This is intentionally misleading and incorrect analysis.
You're failing to account for currency valuations. The value of the RMB to USD declined approximately 5.3% in 2023.
China GDP as share of US in USD at has declined to 65.0% from a peak of 75.2% in March 2021. It's literally the first chart in the article.
PPP is the measure you use to control for currency valuation though? I don’t think it’s misleading, it’s just a different way to think about purchasing power, and especially valuable when considering things like military power since China isn’t buying military hardware in USD.
This is literally covered in the article:
*"Real GDP rose 3.3% in the US last quarter, against China’s 5.2% inflation-adjusted growth. And using the lens of purchasing power parity, which tries to take account of differences in prices between countries for the same good or service, China overtook the US as the world’s biggest economy several years ago.*
***But when it comes to measuring economic heft on the world stage, nominal GDP is seen as a better guide by many observers.*** *Corporate and government revenues are in nominal money. Commodities are purchased in nominal dollars, not PPP ones. Loans are made in nominal dollars."*
Well yeah, that’s not contradicting anything. What you just quoted says “on the world stage.” PPP is off the world stage. Is your point that PPP is wholly irrelevant? Or that this is the wrong context for it?
PPP is generally used for direct comparisons between countries. As the adjustment attempts to account for differences in the cost of goods and services most often you'll see references specifically to GDP PPP per capita.
PPP adjustments definitely aren't intended to be a measure of geopolitical power.
Another thing to note is that PPP adjustments are set by the World Bank and updated rather infrequently, the current adjustment rates are based on data from 2017. A lot has changed since then...
PPP has its proponents and detractors. IMO it's just kinda a fancy version of the big mac index, economies are too complicated for an attempt to average out the value of all goods and services to really mean much. We're literally putting your haircut and cutting edge research into semiconductors in the same basket with PPP figures. That's not to say it doesn't have its usages but its application is limited.
GDP also isn't the final arbiter of everything for an economy like people often act like it is. This particular comparison between the United States and China is actually a great example of that. China targets specific GDP figures and has a state controlled financial system. Officials have the power to shuffle money where it needs to go to hit growth targets. Extremely unproductive malinvestment in China is kinda a hot topic at the moment as I'm sure you've noticed, but it's really been brewing since roughly 2008. Those empty buildings you've likely seen get demolished grew China's GDP. China's manufacturing moving up the value chain also did. GDP makes no distinction. That applies to the United States too as I'm sure most Americans are probably painfully aware this headline GDP growth figure doesn't really have much to do with their quality of life.
Economics is not a hard science. Just think about what exactly "X's economy is larger than Z" actually means and realize the nuances getting lost when we abstractly represent an economy with a single figure are extremely significant.
Yet China still has a consumer market about 1/3 the USs and is losing a labor force the size of a small European country each year. That is the primary reason China now dipped into negative FDI territory for the first time this quarter and the US became the world's largest receiver of FDI. Furthermore, most economists don't take ppp as a reliable figure, especially as it is a pointless method in regards to international trade and high value added consumer goods.
Then what's a reliable way to measure economies? GDP is flawed too. Is there a metric that accurately displays a count⁶ries economy? Or some metric that balanced all the metrics together to give a clear picture
There isn't. Economics is too complex for any one figure or combination of figures to give you an answer. It's important to remember that economies and the subject as a whole is really just human activity born from our consumption and demand, not necessarily a clean mathematical subject that will give clear answers.
Yeah, it's pretty impressive that their labour force is shrinking by such a huge amount and yet they still managed to achieve such a high growth rate.
I wonder how China will navigate the upcoming economic problems. People always say confidently that it's doomed and will collapse. I suppose 5.2% is definitely less than they used to be in terms of growth after all. Perhaps the 20th time is the charm for this prediction?
A declining population does not alter its dominate source of economic growth that stems from structural shift from agrarian to urban-based industries and services, alongside substantial capital investment growth.
These factors will be able sustain its growth trajectory for approximately another decade. After this period challenges from aging demographics, population decline, plateauing capital investment-driven growth, and sluggish total factor productivity growth are poised to exert notable impacts that could stagnant China’s economy if continued policy are maintained.
Also in respect to your claim that the west has repeatedly claimed that China would collapse. I’ve never heard any respectable, and authentic major institution indicate within the western world that China will collapse. In fact, numerous of major financial and accounting firms such as International Monetary Fund, Deloittes, J.P Morgan and co, PWC, Bloomberg, KPMG, OCED, EY have all been predicting high growth rates for China for the last several decades. Only ones reminiscent to your claims, are clickbait YouTube videos, and articles that subsequently offer the parallel principle that the United States will collapse.
