seem to have any seismic shift outcome. So it all comes down to the "quality" of the manpower. Graduating millions of rigid thinking copycats aren't going to make China go ahead. China needs creative problem solvers.

And about supercomputers, let me ask you, did China invented any of the fundamental technology in their supercomputers? The chips runs on RISC, based on the DEC Alpha, then memory and network architectures are all nothing new, even the idea of of the newest champion Sunway TaihuLight is something Intel explored 9 years ago with their

Please, Log in or Register to view URLs content!

(prototype unveiled 2007 - is an experimental 80-core chip) which eventually evolves into commercially available The Knight's Landing (many-multicore). China made some incremental improvements by combining many of the existing technology into the current champion - Sunway TaihuLight.

On the other hand, the US is already investing heavily on the next generation supercomputing, namely the Quantum computing.

In almost every area of science and technology, China is STILL playing the catchup, not as technology leader.

Do you have no understanding of the world at all? The difference in technology in China between 1985 and 2016 is something that you would not consider a seismic shift? It is faster and larger than anywhere in the world at any time. The only way you could be so mistaken is if you thought that technology is freely shared and that Chinese scientists are given equal resources and knowledge base as their western counterparts and that that has not resulted in any seismic advance ON TOP of the best of Western technology. I shouldn't have to tell you this, but it's not true; most technology is heavily guarded. When the Chinese were working on the J-10, no one even knew how to perform computer coding for electronic flight controls while America was already developing the F-22. They did not start at the same starting line, Ultra! That the Chinese are rivals/peers/near peers/superior to Americans in any area today means that the Chinese advanced monstrously faster in the same time.

These "rigid thinking copycats" have factually taken Chinese technology beyond western technology in certain areas from a gap that was once perceived insurmountable. You calling them more names to imply that they can't innovate will simply not stand up to the fact that they already have because that fact is supported by the evidence of them being number one. Quantum computing is not at all being ignored in China; China launched the world's first quantum satellite earlier this year. I'm betting China's quantum computer is online before anyone else's. That something similar to Taihu Light may have been previously explored by Intel does nothing to change the fact that China's supercomputer is 5 times faster than its nearest peer in America, at half the size and 5 times the power efficiency. How hard is it for you to understand? There's no weaseling out of this. That's a hard fact and evidence that Chinese scientists are innovating. I don't know if you understand this, but you cannot copy an inferior machine and end up with a superior one. You can't copy your way to number 1 and China is number one in supercomputing right now, undisputed. There is no one for it to catch up to. But even if we make the false assumption that the US is invested in quantum computing and China is not, you still cannot conclude any US superiority in this area because they have not actually produced working results yet and there's no guarantee they ever will.

I seriously doubt this has changed any of your ideas. It's been drilled into your head too hard that "Chinese scientists can't innovate because communism oppresses free thought." You're simply too rigid-thinking to consider the obvious evidence and reason yourself out of the narrative that was lectured onto you by those who would never admit Chinese success no matter. You can only repeat/regurgitate (copy) what western media has told you. It's ironic really, that you would make such a criticism of anyone, much less someone who can innovate his country to the top.

 

[AssassinsMace]

Since when are American graduates creating seismic shifts in science everyday? Name all these seismic shifts for the last year since they're so frequent for Americans. And somehow China has failed and has to give up and surrender because China hasn't invented a seismic shift in science every day? American born students are turning away from science and engineering in college hence why there are so many foreigners in US R&D labs. The US education system hasn't produced these unique innovators. Look at how many tech entrepreneurs don't even have a college diploma. And you know what they say why that is? It's because the US college system teaches people to be cogs in a machine not be bold enough to take big chances on their own. Where are Europe's Googles? That's been pointed out that even Europe doesn't do what the US does yet the hold the same values. China has grown faster in science, engineering, and its economy than any one else comparably to how long it took them. It's only a matter of time. They tell the Chinese that they have to do it their way for China to be innovative. Since when do they want a competitor? They're already afraid of China surpassing them economically. Since when are they okay with it when it comes to science and invention? So when they tell you how to do it, it's bad advice.

 

[Blitzo]

Do you have no understanding of the world at all? The difference in technology in China between 1985 and 2016 is something that you would not consider a seismic shift? It is faster and larger than anywhere in the world at any time. The only way you could be so mistaken is if you thought that technology is freely shared and that Chinese scientists are given equal resources and knowledge base as their western counterparts and that that has not resulted in any seismic advance ON TOP of the best of Western technology. I shouldn't have to tell you this, but it's not true; most technology is heavily guarded. When the Chinese were working on the J-10, no one even knew how to perform computer coding for electronic flight controls while America was already developing the F-22. They did not start at the same starting line, Ultra! That the Chinese are rivals/peers/near peers/superior to Americans in any area today means that the Chinese advanced monstrously faster in the same time.

