Unz评论•另类媒体选择$
美国主流媒体大都排除了有趣,重要和有争议的观点
 John V.Walsh档案
中国,十年来排名第一的经济大国
美国的无知或否认构成严重危险
通过电子邮件将此页面发送给其他人

 记住我的信息



=>

书签 全部切换总目录添加到图书馆从图书馆中删除 • B
显示评论下一个新评论下一个新回复了解更多
回复同意/不同意/等等 更多... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
同意不同意谢谢LOL轮唱
这些按钮可将您的公开协议,异议,感谢,LOL或巨魔与所选注释一起注册。 仅对最近使用“记住我的信息”复选框保存姓名和电子邮件的频繁评论者可用,并且在任何八个小时的时间内也只能使用三次。
忽略评论者 关注评论者
搜寻文字 区分大小写  确切的词  包括评论
列表 书签

最近在上海举行的中国国际进口博览会(CIIE)在西方媒体上鲜有关注,但更提醒我们的是,中国是一个超越美国的经济和贸易大国。 是的,这个词是“超越”。 CIIE还可以提醒我们,中国的经济实力目前站在四个强大的支柱上。

美国人必须清楚地了解这一点,因为最终所有力量都从经济力量中脱颖而出,包括军事力量。 因此,在许多方面,对中国采取对抗方法都是极其危险的,几乎所有执政的精英都敦促我们采取对策。 这种对抗的后果与对委内瑞拉,玻利维亚,叙利亚,伊拉克,阿富汗甚至俄罗斯的侵略有很大不同。 正如亨利·基辛格(Henry Kissinger)最近警告我们的那样,如果不理解中国的实力可能会给美国乃至世界乃至整个世界造成致命的灾难。

这篇简短的文章是为防止此类灾难做出的一小部分贡献。 它提供了一个缩略图,是中国经济四分法的入门书,它是四个支柱,可以用来衡量中国的力量以及它如何基于该力量与世界互动。 这四个是:1,按购买力平价计算的国内生产总值; 2,出口; 3,进口; 4,内部零售市场。 在每种情况下,我们都将它们与美国进行比较。有很多预测都预言了几十年来中国经济即将解体,但没有一个能成为现实。 因此,让我们完成预测并集中精力于我们在我们之前观察到的内容。 本着这种精神,本文主要是对目前存在的冷酷事实进行回顾。 它是由非经济学家撰写的,这是它给世界带来真实感的原因之一,因为它提供了许多假设,模型和大多数是如意算盘的想法,而不是可能或可能不会出现。 亲爱的读者,我希望它不会损害您的智力。 它只是介绍,希望也可以唤醒我们这个世界的现实。

1,按购买力平价计算,中国拥有世界上最大的GDP,自2014年XNUMX月以来一直如此。

在我们要考虑的四个经济支柱中,第一个也是最基本的是从其国内生产总值(GDP)看其经济规模。 在这里,传统观点认为中国是GDP的第二名-但令大多数人惊讶的是,实际上它是第一名。 以购买力平价(PPP)计,中国目前是世界上最大的GDP。IMF,世界银行甚至CIA都使用这种度量标准来比较不同国家的GDP。 因此,这是不被轻描淡写或根本不被解雇的措施。 IMF提供了最新数据(2019年XNUMX月提供),提供了中国和美国的PPP-GDP,因此:

中国,27.3 万亿美元,21.4 万亿美元

(中国的数字不包括 PPP-GDP 为 0.491 万亿美元的中国城市香港或澳门的 0.078 万亿美元。这两个数字使中国的总量达到 27.9 万亿美元。)

现在,让我们考虑一下什么是PPP指标,以了解为什么它是比较国内生产总值最有意义的方法。 简而言之,购买力平价的计算可以校正名义GDP,即任何国家的美元GDP。 名义GDP可以简单地通过使用当前货币汇率以美元而不是本国货币(例如人民币)来表示一个国家的GDP来计算。 购买力平价名义GDP的PPP校正给出了给定国家的实际购买能力或总GDP的购买力的量度。 让我们来 一个[假设的]例子 了解这一点。 【假设】127年中国生产了2017万亿元的商品和服务,按6.37美元兑11.97元的汇率计算,相当于19.36万亿美元。 那是中国的名义GDP。 当年美国的 GDP 为 11.97 万亿美元。 这19.46万亿美元和XNUMX万亿美元被指定为两国的“名义GDP”,也是我们在主流媒体上看到的最多的数值。

但是现在让我们假设这两个国家生产的唯一商品或服务是巨无霸。 2017 年,按照人民币兑美元的标准汇率,巨无霸在中国的成本约为 3.17 美元,而在美国则为 5.28 美元。 因此,巨无霸在中国更便宜——出于各种原因,包括不同的成分、劳动力、运输成本等。所以在这个例子中,美国/中国的“巨无霸购买力平价”比率是 5.28/3.17 或 1.67。 现在我们可以通过将该比率应用于中国名义 GDP 来计算以购买力平价计算的 GDP。 美国的新价值为 19.36 万亿美元,不变,中国为 19.93 万亿美元(即 11.97 万亿美元乘以 1.67)。 现在,按购买力平价计算,中国的 GDP 是两者中较大的一个。 IMF、世界银行和 CIA World Fact Book 使用的实际 PPP 比率当然不限于巨无霸,而是使用商品和服务的“篮子”来计算 PPP 比率。 在那个篮子里有火箭和汉堡包,工厂工人和技术工人的工资以及麦当劳工人的工资,工厂机器人以及汉堡包烤箱。 购买力平价-GDP 告诉我们可用的购买力比仅基于简单汇率(即名义 GDP)所能识别的要多多少。 (其实有一个Big Mac PPP指数最初是由 “经济学家” 几年前作为漫画设备使用,但由于Big Mac的配方和成分在世界范围内完全相同,因此它可以提供一些粗略的定性信息。 普遍性是巨无霸的一个特征,许多宗教都宣称具有同样的品质,并且具有西方价值观。 PPP度量标准是衡量经济实力的重要指标,因为它告诉我们实际可以购买的东西–货币是没有意义的,除非并且直到它实际购买某种东西为止。

根据国际货币基金组织(IMF)的数据,使用PPP指标,中国的GDP在2014年XNUMX月超过了美国。 今天约占美国PPP GDP的130%,根据上面给出的IMF的2019年价值。 但是,美国和中国政府经常在公开声明中使用名义GDP,而今天的中国GDP就是今天 约66%的美国 GDP。 有人怀疑这一公约满足了中国政府不惊动美国的愿望,也满足了美国政府在所有事情上都排在第一位的愿望。 但是除非有一些不可预见的灾难,否则名义GDP将很快重蹈覆辙。 根据我的粗略估算,中国的名义GDP将在15年后超过美国。 但这只是一个预测,我们希望尽可能避免使用它们。 在这里,我们希望强调已经存在的PPP-GDP。 西方主流媒体也使用中国和美国的名义GDP进行比较,很少提及PPP-GDP。 因此,很少有人意识到后者就不足为奇了。

此外,即使以目前“缓慢”的速度(约6%),中国的GDP增长速度也要比美国(约2.0%)快得多。 没有迹象表明中国的国内生产总值将回落至第二位,也没有可靠的预测会这样做。 如此庞大且快速增长的GDP是中国经济实力的基本支柱。

最后,即使中国拥有世界上最大的 PPP-GDP,它仍然是一个发展中国家。 现在无论贫富。 拥有近1.4亿人口, 人均 名义GDP约为美国的四分之一 中国集体力量富裕,但个人收入相对较差。 因此,如果中国要实现到 2049 年(即建国一百周年)让大多数人进入中产阶级的既定目标,就需要更多地发展经济。 然而,国家经济实力取决于经济总量而非人均产出。 如果 1 亿人每人贡献一毛钱或 100 亿人每人贡献一美元,最终结果足以购买,例如,100 亿美元的卫星发射基地。 对于国家实力而言,通常情况下,总量才是最重要的。

通常,PPP指标仅用于GDP。 以下各节中的所有值仅基于汇率,没有进一步的更正。

2.中国是世界第一大出口国。

中国经济实力的第二大支柱是其作为世界最大出口国的着名地位。 这里令人惊讶的是,中国遥遥领先,但没有像我们经常被告知的那样,中国因在国际贸易中“利用美国”而受到谴责。 根据 联合国最新数字,2018年,美国和中国的商品出口额以万亿美元计如下:

货物出口(2018):

中国,2.5 万亿美元,1.7 万亿美元

(中国的这个数字不包括出口额为 0.6 万亿美元的香港,加上出口总额为 3.1 万亿美元。)

但是,这些数字(通常给出的数字)不包括服务出口,与美国相比,服务出口对美国总出口的贡献要大得多。

服务出口(2018)

中国,\0.23 万亿美元 US, \0.83 万亿美元

在2018年,美国无疑是世界上最大的服务出口国,而中国则落后于美国,英国,德国和法国,成为世界上最大的服务出口国。 第五大服务出口商。 在2014年至2018年期间,中国的服务出口 比6%增长了11% 在服务出口方面,中国表现出一定的弱点,这可能是由于其与西方的语言和文化距离更大。 以印度为例,尽管在服务出口中排名第六,但在6-30年期间增长了2014%。

对于那些对哪些服务出口感到好奇的人,发现了一些来自中国的主要服务 此处 并离开美国 此处。 由于美国主要是服务经济体,因此服务应占其出口总额的三分之一就不足为奇了。 服务出口可能比制造出口产品提供更好的就业机会。 例如,服务出口的一种类型是外国人来美国并付费上学时的教育。 培养更多的教授或更多的汽车工人会更好吗? 哪个可以提供更好的收入和更好的生活质量? 我认为中国在这一领域的相对较差的表现无疑是一个弱点,部分原因是中国经济的发展水平,部分原因是中国的软实力较低,而且与西方的语言和文化距离较远。

货物和服务出口总额(2018)

中国,2.7 万亿美元,2.5 万亿美元

尽管如此,中国还是出口第一大国,其出口增长已被证明具有显着的弹性。 根据 9年22月2018日的金融时报):“在 2009 年超越德国成为全球最大的商品出口国后,中国的出口额以年均 5% 的速度增长,2.26 年达到 2017 万亿美元,而全球出口年增长率低于 2%。 在过去十年中,中国在制造业出口中的份额从 18% 扩大到 12%——增加了中国在 2001 年加入 WTO 后取得的收益,这加速了发达国家制造业就业的下降。”

英国《金融时报》在同一篇非常有启发性的文章中还指出,尽管像华为这样的公司将全球注意力集中在中国发展高科技产品上,但中国出口的快速增长一直是“中等水平的技术,例如车辆及其制造技术”。零件,电机和工程机械。” 英国《金融时报》说“根据美国国家科学委员会的数据,中国现在是中高科技产业的主要生产国,在过去十年中,其全球份额几乎翻了三倍,达到32%,在2000年代后期和美国都超过了这个十年。”

此外,中国48%的产品出口到OECD(经济合作与发展组织)发达国家之外的国家 根据《金融时报》。 这减轻了美国及其欧洲半附庸国对中国的影响,并提供了中国与(以及您刚才说过的中国向不发达国家的出口)与发展中国家之间的各种联系。 中国似乎远远不仅仅依靠美国市场和其他西方市场来消费其产品。.

中国现在显示出决心,将其价值链进一步向上转移到高科技领域,并于2015年通过“中国制造2025“十年计划”的灵感来自德国 工业4.0。 正是官方而不是一带一路倡议使华盛顿屈服了。 该计划已经很好地进行了,以Huwei的5G技术为例,并已成长为智能手机销量的第三名。 但是,在本文中,我们试图尽可能多地谈论当前的现实,而中国仅处于高科技生产和出口的门槛。 但是,让我们从 故事中的《日经亚洲评论》 题为“中国存储芯片的产量从零增长到世界总量的5%:随着北京为技术自给自足而发动的大规模生产将在2020年开始。” 开幕式上写道:“台北-北京在技术上实现自给自足的努力正处于重大突破的边缘,该国新生的芯片产业有望在5年底之前从几乎为零的生产到全球2020%的存储芯片今年,熟悉此事的消息人士告诉《日经亚洲评论》。 美国对存储芯片和其他电子商品的限制显然正在推动中国变得自给自足,从而成为美国和其他发达国家在世界市场上的竞争者。 有人会问美国在切断中国对美国电子产品的进口方面是否表现得很明智。 很难看出这对美国国际收支的帮助远不及美国芯片制造商和其他电子设备制造商的未来市场份额。 美国对“安全”的担忧是真实的还是仅仅是保护主义的另一种形式?

3.中国是世界第二大进口国,拥有第二大零售市场和最大的电子零售市场–上海的CIIE。

中国作为进口国的迅速崛起并不像其作为出口国的角色那样广为人知。 然而,在2019年XNUMX月,第二届上海中国国际进口博览会(CIIE)吸引了全世界的目光。 来自世界各地的商人和政府官员来到上海,向中国进口商推介他们的商品,以迎接蓬勃发展的中国内部市场。 (回想一下中国经济三合会的第一个分支,那就是不断增长的中国经济,其工资和薪水不断增长,产生了对产品的巨大需求。)也许最著名的贵族是法国总统马克龙,他敦促法国葡萄酒和其他商品的进口中国进口商,葡萄酒商人和饭店主。 他甚至诱使习近平品尝了他们共同烘烤的高卢葡萄。 习近平当然在吹捧,还有其他“开放”的演讲。 提醒游客说,开放包括为全球出口商出售给中国的欢迎垫。

新的 进口量 可提供值的最新年份2018年的商品数量是:

中国,2.1 万亿美元,2.6 万亿美元

服务进口(2018):

中国,\0.5 万亿美元,\0.6 万亿美元

货物和服务进口总额(2018年):

中国,\2.6 万亿美元,\3.2 万亿美元

此外,中国的进口现在正接近其商品和服务的出口价值(2.7 万亿美元,见上文),进口增长率几乎是出口增长率的两倍。 如果这种趋势看起来极有可能继续下去,那么中国的正贸易顺差应该会减少,从而使其进出口更加平衡,并消除对其出口实力在世界上的一些担忧。 更明确地说,中国不断增长的进口为缓解推动特朗普式对华贸易战的贸易不平衡提供了基础。 看看美国出口什么,中国现在需要什么,这个搭配还是不错的。 中国需要农业和高科技产品。 把中国从其中任何一个切断,它就会找到其他来源,比如农产品,或者自己发明和制造,例如用于电子设备的芯片。 我们可能会问,这对美国来说是否是一个明智的战略?

