Miscellaneous News

Zli said:

1%, 2%, 3%, 4%, 5%?
Make this falsifiable

Click to expand...

We'll see how it turns out in 2035 and discuss it with your 45,835,346th alt.

ZeEa5KPul said:

We'll see how it turns out in 2035 and discuss it with your 45,835,346th alt.

Click to expand...

They are pushing out the goalposts to a date over ten years from now because they got nothing on China now.

That is how it is.

This war in Europe is extremely damaging for the west.

Ironically, it does not even involves a Western country, lol.

It doesn't.

Yet, there is a spike in fear!

Zli said:

1%, 2%, 3%, 4%, 5%?
Make this falsifiable

Click to expand...

don't worry, China will grow at -5% every year until the economy reaches 0.
Be happy, be Sleepy.

Realistically, growth will keep slowing down as a country develops.
But we haven't had a real case of a country like China having relatively low gdp per capita vs a leading economy and achieving breakthroughs in high value technology.

South Korea was much closer to US gdp capita in the 80s and 90s when it starting competing in those fields.

Zli said:

I agree. I simply pointed out that if the Asian Tigers couldn't grow at 5%, China definitely isn't. China will grow lower but that growth composition will be important for measuring the political significance (including whether it is in "core tech" or not)

Click to expand...

I meant to point out that I wouldn't be so certain about whether or not China can grow at 5% IF your only reference is the Asian Tigers. I think there many factors in China's favor and many not. Since no other country has had China's combination, it's really hard to predict how fast or slow China's growth rate will decline (although decline itself is inevitable). From a psychological point of view, people who like China will likely predict higher growth and vise-versa.

Nonetheless I think this convo is not that meaningful, at least to me, as I only really care about improving quality of life for the Chinese people. I'd rather not see econ growth as a pissing contest.

Zli said:

Economic growth is why America is the hegemon and able to deprive Chinese people of better livelihoods.

Click to expand...

Real life observation:

US quality of life in the last 10 years: Decreasing.
US international power and reputation over the last 10 years: Decreasing.

CN quality of life in the last 10 years: Increasing.
CN international power and reputation in the last 10 years: Increasing.

And now, on another yet again, China bad related news. It appears that U.S. intelligence has yet again changing their narrative about Chinese leader, Pres.Xi Jinping with regards to the Russian special operations a.k.a. Invasion in the west. Having led with the narrative that Pres.Xi greenlighted Pres.Putin to invade, to Pres.Xi Jinping didn’t do enough or anything at all to stop the Russian invasion having been informed by the Americans. The new version has now been modified; it now purports that Pres.Xi is unsettled from the War in Ukraine based on an allegations that his own intelligence services "appeared" to have withheld information from their president.

Zli said:

In 2019, US GDP per capita was $65K and China's was $10.4K or ~16% of the US level. China grew at 5.9%
In 1987, US GDP per capita was $20K and Korea's was $3.5K or ~17% of the US level. South Korea grew at 12.7%
In 1970, US GDP per capita was $5K and Singapore's was $812 or ~16% of the US level. Singapore grew at 13.9%
In 1963, US GDP per capita was $3.37K and Hong Kong's was $511 or ~17% of the US level. Hong Kong grew at 15.8%

So indeed, @lube and @manqiangrexue are right: China is not a Tiger, China is growing substantially slower than the Tigers at the same level of development.

Click to expand...

You're letting the data get ahead of you.
1962-1990 Korean GDP per capita is 1.1k-10k. Very impressive.
1992-2020 Chinese GDP per capita is 1.1k-10k as well.

When you smooth out the data points using constant $US this is what you get.

Zli said:

China has obvious headwinds to the downsides: technological embargo, tariffsand demographics that the Tigers didn't have and no real upsides that the Asian Tigers didn't have (higher human capital, competent public bureauracies, urbanization & higher savings rates - all the Tigers had)

Click to expand...

Is there evidence to show that the Tigers individually had higher human capital than china at the same stage? Did they have competent public bureaucracy? They didn't have the same technological control as china does now. And their financial state was in a more volatile and less fx reserves than china now.

Zli said:

Economic growth is why America is the hegemon and able to deprive Chinese people of better livelihoods.

Click to expand...

Lol. Technology and the lack of damage to the country during world war two is why America is the hegemon. Not just economic growth.

Additionally cherry picking growth rate percentage is not a good marker. You have to look at the amount of GDP growth as well. China in 2019 increases GDP by almost 900 billion USD. That's the fastest in the world. Looking at percentages is useless because it depends on the base GDP. Otherwise India has a fastest growth in 2016 but China still added more to get economy than India.

Zli said:

The Asian Tigers have the fastest emerging markets growth, ever. And in any case, China is growing at 5.5% *this year* and economic development tends to have a downward directionality on growth anyway so growth 13 years out is going to be substantially below 5.5%.

China has obvious headwinds to the downsides: technological embargo, tariffsand demographics that the Tigers didn't have and no real upsides that the Asian Tigers didn't have (higher human capital, competent public bureauracies, urbanization & higher savings rates - all the Tigers had)

Economic growth is why America is the hegemon and able to deprive Chinese people of better livelihoods.

Click to expand...

Lol who are you trying to convince here nutcase? And now you have pretended youre a resident of Malaysia this time, geez louise. You're quite a persistent stalker always coming up with your pseudo intellectual mumbo jumbo. If what you have been preaching all these months are true, then why the persistency to keep on coming back trying to tell us that China is doom?

I mean, shit, your infallible analysis is supposed to be better than all of the entire American think tanks, billionaire investors like Ray Dalio, Elon Musk etc. who are very bullish on the INEVITABLE CHINA'S RISE BABY. Lol Who the f..k are you, and what's your credentials?

Your comparing countries (Singapore, South Korea) and a province (Taiwan) as proof that China can't match, and sustain their economic successes is just beyond hilarious. I don't even know why people respond to you politely, when you're literally bringing nothing to the debate but meaningless meandering diatribe. U.S. rules, China socks, now deal with it. That's your entire analysis at the most basic level. Nuts.

Zli said:

This is a more rigorous treatment of the data from the Bank of Japan. No matter how you spin it, China is growing slower than the Tigers at similar levels of development.

Please, Log in or Register to view URLs content!

Click to expand...

Very impressed you have a folder of images ready to reply but it doesn't change the point China isn't very far behind the South Korean experience. An arbitrary $3000 start point doesn't change the point I was making.

I trust the World Bank data you were using just a moment ago too.

And if you really want to use that point.
The date from reaching $3000-$10000 is:
1975-1991 for South Korea.
2004-2019 for China.

This is a very naïve analysis anyway, because there's many more factors in play.