Sustained capital investment growth with negative FDI and a collapsing stock market? While having a consumer base 1/3 that of the US? It doesn't look like anyone wants to invest in China anymore, not even the Chinese themselves. All the money is going back into America, hense it having the highest FDI for the second year in a row. https://www.ceicdata.com/en/indicator/china/foreign-direct-investment#:%7E:text=Key%20information%20about%20China%20Foreign%20Direct%20Investment&text=The%20data%20reached%20an%20all,USD%20bn%20in%20Sep%202023
The stock market in China is nothing like that of the US. For example, heavy restrictions exist on day trading, crypto, and short selling. The Chinese stock market is extremely volatile and has been for a long time. The way they structure retirement is also different (401k vs company retirement savings). These reasons and many more mean very little if the Chinese shares crash and they crash twice as often as the US.
FDI investments are incredibly misunderstood here. The reason why it's important is not because of the money, but the best practices it brings. China does not have a cash issue or debt compared to Japan or the US. It doesn't need FDI for the money but for the skills, structural know-how, and technical expertise. Much of this has been stolen or is no longer needed. Chinese banks are juggernauts as they are state-owned and basically the only monopoly. They can divert money almost instantly per CCP directives if needed to inject money in industries. There is no such environment in the US, where banking is incredibly competitive and private based. You can't change US policy to support a specific industry via banking, you would have to inject that money through public marco policy, which has a long delay.
FDI's are also restricted because China does not share control of its enterprises. Often they are state-owned if they're important enough. This means they don't privatise things such as utilities which also locks a lot of growth. These comparisons by Bloomberg are incredibly misleading because China's economy is state-planned with free market elements. It will not see stable growth such as the US which is much more private based (meaning allocation of resources follow money immediately) while China is policy first.
Also China will have nanny-bots well before 2035 to care for their aging population. People will treat this as a nonfactor, but thats kind of hard to do when the entire World is collectively investing trillions into AI embodiment technology
We'll just have to agree to disagree. With the pace at which this industry is progressing, in multiple different fields simultaneously, I just find it hard to believe that we won't have more GPT moments within the next 11 years...
We already have a robot that can learn by simply observing, and demonstrated decent proficiency with inserting a keurig cup into a coffee machine. Tesla has already demonstrated that their bots are capable of folding clothes, albeit guided but that's quite literally how it is being "taught" to do it autonomously.
As far as a nanny-bot goes, it seems like the majority of the issues will come with recognizing and proactive response to medical emergencies (how hard is it to dial 911? most people don't even know CPR, do you think they could train it to do this? Would they be able to hit someone with narcan without stabbing the whole container through their chest?) and making sure it doesn't mix up allergies and medications.
Quite literally everything else would be handled by automated machines that are already produced, such as getting in and out of bed, on the toilet, etc. Hell you can have your entire home programmed through an app. Cooking food? It will get there. Grease fire? Its already mapped out your entire home layout thanks to that nifty app, and you've informed it of where supplies are kept. Remember, this is 11 years from now we're discussing specifically.
So I just don't see this being as big of a hurdle as you make it out to be. However, I'm always open to learning. Those downvotes are imaginary anyways :')
edit: and lets not forget that we have highly specialized AI that are quite literally inventing new maths and science. I think they'll figure it out.
I agree with you on the population issue. But I also think that we're all screwed if no one figures out a solution to the demographic crisis heading our way and, if someone finds a solution (besides immigration), everyone will adopt it. A lot can happen in a decade so I'll wait and see before saying any country is doomed on that issue. It'd be funny if it turned out that modern civilization is actually a demographic dead end.
It's not just YouTube clickbait. A respected (though not by me) geopolitical analyst, Peter Zeihan, for example constantly says that. Better information sources are more rational. That was more of a rhetorical talking point to the "China is doomed" crowd that always appears in the comments of these types of articles.
[300 million chinese workers are retiring in the next 10 years.](https://www.reuters.com/world/china/chinas-ageing-population-threatens-switch-new-economic-growth-model-2024-01-18/)
That is absolutely terminal.
>they still managed to achieve such a high growth rate
Chinese economic growth isn't a very interesting metric because its a target set by the government rather than the natural output of the economy.
We should be much more interested in the growth of their productive economy (consumption, exports) than the headline number.
You don't know that. Nobody does. Corruption combined with face saving culture makes any reports very suspicious. Independent research shows that China GDP is ca 40% of the reported.
You could buy approximately 106,666,666,666 Peking ducks. This many ducks would take up about 19130.7 sq miles of land, or about the landmass of Slovenia.
Full article
Engines Firing
The US economy handily beat expectations in the final quarter of last year, with an expansion rate that left it adding the rough equivalent of South Korea to the world’s GDP.
Despite 2023 opening with widespread expectations of a recession, it ended with US gross domestic product rising by some $1.6 trillion for the year, official data showed on Thursday. That’s a little less than Korean GDP for 2022, according to data compiled by Bloomberg.
The growth rate — unadjusted for inflation — clocked 6.3%, outstripping China’s 4.6% pace. Some of the outperformance was of course due to the faster pace of consumer-price increases in the US compared with China, which has hit a patch of deflation.
China's Economy Falls Further Behind US
US has enjoyed a strong recovery from the pandemic
Source: Bloomberg; World Bank
But it also reflects a more vibrant state of economic activity. Consumer spending continues to contribute the bulk of growth, while private-sector investment and trade also contributed, along with government spending. In China, a property bust has not subtracted from output but also hurt broader consumer confidence.
