Honestly with so many horrible things happening in the US that I've never seen before growing up,
Recency bias is a well known cognitive bias. San Francisco is also 0.2% of the United States. There’s also far more media and information access that brings all the issues in the world easily accessible instead of being filtered by one of 3 tveditors (nbc, cbs, or abc)
I saw the news filled with young Americans lamenting that they could never afford a house like their parents because housing prices went up 300% and salaries grew 30% in the same time.
Home ownership rates are well within their historic average -
I still don't know if, through all this, American is actually improving very slowly as your data suggests or if it's some instance where politicians in need of re-elections are playing their hand (since different sources have different data as there are discrepencies between your sources and mine) but the data that you show me does sink in and cast doubt.
You bring out cross-sections and/or time-series that last for 2 years but when you look at the decades-long time-series, nearly everything is getting better. There’s no inconsistency.
Also, “the statistical agencies are producing fake data” is the saddest of all the copes (whether applied to the U.S. or China). 70% of the electorate doesn’t have an undergraduate degree - they don’t care about this.
It seems that COVID is a point of inflection in many graphs so I'd doubt the usefulness of comparing to pre-COVID times.
COVID would’ve caused many indicators to get worse, regardless of governance.
Chinese markets work differently from American ones and it allows China to grow at its world-beating clip so I'd be cautious with any change.
The CSRC itself has said they want to deepen capital markets substantially
What crisis? The GDP grows over 5%. China's control over its markets means that often, what amounts to a crisis in the West is just an adjustment for China.
There are no countries at similar levels of development to China;
It’s a comparison across time to the tigers at similar levels of gdppc. China is growing slower than what you’d expect if you used those countries as reference points (see pg. 6 -
)
we are at a level of reaching autonomy while still charging to the forefront of technology.
If China had uniquely high levels of technological deepening, its gdp growth would be faster.
I have no idea what data you are talking about but if you mean things like per capita income and personal wealth, then of course. The importance is that they are rising and China has much greater overall numbers.
Simple example: only 70% of rural China has access to a toilet (
)
Well, if you're drawing evidence from things that you know are of highly limited probative value, then that's your error there.
No: if China was managed by supremely competent people, evergrande shouldn’t have gone bankrupt (financial regulators should’ve stopped it sooner), securities regulators should’ve found a better way of channeling private Chinese savings to capital formation, and China would be growing faster than tigers at similar levels of development.
The US is "reasonably well managed" compared to its other developed country peers in Europe which honestly don't set a high standard.
The best managed country of all the wealthiest countries is “reasonably well managed”. Sadly, we live on planet earth and deal with constraints of public and asymmetric information and are governed by humans.