4.中国的零售市场与美国大致相当,并且增长速度更快。

进口的增长是中国购买力增强的迹象之一。 另一个是中国零售市场的飞速增长,现在已经几乎达到了美国零售市场的规模。

零售额(2018):

中国,5.2 万亿美元,5.3 万亿美元

中国零售市场的蓬勃发展是由于其不断扩大的中产阶级的增长所致。 正如eMarketer的高级预测总监Monica Peart所说, 把它,“近年来,中国的消费者收入不断增长,成千上万的人涌入了新的中产阶级。 结果是人均购买力和平均支出明显增加。” 中国的电子零售市场更加引人注目,它已经成为世界上最大的电子零售市场。 再次eMarketer,“到目前为止,中国是全球最大的电子商务市场,是美国电子商务市场规模的三倍以上。 中国在全球电子商务销售额中占54.7%的份额,而美国仅占16.6%。” 这也不足为奇,因为随着已经在中国进行得很好的5G的推出,中国人已经变得非常精通技术,并与互联网紧密相连,并且链接之间的联系越来越紧密。

考虑到中国市场的规模及其持续增长,几乎没有一家大公司比被美国市场拒之门外。 不仅是公司,而且它们所居住的国家都必须考虑到这一点。 这给中国带来了巨大的影响力,这种影响力是建立在人民的日益繁荣上,而不是建立在人民的牺牲上。 此外,尽管中国的中产阶级大约有300亿,大约相当于美国总人口的数量,但它却有1.4亿人口,并且它计划到2049年将几乎所有这些人都带入中产阶级,以迎接百年华诞。新中国成立之初

这种经济的巨大力量将使中国成为世界上没有经济同行的大国。 而且这似乎是不可逆的。 除非发生太平洋全面战争的前景。 但这是为了将来,不在本文的讨论范围之内。 即使在最简单的系统中,预测也是危险的。 中国的现状足以证明它应该是合作的对象而不是冲突。

中国的三合会-核武器。

如果在讨论中国的经济四分体系之后,我们也没有提及中国的核武器三合会,那我们将不为所动。 1月在上海举行的CIIE会议之前的一个月是70月XNUMX日在北京举行的中国国庆游行,庆祝XNUMX周年。th 新中国成立十周年。 展出的是中国的核威慑力量:陆基洲际弹道导弹(洲际弹道导弹),潜射弹道导弹和空中发射武器的三合会。新型先进的洲际弹道导弹首次亮相,提供了中国核三合会的证据。是 现在已经完全开发。 简而言之,像俄罗斯和美国一样,中国现在可以摧毁任何试图对其发动战争的国家。

但是中国核威慑的几个特点值得关注。 正如香港《南华早报》告诉我们的那样:“按照其“最小威慑”战略,目前的中国核武库估计约为250枚弹头,该国对核导弹采取了“不首先使用”的原则……。总部位于北京的军事评论员周晨鸣说,“中国不需要保留太多的核弹头,只需让远程导弹配备昂贵的核弹头,因为这足以进行核威慑。”与俄罗斯或美国不同,中国没有数千枚核弹头,与美国不同,中国已经“抛弃”了“首次使用”核武器。 中国具有强大的威慑力,但现在不构成进攻威胁。

结论。

我们如何看待中国的这种经济和军事力量? 总之,中国是一个强大的经济大国,无法摧毁,对美国或任何其他国家也没有进攻姿态。 美国该怎么办? 答案不是很明显吗?事实上,鉴于两国的相对实力,这是不可避免的吗? 现在是时候制定一种和平的安排,使我们能够共同生活。 美国应该在可能的时候和在灾难发生之前这样做。 偶然战争核战争席卷了我们所有人。 时钟在滴答作响。

可以通过以下方式与约翰·沃尔什(John V.Walsh)联系: [电子邮件保护]。 他为Antiwar.com,Consortium News,Dissident Voice.org和其他媒体撰写有关战争,和平与帝国以及医疗保健的文章。 现在住在东湾,直到最近他还是麻省医学院的生理学和细胞神经科学教授。

 
中美丛书
隐藏202条评论发表评论
忽略评论者...跟随Endorsed Only
修剪评论?
    []
  1. Isn’t China’s debt 4x its GDP? Sounds pretty scary.

  2. Anonymous[411]• 免责声明 说:

    I find it odd how passionately White Americans defend “their” country, considering it is dominated by Jews and blacks and they are very much second class citizens in it and becoming ever more so year on year.

    Yet despite this most of them still have a naive “USA! USA! USA!” mentality, even many white Americans who should know better, such as self-proclaimed “ethnic nationalists” still very often have this mentality. You won’t find this mentality so much amongst ethnic nationalists in Europe, European ethnic nationalists are no where near as invested in supporting the state as Americans are, in fact most European ethnic nationalists frankly see the state as the enemy without a doubt.

    • 同意: Ghan-buri-Ghan
    • 回复: @Realist
    , @Moi
  3. Lin 说:

    China produced 127 trillion yuan’s worth of goods and services in 2017

    A typo: China’s GDP in 2017 is 82.7 trillion yuan not 127 trillion yuan according to Chinese gov stats bureau
    PPP GDP could be grossly inaccurate because it doesn’t taking into account consumption pattern.
    一些例子:
    1)The poorer the people, the bigger % of the household budget is spent on food and US farmers have lower production cost of bulk food (Corn and soy are good examples) because of higher degree of mechanization. Consumer computer HW in china also don’t seem to be cheaper.
    2)Indian PPP GDP is said to be \$11 trillion. No way india has half of American economic power.
    I once read from an indian nationalist site that it costs 24 times more to have a hair cut in US than in india. Service quality and service experience of the customers aside, tell me how much bulk food could a poor indian barber buy with his/her meagre income?

  4. Here is a great 4-minute video that explains these basics to Americans:

    • 同意: Biff
    • 谢谢: Alfred
    • 哈哈: eah
    • 回复: @eah
  5. A123 说:

    The official numbers may look good, however there are all sorts of problems that make those government sponsored values seem mythical.
    _____

    China has a ‘pump priming’ problem that is worse than the U.S.: (1)

    中国在1年第一季度和第三季度积极刺激了经济增长,但我们没有像3/2019年那样看到对基础设施投资的类似重视。 例如,在第三季度创纪录的刺激计划中,中国集中于通过传统银行和“影子”银行向企业提供宽松信贷。

    值得注意的是,即使采取了这一创纪录的刺激措施,中国也保持其经济增长仅略高于“官方速度”。 这告诉我们,中国经济已经达到或非常接近债务饱和点,在那里家庭和公司根本无法吸收更多的债务,任何新的债务发行都无法刺激经济。

    ____

    China has a impending bank failure problem: (2)

    最后,对于那些好奇哪些银行最有可能追随包商的脚步而接下来倒闭的人,巴克莱编制了一份延迟发布 2018 年报告的区域性银行名单,这是预示即将到来的偿付能力“事件”的最大危险信号。

    .

    ______

    Also, consider the fact that the U.S. is ending (or at least reducing) Chinese exploitation in currency valuation and trade arrangements. This is a moving target as negotiations continue, but serious analysts are confident that this will slow portions of the Chinese economy.

    和平😇
    _______

    (1) https://www.zerohedge.com/geopolitical/end-chinese-miracle

    (2) https://www.zerohedge.com/news/2019-05-30/which-chinese-banks-will-fail-next

    • 回复: @Godfree Roberts
    , @ritchiet
  6. TG 说:

    A word about Henry Kissinger.

    I remember when MFN for China was being ‘debated’ in congress. In New York Times editorials Henry Kissinger insisted that shipping our entire industrial base to communist China would be wonderful and great and there could be no possible downside.

    Of course, these New York Time editorials never mentioned that he was being paid millions of dollars by communist China (laundered through “Kissinger Associates”).

    Whatever else one thinks about all of this, remember that Henry Kissinger was a traitor to his country.

    • 同意: GMC
  7. “因为最终所有的权力都来自经济权力”

    那么,美国将经济基础输出到中国的原因可能是什么?

    • 回复: @Erebus
  8. @Lin

    “according to Chinese gov stats bureau”

    Well that is a real facepalm moment right there. If china is like the USA most “stats” are made up……..like the inflation and unemployment rates for example.

    • 回复: @Lin
  9. “The nominal GDP is calculated simply by using the present currency exchange rate to express a country’s GDP in dollars”

    these China are masters of the universe articles always argue the same things in their own metrics………how is this metric relevant when China PEGS their currency to the dollar? They can make up any exchange they want to get any PPP level they desire…………..this all just seems so nonsensical.

    Also, I notice that the “China miracle” articles always shift into high gear when the top is in…..IMHO.

  10. Anon[200]• 免责声明 说:

    A trade deal with China is the last thing the US needs. We need a complete decoupling from China, the sooner the better. We need to produce more of what we consume, and they need to consume more of what they produce. Bring back our manufacturing, restore jobs to the heartland. The farm sector is owned almost entirely by 4 multinational corporations that hire the most illegal immigrants, send them all home. Better to create more factory jobs and keep the “deplorables” employed, who are committing suicide and OD’ing on opioid in droves out of despair.

    Same goes for India — their entire service sector is built on outsourcing from the US. It’s time to end the gravy train. End the H1b visa and send these leeches packing, hire and train our own citizens.

  11. US GDP is only 8 trillion when you take out the US govt debt and military. Only an 8 trillion dollars on the productive side.

    Anyway has anyone seen the new Ukraine aircraft crash video ? Its mass murder. 2 shots, 30 second pause between 1st and kill shot.

    MASS MURDER

    • 回复: @Alfred
    , @Ber
    , @Anon
  12. Automation is coming.

    Whichever country handles the coming industrial revolution 4.0 better will reign what is left of this century.

  13. shiny hand 说:

    China seems very geographically vulnerable. Much of that industrial base and economic power would disappear with the destruction of several dams. Couple that with a biological weapon like SARS and the greatest genocide on Earth will take place within a matter of months. If anything China should be pumping out nukes like their lives depend on it.

    • 回复: @anon
    , @JohnPlywood
  14. @Priss Factor

    No, China’s debt to GDP ratio is the same as America’s and Europe’s, 250%.

    Its debt 负担 is much lower because its economy is growing three times faster than ours, and its debt is entirely internal.

    China’s debt burden is thus less than one-third of of ours.

    • 回复: @Mefobills
    , @bobbybobbob
  15. @A123

    Zero Hedge is not a reliable source for information on China. It has always been wrong in both its premises and its predictions.

    See my comment on China’s debt, above.

    • 回复: @Gorgeous George
  16. Yee 说:

    TG

    “I remember when MFN for China was being ‘debated’ in congress. In New York Times editorials Henry Kissinger insisted that shipping our entire industrial base to communist China would be wonderful and great and there could be no possible downside.”

    You do understand that MFN is just a un-discrimination status, don’t you? It just promise to treat China the same as other countries. China also must treat US companies the same as Singapore, Japanese, Korean, Germany, Dutch, Franch, British, Italian etc., no discrimination.

    Henry Kissinger doesn’t need communist China to give him money. He makes plenty of money from consulting fee from US companies which want to enter China. Everytime he visit China, he takes several CEOs to accompany him. Since Kissinger is guaranteed to meet with the leaders, those CEOs will have a nice photo meeting with the leaders to hang in their company… That’s going to cost them quite a bit of consulting fee.

  17. animalogic 说:
    @Priss Factor

    Could be scary. Depends a lot on how the debt is denominated (in your own or foreign currency) & who took it out (public or private) & how it was used (mere speculation or investment in material production or R & D)?

    • 同意: Erebus, Mefobills
  18. @Lin

    Considering the population difference, it is quite plausible India has half the economic power as as America.

    But this is in number terms, economic power also means the types of goods being sold. Surely the country selling \$1b worth of computer chip will have more economic leverage than a country selling \$1b worth of clothes and food?

  19. @TG

    Kissinger was Jewish so he was the complete opposite of a traitor, he was a patriot of 他的 country which is the Nation of Israel.

  20. GMC 说:

    The Plan was to loot America – before it falls { unlike the Soviet Union } . Wall Street and the Federal Reserve /Central Banks/ MIC have already finished with the plan to – not only loot America but to use it as a tool to print as much money as it wants= tens of Trillions. The country was 100% sabotaged, along with any big dollar social funds { SS , housing/urban development, you name them }, and the next Wall Street/ Fed induced depression, will suck even more out from an already dried up society. They will get the upper middle class – next. There is no one working for any huge improvements for the society – Domestic or Internationally – everyone in the Governments { Federal, State, Muni etc. } it seems, is getting all the money and benefits they can .I’m sorry, but I don’t see any positive future, until it comes crashing down and the people can fight off the armies of governmental Controllers that will sabotage everything they can – even afterwards. These ” Owners” got what they wanted in plan #1 – they hate us and would rather eliminate most of us. China watched everything go down and is in on it. Russia too, won’t cry much either.

  21. Erebus 说:
    @interesting

    “因为最终所有的权力都来自经济权力”

    那么,美国将经济基础输出到中国的原因可能是什么?

    他们忘记了?

    更严重的是,美国的精英们用金融权力代替了经济权力,因为这样做对他们有利。 他们根本不在乎这个国家其他地方发生了什么。 他们不住在那里。

    他们不仅直接从美国的去工业化中受益,而且还想从中国工业增长最终的金融化中受益。 中国人有更好的想法,并将他们排除在交易之外。 美国精英会因此而倒下,但美国中部却受到双重打击。 首先是他们自己的精英,然后是他们的精英未能控制中国人。

    当你不注意你中间的叛徒时,就会发生这种情况。

    • 同意: Iris, 22pp22, Ilyana_Rozumova
  22. Jason Liu 说:

    Both the American center left and center right have concluded that China is a threat to the postwar “world order”, “global norms”, “universal liberal values” etc, and from now on that will be the basis for conflict regardless of China’s economic size. The question is how China will respond to this challenge.

    When I was younger I used to think we’ll just make money and keep to ourselves, like Japan/Korea, but unfortunately China’s size attracts much more attention and makes this sort of isolationism untenable. For long-term security the CCP should try to de-normalize the liberal values that the US enforces on the world, so that states that aren’t liberal democracies can still be seen as legitimate and therefore worthy of permanent support without caveats such as “one day they’ll be like us!”

    • 同意: Ghan-buri-Ghan
  23. Erebus 说:
    @Anon

    We need a complete decoupling from China, the sooner the better.

    You’re getting it, but these things take time. Also, be careful what you wish for. It’ll take more than a generation to “bring back our manufacturing”.

    One reason is that the people who built and worked America’s industrial heartland are retired or gone. A whole generation of hard working men & women have to be raised to man the plants. Who’s gonna raise them? Make that 2 generations. In the meantime, decoupling means a world of hurt for Americans.

    It has to be done, so it will be. The question is how.

    • 回复: @Astuteobservor II
  24. China’s most significant advantage in becoming an economic powerhouse is that it doesn’t have parasitic Jews bleeding it to death.

  25. Chinese women are homely. That’s something.

  26. Realist 说:
    @Anonymous

    I find it odd how passionately White Americans defend “their” country, considering it is dominated by Jews and blacks and they are very much second class citizens in it and becoming ever more so year on year.

    Yes,way too many stupid Whites.

  27. @Elementarium

    Finance is international, it is unlikely the Jews don’t have some sort of control in China seeing as it was Jew Henry Kissinger who advocated for shipping out manufacturing there in the first place.

    • 回复: @Alden
  28. anon[837]• 免责声明 说:
    @shiny hand

    Sounds like a great plan to neutralize China. Also Chinese were never good at large-scale sophisticated warfare. Han Chinese population needs to be culled….too many of those ugly insects around.

    • 巨魔: d dan, John Arthur
  29. America has a huge technological lead over China and everyone else for that matter (no not infrastructure like airports, but leading edge technology). It’s probably going to continue for some time. No one’s going to be starting wars with us.

  30. @Erebus

    Isn’t that just a pipe dream? As automation is right around the corner.

    • 回复: @Mefobills
  31. @Elementarium

    It has elites that is different than our own. They also get rich, corrupted, but at the same time do their job and make the country they reside in a little better.

    • 回复: @Digital Samizdat
  32. Lin 说:
    @interesting

    Excuse me that I typed in a rush without proper punctuation.
    It should be: according to Chinese gov stats bureau, 2017 Chinese GDP is 82.7 trillion yuan, not that mistyped 127 trillion yuan.
    GDP skepticism is not unusual, without elaborating on the subject, Chinese economic data do coincide boardly with countries with similar GDP/capita.
    Of course, china is a poor developing country overall.

  33. eah 说:
    @Carlton Meyer

    While the video is short enough to be easily watched, and it is worth watching, you must have a pretty low opinion of Americans generally to think we’re dumb enough to need the rather elementary information in it.

    While today there are many Chinese tourists who return to their homes in China, there are also many Chinese who emigrate, including illegally, mostly to white countries — and Chinese are the main customers for the ‘birth tourism’ industry in the US — so the migration flow, as opposed to the tourist flow, is still pretty much unidirectional.

    I think a significant majority of ordinary western Whites are aware that China has changed substantially, and do not begrudge the Chinese their deserved success.

  34. Lin 说:
    @Anon

    We need a complete decoupling from China…We need to produce more of what we consume, and they need to consume more of what they produce. Bring back our manufacturing…

    While I understand your sentiment, be reminded of the followings:

    –Most of the externally sourced investment in china are not from US.
    –Labor intensive industry: Much of the manufacturing relocated from US to China are of low-valued-added nature. Actually such manufacturing are being relocated to countries like Vietnam and Bangladesh. Feel free to compete with them or if keeping a large number of US seamtresses employed at min wage is so desirable.
    In the recent past, such industry has provided employment to rural migrants in china but demographically china has changed; I doubt, at least in the cities, young Chinese are that interested in working in low-pay factories.
    –Core or medium tech industry: Only the auto industry has received substantial investment from US. You can ask them to ignore the Chinese market and get out. One of the higher profile industries in china is high-speed rail infra-structure which is almost absent in US. China produces 8 to 10 times as much steel per year as US does.
    –Hi tech sector: China has been under severe tech sanction embargo from US. Again, you can ask Microsoft to ignore the Chinese market.
    .....................。
    Of cource decoupling from china is not enough; please add mexico, Canada, germany…to the list.
    I suggest you should also campaign to tax heavily US enterprises that replace human workers with robots.