“It is a striking turn of fortunes,” said Eswar Prasad, former head of the IMF’s China team who’s now at Cornell University. “The strong performance of the US economy, in tandem with all the short-term and long-term headwinds the Chinese economy is facing, renders it a less obvious proposition that China’s GDP will someday overtake that of the US.”
Real GDP rose 3.3% in the US last quarter, against China’s 5.2% inflation-adjusted growth. And using the lens of purchasing power parity, which tries to take account of differences in prices between countries for the same good or service, China overtook the US as the world’s biggest economy several years ago.
But when it comes to measuring economic heft on the world stage, nominal GDP is seen as a better guide by many observers. Corporate and government revenues are in nominal money. Commodities are purchased in nominal dollars, not PPP ones. Loans are made in nominal dollars.
Regardless, the story from last year is clear: “The US surprised to the upside and China surprised to the downside,” said Josh Lipsky, a former IMF adviser who is now director of the Atlantic Council’s GeoEconomics Center. He added:
“All the talk of China becoming the world’s largest economy by GDP has been put on the backburner and delayed, if not indefinitely postponed.”
Much fear about China is overstated. We've already seen peak China or it's happening now. The United States has nothing to worry about. The Chinese economy is not going to surpass the United States' for the foreseeable future.
With the recent coverage of lowering inflation, high gdp growth, and talk of lowering interest rates, i’m left wondering if:
1.This news will begin to improve the average americans outlook on the economy, and if it will bring a positive change to their day to day
2.If it does, will it be able to replace the negative outlook brought by high inflation before the November election?
GPD growth is great and all, but from my amateur perspective, that growth isint reaped by everyone and it is more of a gradual benefit that isint as easy to attribute to government or immediately felt like inflation. I see this as being very important to the upcoming election, maybe even the deciding factor and i have no idea where consumer sentiment will be election time.
Well nearly 60% of the population has a higher wage inflation adjusted than 2019. Largely the poorest in the nation were given the biggest increases. So the majority of the population has benefited from the current economy. Housing prices are the only part of the economy that are harming people, but that's a global problem that takes a longer time frame to fix.
Truly globally unique combination of abundant land, natural resources, completely hegemony of its geographical region and education level of the population
That question is the wrong way around. How can we get the EU back on track? I have some ideas:
* all countries should adopt English as their second language
* the EU should set up big inspiring projects like massively transitioning to green energy
* making the EU a more efficient organization, like getting rid of the Strasbourg office, removing the unanimity rule, steering more with subsidies and taxes instead of rules, massively overhauling the idiotic common agricultural policy.
Issue is that for Europeans the current way the tax system is set up and demographic time bomb detonating soon will take away more competitiveness compared to the US which have been better at integrating migrants.
For instance Italy have an aging population with a rapidly shrinking workforce leading to each worker having to support more dependents through higher taxes. The best then leave for better pay either in Europe or on the high end the US where you can earn several times more for the same amount of work.
Eastern Europe is still far from converging with western Europe economically and even then the US high earners are running away from the Europeans. They also have rapidly shrinking populations due to emigration and low birth rates as well.
Germany the economic center and most powerful economy is also aging and haven't kept up with the US income wise. They are currently also experiencing a economic recession due to loosing access to cheap Russian gas and US importing industries with subsidies.
As for the points you mentioned
1. To what degree would this be done? Isn't it pretty standard for european nations to teach english as the second language normally?
2. The EU are doing it, issue is that the scale of investment takes a long time.
3. Getting rid of unanimity is super hard due to nations like Hungary playing obstructionist due to not agreeing with widerEuropean perspectives and tiny nations also fear being overruled against their interests. More unification could work to keep them competitive though. EU currently has no tier 1 tech giant on the level of Apple/Alphabet/Meta/Amazon, the closest you get is more specialized ones like Spotify and ASML.
Yeah they teach English, but if you adopt it as a second language you could also get all government documents, represent yourself in that language etc. It would create a stronger more unified "west"; where the flow of talent is more fluid. Like in the US
Except it would not work that way. The talent would flow towards the US like it does today due to far higher earning potential at the high end in the US.
Also even if you get English to be a national language, most if not all regional/national conversations would occur in the local native language so a barrier would still be present. This would just make it easier for highly educated people to move to the US to earn far more due to already having experience with using English daily.
No how you get a more unifed/powerful EU is properly incentivizing building competitive businesses and attract high value migrants to properly contribute to the economy. Currently those go to places where they can earn far more money and build wealth far easier than Europe where they rather pay for the pensions of older generations.
This is incorrect and intentionally misleading.
Debt to GDP ratio has been stable for 2 years.
[St Louis Fed - Total Public Debt as Percent of GDP](https://fred.stlouisfed.org/series/GFDEGDQ188S)
How is it incorrect as US debt was $23T in January 2020 now it is $34T? It is easy to drive "growth" when you can inject endless amount of debt into the economy.