These "rigid thinking copycats" have factually taken Chinese technology beyond western technology in certain areas from a gap that was once perceived insurmountable. You calling them more names to imply that they can't innovate will simply not stand up to the fact that they already have because that fact is supported by the evidence of them being number one. Quantum computing is not at all being ignored in China; China launched the world's first quantum satellite earlier this year. I'm betting China's quantum computer is online before anyone else's. That something similar to Taihu Light may have been previously explored by Intel does nothing to change the fact that China's supercomputer is 5 times faster than its nearest peer in America, at half the size and 5 times the power efficiency. How hard is it for you to understand? There's no weaseling out of this. That's a hard fact and evidence that Chinese scientists are innovating. I don't know if you understand this, but you cannot copy an inferior machine and end up with a superior one. You can't copy your way to number 1 and China is number one in supercomputing right now, undisputed. There is no one for it to catch up to. But even if we make the false assumption that the US is invested in quantum computing and China is not, you still cannot conclude any US superiority in this area because they have not actually produced working results yet and there's no guarantee they ever will.

I seriously doubt this has changed any of your ideas. It's been drilled into your head too hard that "Chinese scientists can't innovate because communism oppresses free thought." You're simply too rigid-thinking to consider the obvious evidence and reason yourself out of the narrative that was lectured onto you by those who would never admit Chinese success no matter. You can only repeat/regurgitate (copy) what western media has told you. It's ironic really, that you would make such a criticism of anyone, much less someone who can innovate his country to the top.

Just a word, the quantum satellite has not been launched yet, and it's applications for quantum computing are not that direct; it is more relevant for quantum communication applications.

 

[AssassinsMace]

BTW, Ultra, since you know the secrets to invention and innovation, what seismic invention that changed the world have you invented? You prescribed that the Western way of doing things breeds those kinds of invention, then you should have something that you have invented that changed the world. Do all Westerners and anyone else who follows the Western way of doing things have their own seismic inventions to brag about? If not then what you say it takes isn't so or you would have an invention of your own to tell us about.

 

[Yvrch]

I think all about these innovation, creativity, open society, social institutions etc are the offshoots of great divergence debate, why the west pulled ahead of the others in the second half of 18th century.

First of all, I don't really buy the usual refrain that freedom and democracy and such in a modern 21st century sense are necessary for the west to pull ahead of the rest of the crowd visibly and categorically beginning from the industrial revolution. Back then when it all started, US had slavery, England had Oliver Twist. So the roots of the divergence must lie in something else.

A few theories are out there, our Justin Yifu Lin has one too. Given the abundance or restraint of resources, countries generally find a path to growth that make sense to them given the circumstances. Revolutions of one kind or another are coming one after another since then. So it's still an ongoing process. There is no end of history, will never be until the last man.

As I see it, rote learning is a standardized, assembly line mass production system that makes sure basics and minimum requirements are met regardless of faculties or capacities. It is economical and takes good care of bottom half to get to a minimum required level. That's why that system is so good for high school level. But it lacks the path ways at the upper half of the 50 percentiles.

Western high schools lacks the serious attention to details unlike Asian high schools. But they have better, more path ways, compared to what is available in Asia, once they manage to get past the high school level. One of the reasons US got ahead in so many areas is the egalitarian system of US universities compared to European ones during 18th 19th centuries.
So Asian system needs to pay attention to manage the upper 50 percentiles giving them more pathways past high school, and Western system needs to pay attention to the opposites.

There is nothing wrong with rote learning, they are just forcing you to do the usual 10,000 hours to get the mastery of anything you do in life. Ask any kids how many hours they spend playing games or piano, no wonder there are more expert gamers than pianists like Lang Lang.

What counts are the transferable skills, like reasoning, connecting the dots, and problem solving etc that you learn in the class room, ie you applied the same skill sets to real world situations and move up the learning ladder.

Whatever we do, we'd need at least 10,000 hours to have some idea of what it is all about. Repetition, rote learning whatever you call it. Then comes the creativity and innovation, provided there are opportunities and path ways.

 

[AndrewS]

I'll say this again as it is relevant to the question of scientific and technological development.

15 years ago, a much poorer Chinese was spending 1% of GDP on R&D, which was at the top end for a developing country.

Now a much richer China is spending 2.1% of GDP on R&D, which is well outside the performance of any other developing country. In fact 2.1%places China firmly at wealthy developed world levels.

But much of this past spending was to catch up to current technological levels, and lay the foundations for a R&D / S&T base.

And by 2025, the target is an increase to 2.5% of GDP and which should result in an explosive increase in new discoveries/inventions/products.

The worse case scenario is that China becomes a much larger version of Japan or Korea (But note that Korea and Japan are way more insular and risk-averse societies, which are also much less diverse than China)