    • 回复: @JUSA
  35. Pillar I

    There is no God but no God and China doesn’t have Big Macs but Big Unknowns (civet cat anyone?).

    Pillar Ii

    Exporter, smexporter… the world gangs up and there goes the export based economy.

    第三支柱

    Importer # 2 … well, if pillar two goes to pieces then # 1 son is not to be found in China but hiding out in plain view.

    支柱四

    See please one number and two number and find then please no possible four number…

    All kidding aside, the white boys (Jews and Christians) are NOT gonna give up their power to their own monster and as soon as the Iranian problem is solved to secure the black gold, Russia will be bribed to stay out of the coming confrontation with China using Taiwan as the bait.

  36. Vaterland 说:
    @Jason Liu

    Japan and South Korea never were left alone to make money; both were and are effectively occupied by the USA, just like Germany is. China has a tangible chance to at least compete with the USA as a dominant factor in Europe, but for this you need a soft power revolution and understand the European mindset. It shouldn’t be too hard to offer something appealing compared to the current US “cultural revolution”. Sanity, family, peace and prosperity are all in the great harmony.

    Who knows, the end of your century of humiliation might bring an end to ours as well.

  37. China can have the designation of number one. All I see here in my neck of the woods is decay and rot. Let’s stop applying bandages to the Liberal rot. American irrelevance will mean a lot of pain. However it can bring the opportunity of much needed cleanup and restoration. We just need to dispose the military’s nuclear, biological, and conventional weapons first so as to be irreverent.

    Best wishes to China. You still owe lots of money to the Rothschild banks. Plus you got Chinese- African babies, and their mama’s, headed your way. Always remember it’s all about GDP and another dynasty. I wish I had a foam finger to send your way, but you probably made them. I also agree with Mr. Walsh, making nice is to our long term advantage. We need some not interested in payback and revenge.

  38. Alfred 说:
    @Paul holland

    MASS MURDER

    同意。

    The question is by whom? Who do you think gained most from this tragedy?

    WORLD WAR III: Ukrainian flight PS752 Western False Flag

    Remote Hijacking/Transponder Disabling to Trigger Two Tor-M1 missiles

  39. 这是一个 计划。

    While the US has been de-industrialized by the bankers of the City of London; China was industrialized. Many POTUS took part of the initiative ever since JFK was assassinated.

    “1913 年中期,英国成为第一个在欧洲推广使用人民币的国家。 德国、法国、瑞士和卢森堡通过安装 OCB 以促进“人民货币”(“人民币”)的使用而参与竞争。 尽管如此,这些都没有对英国构成严重威胁。 伦敦金融城在欧洲大陆有超过一半的业务以人民币计价。”

    伦敦金融城使世界人民币化
    https://bit.ly/2TrSYrk

    “In spite of the fierce opposition of the US treasury Department, on November 30 the IMF finally approved the inclusion of the yuan in the Special Drawing Rights, the currency basket created in 1969 to complement the official reserves of the members of the multilateral organization.

    人民币将成为国际货币基金组织货币篮子中第三强的货币
    https://bit.ly/36V44J3

    “… but on the contrary, it will be able to use the sovereignty of London to develop the yuan market. Already in April, it obtained the necessary privileges by signing an agreement with the Central Bank of China.”

    The Brexit reshuffles world geopolitics
    https://bit.ly/387tVxK

    IMF could be based in Beijing in a decade: Lagarde
    https://www.reuters.com/article/us-imf-china-lagarde-idUSKBN1A922L

    • 回复: @Mefobills
    , @foolisholdman
  40. Agent76 说:

    Jan 14, 2020 China’s rising yuan means rude awakening for Americans

    Peter Schiff discusses China’s economy, their rising Renminbi and what that means for American consumers and investors – RT America Boom Bust January 13th 2020.

    • 回复: @Mefobills
  41. The Chinese Economy-Living on Borrowed Time!

    The return [under Xi] of the idiotic, anti-freedom, hard-core communist, pre-Xiaoping economic policies means that China is currently living on borrowed time and must collapse at some point in time, and probably quite soon.

    事实:当权者通过自上而下的集中控制措施(即“加倍下注”)对这次崩溃做出的反应越多,经济崩溃的速度就越快,而且越严重。

    Since power-mad megalomaniacs like Xi and his ilk are incapable of learning either through education, history [ e.g. the USSR], or even via direct experience, I expect the collapse of the “Chinese miracle” to continue unabated, and for it to actually accelerate, as the mainland Chinese communist economic illiterates running the show literally double down on their highly destructive policies of  even less economic freedom and  even more draconian control of the Chinese population.

    请参见:
    China Braces For December D-Day: The “Unprecedented” Default Of A Massive State-Owned Enterprise: something is seriously starting to break in China’s financial system.

    “Three days after we described the self-destructive doom loop that is tearing apart China’s smaller banks,  where a second bank run took place in just two weeks – an unprecedented event for a country where until earlier this year not a single bank was allowed to fail publicly and has now had no less than five bank  high profile nationalizations/bailouts/runs so far this year – the Chinese bond market is bracing itself for an unprecedented shock: a major, Fortune 500 Chinese commodity trader is poised to become the biggest and highest profile state-owned enterprise to default in the dollar bond market in over two decades.”:

    https://www.zerohedge.com/economics/china-braces-unprecedented-massive-default-state-owned-enterprise

    China’s Skyscraper Boom Comes Crashing Down Amid Developer Default”
    https://www.zerohedge.com/markets/chinas-skyscraper-boom-halted-amid-developer-default

    “Economic Recovery Narrative Doomed: Fathom’s China Momentum Indicator Signals More Downside Ahead”
    https://www.zerohedge.com/economics/without-china-global-economy-doomed-brace-downside

    此致onebornfree
    http://onebornfreesfinancialsafetyreports.blogspot.com/

    • 不同意: bluedog
    • 哈哈: Mefobills
  42. Mefobills 说:
    @Godfree Roberts

    its debt is entirely internal.

    Godfree… China’s debt is internal yes. But, even more salient point is that China’s debt paper is housed within her state banks. People that compare debts are missing the “type and channeling” factors inherent in money. They are comparing unlike kinds. Apples and Oranges.

    In the west, public and private debt instruments are on-sold into markets. There they fall into the hands of plutocracy. The money type of the West behaves differently than that of China.

    China has a mid tier level of private banks, who in turn borrow from the larger state banks, and this mid-tier has done some damage by pushing housing prices. The state has pulled this back some in recent years by preventing loans.

    Bottom line: China has a debt based money system, but the debt instruments that spawn Chinese Yuans channel differently than in the West, and this channeling is a critical feature. China’s debts can be released to prevent polarization of society, because said debts are under political control. China’s debts are not held by a predatory (((plutocratic))) class that hates average citizens. Debt instruments created at public level i.e. state banks, specify how newly hypothecated Yuans are to be spent. Yuan path (channeling) is into the commons and industry. This type and channeling factor means that new Yuans are beneficial and improve the lot of all. It also means that Chinese leadership are doing their job, even if average Chinese don’t understand it.

    Money channeling and type is the critical feature of Industrial Capitalism. I’ve been arguing here that China has an Industrial Capitalist economy.

    Looking at things this way helps one see more clearly. The U.S. and West have already lost to China. The parasite (((finance class))) of the west won in WW2. WW1 and 2 was mostly an economic war of finance capitalism vs industrial capitalism, whereby industrial capitalism of Germany was attacked. Bolshevism was a creature of finance capital, and hence was on the side of the West in WW2.

    Democracy of the west is nothing more than state sponsored usury. The neo-liberal, neo-cohens and false economy of the predator class of the west is spent… it can cause chaos on world stage in a desperate bid for profit and control, but cannot summon millions of men and material of war against China. Today’s scenario will not unfold like in the days before WW2.

    Mencken, “Democracy is the pathetic belief in the collective wisdom of individual ignorance. No one in this world, so far as I know and I have researched the records for years, and employed agents to help me has ever lost money by underestimating the intelligence of the great masses of the plain people. Nor has anyone ever lost public office thereby.”

    Unfortunately, the West is locked into a collective belief system that cannot end but in failure. There is no way U.S. especially can compete with a vampire squid wrapped around its face, and sucking away lifeblood of unearned income and rents. The squid causes inefficiencies, and hence purchasing power is reduced through squid rake-offs. These rake-offs are unseen, but they come in the form of high prices. I estimate it could be as high as 40% of the economy… this is losses and rake-offs causing high prices, a price-tax which funnels purchasing power to the predators.

    Hopefully, Russia escapes to a new Tsar or Byzantine-like King system, and then adopts some sort of Sovereign money control. Then western people will have an example of escape from head lock usurers have on their brain-space, polity and lives.

    http://www.sovereignmoney.eu

    • 回复: @GeeBee
  43. Desert Fox 说:

    In the early 1970s David Rockerfeller sent his batman Kissinger over to China to open up the Chinese slave labor to the ZUS and then the deindustrialization of the ZUS began and every major ZUS corporation moved their factories to China, the bottom line is that modern China was made by the ZUS.

    The supposed rifts between the ZUS and China are total bullshit.

    • 回复: @Hiram of Tyre
  44. @eah

    Why would anyone care what ordinary Whites think of their country? Ordinary Whites are quite possibly on the lowest rung of the ladder now as they are like a very inefficient piece of machinery, that is to say they demand a lot and give very little in return due to advances in tech made by elite Whites – who are the one who run things along with elite Jews.

    Perhaps the mass 0f unthinking Whites do not bredudge China…but they ought to, their countries’ entire manufacturing base was destroyed when Western politicians shipped all the jobs there.

    • 回复: @eah
  45. @Jason Liu

    You are mistaken in thinking that America dislikes countries because of their lack of Liberal Democracy, America is more than willing to cosy up with the worst dictators and autocrats…as long as they are on the same side. The CIA have installed numerous dictators in Latin America.

    中国只是威胁美国霸权,民主只是用来为侵略辩护的借口

    • 回复: @Blankaerd
  46. eah 说:
    @Just passing through

    Why would anyone care what ordinary Whites think of their country?

    I presume 1) that’s the target audience for the video; after all, it’s on YouTube, where anyone and everyone can watch it, and 2) it’s why Carlton Meyer posted it here, i.e. so ordinary people would watch it, and so perhaps update their opinion/view of China.

    Some Americans are intelligent and mature enough to realize American politicians and bureaucrats are responsible for the trade legislation and policies that destroyed jobs in the US (also business executives who exploited the situation), and therefore they don’t begrudge the Chinese their economic success — apparently you are not among these intelligent and mature people.

    In deciding to read your comment, I was immediately reminded of why you’re on my IGNORE list.

    笨蛋。

    • 回复: @Just passing through
  47. @Desert Fox

    In the early 1970s David Rockerfeller sent his batman Kissinger over to China to open up the Chinese slave labor to the ZUS and then the deindustrialization of the ZUS began and every major ZUS corporation moved their factories to China, the bottom line is that modern China was made by the ZUS.

    The supposed rifts between the ZUS and China are total bullshit.

    正是。

    They (the Rockefeller) didn’t have their hands deep in the Warren Commission cover-up of the Kennedy assassination for any reason.

    • 回复: @Desert Fox
  48. Mefobills 说:
    @Agent76

    Lolbertarians like Schiff are a laugh riot. They get honorary Jew status for their wrong think.

    Here are some of his comments from your video that beggar belief:

    Bad thing for U.S. Imports (as Yuan goes up) as it lowers standard of living.

    Bad thing in the short term, but good in the long term as the U.S. moves toward Autarky, and begins to make things for its self, as any sovereign nation should.

    Interest rates in the U.S. will go up as Chinese creditors no longer lending money to Americans.

    This would be more typical Lol-bertarian hypnosis, as if you need to borrow or get money from foreign creditors. The U.S. doesn’t need to borrow from anybody, it already has an installed base of technology and capability. It especially doesn’t need to borrow its own dollars back from China, nor does it need Chinese debt or Yuans.

    And so we have to draw from our own savings pool.

    Any sovereign country can issue new money directly into the population… and presto you have a savings pool. Or, any sovereign country can release debts, and then the former credit as money is no longer recalled to destruction, and presto you have savings pool. Or, you can issue directly from treasury into industry, and presto you don’t need Chinese money to build industry.

    Lolbertarians get honorary Jew status for their distorted way of thinking.

    Savings are extremely shallow hence Federal Reserve has to monetize debt that Chinese and other nations want to buy.

    True enough, but Lol-bertarians are apologists for private money and private banks, of which the FED is a an example. Lolbertarians are the pot calling the kettle black.

    Please do yourself a favor and tune out lol-bertarians, they are honorary agents of (((mammon))).

    Schiff keeps talking about standard of living. A real country has its own money, and makes things for itself and cares about its people, and hence its standard of living will rise by dint of its own effort.

    The only time any country needs foreign “capital” is to buy things it cannot make for itself. And even then, borrowing has to be done carefully so new things it buys can increase productivity to pay for money interest – which points at foreign creditors.

    You go into debt to foreigners and you’ve lost sovereignty; a lolbertarian cannot understand these concepts. They are for free markets (no such thing) and free-dumb, and international movement of people in a border-less world.

    The nation-wrecker (((international cabal))) is very happy with their agent Schiff.

    • 同意: utu
  49. Desert Fox 说:
    @Hiram of Tyre

    In regards to JFK’s assassination, please read the book JFK, the CIA and Vietnam by Col. L. Fletcher Prouty and Blood in the Water by Joan Mellen, both can be had on amazon.com.

    • 回复: @Hiram of Tyre
  50. @Lin

    搜索结果
    网上精选片段
    India: Gross domestic product (GDP) in current prices from 1984 to 2024 (in billion U.S. dollars)
    以十亿美元计的国内生产总值
    2020* 3,202.18
    2019* 2,935.57
    2018 2,718.73
    2017 2,652.25
    37 more rows•Nov 6, 2019
    https://www.statista.com/www.statista.com › statistics › gross-domestic-product-gdp-in-india
    • GDP of India 1984-2024 | Statista

    The Elephant vs the Dragon.
    And the USA is the eagle.

    I think the mythical beast will overcome both the Eagle and the Elephant.

    • 回复: @Lin
    , @Lin
  51. @eah

    People make videos to inform, however my question was why should people from other countries really care what ordinary White people think? They are essentially irrelevant. Even if White people were to view China in a negative light, China would continue to do whatever it ashes to do and there is nothing these ordinary Whites can do about it. Caring about what ordinary White people think is like caring about what ordinary Bantus think.

    Also, ordinary White people know their own fat cats sold them out, but that doesn’t mean they don’t view China with anger because the intelligent ones know China was just another shithole country before treacherous executives shipped all the jobs there.

  52. Sean 说:

    Linked to the essential statement.

    Harvard’s Graham Allison disagrees with Professor Mearsheimer that it is inevitable there will be at least cold or proxy war between China and America. But even Allison thinks the precedents are for it.

    China possesses a powerful deterrent but now presents no offensive threat.

    Funny how neither Nato or the Soviet Union, judging by their tens of thousands of tanks facing one another, seemed to believe that nuclear weapons were a deterrent. How does it go again, ‘the threat of an incredible action is not a credible deterrent. The Soviets probably always were capable of steamrolling across the Iron Curtain with their tanks and their almost 10:1 advantage in in tube artillery. Nukes are a deterrent to nuclear war. Yet such a Mexican Standoff leaves open the possibility of conventional war. The Kremlin knew it could not win the conflict fought across the globe against the world’s most powerful economy that would have inevitably followed a military conquest of Western Europe.

    The US will first try to slow down China’s growth, and see if it can out-compete it. There being so many Chinese their country exceeding the US seems inevitable. If American sits and waits China will have an economy too powerful (big and 高级 ) to take on. The US will have India and Russia as allies as China becomes more threatening to its neighbours by its sheer size. That time is not yet, but unless the US suddenly begins to outgrow China, the US economic strategy fails and using military force becomes the only way.

  53. @Priss Factor

    Globally, China’s a net creditor. Think about it: have you ever heard of a Chinese bond?

    • 回复: @Antiwar7
  54. @shiny hand

    It is impossible for SARS and all other serious infectious diseases to claim many victims in a sterile, modernized country like China.

    • 回复: @Just passing through
  55. @Astuteobservor II

    Yup. I’d rather have my country run by corrupt engineers than by corrupt lawyers–any day!