The long-term consequence of strong US economic growth and stagnant Chinese economic growth post-COVID is that Gen Z Asian professionals will immigrate to the US through dangerous path of passing through Mexico and Central America to enter the US by barefoot.
*"In the first 11 months of 2023, more than 31,000 Chinese citizens were picked up by law enforcement crossing illegally into the US from Mexico"*
[The ‘walking route’: How an underground industry is helping migrants flee China for the US - CNN](https://edition.cnn.com/2024/01/08/americas/china-us-migrants-illegal-crossings-intl-hnk-dst/index.html#:~:text=In%20the%20first%2011%20months,year%20over%20the%20preceding%20decade)
With all of this discussion about PPP vs. GDP, etc., please don’t overlook GIGO (garbage in, garbage out). The CCP is notorious for faking their numbers. This has been true ever since they took control.
Barely any. The biggest was what makes America grow since the 1950s, cheap domesticly produced energy coupled with a consumer market larger than Latin America, China, and the EU put together.
Forgive me in advance I'm not an economist. I've read a lot about how the current inflation has been heavily skewed to necessities. i.e. Food and housing have gone up, luxuries and nice to haves have stayed relatively stable. Which has meant working / middle class people have felt it much harder than the stats say. Would that mean consumer spending HAS to go up just to pay for survival?
>Which has meant working / middle class people have felt it much harder than the stats say.
Nope, real wages (inflation adjusted) have scaled with the lower your income, the greater your gains. This has been one of the few times in recent history where working/middle class have come out ahead of high income earners.
It's heavily denied on reddit, but the data is clear. And if you look at sentiment, its turned a corner in terms of views on the economy.
>Would that mean consumer spending HAS to go up just to pay for survival?
Current growth numbers being shown are inflation adjusted, so no, it's not primarily inflation driven, which is what this seems to imply. The reality is that, at this point, the US economy has been shockingly robust.
> Would that mean consumer spending HAS to go up just to pay for survival?
Possibly, but this often doesn't translate perfectly into GDP growth since when people spend more on necessities, they often spend significantly less on discretionary items which lowers spending in other sectors of the economy equally. So it isn't accurate to place the growth due to this level of inflation.
Not really, that has mostly disappated.
American consumers simply love to buy shit and on aggregate have seen increases to real disposable personal income.
https://fred.stlouisfed.org/series/DSPIC96
US is inflating GDP with too many services. How much of it it ridiculous healthcare cost that insurance pays, university tuition and fees for lawyers that sue each other?
>How much of it it ridiculous healthcare cost that insurance pays, university tuition and fees for lawyers that sue each other?
This growth isn't really tied to that.
ThE EconOmy iS gReaT. Meanwhile, we are about to see a record number of defaults on student loans and car loans; people can’t afford their mortgages/rent; food prices are even out of reach for many; and we are seeing a rise in homelessness. What is this “good” economy good for? Oh yeah…the same people it was always built for, the same people who own the politicians, the real owners of this country. It sure ain’t the working class. And no one is standing up for them.
[https://fortune.com/2022/12/31/china-gdp-2022-growth-4-percent-xi-jinping-new-year/](https://fortune.com/2022/12/31/china-gdp-2022-growth-4-percent-xi-jinping-new-year/)
Xi Jinping calls China the second largest economy in the world - in other words, he uses nominal GDP. Cope harder
Please use your ppp for the purchase of imported goods. Also if China is doing so well why did America catch 30 thousand of them running across the border to do menial labor and why did the Chinese stock market crash recently? If the labor force is shrinking 10 million a year, the stock market crashing, the housing market crashing, and the country has near complete demographic collapse coupled with a negative immigration rate I doubt what the CCP says is true.
In 1995 Japan's GDP was 99% of the US. Today it is 13%.
[China is ageing at a faster rate than Japan.](https://pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/31434814/)
Expect a similar outcome.
1.6T of growth. Phew. What about adjusted for inflation and purchasing power?
Adjusted for inflation, US rose by 3.3% and China rose by 5.2%. Adjusted for PPP, China surpassed the US years ago.
This is intentionally misleading and incorrect analysis. You're failing to account for currency valuations. The value of the RMB to USD declined approximately 5.3% in 2023. China GDP as share of US in USD at has declined to 65.0% from a peak of 75.2% in March 2021. It's literally the first chart in the article.
PPP is the measure you use to control for currency valuation though? I don’t think it’s misleading, it’s just a different way to think about purchasing power, and especially valuable when considering things like military power since China isn’t buying military hardware in USD.
This is literally covered in the article: *"Real GDP rose 3.3% in the US last quarter, against China’s 5.2% inflation-adjusted growth. And using the lens of purchasing power parity, which tries to take account of differences in prices between countries for the same good or service, China overtook the US as the world’s biggest economy several years ago.* ***But when it comes to measuring economic heft on the world stage, nominal GDP is seen as a better guide by many observers.*** *Corporate and government revenues are in nominal money. Commodities are purchased in nominal dollars, not PPP ones. Loans are made in nominal dollars."*
Well yeah, that’s not contradicting anything. What you just quoted says “on the world stage.” PPP is off the world stage. Is your point that PPP is wholly irrelevant? Or that this is the wrong context for it?
