The US is at a massive disadvantage in terms of being bottlenecked by maybe a dozen operationally significant bases but on the flip side the PRC itself gets put on a timer the moment the USN and JMSDF and probably the Indian navy shut down Chinese maritime shipping. There is good progress being made on overland trade corridors and oil & gas pipelines but these are not sufficient to sustain the Chinese economy at anything approaching pre-hostility levels.
The threshold for American success IMO is sustaining a blockade of Chinese commercial traffic long enough to force a capitulation in Beijing. The threshold for Chinese success is probably at least clearing the Arctic maritime route with Russia so that maritime cargos can flow again. This necessitates boots on the ground in the Japanese mainland IMO.
I've studied the figures and to my understanding, assuming the overland trade corridors are completed on schedule and a 20-50% wartime rationing scheme, there is about 3-5 years of state reserves of critical commodities (foods, rare earths, fossil fuels, etc) for the PRC to smash through the blockade and destroy/severely degrade the US global strike command.
Even assuming some 100% effective naval blockade, which would be far from realistic, China's wartime resources and needs are all situation on the eurasian mainland...
I don't see why China has any need to sustain it's entire economy at pre war levels.
If Japan joins in an invasion, which is crucial in many ways for US to have a chance to build up, after China repels the US attack, they will counterattack in Japan. Japan is a 5.7 trillion economy, so US can inflict as much shipping damage to primarily non Chinese flagged vessels which will piss off the whole world as they want, while China can sustain its continued mobilization first by land, and then continously grow through conquest.
A scenario where a China creates it's own client state collection by force using the former US controlled states in Asia and the subcontinent, despite whatever piracy US manages to commit in the far seas thousands of miles away from China, is still going to see significant growth for China, as they can now strip the loser countries of anything valuable, if the need arises.
The whole idea that US can avoid direct assault and just vaguely attack Chinese interests from afar while all of Asia lies open is mainly cope from US side, because they know a direct attack has poor chances of success. But if US doesn't directly attack, China will push and someone else has to take the full brunt of it. So this is really just muddying the waters by saying "meh we don't know what will happen" as opposed to sending an armada to invade Taiwan, where even fairly staunch US nationalists suspect that it may become a turkey shoot.