  56. Good piece, after brief reading. The axiom–US “elites” have no grasp of global economic, military (especially military) and geopolitical balance. Even (still grossly inaccurate, albeit better than “nominal”) PPP GDP numbers do not reflect an appalling reality of the US “economy” which is monetized to the grotesque scale and is not simply smaller, it is much smaller in terms of REAL economy than economy of China. Remarkably, people who do have at least some grasp of the trends are SOME people in US military (possibly intelligence) and what I would call relatively fringe economists and analysts. The whole house of cards of US Dollar global financial system is just that–house of cards. The reason being that the main instrument sustaining this system–(mythology of) US military power can not sustain it, it simply has no resources (human, technological, intellectual etc.) to do so. This bluff was called few years ago, but many simply refused to face he facts–they will, it is inevitable. So, they better start buying real estate (I am sure they already did) somewhere in Southern Hemisphere or make arrangements for a nice upscale Psychiatric Ward with nice nurses and good drugs.

    • 同意: Ron Unz, Oscar Peterson, Mefobills
    • 回复: @John Arthur
  57. Lin 说:
    @Rev. Spooner

    I understand the aspiration of the hindu nationalists to look forward to indian ascension to superpowerdom. India is a complicate country and is difficult to predict. Let me repeat what I’ve said here and there:
    1)The biggest problem in india is not economic growth rate. Massive un/under-employment is.
    (Indian govt unemployment figures are highly understated)
    2)The india elite grossly lack sense of prioritization of objectives.
    3)Indian society is excessively elitist.
    (I could add a few more, but lets stop here..)
    ...... ..
    The indian nationalists complain of the trade deficits with china. The imports from china range from cell phones to solar panels to pots and pans. Indian manufacturing wage sure is much lower than china’s (and china is still a developing country). Isn’t it baffling they can’t make cheaper pots and pans?

    • 回复: @Just passing through
  58. Lin 说:
    @Rev. Spooner

    I think the mythical beast will overcome both the Eagle and the Elephant.

    China is still a developing country and has no intention to project power into every corners of the Earth. China hasn’t fought any war since 1979.
    Peace on Earth. Maranatha.

  59. Curmudgeon 说:

    I understood the con of the GDP almost 50 years ago, while in Europe. The cost of a pint of beer (approximately 2 bottles of US beer) in the UK was about 8 pence, with bottled beer being slightly more expensive. At the time, the pound was in the \$2 range, so the cost of a pint was roughly 1/12 x 2 = 17 cents. Where could you buy a bottle of beer for 10 cents? The average wage in the UK at the time was 15 – 20 pounds a week, or \$30 -\$40, or less than half of what it was in the US. It was obvious, in the days of the gold standard, that if everything is priced in dollars, even those with lower wages in Britain were as well off as those in the US with higher wages.
    Scandinavia was different. The cost of everything was much higher, but the average wage was higher than the US, and the difference between the highest and the lowest earners was more compressed than the US. So, while it was more costly, the lower end wage earners had better purchasing power than in the US.
    Floating currency rates has only added to the illusion.

  60. Hodd 说:

    好文章错过了更重要的相关点。

    1.中国不是一个以战争为基础的经济体,因此美国在F35这样的飞砖上浪费的钱都投资在了基础设施上。 中国的公路、铁路和城市设施使美国看起来像一个第三世界国家。

    2. 有100个城市配备了工作5G,每个城市的人口都超过10,000,000万,再加上高就业率,使美国和欧洲看起来几乎是史前时代。 有了这些城市,美国已经输掉了比赛。

    3. 中国的教育是重中之重,基础科学学科的标准是世界上最好的。 美国、英国和欧洲的教育主要基于外来主人强加给土著人民的过时的政治正确政策。

    还有许多其他的东西,例如基于忠诚、尊重和共同礼仪的家庭道德。 通过货币价值衡量生活并不是唯一或最好的标准。

    好文章都一样。

  61. Although this is a well presented article, might I respectfully suggest that the author’s argument is too much a macro economic observation of China and one that does not reflect recent facts that call the assertion of continued Chinese economic supremacy very much into question.

    Although, the metrics the author presents do support his overall premise, of the major four points presented might I add the following very abridged counterpoints for initial discussion that are illustrative from the past six months:

    1,按购买力平价计算,中国拥有世界上最大的GDP,自2014年XNUMX月以来一直如此。
    True, but…..China is now in an economic slowdown that has seen GDP plummet from 14.2% in 2008, and has dropped every year for six years down to a current 6.15% in 2018. PBoC estimates that 2019 and 2020 will be below this number.

    2.中国是世界第一大出口国。

    True, but….as reported in Dec. Chinese exports to the US for 2019 were down 23% which is why MSM/Trump has touted the lowering of the trade deficit as well.

    3.中国是世界第二大进口国,拥有第二大零售市场和最大的电子零售市场–上海的CIIE。

    True, but….Chinese consumer purchasing is down as shown by the continued drop in auto sales that fell 7.5% in 2019 and 6% in 2018. GM said that its sales were down 15% in China.

    4.China’s retail market is roughly equal to that of the U.S. and growing faster.

    True, but….consumer purchasing is dropping and the PBoC last month stepped in with several moves designed to inject more liquidity into the economy to juice the purchasing and GDP. PBoC just began, after four years, the first interest rate cuts.

    Although the author’s presentation is well done and substantiated, it is an article steeped in the past successes of China, not it’s current internal realities that show that this is another country soon to realize the truth about unsustainable debt.

    I did, however, enjoy the article. Cheers!! B.R-T.

    • 回复: @Mefobills
    , @John Arthur
  62. The economic factor is irrelevant. In time, the average “educated”American will be an expert in “climate change”, “political correctness”, “diversity”,”gender studies”, “equality”, etc, etc.
    The Chinese will have none of that, but highly educated people that are scientists, engineers,and experts in things that are actually real, and productive.

    Guess who’ll win?

    • 同意: Dannyboy
    • 回复: @GeeBee
  63. Mefobills 说:
    @Hiram of Tyre

    It’s part of a long plan.

    Don’t confuse the maneuverings of Zion and “Debt Spreading” of London.

    They did maneuver China, especially with Opium wars. The “city” had imbalanced trade with China, especially in Silver, so their idea was to recall their money by hook or crook. In this case it was thrusting a drug dependency hook into the mouths of Chinese. And of course Jews were involved… the Sassoons. They are always involved when crime inc. is being done.

    China learned from that experience. Post Tianmen square they kept their state banks.

    While the US has been de-industrialized by the bankers of the City of London; China was industrialized

    The de-industrialization of America occured mostly post 1995, where “international capital” wanted to take wage arbitrage on Chinese labor. China helped the wall street/london gambit along by sweeping their communist era debts into the trash can, so they could meet the criteria, to then acquire trading, even MFN status.

    “In spite of the fierce opposition of the US treasury Department, on November 30 the IMF finally approved the inclusion of the yuan in the Special Drawing Rights, the currency basket created in 1969 to complement the official reserves of the members of the multilateral organization.

    By having Yuans in the “basket of currencies” then that lowers the relative power of dollar in world trade. Those who issue dollars (private banking), and their lackeys (U.S. Treasury) would not be for that, hence the opposition.

    China’s money is mostly sovereign, and under full government control through its 5 State Banks. Any private corporate banks within the system (middle and lower tier) ultimately are under state control. The private banks are not allowed to get froggy, and start stealing from the public weal.

    You cannot conflate IMF with China, as IMF is supranational while China operates in their national interests.

    • 回复: @Hiram of Tyre
  64. Mefobills 说:
    @Brett Redmayne-Titley

    China, not it’s current internal realities that show that this is another country soon to realize the truth about unsustainable debt.

    China doesn’t have unsustainable debt… it is a laughable assertion made by brain dead economists trained in Neo-Liberal economics.

    China’s debt is sovereign, and held in their state banks. They can simply erase it at any time. China can also stimulate internal consumption anytime, they no longer need to maintain the export model.

    Further, China is acquiring new minerals resources assets and capability on the silk roads.

    China’s population is growing in capability as their human labor becomes more efficient, while simultaneously, their industrial plant and equipment is regenerated to new status regularly, and their commons are improved. All of the new rail roads and ports are visible testament.

    China is operating the former “american system of economy” of industrial capitalism.

    Meanwhile, american economist have become brain-washed dupes of neo-liberalism type economy (imported from ZOG London) and cannot see the forest for the trees. So, we have to suffer with comments about China’s unsustainable debt.

    Whistling past the graveyard is not a survival tactic. Seeing things for how they really are, is a survival tactic.

  65. @JohnPlywood

    I think you may he wrong on that. Although it is true Chinese cities are very clean, the more rural areas are not and I say this from experience. Wikipedia has 2% of the population practicing open defecation and one of the worst toilets I’ve ever seen was in China, it was a squat toilet with shit smeared across the floor and even the walls!

    I think bioweapons would claim a lot of casualties in China, a lot of the population still live in rural and dirty environments.

    • 回复: @Daniel Chieh
    , @Vidi
    , @Realist
  66. nsa 说:

    The main trade dispute between China and the USA involves the opening of the Chinese service sector to “foreign financial services”…..a euphemism for the jew. The importing of actual Chinese goods is not a problem, as the jew is well represented with their middle men, wholesalers, and retail outlets getting a generous cut off every imported pair of crap flip flops, cheap sunglasses, and nike afro boots….so excessive importation from China is not a problem. Notice that in the recent partial “trade deal” with China, the crypto-jew Trumpstein and his merry band of real jooies (Munchkin, Krudlow, etc) have obtained a promise to allow a greater penetration of the Chinese domestic service sector by “foreign financial services” i.e. the jew. The idea of cream shooting 1.4 billion Wangs and Wongs with reverse mortgages, payday loans, 96 month car loans, home equity loans, ETFs, annuities, 18% credit cards, mutual funds, casinos, etc etc has the KKK (Kock Kutter Kult) thinking it just hit the motherload………the possibility it can dominate China the way it dominates a cowering subservient North America.

    • 回复: @Astuteobservor II
  67. @Brett Redmayne-Titley

    China’s elites make *很多* better foreign policy/demographic decisions than the US, which is why their country is far more secure than the US or the West.

    However, China’s economy is markedly slowing down as you had stated, but the growth slowdown is much more than you think.

    The US has been growing faster on a per-capita basis at PPP for the last 10 years, with the absolute gap between the US on a per capita basis and China on a per capita basis growing. The US’s per capita GDP is more bigger than China’s than it was in 1990.
    https://data.worldbank.org/indicator/NY.GDP.PCAP.PP.CD?locations=US-CN
    Here are chained dollars:
    https://data.worldbank.org/indicator/NY.GDP.PCAP.PP.KD?locations=CN-US

    When you consider the extremely dysfunctional Black population, this result becomes even more astonishing. The gap between the per capita GDP of American Whites and Han Chinese is massively larger than the current gap between all Americans and all Chinese.

    The problem is that America’s economy is by far the best of any big country in the world, but its elites are *极其* greedy and have been hording all the money for themselves, and have been wasting it on stupid and silly wars, and pocketing much of American money for themselves.

    • 回复: @last straw
    , @last straw
  68. @Lin

    India is also very multi-ethnic so change happens very slow due to democracy and squabbling, if it even happens at all. I do think the Modi government are trying to unite the Hindus and Sikhs into one identity though at the expense of Muslims.

    Chinese economy seems to be very centralised and smooth running. Indian economy is very informal and everything is a cottage industry, you won’t see Wal-Mart type stores in India except in some major cities. This in my view is good from a cultural standpoint as there still exists that sense of community that has ceased to exist in the West due to MNCs moving in and destroying uniqueness.

    The biggest problem India has is the caste system IMO, there is no meritocracy and there is instead a affirmative action system that allocates government jobs and university places in different proportions to different castes based on the demographics of that particular state. In some cases as many as 70% of places can be reserved for those deemed to be “backwards caste”, think the American university system but in steroids, this results in brain drain as the people who can afford to emigrate do so, and those that can’t afford to do so are kind of screwed.

    The US also seems to be using India as some sort of pawn to balance of China, the US used to be very chummy with Pakistan, even sending a carrier group to to the Bay of Bengal in support of the Pakistanis during the 1971 War. Pakistan has good relations with China even back then but the latter was small potatoes and nobody saw it as a threat. But since then, China has grown and so too has Sino-Pakistani relations with things like CPEC. US is now backing India and shunning Pakistan.

    Pakistanis saw they were getting a better deal with China who were actually building their country IL as opposed to America who were just causing wars to sell weapons to them, the CIA can almost certainly he blames for Pakistan being a hotbed of Islamic terror (much more so than Iran)

    India isn’t really a nation state in the traditional sense and it is a wonder it hasn’t balknanised in its 72 years of existence. I do wonder if it would be good for them to enter China’s orbit though.

    • 同意: John Arthur
  69. JUSA 说:
    @TG

    Whatever else one thinks about all of this, remember that Henry Kissinger was a traitor to his country.

    Not if you realized his country is not the USA.

  70. GeeBee 说:
    @Mefobills

    Mefobills (the very name you choose warms my heart) you are on a roll. I take it you have experience in the world of finance/economics? At all events, your words cut through the dense fog of obfuscation that surrounds Western polity and which obscures what ought to be obvious. I refer not just to this post which I reply to, but several others of yours in this same article. Keep up the good work!

    • 同意: Blinky Bill
    • 回复: @onebornfree
    , @Mefobills
  71. JUSA 说:
    @Lin

    Multinationals that care more about profit than country are the biggest culprits in bringing in mass immigration from the third world. I won’t shed a tear if they all decide to move out of the country. Google, Facebook, Apple, Microsoft, Amazon, all could GTFO for all I care. Goodbye and good riddance. Move the hell out of the US and stop selling their shite in the US. If you want to sell in the US, not just make it in the US, but hire US citizens. Let’s see which market they can’t afford to lose more, US or China.

  72. Moi 说:
    @Anonymous

    “I find it odd how passionately White Americans defend “their” country, considering it is dominated by Jews and blacks and they are very much second class citizens in it and becoming ever more so year on year.”

    Yeah, that is stupid, but then we are a stupid, ignorant, rude and loutish people.

  73. 我是否天真地认为没有发明任何基本技术的文化无法取代基本上发明了一切的文化?

    • 回复: @Astuteobservor II
  74. GeeBee 说:
    @Common sense Giuseppe

    ‘In time, the average “educated”American will be an expert in “climate change”, “political correctness”, “diversity”,”gender studies”, “equality”, etc, etc.’

    You forgot the ‘holyhoax’.

    • 同意: Dannyboy
  75. Mark in BC 说:
    @Lin

    林,

    You left out the previous sentence and the first word OF the sentence you quoted.

    Let’s take a hypothetical example to understand this. Suppose China produced 127 trillion yuan’s worth of goods and services in 2017. ”

    Please read weller… ;^)

  76. @GeeBee

    You are that easily fooled by this particular pseudo-intellectuals, “we need more government interference in the economy”, commie apologizing, never ending line of statist B.S.?
    Well, shame on you! 🤮

    “问候” onebornfree

    • 哈哈: bluedog
  77. @nsa

    This is a real threat. How the Chinese govt handles this will determine their future.

    This is basically parasites attempting to latch onto a new host.

    • 同意: Mefobills
  78. Anon[279]• 免责声明 说:
    @Elementarium

    China’s most significant advantage in becoming an economic powerhouse is that it doesn’t have parasitic Jews bleeding it to death.

    China has its own parasitic elites who are every bit as ruthless and unscrupulous as the Jews, if not more so. The only difference is they don’t also hunger for power like the Jews. Rest assure though that the damage they inflict on China is just as great. They have been stealing and plundering from their own people for two decades. Many are now escaping to greener pastures, i.e. the West, with their ill gotten gains, for “freedom” (before they get thrown in jail for corruption) and “clean air”, even though it was them who fouled up the air and the rivers with their highly polluting factories to begin with, or accept bribes for factory owners to do so.

    • 同意: Jett Rucker
  79. Mefobills 说:
    @GeeBee

    Gee bee, I was in the vanguard of having to train Chinese our jobs. The first American technology company to go to China. I observed the economics first hand and subsequent destruction of American industry. Even with my warnings company management continued on the destructive path. Management and finance were in the grip of false constructs making them malfunction. Mostly it was trained incompetence learned in college.

    So I took on the task of learning the dismal profession in order to understand. It is engineers like Soddy and Douglas that get to the economic truth of things.

    The dismal profession is aptly named. Usury funds a lot of deception.