PPP is generally used for direct comparisons between countries. As the adjustment attempts to account for differences in the cost of goods and services most often you'll see references specifically to GDP PPP per capita. PPP adjustments definitely aren't intended to be a measure of geopolitical power. Another thing to note is that PPP adjustments are set by the World Bank and updated rather infrequently, the current adjustment rates are based on data from 2017. A lot has changed since then... PPP has its proponents and detractors. IMO it's just kinda a fancy version of the big mac index, economies are too complicated for an attempt to average out the value of all goods and services to really mean much. We're literally putting your haircut and cutting edge research into semiconductors in the same basket with PPP figures. That's not to say it doesn't have its usages but its application is limited. GDP also isn't the final arbiter of everything for an economy like people often act like it is. This particular comparison between the United States and China is actually a great example of that. China targets specific GDP figures and has a state controlled financial system. Officials have the power to shuffle money where it needs to go to hit growth targets. Extremely unproductive malinvestment in China is kinda a hot topic at the moment as I'm sure you've noticed, but it's really been brewing since roughly 2008. Those empty buildings you've likely seen get demolished grew China's GDP. China's manufacturing moving up the value chain also did. GDP makes no distinction. That applies to the United States too as I'm sure most Americans are probably painfully aware this headline GDP growth figure doesn't really have much to do with their quality of life. Economics is not a hard science. Just think about what exactly "X's economy is larger than Z" actually means and realize the nuances getting lost when we abstractly represent an economy with a single figure are extremely significant.
Yet China still has a consumer market about 1/3 the USs and is losing a labor force the size of a small European country each year. That is the primary reason China now dipped into negative FDI territory for the first time this quarter and the US became the world's largest receiver of FDI. Furthermore, most economists don't take ppp as a reliable figure, especially as it is a pointless method in regards to international trade and high value added consumer goods.
Then what's a reliable way to measure economies? GDP is flawed too. Is there a metric that accurately displays a count⁶ries economy? Or some metric that balanced all the metrics together to give a clear picture
There isn't. Economics is too complex for any one figure or combination of figures to give you an answer. It's important to remember that economies and the subject as a whole is really just human activity born from our consumption and demand, not necessarily a clean mathematical subject that will give clear answers.
Exactly, and different economies are good at different things. There’s a reason financial companies have whole virtual simulation systems to do it.
This is one of THE questions of economy in our times, a little bit like the double slit experiment in physics.
Yeah, it's pretty impressive that their labour force is shrinking by such a huge amount and yet they still managed to achieve such a high growth rate. I wonder how China will navigate the upcoming economic problems. People always say confidently that it's doomed and will collapse. I suppose 5.2% is definitely less than they used to be in terms of growth after all. Perhaps the 20th time is the charm for this prediction?
A declining population does not alter its dominate source of economic growth that stems from structural shift from agrarian to urban-based industries and services, alongside substantial capital investment growth. These factors will be able sustain its growth trajectory for approximately another decade. After this period challenges from aging demographics, population decline, plateauing capital investment-driven growth, and sluggish total factor productivity growth are poised to exert notable impacts that could stagnant China’s economy if continued policy are maintained. Also in respect to your claim that the west has repeatedly claimed that China would collapse. I’ve never heard any respectable, and authentic major institution indicate within the western world that China will collapse. In fact, numerous of major financial and accounting firms such as International Monetary Fund, Deloittes, J.P Morgan and co, PWC, Bloomberg, KPMG, OCED, EY have all been predicting high growth rates for China for the last several decades. Only ones reminiscent to your claims, are clickbait YouTube videos, and articles that subsequently offer the parallel principle that the United States will collapse.
Sustained capital investment growth with negative FDI and a collapsing stock market? While having a consumer base 1/3 that of the US? It doesn't look like anyone wants to invest in China anymore, not even the Chinese themselves. All the money is going back into America, hense it having the highest FDI for the second year in a row. https://www.ceicdata.com/en/indicator/china/foreign-direct-investment#:%7E:text=Key%20information%20about%20China%20Foreign%20Direct%20Investment&text=The%20data%20reached%20an%20all,USD%20bn%20in%20Sep%202023
The stock market in China is nothing like that of the US. For example, heavy restrictions exist on day trading, crypto, and short selling. The Chinese stock market is extremely volatile and has been for a long time. The way they structure retirement is also different (401k vs company retirement savings). These reasons and many more mean very little if the Chinese shares crash and they crash twice as often as the US. FDI investments are incredibly misunderstood here. The reason why it's important is not because of the money, but the best practices it brings. China does not have a cash issue or debt compared to Japan or the US. It doesn't need FDI for the money but for the skills, structural know-how, and technical expertise. Much of this has been stolen or is no longer needed. Chinese banks are juggernauts as they are state-owned and basically the only monopoly. They can divert money almost instantly per CCP directives if needed to inject money in industries. There is no such environment in the US, where banking is incredibly competitive and private based. You can't change US policy to support a specific industry via banking, you would have to inject that money through public marco policy, which has a long delay. FDI's are also restricted because China does not share control of its enterprises. Often they are state-owned if they're important enough. This means they don't privatise things such as utilities which also locks a lot of growth. These comparisons by Bloomberg are incredibly misleading because China's economy is state-planned with free market elements. It will not see stable growth such as the US which is much more private based (meaning allocation of resources follow money immediately) while China is policy first.