  80. Suvorov 说:

    Hillary Clinton gave China access to her email server that held everything she did, State Department, all the Committees, all her private affairs with the Clinton Foundation.

    https://truepundit.com/fbi-lisa-page-dimes-out-top-fbi-officials-during-classified-house-testimony-bureau-bosses-covered-up-evidence-china-hacked-hillarys-top-secret-emails/

    The FBI knew, and they did nothing.

    https://dailycaller.com/2018/07/12/ig-clinton-foreign-emails/?utm_medium=social&utm_source=twitter&utm_campaign=site-share

    James Clapper, Peter Strozk, Christopher Wray, the entire Swamp was complicit. They knew, and did nothing. The FBI did nothing. The DOJ did nothing. Your CIA did nothing. How much money were they receiving from China?

    Yet you blame Russia and hate Russians.

    The Chinese-owned company, based in Washington, D.C., reportedly inserted code into Clinton’s email server, located in upstate New York, that would send the company virtually all her emails in real-time, The Daily Caller reported Monday. This allegedly took place throughout her tenure as Secretary of State, until 2013.

    Yet you blame Russia for your problems.

    Maybe the United States really could be great again, if it stopped the hurricane of betrayal, and political, economic and military treason that have been cutting it to pieces for decades.

    Maybe then Russia and America could contain China.

    They cheat just as much in Russian universities, and the same class of people turn a blind eye.

  81. last straw 说:
    @John Arthur

    The US has been growing faster on a per-capita basis at PPP for the last 10 years, with the absolute gap between the US on a per capita basis and China on a per capita basis growing.

    Maybe that reflects the fact that China was a capital-intensive economy in the past 10 years. The share of infrastructure-building was probably disproportionately high during that period. Once China transforms into a consumer economy, the growth of per capita income and personal consumption will start to accelerate.

    • 回复: @John Arthur
  82. last straw 说:
    @John Arthur

    The gap between the per capita GDP of American Whites and Han Chinese is massively larger than the current gap between all Americans and all Chinese.

    The question is, how long that gap will last? The relative growth of China’s per capita PPP seems to be faster in recent years. For example, the per capita GDP of China was approximately 19% of America’s in 2010. In 2018, it was about 29%. If you look farther, in 1990, the per capita PPP of China was only about 4% of America’s.

    • 回复: @John Arthur
  83. @last straw

    Last-Straw,
    Perhaps this could be the case. I can see it happening. However, it is far easier to grow in the beginning stages of a country’s development than in the latter stages. This is due to the fact that most innovation/technology is transferred. China, barring major reform, isn’t going to grow any faster than this, and is likely to slow down due to their old age.

    Of course, nothing is preventable, so take this analysis with some skepticism, but my point was that if you judge the economic profile of China and the US over the last decade, the US has done better. Of course, given the demographic stupidity of the US and the fiscal irresponsibility of the government, this may very well end in the future.

  84. @Andrei Martyanov

    I usually agree with the analysis of some China watchers on this website, including GodFree Roberts, but disagree strongly with this.

    Essentially, your argument is that the purchasing power of the US is inflated, and is based on fake worth, and soon will dissipate. Not only that, but that the real economy of the US is far lower than what is currently estimated.

    Now if what you are saying is true, then the American people received trillions of dollars worth of consumer goods from China, while giving them meaningless dollar bills in return, while their actual real purchasing power is dramatically lower, in what is the biggest scam in world History. Why would those sensible Chinese elites allow for this to happen?

    Not only that, given that a dramatically lower real economy, it would imply that Americans are receiving extreme amount of value for little input, making them the most productive people on the entire planet.

    The reality is that America’s economy is really \$21 trillion, and China’s economy is \$27 trillion. China is growing faster than America, and has a good chance of making the world bipolar from the American dominated unipolar world.

    But claiming that America is on the verge of a massive collapse is highly doubtable. Stagnation like Japan is plausable, which had an even greater deindustralization and a *非常* higher debt-to-GDP ratio than the US, but collapse is just a silly fantasy in my opinion.

    • 回复: @Andrei Martyanov
    , @Erebus
  85. @last straw

    The Chinese certainly have the resources and capabilities to close the gap.

    However, I doubt this. It is easier to grow from the bottom in absolute terms than it is to grow for the top, so it is easy for countries like China to catch up in relative terms.

    It has always been easy for countries to close the relative gap, Solow’s curve is what they call that phenomenon.

    Given China’s vastly better demographic picture than the US, if they aren’t going to close the absolute gap now, then I don’t think they will anytime soon, since their picture is rapidly degrading.

  86. Anon[328]• 免责声明 说:
    @Paul holland

    Tremendous amounts of money are lost in useless investments in the MILITARY INDUSTRIAL complex. Meanwhile, the education system is kept obsolete, power plants leaking tritium stay unrepaired, infrastructure, roads, bridges, dams are crumbling.

    Are the following ”services” among those ”exported” by the US: Bombing a country or assassinating a general (an act of war), threatening countries with military invasions, gross intimidation through sanctions? Are these among the services exported by the US?

  87. Yet another China-worshiping article.

    The extent to which any economy is built on theft, lies and distortions, is in inverse proportion to how long that economy will last before it crashes and burns. It’s also never obvious what kind of thing will light off the fuse. Since it’s almost impossible to determine the percentage of truth from the lies, it’s always a surprise when the whole thing collapses.

    My China prediction: expect crash-and-burn within the next ten years, instigated by some non-economic event. If the CCP survives, China will be a greatly diminished “world power”.

  88. @John Arthur

    The reality is that America’s economy is really \$21 trillion

    The reality of American “economy” is 75%+ of FIRE (that is Service Economy producing zero real value) and is dwarfed by China’s manufacturing capacity. It is easier to count fields in which the United States retains at least some leadership and expertise than where it fell dramatically behind. Here is a bit of “insight” for you.

    Inadequate U.S. Skilled Labor Supply

    The U.S. machine tools sector lacks assured access to a sufficiently large pool of skilled labor. Many skilled workers are exiting the workforce due to age, and there are too few technical educational programs to train those who could take their place. Without concerted action that provides both a ready workforce and a continuously-charged pipeline of new employees, the U.S. will not be able to maintain the large, vibrant, and diverse machine tools sector needed to produce the required number and types of products when needed. Market Forces Decreasing Domestic Capabilities The U.S. machine tools sector has been shrinking since at least the 1980s due to a number of primary and contributing factors with the U.S. standing dropping significantly since 2000. In 2015, China’s global machine tool production skyrocketed to \$24.7B accounting for 28% of global production, while the U.S. accounted for only \$4.6B, after China, Japan, Germany, Italy, and South Korea. According to the U.S. Census Bureau data, in 2015 there were 1,028 machine tool firms employing 27,919 people.

    I suggest you get acquainted with this Interagency Report to POTUS.

    https://media.defense.gov/2018/Oct/05/2002048904/-1/-1/1/ASSESSING-AND-STRENGTHENING-THE-MANUFACTURING-AND-DEFENSE-INDUSTRIAL-BASE-AND-SUPPLY-CHAIN-RESILIENCY.PDF

    If you didn’t do it yet, it is a good time to start–it is a good primer for handling cognitive dissonance. I am sure you never heard the news that the United States doesn’t have actual commercial shipbuilding industry, while China has a gigantic one. Hell, Russia’s commercial shipbuilding makes the US look like amateurs. I am sure you heard of Boeing and GE and how they are still being killed. Other than that–sure, everything is peachy. I am sure armies of US lawyers, literary critics, insurance agents, realtors and car dealers are hard at work developing plan for US economic revival.

    • 同意: Biff
    • 谢谢: Miro23
  89. Mefobills 说:

    Yet another China-worshiping article.

    The extent to which any economy is built on theft, lies and distortions, is in inverse proportion to how long that economy will last before it crashes and burns.

    The sub-title of Walsh’s article is “Ignorance or Denial by the U.S. Poses Grave Dangers”

    I contend that American’s (I’m one) are in deep Denial, or are Ignorant. It’s embarrassing actually to be surrounded by hypnotized and degraded people. But, then again, if all you ever hear is bad narrative, then you will not know any better. Garbage in and Garbage out. Humans are little different than computers, unless they get new programming. Hollywood and the owned media have done quite a number on American brain-space, and by extension, the Western World. Thanks Jews.

    America, mostly led by Wall Street, sold America’s patrimony for wage arbitrage. Patrimony comes from the past, and includes intellectual property and crown jewels of a nation state – including hard won know how. Wage arbitrage is the delta between wages.

    Lifting of industry from America (and other Western Countries) was done by sneaky underhanded methods by the (((usual suspects)) who think that only prices matter.

    American industry was attacked by the finance class with green mail techniques, shorts, and outright coercion, to go to China and get the China price. Also, there was skiff and skim paid as bribes to dock workers and retail. China goods would be put on the shelf at retail eye-level, to then displace existing American main-street labor. (Labor makes goods as prices).

    I contend that American economy is based on lies, thefts, and distortion. I actually don’t contend – I know. It is a reality that most American’s don’t want to face up to and look at squarely.

    Soy boys and women are emotionally driven, and they especially don’t want to square up to facts on the ground.

    Any and all civilizations have hierarchy, and western hierarchical elites are hidden. Hidden finance elites are controlling things; NOT POLITICAL ELITES working for the people. Demon-ocracy politicians are no more than sock puppets.

    China by contrast, has a political class that is firmly in charge. This political class uses poling and data for feedback rather than votes. China’s political class is working for its people. Deal with it.

    China uses a superior type of money that doesn’t “take” for its right to exist, and this in turn means that China is PERMANENTLY EFFICIENT. If a nations money siphons off to a predatory group, then prices must go up. The American worker is carrying a parasite in his brain and on his back.

    With the rake-off that predator finance class is taking on U.S labor, as compared to China’s labor being improved year on year, then it is a foregone conclusion: China wins

    The patrimony that was sold off by Wall Street, was sold off for pennies. The hard won past was sold for arbitrage today. The arbitrage funneled into wall street, pushing 401Ks, and making Wall Street as heroes… for a time. But, the future came and now main street is Zeroes, as they have lost any potential gains had wall street off-shoring gambit never happened.

    Economics… especially neo-liberal false economy does not codify time. The equal sign is not up to the challenge, so unlike swaps across the equal sign is rampant. Loss of Patrimony was a tremendous loss, a generational loss.

    In addition, infinity immigration of brown people from turd world causes wage depression, causes economic insecurity, and causes border/cultural insecurity. American’s vote against this, yet it persists. Do you need any more proof that the political class does not work for you?

    These insecurities do not have a monetary price. Patrimony did not have a monetary price. You cannot have a cohesive nation state, when giant hoaxes of this kind are on-going, all under the guise that it is good economics, when the opposite is true. It is only good for a “class” of people, everybody else has a hidden hand deep in their pocket squeezing away at their testicles.

    The gift economy, or non-monetized economy in China is NOT CALCULATED IN GDP numbers. But, we can be sure that it is much larger than in U.S., which has been almost entirely monetized by finance class. U.S. suckers only think in terms of dollars now, as their brain space has been colonized. This then forecloses on other aspects of what it is to be a human. American degradation will continue because the underlying usury system of the West, has not been replaced.

    Money prices are not the be-all and end-all for economic health. Use your eyes and don’t believe false narratives spewing from Teevee and know-nothing paid for pundits. China is on the rise, and U.S. is on the decline. There is no making America great again, if all economic gains channel through finance plutocracy, and most of U.S economy is fake finance engineering, which in turn is another form of usury. Wall Street is not the real economy.

    Boeing is a perfect analogy of U.S. today. Imported low value Indian labor writing code for the MCAS system. Boeing executives pushing their stock options with new bank credit, but not investing in new plant and equipment (replace the 737 rather than re-engine). Move headquarters away from Seattle, and then give instructions from the remote location, and from on high. Finance makes decisions based on EBITDA, as if earnings before interest taxes and depreciation are the only metric that matters.

    This kind of giant hoaxing can only be done with usury flows out of finance, because anything that is anti-logos is unnatural, and unnatural must be funded to exist.

    • 同意: niceland, Monotonous Languor
    • 回复: @Biff
    , @Erebus
  90. niceland 说:

    Why would China worry about ‘debt’? It’s an internal matter, mostly by state run banks under the control of the government. As long as the foreign account is in order they can do what they want with ‘debt’. It’s just fiction, internal bookkeeping, can be created and cancelled at will IF you have the power to do so. And the Chinese .gov has that power. This is something western financial pundits don’t seem to understand.

    Commenter Mefobills is spot on in his analysis.

    • 同意: Ron Unz
  91. Biff 说:
    @Mefobills

    Well done sir. Especially this:

    Boeing is a perfect analogy of U.S. today. Imported low value Indian labor writing code for the MCAS system. Boeing executives pushing their stock options with new bank credit, but not investing in new plant and equipment (replace the 737 rather than re-engine). Move headquarters away from Seattle, and then give instructions from the remote location, and from on high. Finance makes decisions based on EBITDA, as if earnings before interest taxes and depreciation are the only metric that matters.

  92. Smith 说:

    Only failure and civil war can wake the US up.

    China will fall when they are at the top, just like what US is now.

    • 回复: @HallParvey
  93. Erebus 说:
    @John Arthur

    The reality is that America’s economy is really \$21 trillion…

    The reality is that GDP is a tally of transactions, and transactions do not create wealth. They at best reflect an activity which may or may not have produced wealth. Wealth, of course is measured in things, and if the activity didn’t produce, or help produce some thing, it added not a jot to wealth.

    … claiming that America is on the verge of a massive collapse is highly doubtable… a silly fantasy in my opinion.

    I too doubt that a massive collapse is likely, so long as certain conditions prevail.

    Principal amongst these is the USD’s ability to maintain its reserve currency role. Should that falter in an uncontrolled fashion, the fact that there is a vastly greater amount of USDs held internationally than is held domestically would mean that a flood of USDs would rush home to buy whatever physical assets it can as its international utility collapses.

    That puts hyper-inflation on the menu, and the only way to counter it would be to put currency controls in place and let the international USDs die as orphans. Either way, an internal “massive collapse” will ensue. Unable to buy components in the international market, America’s remaining factories (in reality, just assembly plants) would close in days. Inability to buy energy (oil, gas & electricity) internationally, would further result in a massive lowering of economic activity as energy prices would skyrocket and shortages ensue.

    How far are we away from the USD losing its reserve status? Well, it’s being discussed at the highest levels of the IMF and Central Banks have been told to prepare for a post-USD world. In fact, Mark Carney, head of the Bank of England made a speech on that very topic recently at Jackson Hole. I suggest you look into it.

    If the people who run the world’s reserve system think the USD’s demise as the world’s reserve currency is inevitable, and are talking about it publicly it’s not only inevitable but quite likely imminent.

    Be that as it may, the USD’s demise is certainly not a “silly fantasy”, and so neither is the “massive collapse” that will inevitably follow.

    • 同意: Mefobills
    • 回复: @Biff
    , @Smith
    , @John Arthur
    , @Miro23
  94. Erebus 说:
    @Mefobills

    Great series of posts Mefobills. I would’ve liked to have typed them myself.

  95. Biff 说:
    @Erebus

    Principal amongst these is the USD’s ability to maintain its reserve currency role. Should that falter in an uncontrolled fashion, the fact that there is a vastly greater amount of USDs held internationally than is held domestically would mean that a flood of USDs

    Another analogy for it is writing a series of IOU’s or checks for people to trade with, and then one day everybody at once wants to cash their checks, and BAM! You’re holding the bag.

    Money = Debt = Money = Debt = Money = Debt

    “We’re giving you your debt back – good luck.”

  96. Smith 说:
    @Erebus

    Ah, Erebus, the usual chink shill.

    You would have a point if the USA and the America continent itself isn’t blessed up by having huge resources.

    Unlike Russia and China who are selling resources, they are buying resources with money (i.e. paper) so they can stock their own. Money i.e. paper can be propped up simply by trust and violence.

    America collapse will not be about money or resources, it will be about the death of american society and an ethnic conflict/civil war. And that would lead to a rebirth with true nationalists taking charge.

    • 巨魔: Blinky Bill, d dan
    • 回复: @Erebus
  97. Erebus 说:
    @Smith

    You would have a point if the USA and the America continent itself isn’t blessed up by having huge resources.

    It had a great deal more resources in 1920. In fact, the remaining resources are high hanging fruit. Difficult and expensive to extract, and in some cases also severely depleted. The easily extracted resources are gone, and the almost free energy available then that drove America’s industrialization is also gone.

    How long did it take to start using 1920’s resources at the present rate? Hint: 4 generations
    Doubtless America will recover, but how long will it take to start using what’s left at the present rate this time?
    One generation?
    二?
    三?
    What happens in the interim?

    Hint: It’s called “collapse”.

    • 回复: @Smith
  98. Blankaerd 说:
    @Just passing through

    美国致力于自由主义,无论是专制的还是民主的自由主义都无所谓。 他们支持的独裁者——尽管经常被称为法西斯主义者——在经济上始终是自由的。 像皮诺切特和佛朗哥这样的独裁者并没有过多地参与他们国家的经济,而是向外国(通常是当时的美国)影响开放。 他们通常将经济交给技术官僚来运行。 这就是为什么在佛朗哥死后西班牙如此顺利地过渡到自由民主国家的原因,因为技术官僚们已经种下了自由主义毒药的根源。

    这也是美国容忍他们存在的原因,即使他们像佛朗哥一样在社会上保守。

  99. Smith 说:
    @Erebus

    America has a shitton of oil, coal, minerals and gas available in both land and nearby sea (Texas, Canada, Alaska), that’s not counting the treasure troves in South America.

    The collapse can happen, and will happen if the course is not changed. But America will not stay lazy for long, because if not americans harvesting these resources, other people will cross the sea to do that.

    Also, no, the resources in America are barely used, as said, because America prefers to BUY resources with money instead.

  100. @Erebus

    Erebus,
    I agree that the USD may lose its reserve status at some point, though the chances are far less than people on this site generally think.

    However, I am not convinced that that would lead to a collapse or even enduring issues for the US. There are plenty of countries that have had collapses in their currency and some had stagnation, and some had recession, but none of them had collapse. Venezuela is getting close, but that is due to US sanctions and nationalization of industry not collapse in Venezuelan currency.

    I agree that Chinese elites are more meritocratic than US elites and far more competent, but the reality is that at worse the US will stagnate. There is a chance of collapse, but it is no more than that of Chinas or Russias. Every developed country has those tail end risks.

    • 回复: @A123
    , @Erebus
  101. @Godfree Roberts

    题外话。

    Haven’t seen an article from you lately sir. I much enjoyed the Toyota factory comparison made in your https://www.unz.com/article/trade-war-iii/ article. Do you have any more of such gems?

    最好。

    • 回复: @Godfree Roberts
  102. @TG

    Yes Mr. Kissinger was not registered under the Foreign Agents Registration Act (FARA).

  103. A123 说:
    @John Arthur

    the USD may lose its reserve status at some point, though the chances are far less than people on this site generally think. … However, I am not convinced that that would lead to a collapse or even enduring issues for the US.

    What almost everyone misses is that reserve currency status is a penalty. The USD has a premium over its utility in trade. The 储备金 有效地:

    — Subsidizes every import
    — Penalizes every export

    A substantial number of real jobs in manufacturing would be *已创建* by ending the USD reserve premium.

    和平😇

    • 回复: @John Arthur
  104. @Hiram of Tyre

    “In mid-1913 the United Kingdom became the first country to promote the use of the yuan in Europe. Germany, France, Switzerland and Luxembourg entered the competition through the installation of OCB to facilitate the use of the «people’s currency» (‘renminbi’). ”
    Prescience?

  105. @A123

    Exactly. Some other form of equilibrium would be achieved.

    • 哈哈: d dan
  106. @Just passing through

    Most of the population don’t live in rural China and density is much lower, so communicable diseases don’t spread as quickly. The overwhelming density of urban centers is one of the major challenges, in fact, but it is also one of the easier places to control disease.

  107. Miro23 说:
    @Erebus

    The reality is that GDP is a tally of transactions, and transactions do not create wealth. They at best reflect an activity which may or may not have produced wealth.

    You’ve got a point there. If all Americas insurance companies disappeared overnight , would it be the end of the world? Or would a sick person manage to find a doctor and pay them?

    Equally, the overnight disappearance of all US lawyers wouldn’t be all bad. Many less court cases and more informal settlements.

  108. HallParvey 说:
    @Smith

    China will fall when they are at the top, just like what US is now.

    No. They have one big advantage. Their people. They are susceptible to outside political pie in the sky influence, but they seem to have the ability to recover from such deviancy.

    • 回复: @Smith
  109. Smith 说:
    @HallParvey

    Lol, you don’t know chinks and their deviancy.

    There is a reason they got humiliated by barbarians all over history.

    The average chinese dynasty has an expired date of 200 years at best.

    • 巨魔: d dan
    • 回复: @Daniel Chieh
  110. @Smith

    Your understanding of history, like your grasp of numbers, is extraordinarily poor. China “lost” twice to barbarians – the first time after an incredibly long war with Mongols and Jurchens, the same Mongols who essentially curbstomped everyone else. And that lasted a very short period of time before the Chinese restored themselves under the Ming.

    The Ming itself would last almost three hundred years, fighting pretty much endlessly during the period, and ultimately collapse not because of any special “deviancy” but typical bureaucratic corruption and inefficiencies which allowed the Manchu to prevail, after internal revolts had weakened the Ming.

    As for being “humiliated”, the Chinese actually tamed the Tarim Basin, wiped out the Xiongnu, essentially exterminated the Mongol identity, and gradually overtook lands once occupied by the steppe barbarians. The size didn’t come from nowhere, you know.

    But your ignorance and incapability is a blessing in many ways, I suppose.

    • 回复: @Smith
  111. Erebus 说:
    @John Arthur

    I agree that the USD 五月 lose its reserve status 在某一点...

    How mealy mouthed can you get? Of course it will. No reserve currency lasted forever. “Forever” is a very long time

    The question here is whether the word “imminent” can be applied to America’s collapse. To me, in the case of currency collapses, “imminent” means within the next 2 business cycles. The White Papers published by the IMF and speeches of Central Bankers indicate that they so too. How would you argue against them?

    There are plenty of countries that have had collapses in their currency and some had stagnation, and some had recession, but none of them had collapse.

    Oh? You mean Weimar Republic? Perhaps Zimbabwe? I’d call them collapses. What would you call them?

    • 回复: @John Arthur
  112. @Erebus

    Well I am not suggesting that US power is enduring. I am just saying that the notion of a collapse is far exaggerated, and I expect a soft crash of the dollar, which is what I was implying. Two business cycles leading to a collapse of the dollar is possible, and certainly in the realm of possibility, but it won’t lead to a collapse of the US.

    With respect to the Weimar Republic and Zimbabwe, one country was military defeated and forced to accept horrid edicts, with most of its prime age population dead or infirmed, and Zimbabwe got rid of their entire smart fraction, and literally slaughtered their economically successful people. The US has serious issues, but nothing like those, which are sheer existential issues. They didn’t collapse because their currency lost power…

    Look I agree with the notion of an ascendant China and a stagnating US. But the notion of collapse is just a stupid fantasy. If Japan, which had a far worse deindustrialization and a debt to GDP ratio far worse than the US didn’t collapse, then America isn’t going to. Countries aren’t bitcoin, they dont collapse out of the blue. That has never happened in modern history.

    Btw none of those papers indicate a US collapse, so none of it proves your point. Indeed the IMF estimates that America’s GDP per capita will continue to grow faster than Chinas and for the gap between the two countries to grow… The same people who you cited believe exactly what I say.

    All they say is given the fact that US makes an decreasing share of the world population and economy, there is a reasonable chance for the sheer power of the dollar to fade, especially with China aggregate GDP increasing.

    • 回复: @John Arthur
    , @Erebus
  113. @John Arthur

    One more thing, you should check out this chart by the World Bank and the IMF, which indicates that the US has increased the gap between itself and China in per capita terms over the last 20 years, while you and everyone had been crowing about America’s complete shadowing by China:
    https://data.worldbank.org/indicator/NY.GDP.PCAP.PP.CD?locations=US-CN

    If you check the IMF’s estimates for the future, the same people that wrote your papers estimate the US to continue to increase its gap with respect to China.

    Since the US is only 4% of the world population, of course its dollar isn’t going to hold sway forever. The same is true for Singapore’s currency, which only enjoys middling power, yet Singapore is the most succesful and wealthiest country in the world on a per capita basis. No collapse there either.

    You guys are confusing a 105 IQ country having moderate success in getting to middle income, when many countries with lower IQs attaining far higher heights, and saying this is the result of 4-D chess. You guys have taken China’s growth from going from below Africa’s level of standards to livable, extrapolated the growth rates, and assumed that China will blow past all the developed countries in the world. It just looks ridiculous quite frankly.

    Just as the mainstream media are fanatic Chinese bears, you guys are fanatic Chinese bulls. I think China will become the dominant economic power, but the US isn’t going to collapse or any of that nonsense. Nor will China blow past US standards of living, though it might, given another 50 years, catch up and suprass the US in per capita terms, anything is possible.

    Remember, the US system of governance has allowed it to live at the technological frontier for its entire existance, whereas China has been so improvished, it has been on a Malthusian edge for 2000 years. I wouldn’t count the US out anytime soon.

    • 哈哈: d dan, Daniel Chieh
    • 回复: @Vidi
  114. Vidi 说:
    @Just passing through

    As with nearly everything in China, the important question is, When?

    If you don’t specify a date for when you saw a thing you didn’t like, then I’ll assume that what you saw was the old, dirt poor China.

  115. Alden 说:
    @Just passing through

    Don’t forget Richard Blum, Dianne Feinstein’s husband who was negotiating with Chinese as early as the mid 19 sixties. I’m sure there were plenty more like him.

  116. Mefobills 说:
    @Astuteobservor II

    Isn’t that just a pipe dream? As automation is right around the corner.

    Easy enough: Use a Mefobill like device if you want to direct credit at industry. Bills are three parties, and specify the payer the payee and drawee.

    (Schacht used Mefobills and Oeffa bills in Germany starting in 33-34 to do the very thing I state above. But you know- we cannot study National Socialism because of Nazi’s and other hypnosis.)

    Basically, you create new purchasing power and point it at industry, then examine the bills to make sure new goods and services are produced. If new goods and services were produced, then the bill is allowed to be discounted. Discounting is a fancy word for redeeming.

    Somehow, I find myself as one of the few people alive with answers on how to monetize the future? Why is that? I’m not bragging – it is more of a sad commentary about how ignorant people are with regards to money.. and the ignorance extends to those who should know better.

    Once you have built out your industrial infrastructure, then you use Douglas Social Credit to account for robotic and automated production.

    In this way, you end up with first class infrastructure, a trained population, and money in hands of said population to buy the product of automated and skilled labor production.

    There has always been a gap between goods as prices, and the ability of labor to buy their output.

    We (humans) have known about gap theory since the interwar years. Usury pays for deception, so economists are not taught reality. They have trained ignorance, and hence cannot answer sophisticated questions like yours.

    If you get both fiscal and monetary policy correct, there is no need to worry about an automated future.

    The bad: Neoliberal plutocracy makes its nut by usury, and they have no intention of letting go of their money control. Likely it will take force to pry their fingers off of the levers of power.

    The tree of liberty needs watering.

    • 同意: bluedog
  117. last straw 说:

    One more thing, you should check out this chart by the World Bank and the IMF, which indicates that the US has increased the gap between itself and China in per capita terms over the last 20 years, while you and everyone had been crowing about America’s complete shadowing by China:
    https://data.worldbank.org/indicator/NY.GDP.PCAP.PP.CD?locations=US-CN

    If you check the IMF’s estimates for the future, the same people that wrote your papers estimate the US to continue to increase its gap with respect to China.

    That chart is quite misleading. Go to 彭博, and trace the lines in the diagram labeled “Most Chinese people are still much poorer than the average American”, then you will clearly see how China is closing the per capita GDP gap with the U.S. Notice that the diagram at Bloomberg is virtually identical to the chart to which you linked, except it shows the ratio of American per capita GDP to Chinese per capita GDP.

    I’m not sure which IMF estimate you are referring to, because as I pointed out above, it seems to me that China is inexorably closing the per capita GDP gap with the U.S.

    I don’t think China will blow past anyone. But it won’t stop growing at 5-6% a year anytime soon either.

    Remember, the US system of governance has allowed it to live at the technological frontier for its entire existance, whereas China has been so improvished, it has been on a Malthusian edge for 2000 years. I wouldn’t count the US out anytime soon.

    The West has been on the forefront of science and technology in the past two hundred and fifty years. The U.S. was established by Europeans. China did not have such luck. On the other hand, if China barely survived for two thousand years, it would be a little bit hard to imagine how China managed to be the world’s longest continuous civilization. Two hundred fifty years is a relative short period in Chinese history, and its stagnation during this period seems to have been an abnormality. I think China will catch up the West and restore its historic norm in the next 30-50 years.

  118. denk 说:
    @Anon

    A trade deal with China is the last thing the US needs. We need a complete decoupling from China

    The Chinese didnt force uncle sham at gun point to invest,
    ITS THE US that offered to ‘couple’ ,
    its your right to de-couple any time you wish.

    But what you are doing is to force a 全球化 de-coupling from China,

    The trade war is designed to trigger a flight of foreign industries out of China, which’s already happening.

    The main thrust tho, is to nip ‘中国制造2030‘ in the bud.

    I heard [[[they]]] are mulling to amend the ‘25% made in USA law’ to forbid any country selling eqpt which has 10% or more US content 到中国。
    This is the latest attempt to kill off Huawei, after all the previous shenanigans have failed to do so.

    On the critical chip industry, [[[they]]] are arm twisting Holland to stop supplying chip making machinery to China, fact is, TW’s TSMC, the world’s largest chip fab plant, is under increasing pressure to stop doing biz with the mainland.

    Extreme pressure is also applied on Ukraine to block the sale of jet engine technology to China, etc etc etc…….

    These are just the Tip of an iceberg.

    Even Chinese infrastructure projects like railways , airport, electricity, harbor port etc etc in Africa, Asia and the Pacific are being sabotaged and derailed, to be taken over by murkkans or their vassals such as Oz, Jp, India…

    This is nothing short of a 全球排华法案 dictated from Washington.

    This the 21C murkkan mantra,
    If you cant compete, kill the [电子邮件保护]#\$%^& !!!

    PS
    Dont get me started on Tibet, Xinjiang, HK, SCS, TW, ECS………

  119. Vidi 说:
    @John Arthur

    One more thing, you should check out this chart by the World Bank and the IMF, which indicates that the US has increased the gap between itself and China in per capita terms over the last 20 years, while you and everyone had been crowing about America’s complete shadowing by China:
    https://data.worldbank.org/indicator/NY.GDP.PCAP.PP.CD?locations=US-CN

    The World Bank’s numbers aren’t saying what you think they are saying.

    (I believe I drew your attention to those numbers a while back, so I am quite familiar with them.)

    What you should be focusing on is the in per-capita GDP between the US and the PRC. In 1990, the average American was 24 times as rich as the average inhabitant of China. By 2018, the ratio had shrunk to 3.4. China has been catching up very quickly.

    If you only subtract the per-capita GDPs of the same year, arriving at what I call the year’s “absolute gap”, you could be fooled into thinking that the gap between the U.S. and the PRC is growing. That’s because the absolute gap is initially so large that China would have to grow ridiculously fast in order to prevent the gap from seeming to increase. (If you want the math, the note below should satisfy you.)

    When you cite the absolute gap, you are basically claiming that China isn’t growing 100% a year, and you are wasting everyone’s time. Of course China isn’t doing that — nobody is doing that.

    所以 显著 conclusion is that the gap between the U.S. and the PRC is actually narrowing, not widening.

    -

    Note for those who want to see some simple math.

    For a given year, let U be the U.S. number, and C be the corresponding Chinese number. In 1990, according to the World Bank, those figures would be U=\$23,888.60 and C=\$987.64 respectively. Thus U=24*C, approximately (where “*” means “multiply”).

    Now let Ug be the U.S. growth rate in 1990, and Cg be the Chinese growth rate that year. Then for the absolute gap to shrink, we want

    >>>  U*Ug – C*Cg < U – C

    (where ">>>" marks an equation.) Recall that U=24*C. Thus we want

    >>>  24*C*Ug – C*Cg < 24*C – C = 23*C .

    Divide by C throughout (this works because C is positive):

    >>>  24*Ug – Cg 24*Ug – 23

    or

    >>>  Cg > 24*Ug – 23 .

    If the U.S. grows by just one percent, we would need Cg > 24*1.01 – 23 = 1.24.
    That is, China would have to grow by 124% just to keep the absolute gap from increasing.