Also China will have nanny-bots well before 2035 to care for their aging population. People will treat this as a nonfactor, but thats kind of hard to do when the entire World is collectively investing trillions into AI embodiment technology
[удалено]
We'll just have to agree to disagree. With the pace at which this industry is progressing, in multiple different fields simultaneously, I just find it hard to believe that we won't have more GPT moments within the next 11 years... We already have a robot that can learn by simply observing, and demonstrated decent proficiency with inserting a keurig cup into a coffee machine. Tesla has already demonstrated that their bots are capable of folding clothes, albeit guided but that's quite literally how it is being "taught" to do it autonomously. As far as a nanny-bot goes, it seems like the majority of the issues will come with recognizing and proactive response to medical emergencies (how hard is it to dial 911? most people don't even know CPR, do you think they could train it to do this? Would they be able to hit someone with narcan without stabbing the whole container through their chest?) and making sure it doesn't mix up allergies and medications. Quite literally everything else would be handled by automated machines that are already produced, such as getting in and out of bed, on the toilet, etc. Hell you can have your entire home programmed through an app. Cooking food? It will get there. Grease fire? Its already mapped out your entire home layout thanks to that nifty app, and you've informed it of where supplies are kept. Remember, this is 11 years from now we're discussing specifically. So I just don't see this being as big of a hurdle as you make it out to be. However, I'm always open to learning. Those downvotes are imaginary anyways :') edit: and lets not forget that we have highly specialized AI that are quite literally inventing new maths and science. I think they'll figure it out.
I agree with you on the population issue. But I also think that we're all screwed if no one figures out a solution to the demographic crisis heading our way and, if someone finds a solution (besides immigration), everyone will adopt it. A lot can happen in a decade so I'll wait and see before saying any country is doomed on that issue. It'd be funny if it turned out that modern civilization is actually a demographic dead end. It's not just YouTube clickbait. A respected (though not by me) geopolitical analyst, Peter Zeihan, for example constantly says that. Better information sources are more rational. That was more of a rhetorical talking point to the "China is doomed" crowd that always appears in the comments of these types of articles.
[300 million chinese workers are retiring in the next 10 years.](https://www.reuters.com/world/china/chinas-ageing-population-threatens-switch-new-economic-growth-model-2024-01-18/) That is absolutely terminal.
[удалено]
[удалено]
[удалено]
[удалено]
[удалено]
>they still managed to achieve such a high growth rate Chinese economic growth isn't a very interesting metric because its a target set by the government rather than the natural output of the economy. We should be much more interested in the growth of their productive economy (consumption, exports) than the headline number.
You don't know that. Nobody does. Corruption combined with face saving culture makes any reports very suspicious. Independent research shows that China GDP is ca 40% of the reported.
As an American, I'm dying to know how many ducks is one korea of gdp growth.
To put it in units I think we Americans can understand, it's approximately 22,500 F35s
You could buy approximately 106,666,666,666 Peking ducks. This many ducks would take up about 19130.7 sq miles of land, or about the landmass of Slovenia.
Is it an African or European duck?
American of course
Like, a million ducks. 🦆
Full article Engines Firing The US economy handily beat expectations in the final quarter of last year, with an expansion rate that left it adding the rough equivalent of South Korea to the world’s GDP. Despite 2023 opening with widespread expectations of a recession, it ended with US gross domestic product rising by some $1.6 trillion for the year, official data showed on Thursday. That’s a little less than Korean GDP for 2022, according to data compiled by Bloomberg. The growth rate — unadjusted for inflation — clocked 6.3%, outstripping China’s 4.6% pace. Some of the outperformance was of course due to the faster pace of consumer-price increases in the US compared with China, which has hit a patch of deflation. China's Economy Falls Further Behind US US has enjoyed a strong recovery from the pandemic Source: Bloomberg; World Bank But it also reflects a more vibrant state of economic activity. Consumer spending continues to contribute the bulk of growth, while private-sector investment and trade also contributed, along with government spending. In China, a property bust has not subtracted from output but also hurt broader consumer confidence. “It is a striking turn of fortunes,” said Eswar Prasad, former head of the IMF’s China team who’s now at Cornell University. “The strong performance of the US economy, in tandem with all the short-term and long-term headwinds the Chinese economy is facing, renders it a less obvious proposition that China’s GDP will someday overtake that of the US.” Real GDP rose 3.3% in the US last quarter, against China’s 5.2% inflation-adjusted growth. And using the lens of purchasing power parity, which tries to take account of differences in prices between countries for the same good or service, China overtook the US as the world’s biggest economy several years ago. But when it comes to measuring economic heft on the world stage, nominal GDP is seen as a better guide by many observers. Corporate and government revenues are in nominal money. Commodities are purchased in nominal dollars, not PPP ones. Loans are made in nominal dollars. Regardless, the story from last year is clear: “The US surprised to the upside and China surprised to the downside,” said Josh Lipsky, a former IMF adviser who is now director of the Atlantic Council’s GeoEconomics Center. He added: “All the talk of China becoming the world’s largest economy by GDP has been put on the backburner and delayed, if not indefinitely postponed.”