    If the U.S. grows by three percent, we would need Cg > 24*1.03 – 23 = 1.72.
    China would have to grow by 172% just to keep the absolute gap from increasing.

    You are not saying much when you are claiming, basically, that China isn’t reaching these impossible rates of growth. Like saying that no high jumper on Earth can clear 40 feet unaided — which is true, but so what?

    • 回复: @John Arthur
  120. Smith 说:
    @Daniel Chieh

    China history is complex but it can be sum up in two phases:

    – Before Song: endless civil war and kinstrife.
    – After Song: endless humiliation by barbarians from all direction.

    Even the good era like Tang and Ming had huge civil war and the later half of Ming court were ruled by eunuchs and were so bad that the border general opened the gate for Manchu to come invade.

    Ironically, the times when China territory were the biggest is when Han chinese were being ruled by mongols (Yuan) and the Manchu (Qing). Also, the Xiongnu, Jurchen were effectively defeated and absorbed by the mongols, not chinks. And this also extends to various kingdoms like Western Xia, Dali and Yin during the Song-Yuan dynasties that are now just boring chink provinces. Glad Vietnam and Japan resisted the mongo-chinks.

    • 巨魔: d dan
    • 回复: @Daniel Chieh
  121. @Vidi

    I agree with some of your points, but I think you are missing something here. Everyone closes the relative gap with a richer country, that is just how the numbers work out.

    First countries dont grow in exponential factors, that is just how their growth is characterized. Remember, as I pointed out in the other thread, due to Chinas constant reform, its growth was actually accelerating due to reforms, but due to the higher bases it had than in 1990 or even 2000, it looked like it was slowing down. The Chinese are very happy that the economy is adding 1000+ to wages and GDP per capita yearly then adding 100+ like it was in the 90s, even if that growth was characterized as higher. China is developing faster than it was in the 90s, but due to the low bases, was seen as developing faster in the 90s than it was today.

    It’s actually harder for a country at the technological frontier to grow, which is why the exponential argument that you are basing your arguments on make no sense, otherwise it would be impossible for any country to play catch up. It is much easier for China to add an additional dollar than it would be for the UK and it would be easier for UK to add an additional dollar than the US. That is how technological transfers work. That’s why developed countries with low population growth like Japan grow something like 0.1% a year and African countries maintain like 10.9% a year growth.

    What your point’s math implies to be is that it is easier for developed countries to grow than underdeveloped countries, which would validate the argument that it would be impossible for China to close the gap if the US grew at some 3-4%. But that is just not how it works, they even call it Solows Curve.

    If you actually take a look at that worldbank statistics I showed, China has actually converged in absolute terms with Japan, France, United Kingdom, and Italy. So it is very possible, not impossible, as you claim. The US is just an economic powerweight, which is why the gap as increased. If you compare Singapore and China, you will see that one has closed the relative gaps, but has made absolutely no progress on closing the absolute gaps.

    Thanks for taking the time for responding to my comment.

    • 回复: @last straw
  122. augusto 说:
    @Lin

    False reasoning mr Lin.
    The indian poor barber could easily buy much more of LOW COST indian food than the ‘merican
    equal service provider (such as a barber) with FIVE or ten percent of his earnings that the ‘merican one.
    Of course the problem for India is not at the barbers level but in the 60% misery poors in the subcontinent.
    But India grows continually at 5 or 5.5 pct a year whereas the exceptionalist use across the board LIE in their statistics every single day and everysingle TV news services.

    • 回复: @Lin
  123. @Smith

    错误。

    1) Tang was the furthest era of Chinese expansion, including much of South Asia and stretching into Central Asia.

    2) Jurchens were only defeated by Mongols because of Chinese intervention. In isolation, Song was slowly defeating the Jin and indeed forsaked an opportunity to retake China due to pure court politics.

    Yue fought a long campaign against the invading Jurchen in an effort to retake northern China. Just when he was threatening to attack and retake Kaifeng, corrupt officials advised Emperor Gaozong to recall Yue to the capital and sue for peace with the Jurchen. Fearing that a defeat at Kaifeng might cause the Jurchen to release Emperor Qinzong, threatening his claim to the throne, Emperor Gaozong followed their advice, sending 12 orders in the form of 12 gold plaques to Yue Fei, recalling him back to the capital. Knowing that a success at Kaifeng could lead to internal strife, Yue submitted to the emperor’s orders and returned to the capital, where he was imprisoned and where Qin Hui would eventually arrange for him to be executed on false charges.

    3) The Yuan/Mongol dynasty was so short-lived to almost be irrelevant, with their final victory in 1279, the Red Turbans rising in 1356 and founding the Ming by 1356. The Yuan lasted less than 80 years, and their remnants were wiped out and added to China.

    https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Ming_conquest_of_Yunnan

    4) The Ming in particularly despised eunuchs with the Hongwu Emperor attempting to eliminate their court presence in total. They would never control the court; Ming issues were from a separate provenance.

    5) The Ming fought over three hundred years in their era, almost all of them victorious(obviously, thus their continued existence). They intervened in the Imjin War and defeated Japan, and had so continuously crushed the Mongols that the Manchus came to exist – essentially the unified remnants of Mongols, Jurchens and other steppe people who managed to finally conquer a Ming weakened by internal rebellion.

    Manchu is now so utterly wiped out that China struggles to keep the language alive by paying stipends to the last remaining stipends.

    In summation: You are just very, very, very wrong. On everything. Which in someone as stupid as you, is probably a good thing, as it keeps you from harming anything worthwhile(it hurts yourself, but you are obviously worthless).

    • 回复: @Smith
    , @Alden
  124. Lin 说:
    @augusto

    我的原始声明:

    The poorer the people, the bigger % of the household budget is spent on food and US farmers have lower production cost of bulk food…because of higher degree of mechanization

    Here I’m talking about production cost. Ever wonder why murica is the biggest exporter of food?
    (And it’s also well known as % of price, indian grains are more subsidized than those of American. Of course there’s also the issue of state/quality of bulk grain sold in india)

    The indian poor barber could easily buy much more of LOW COST indian food than the ‘merican equal service provider (such as a barber) with FIVE or ten percent of his earnings that the ‘merican one.

    Honestly I’m not sure what’s your point comparing 5 % of a murican barber’s income to 30% of that of an indian barber. 5 % of a murican barber’s income could buy good amount of meat which Indians consume very little. 30% of an indian barber’s income will be spent mostly on grains+some beans.
    As I said before PPP GDP has the problem of not considering consumption pattern. Which country, india or murica, has lower prices for:
    —Gasoline, chicken breast, laptop computer,
    —Domestic servant salary, service ‘providers’…
    (BicMac index might not be appropriate because BicMac in india are chicken sandwich which are cheaper than beef ones)

  125. Smith 说:
    @Daniel Chieh

    I don’t think anything you said changed anything I said.

    The Tang territory comes not close to either the Yuan or Qing.
    The Song is still humilated by barbarians.
    The Ming is still humiliated by barbarian.
    The so-called civil strife happens because the emperor is corrupted, the court is corrupted and eunuchs run the show, as it is in every ending of chinese dynasties from Qin to Qing.

    It is ironic that you call mongols as wimps when northern asians are physically more imposing and stronger than chinks.

    • 巨魔: d dan
  126. @Smith

    Dude stop calling them Chinks. You can make an argument without resorting to such vulgarity.

    Anyways, as I have pointed out, China was the poorest people in the world for the last 2000 years, which is why they have been under such Malthusian pressure for intelligence.

    So while they made have had the world’s largest economy, it was only due to having the world’s largest population by far, which explains why they have had so much trouble dealing with the barbarians. But by the 18th century, the barbarians throughly were beaten by the Chinese, once population pressures started to abate.

    • 回复: @Daniel Chieh
  127. @Smith

    It is ironic that you call mongols as wimps when northern asians are physically more imposing and stronger than chinks.

    And essentially eradicated between Russia and China.

    Seems like it wasn’t very helpful, was it?

    • 回复: @Smith
  128. @John Arthur

    Anyways, as I have pointed out, China was the poorest people in the world for the last 2000 years, which is why they have been under such Malthusian pressure for intelligence.

    Self-evident nonsense. China’s GDP per capita was consistently higher than England’s until the 1300s.

    https://voxeu.org/article/japan-and-great-divergence-725-1874

    Should also be self-evident that one does not get high population and an organized nation simply by being poor; high levels of mortality would take away from the losses. The disconnect between poverty and infant morality has only been fairly recent.

    What is accurate is that China has had immense organizational issues in an effort to maintain a centralized government. Such difficulties have had consistent consequences, not so much as “bad emperors” as much as a consistently in-fighting and fractious court(it got as bad as during the Imjin War, elements would outright lie to the emperor to his face, making it hard for him to make any decisions).

    If the emperor was a genius, like Taizong, everything was fine. For everyone else, the emperor would either be driven to tyrannical methods like the Yongle Emperor – which angered and disaffected his court further; or the emperor(especially if he was not inclined to cruelty) would essentially give up and “go on strike” such as the Wanli Emperor, who essentially ceased to rule on anything besides warfare, apparently deciding that herding cats was not in the job description.

    A fundamental problem resulting from this was that later dynasties would have difficulties collecting taxes; the Ming in particular struggled throughout, as any large scale tax efforts were stymied by local powers. Similar to King Charles in the English Civil War, the Imperial court simply had no good way of financing that was not overwhelmingly burdened and limited by the very people who wanted to keep the centralized power over them weakened. Some emperors, like Hongwu, overcame this by keeping the court spartan and expecting the mandarins to accept honor rather than wealth – but this just made them more suspectible to corruption.

    No good solution ultimately was found for this, and constantly wars and intervention drained the treasury; eventually such stresses would lead to the fall of the dynasty. It wasn’t because of particular poverty of the population – but essentially corruption and issues of scale that were not solved.

    Such centralization issues with modern day techniques are much different. The notion of local powers having such authority is hard to even think nowadays.

    • 回复: @John Arthur
    , @Jeff Stryker
  129. @Godfree Roberts

    China’s state controlled banking system has created \$21 trillion of new money since 2009. That’s more than Japan, the EU, and the USA combined. A massive fraction of Chinese debt is non-performing and the economy is loaded with enormous loss making companies.

    China is in a huge bubble and will have a hard landing. They’ll probably dust themselves off be the #1 power in my lifetime, but there’s no way they get through this decade without a huge economic crisis.

  130. @Daniel Chieh

    丹尼尔,
    These numbers sharply differ with historical reality and Angus Maddisons own estimates. He is the premier on these issues. Check out his website. Instead of calling all my stuff nonsense while citing only one number for the pre 1000 ad UK with your link, you should check out the main guy on this, who has the most comprehensive data on this subject.
    On the data that he has, the Chinese were some of the poorest people on the planet. Not only that, larger populations tend to have larger per capita incomes, which indicates that a vast number of Chinese experienced horrific poverty unseen anywhere else.
    http://www.ggdc.net/maddison/oriindex.htm
    Ron even wrote an article on Chinese selection pressures, how would have that worked if they were richer than the British?

    • 回复: @John Arthur
    , @Daniel Chieh
  131. @bobbybobbob

    They won’t collapse, but stagnate like the Japanese, which followed that exact path, but it won’t happen for another 12-15 years.

  132. @John Arthur

    Oh well. These numbers from Angus cannot be really precise either, so I guess whatever I said can also be counted as guesswork. But one critique that I had was that China in your numbers was at the wealth cutoff point that the authors found was necessary for modern development for around 600 years, but never sprung the way forward. How likely would have that really been? Chinese are really smart, so it seems unlikely.
    Thanks for the comment nevertheless.

  133. @John Arthur

    These numbers sharply differ with historical reality

    What historical reality? China was indicated to be wealthy by visitors.

    When Marco Polo returned to Europe in 1295, his account of China (Cathay) as the largest, wealthiest, and most populous land in the world was not believed by many of his contemporaries. While his factual description gradually gained credibility, the Europeans of his day and long after continued to cherish a belief in the mysterious and exotic East.

    THE early sixteenth-century European accounts of China were prepared mainly by Portuguese merchants who stressed the material wealth, technological skills, and complex organization of Chinese society.

    etc. Derogatory comments were on the lack of courage of the Chinese, not their poverty.

    and Angus Maddisons own estimates. He is the premier on these issues.

    这也是 Cambridge core reader:

    Placing these results for China in an international comparative framework sheds new light on the timing of the Great Divergence. Our estimates indicate that Northern Song China was richer than Domesday Britain circa 1090, but Britain had caught up by 1400.

    Selecting and picking a random author doesn’t make it any more valid.

    Ron even wrote an article on Chinese selection pressures, how would have that worked if they were richer than the British?

    I’m familiar with the Clark-Unz selection theory, you can look it up yourself.

    https://www.theamericanconservative.com/articles/how-social-darwinism-made-modern-china-248/

    It does not require poverty, obviously. That’s not how evolution works. Selection only requires a trait to be selected for in reproduction. It just required the literati to have more children.

    In it, it specifically mentioned that Chinese agricultural techniques only fell behind in the 19th century.

    Chinese agricultural methods had always been exceptionally efficient, but by the 19th century, the continuing growth of the Chinese population had finally caught and surpassed the absolute Malthusian carrying-capacity of the farming system under its existing technical and economic structure

    The beauty of this, in fact, is that you can ask Unz himself here and he would almost certainly disagree with your very questionable assessment of history.

    • 回复: @Ron Unz
  134. First of all, Marco Polo visted the wealthiest area of China, also the most populous and assumed that the reality was the same everywhere else, that obviously wasn’t the reality.

    While the Angus Maddison statistics aren’t perfect, they are far better than the ones you listed, and they have China’s overall level of development as being low-medicore for most of the last 2000 years, lower than other Asian nations, and even Latin American societies.

    Even the statistics that *you posted* have Italy’s level of development was far higher of China’s during the period when Marco Polo visited. Relying on ancedotes that clash with your fundamental data hardly makes your image look better here. Marco Polo was obviously speaking in a grand style, and since the Chinese are obviously intelligent people, it makes sense that their richest area was one of some development. But Italy had a 50% higher standard of development by 1300 than China, per your own data, so either Marco Polo was blind as a bat, or he was speaking in grandiose terms, like most European writes are tend to do. Additionally, from that period onward, China’s would lose about half its GDP per capita, so Marco Polo’s observations were missing the mark there.

    With respect to the point about the Clark-Unz thesis, I do not follow your statement. Selection only works if poverty exists, otherwise then nothing will be selected for. In every society in the world, the poor have more children than the wealthy. The only time the opposite would occur if poverty was in sufficient form that it would quickly make the marriagable and future prospects of the poor deadly, which is what happened in contemporary China. If China was richer than Britian, which is the claim you made, then why did extreme selection occur over the last 1000-2000 years in China, but not in early Britain?

    I know that Ron mentioned to Peter Frost that the selection pressures in China were *非常* greater than selection pressures in the UK, and the UK was even then, highly dense. If it was poorer than China, then it would have almost certainly undergone the same selective pressure.

    I get the feeling that you think that I am insulting the Chinese people here, when I have great respect for them. But the facts are that given China’s extreme population density, and the fact it had a low per-capita GDP for a country of its size, that explains why the barbarians were able to cause so much damage at the northern border. In the 1800s, China’s population pressures subsided, its economy grew into its apex, and it finally destroyed the barbarian hordes for good. All frameworks of China’s economy admit it grew into its apex in 1830, with the Song Dynasty, and the Chinese had its largest share of the world economy. That is what your data showcases, and what all the textbooks state. So I am really confused what you are trying to argue here.

    • 回复: @John Arthur
  135. @John Arthur

    Sorry I mean the Qing Dynasty instead of the Song Dynasty.

  136. Smith 说:
    @Daniel Chieh

    Well, millions of them yet live in Mongolia, northern China and a part of Russia.

    Be careful on sating your bloodlust though, else you might piss up your russian backers.

    • 巨魔: Blinky Bill
    • 回复: @Daemon
  137. @bobbybobbob

    China’s debt burden is one-third of America’s right now, in 2020.

    上周,高盛高级银行家贝丝·哈马克 (Beth Hammack) 曾担任美国政府咨询小组美国国债咨询委员会主席,他向财政部长史蒂文·姆努钦 (Steven Mnuchin) 发送了一封信,信中底部有一个重磅炸弹。

    According to TBAC calculations, America will need to sell an eye-popping \$12tn of bonds in the coming decade, sharply more than it did in the past 10 years.