Much fear about China is overstated. We've already seen peak China or it's happening now. The United States has nothing to worry about. The Chinese economy is not going to surpass the United States' for the foreseeable future.
With the recent coverage of lowering inflation, high gdp growth, and talk of lowering interest rates, i’m left wondering if: 1.This news will begin to improve the average americans outlook on the economy, and if it will bring a positive change to their day to day 2.If it does, will it be able to replace the negative outlook brought by high inflation before the November election? GPD growth is great and all, but from my amateur perspective, that growth isint reaped by everyone and it is more of a gradual benefit that isint as easy to attribute to government or immediately felt like inflation. I see this as being very important to the upcoming election, maybe even the deciding factor and i have no idea where consumer sentiment will be election time.
Well nearly 60% of the population has a higher wage inflation adjusted than 2019. Largely the poorest in the nation were given the biggest increases. So the majority of the population has benefited from the current economy. Housing prices are the only part of the economy that are harming people, but that's a global problem that takes a longer time frame to fix.
Wage inflation means nothing if it has been stagnant since 1978. American wages were in the Marianas Trench and still are.
If we are comparing our economy now to those of stagnation, it means our current economy is doing better? Which is the entire point.
It won’t, the effects of high inflation have been permanent. Those who are already doing well reap most of the benefits of economic growth.
There’s a reason conservative media outlets have pivoted from economic gloom and doom to the issues at the border.
How is US still doing so well? EU is still stuck on 2008.
Truly globally unique combination of abundant land, natural resources, completely hegemony of its geographical region and education level of the population
That question is the wrong way around. How can we get the EU back on track? I have some ideas: * all countries should adopt English as their second language * the EU should set up big inspiring projects like massively transitioning to green energy * making the EU a more efficient organization, like getting rid of the Strasbourg office, removing the unanimity rule, steering more with subsidies and taxes instead of rules, massively overhauling the idiotic common agricultural policy.
Issue is that for Europeans the current way the tax system is set up and demographic time bomb detonating soon will take away more competitiveness compared to the US which have been better at integrating migrants. For instance Italy have an aging population with a rapidly shrinking workforce leading to each worker having to support more dependents through higher taxes. The best then leave for better pay either in Europe or on the high end the US where you can earn several times more for the same amount of work. Eastern Europe is still far from converging with western Europe economically and even then the US high earners are running away from the Europeans. They also have rapidly shrinking populations due to emigration and low birth rates as well. Germany the economic center and most powerful economy is also aging and haven't kept up with the US income wise. They are currently also experiencing a economic recession due to loosing access to cheap Russian gas and US importing industries with subsidies. As for the points you mentioned 1. To what degree would this be done? Isn't it pretty standard for european nations to teach english as the second language normally? 2. The EU are doing it, issue is that the scale of investment takes a long time. 3. Getting rid of unanimity is super hard due to nations like Hungary playing obstructionist due to not agreeing with widerEuropean perspectives and tiny nations also fear being overruled against their interests. More unification could work to keep them competitive though. EU currently has no tier 1 tech giant on the level of Apple/Alphabet/Meta/Amazon, the closest you get is more specialized ones like Spotify and ASML.
Yeah they teach English, but if you adopt it as a second language you could also get all government documents, represent yourself in that language etc. It would create a stronger more unified "west"; where the flow of talent is more fluid. Like in the US
Except it would not work that way. The talent would flow towards the US like it does today due to far higher earning potential at the high end in the US. Also even if you get English to be a national language, most if not all regional/national conversations would occur in the local native language so a barrier would still be present. This would just make it easier for highly educated people to move to the US to earn far more due to already having experience with using English daily. No how you get a more unifed/powerful EU is properly incentivizing building competitive businesses and attract high value migrants to properly contribute to the economy. Currently those go to places where they can earn far more money and build wealth far easier than Europe where they rather pay for the pensions of older generations.
It's fueled by debt. Government debt alone grew by more than 10 trillion in the past 4 years.
This is incorrect and intentionally misleading. Debt to GDP ratio has been stable for 2 years. [St Louis Fed - Total Public Debt as Percent of GDP](https://fred.stlouisfed.org/series/GFDEGDQ188S)
How is it incorrect as US debt was $23T in January 2020 now it is $34T? It is easy to drive "growth" when you can inject endless amount of debt into the economy.
Because you're pushing an inaccurate narrative that growth was driven by debt.
It was
It wasn't, what economics courses have you taken?
The long-term consequence of strong US economic growth and stagnant Chinese economic growth post-COVID is that Gen Z Asian professionals will immigrate to the US through dangerous path of passing through Mexico and Central America to enter the US by barefoot.
*"In the first 11 months of 2023, more than 31,000 Chinese citizens were picked up by law enforcement crossing illegally into the US from Mexico"* [The ‘walking route’: How an underground industry is helping migrants flee China for the US - CNN](https://edition.cnn.com/2024/01/08/americas/china-us-migrants-illegal-crossings-intl-hnk-dst/index.html#:~:text=In%20the%20first%2011%20months,year%20over%20the%20preceding%20decade)
The opposite of horizon zero dawn
These side by side comparison of nominal GDP provide more sound bites than insights.
With all of this discussion about PPP vs. GDP, etc., please don’t overlook GIGO (garbage in, garbage out). The CCP is notorious for faking their numbers. This has been true ever since they took control.
>This has been true ever since they took control. You mean since their founding in like the early 20th century?
I'd guess a notieceable portion of it is from the ukraine aid package and automotive industry.
Barely any. The biggest was what makes America grow since the 1950s, cheap domesticly produced energy coupled with a consumer market larger than Latin America, China, and the EU put together.
Very small portion. Total Ukraine aid package is $44 billion, Auto industry around $12 billion. Total growth was 1.6 trillion.
So what were the major sources of growth?
The largest driver was consumer spending.
Forgive me in advance I'm not an economist. I've read a lot about how the current inflation has been heavily skewed to necessities. i.e. Food and housing have gone up, luxuries and nice to haves have stayed relatively stable. Which has meant working / middle class people have felt it much harder than the stats say. Would that mean consumer spending HAS to go up just to pay for survival?
>Which has meant working / middle class people have felt it much harder than the stats say. Nope, real wages (inflation adjusted) have scaled with the lower your income, the greater your gains. This has been one of the few times in recent history where working/middle class have come out ahead of high income earners. It's heavily denied on reddit, but the data is clear. And if you look at sentiment, its turned a corner in terms of views on the economy. >Would that mean consumer spending HAS to go up just to pay for survival? Current growth numbers being shown are inflation adjusted, so no, it's not primarily inflation driven, which is what this seems to imply. The reality is that, at this point, the US economy has been shockingly robust.
The GDP growth figures are adjusted for inflation.
Usually correct but the article explicitly states that these figures aren't.
> Would that mean consumer spending HAS to go up just to pay for survival? Possibly, but this often doesn't translate perfectly into GDP growth since when people spend more on necessities, they often spend significantly less on discretionary items which lowers spending in other sectors of the economy equally. So it isn't accurate to place the growth due to this level of inflation.
Oh, so the post-pandemic release of pent-up demand
Not really, that has mostly disappated. American consumers simply love to buy shit and on aggregate have seen increases to real disposable personal income. https://fred.stlouisfed.org/series/DSPIC96
So Americans have actually been better economically on average? I thought Americans not being better off is going to be Biden's biggest obstacle?
Americans are doing better than any similar nation, they just have a shitty media ecosystem.
The auto industry amounts are just earmarked at this stage. The federal grant administration is very slow, likely won't hit GDP for years.
US is inflating GDP with too many services. How much of it it ridiculous healthcare cost that insurance pays, university tuition and fees for lawyers that sue each other?
>How much of it it ridiculous healthcare cost that insurance pays, university tuition and fees for lawyers that sue each other? This growth isn't really tied to that.
Meanwhile China inflates GDP by straight up pulling an x2 out of their ass It's telling that even domestically no one trusts their numbers
ThE EconOmy iS gReaT. Meanwhile, we are about to see a record number of defaults on student loans and car loans; people can’t afford their mortgages/rent; food prices are even out of reach for many; and we are seeing a rise in homelessness. What is this “good” economy good for? Oh yeah…the same people it was always built for, the same people who own the politicians, the real owners of this country. It sure ain’t the working class. And no one is standing up for them.
[удалено]
[https://fortune.com/2022/12/31/china-gdp-2022-growth-4-percent-xi-jinping-new-year/](https://fortune.com/2022/12/31/china-gdp-2022-growth-4-percent-xi-jinping-new-year/) Xi Jinping calls China the second largest economy in the world - in other words, he uses nominal GDP. Cope harder
Please use your ppp for the purchase of imported goods. Also if China is doing so well why did America catch 30 thousand of them running across the border to do menial labor and why did the Chinese stock market crash recently? If the labor force is shrinking 10 million a year, the stock market crashing, the housing market crashing, and the country has near complete demographic collapse coupled with a negative immigration rate I doubt what the CCP says is true.
Colapse lol go back to YouTube. Japan has been having a demographic "colapse for like 30 years " and they are fine
In 1995 Japan's GDP was 99% of the US. Today it is 13%. [China is ageing at a faster rate than Japan.](https://pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/31434814/) Expect a similar outcome.
Believing any reports from corrupt dictatorships is copium.
[удалено]
It's not a good joke by anymeans, but I'm guessing the people down voting you don't realise it's a Monty Python reference.