    This will “pose a unique challenge for the Treasury”, Ms Hammack warned, even “without factoring in the possibility of a recession”.

    In plain English, the Wall Street luminaries on the committee were asking who on earth — or in global finance — will buy this looming mountain of Treasuries?

    The question is highly timely, if not ironic, given that Mr Mnuchin is heading to Beijing for yet another round of US-China trade talks.

    近几十年来,中国一直是美国债务需求的可靠来源,因为该国积累了大量的防御性外汇储备,其出口繁荣使其有美元可投资。

    But now a shift is in the air: between May and November last year, China’s holdings of US Treasuries quietly shrank from \$1.18tn to \$1.12tn, well below the levels seen just three years ago, when China’s holdings topped \$1.25tn. –Gillian Tett, FT.

    • 回复: @bobbybobbob
    , @Mefobills
  138. Erebus 说:
    @John Arthur

    The underpinnings of a nation’s currency achieving and maintaining international reserve currency status cannot be reduced to statistics. They are as much political as they are economic.

    The USD’s reserve status stood on 3 legs:

    – The world’s largest economy. Size and productive output matter…
    – The world’s most powerful military. Size and capability matter…
    – A deep, transparent, and well run financial/taxation system. Size and political trust matter.

    None of those holds today, and so the USD’s reserve status is running on the fumes of inertia.

    The fact that no single country stands on all 3 legs and can take its place is the primary “support” that continues to keep it where it is. There is no mechanism to transition away from the USD, and there’s nothing to transition to. As soon as a solution to that is found, the USD’s reserve status falters.

    That the US & USD are now unbacked by any of the 3 legs is widely recognized, and so a lot of people are working on currency baskets & swaps, SDRs and various digital currency schemes looking for a solution. Presumably in the hope that a solution is found before an exogenous event blows the problem sky high, China does more now to support the USD’s reserve status than the US itself.

    China’s ancillary, but important, support comes from what can be called the “network effect” of the USD’s permeation through the world as a unit of exchange and store of value. As the world’s largest trader, China’s acceptance and use of the USD in international trade is critical to its maintenance.

    In banknotes alone (aka: physical paper FRNs), some \$250B of the \$375B total circulates overseas. \$6.2T of a total of \$16.1T in UST paper is held by foreigners, mostly Central Banks. So, another support the USD enjoys is that foreigners hold a lot of USDs. China could kiss off their remaining \$1.1T without skipping a beat, but could a Kenya, a Zimbabwe, a Brazil or any developing country that has been forced by IMF treaty to hold USDs kiss off their foreign currency reserves and not fall into chaos? No.

    Nobody likes chaos, least of all China. However, if the US continues to misbehave politically and financially, its view can be expected to change to “Chaos if necessary, but not necessarily chaos.” It’s a short step from there to “Let it burn”.

  139. Daemon 说:
    @Smith

    Those chinks will always be your big older brother.

    总是。

    • 回复: @Smith
  140. @Godfree Roberts

    Yes, the USA is rapidly careening towards a fiscal crisis. As are Japan and most European nations. This has little bearing on the point at hand: the banking system in China has conjured up 2X more money than the rest of the world combined in recent years, and invested most of it non-productively. Your sources indicating otherwise are misleading. We have seen how this “helicopter money” strategy plays out over and over again throughout history. There’s no way China is special.

    China will have a financial crisis of some sort first. This in turn will probably pull the other countries into crisis, but it’s set to kick off in China.

    • 回复: @Godfree Roberts
  141. Alden 说:
    @Daniel Chieh

    From what I know about Chinese history, you’re right.

  142. Alden 说:
    @Smith

    North Han Chinese are very tall, like 6 ft or more for men 5’6 women.

    We westerners think Han Chinese are short because for hundreds of years the diaspora came from the small southern Chinese. Difference might be caused by northerners eating high protein wheat southerners eating low protein rice. I don’t know, doesn’t matter why.

    The biggest diaspora comes from south China, canton after the Taiping rebels of Canton were defeated 1850???. Thinking all Han are the small Cantonese is like thinking all Europeans are tall Russians or short Sicilians.

    I don’t think mongols are all that big compared to the Han.

    Historically, the Chinese were very Nationalist ethnicist chauvinist didn’t want contamination by the lesser breeds. Plus it’s so big China never needed to conquer the neighbors. China basically has everything a country needs. I don’t know all that much about it. But I have the impression China was always just defensive. China repelled invaders if it could but didn’t need to conquer and expand geographically.

    The Han eventually overthrew the Manchu.

    • 回复: @Smith
  143. last straw 说:
    @John Arthur

    If you actually take a look at that worldbank statistics I showed, China has actually converged in absolute terms with Japan, France, United Kingdom, and Italy. So it is very possible, not impossible, as you claim. The US is just an economic powerweight, which is why the gap as increased. If you compare Singapore and China, you will see that one has closed the relative gaps, but has made absolutely no progress on closing the absolute gaps.

    You miss the whole picture if you concentrate on the absolute gap between per capita GDP only. To fully appreciate the relative effect of the gap, you have to take China’s per capita GDP into consideration. For example, a gap of \$40,000 will have a greater relative effect if China’s per capita GDP is \$20,000, when compared to, say, if China’s per capita GDP is \$80,000. Once you take China’s per capita GDP into consideration, you will realize that the gap has decreased, instead of increased, effectively.

    As for converging with the U.S. or Singapore, with a growth rate of 3-4 times (combined effects of economic growth and China’s currency appreciation) faster, it’s a mathematical certainty that China’s per capita GDP will approach the former two. Insisting otherwise sounds illogical to me.

  144. @Daniel Chieh

    …If China was so poor, why could they afford to dismiss Marco Polo’s offer? And later that of the British? It is not as if China was interested in the Silk Trade and definitely was not interested in Opium.

    …If China is so undeveloped, why is crime there lower than in the West? Of course some Hong Kong casinos are the stalking grounds of Triads but in general China is not beset by street violence and infested by gangs like America or even UK.

    …Why did Hong Kong improve after the Brits left in 1997? Of course there is political turmoil but the poverty and lawlessness of the so-called “Wild East” no longer exists in Hong Kong.

    …Why is China less corrupt than the Philippines or even the US? I’m not saying corruption does not exist but it is not as rampant as Manila or Los Angeles.

    …Why is China safer than Detroit or Los Angeles?

    …Why is there less homelessness in China than in America?

  145. @bobbybobbob

    Do you have any facts to back up your statements or are you just remembering Fox News?

    • 回复: @bobbybobbob
  146. denk 说:

    I heard the US IS on decline while China is ascending…

    BUt you cant put a 非常好 man down for long,

    The world’s no 1 ‘屎搅拌器‘ has been on 康力龙 lately….

    Violent color rev in HK.

    ‘five liars’ concerted smear campaign on ‘Chinese spies in
    Oz and TW..’

    The above combined help Washington’s bitch Cai Yin Wen
    to sweep to a big victory in prez election.

    Washington scheming to ‘upgrade’ the so-called Amerkkan Institute in TW to ’embassy’ status, followed by ambassador posting.

    THIS IS CHINA’S DECLARED RED LINE,

    Intensive smear campaign on Xinjiang.

    Stoking fire in SCS…

    numerous skirmishes bet VN and PRC,

    Now even the hitherto neutral Indonesia, which has no territorial dispute with China, has joined the fray.

    Swine flu in China which almost wipe out the domestic pork supply,

    Now a mysterious SARS like epidemic is spreading in Wuhan,

    Now you know why PRC is building its navy like there’s no tomorrow,

  147. @Desert Fox

    Thanks for the two book recommendations.

    • 回复: @Desert Fox
  148. @Mefobills

    Thanks for your comment; many valid points.

    I don’t however understand the relevance of Zion here. Zion was created by the people running the City but that’s for another discussion. My reference to “long plan” was about the City of London, only. It was the City who brought up the USA and is now taking it down. History seems to repeat with China. I am wary of Kissinger’s decade-long involvement in China. Just recently again, he met with Xi.

    • 回复: @Mefobills
  149. Ron Unz 说:
    @Daniel Chieh

    In it, it specifically mentioned that Chinese agricultural techniques only fell behind in the 19th century…The beauty of this, in fact, is that you can ask Unz himself here and he would almost certainly disagree with your very questionable assessment of history.

    Yes, I’d generally be much closer to your own position on these issues.

    I’m hardly a specialist in these historical economic comparisons, but my impression is that the traditional consensus view had been that the standard of living of ordinary Europeans only pulled noticeably ahead of that in China around the end of the 18th century, though there were obviously huge geographical variations in both regions.

    For example, back about seven or eight years ago, I read Kenneth Pomeranz’s The Great Divergence (2000), which I found extremely impressive and certainly supported this perspective. Pomeranz also provided a seemingly persuasive analysis of how the successful European colonization of the Americas had been a key factor behind Europe’s later economic rise.

    However, last year there was an enormously long thread on this website in which several commenters disputed when Europe had surpassed China, with one of them claiming that more recent scholarly research suggested that the economic/technological cross-over had actually occurred something like a century earlier, maybe around 1700.

    Frankly, all those individuals seemed far more knowledgeable than myself, so those interested in the question might just want to review the debate and decide for themselves:

    https://www.unz.com/article/why-harvard-is-right-to-discriminate-against-asians/?showcomments#comment-3465250

    (I’m not sure about Maddison’s specific sources, but my impression is that since his economic tables cover the entire world and the last thousand years or so, they tend to be much less reliable with regard to specific regions than the analyses of leading academic specialists. But perhaps I’m mistaken.)

    • 谢谢: Daniel Chieh
  150. Desert Fox 说:
    @Hiram of Tyre

    I would like to recommend these also, The Committee of 300 by ex MI6 officer John Coleman and By Way of Deception by ex Mossad Victor Ostrovsky and The Secret Team by Col. L. Fletcher Prouty, I have these books, they can be had on amazon.com.

    • 回复: @Hiram of Tyre
  151. @Desert Fox

    Thanks for that. I read the first two but not the last one (which seems great).

  152. @Godfree Roberts

    The Chinese banking system is now over \$40.1 trillion dollars. More than 37% of *全球的* GDP. All your analysis is either glossing over or incorrectly tallying the totally historically unprecedented state controlled Chinese banking system balance sheet expansion. A deflationary default crisis is baked into the cake.

    Yes, the USA is over extended and headed for problems. That’s also not the imminent problem. It’s the insanity in the Chinese banking system.

    • 回复: @Godfree Roberts
    , @Vidi
  153. Smith 说:
    @Daemon

    Aye, but bigger doesn’t necessarily mean better.

    In fact, a tiger can be taken apart by a pack of monkeys.

    • 回复: @Daemon
  154. Smith 说:
    @Alden

    The North “Han chinese” are basically mutt that mix with mongols, jurchen and the northern asian, which explain why they look very different than southern Han chinese, and stronger too.

    And China did ATTEMPT to conquer and vassalage its neighbors, like Korea or Vietnam. Korea is basically China’s dog in this case while Vietnam times and times again defeat China. Japan meanwhile is too far away, and despite muh best navy in Asia (at the times), China can’t even hope to invade Japan (the mongols certainly tried with very dubious results).

    Ironically, it was the mongols and their burn-rape-kill tactics that destroyed Western Xia and Dali that gave China such huge territories.

    • 回复: @showmethereal
  155. @bobbybobbob

    You’re only looking at one side of the ledger.

    Yes, liabilities have expanded, but China’s banking assets more than offset their liabilities.

    A deflationary default crisis is baked into the cake?
    1990年。中国经济停滞不前。 经济学家
    1996年。中国经济将面临硬着陆。 经济学家
    1998年。中国经济增长缓慢的危险时期。 经济学家
    1999。中国经济硬着陆的可能性。 加拿大银行
    2000年。中国的货币举动使硬着陆风险棺材陷入困境。 芝加哥论坛报
    2001。在中国的硬着陆。 威尔班克斯,史密斯和托马斯
    2002年。中国寻求经济软着陆。 威彻斯特大学
    2003年。银行危机危及中国。 纽约时报
    2004年。中国的大败亡? 经济学家
    2005。《中国硬着陆的风险》。 努里尔·鲁比尼(Nouriel Roubini)
    2006年。中国能否实现软着陆? 国际经济
    2007年。中国能否避免硬着陆? 时间
    2008.中国的硬着陆? 福布斯
    2009。中国的硬着陆。 中国必须找到一种复苏的方法。 运势
    2010年:硬着陆来到中国。 努里尔·鲁比尼(Nouriel Roubini)
    2011年:中国的硬着陆比您想像的要紧密。 商业内幕
    2012年:《中国经济新闻:硬着陆》。 美国利益 
    2013年:中国的硬着陆。 零对冲 
    2014。在中国的硬着陆。 CNBC
    2015年。恭喜,您获得了中国的硬着陆。 福布斯 
    2016年。中国的硬着陆迫在眉睫。 经济学家
    2017.中国经济会崩溃吗? 国家利益
    2018.中国即将到来的金融危机。 每日清算。
    2019年中国经济放缓:我们应该多担心? 英国广播公司

    • 回复: @Smith
    , @Mefobills
  156. Smith 说:
    @Godfree Roberts

    They say the same thing about the USSR too.

    Then boom, one day the USSR imploded.

    • 回复: @bobbybobbob
  157. Daemon 说:
    @Smith

    It’s not about being bigger or being better.

    You either follow the Confucian traditions of your ancestors and pay respects to your elders or you spit on everything your forebears stood for and throw in your lot with the barbarians.

    But then again, seeing your handle I guess I know what side you’ve already chosen.

    • 回复: @Smith
  158. Smith 说:
    @Daemon

    My elders and ancestors are vietnamese, I am following them.

    For them, the chinks are the invaders.

    • 回复: @Lin
  159. @Smith

    USSR collapsed when oil prices collapsed and they couldn’t ramp up production. USA quality of life metrics flat-lined when the conventional oil fields peaked in the early 1970s.

    In substantial part, China’s rise was based on their ability to massively ramp up coal mining. They’re now running out of coal. I think the peak was a few years ago. It might be “now-ish”.

    Without artificially cheap coal powered electricity, China does not offer much in the modern global economy. (Same true of USA, as the totally fake fracking boom dies out.)

    • 回复: @Smith
  160. Smith 说:
    @bobbybobbob

    Meh, USA and China are both globalized consumerist shitholes with manufactured culture, so I wouldn’t be missing them.

    I just hope Europe and Asia aren’t much affected. No one is going to be missing the rap music and cheap plastic crap.

  161. Anonymous[214]• 免责声明 说:
    @Anon

    American stupid unions and lazy workers vs. Chinese workers

    • 哈哈: bluedog
  162. Lin 说:
    @Smith

    南加州,

    My elders and ancestors are vietnamese, I am following them.

    For them, the chinks are the invaders.

    My sympathy, you inherited the genetics from your agent orange damaged elders and ancestors.
    No country on Earth has ever inflicted more deaths on VN than the yanks&allies during the Vietnam war.
    Your elders and ancestors are phoney viet nationalists who fled with great desperation to countries that bombed/poisoned the fcuk out of their homeland

    [更多]

    • 回复: @Jeff Stryker
    , @Smith
  163. @Lin

    Well it isn’t like Communist China offered them anything, is it?

    Take the Philippines. China is responsible for the drug war and all the businesses are owned by Chinese-born tycoons and America has to donate food and AID while all the money goes back to China.

    China will never do anything humanitarian for anyone. Africa is similar. Black refugees pour into Europe while China strip mines Africa’s precious minerals.

    Then when the natives occasionally riot-and they will again in Africa sooner because blacks are not low-T laidback Malays-Chinese will blame the US.

    • 巨魔: Vidi
  164. China produced 127 trillion yuan’s worth of goods and services in 2017. Using an exchange rate of 6.37 yuan per dollar, that amounts to US \$11.97 trillion.

    Aheum… How the hell do you come to this result? in my book, 127/6.37 gives 19.94, not 11.97.

  165. @Smith

    “Vietnam times and times again defeat China”… Vietnam was a part of China for centuries. For all intents and purposes – they were “southern Chinese” – which is why someone who doesn’t know will think someone in Guangxi and Vietnam are the same. In many cases – they are the same ethnic groups. French colonization changed Vietnam. But even then – they requested help from their supposedly hated “Chinese” neighbors. The Qing dynasty did fight the French on their behalf. They didn’t evict the French as they were already weak (though they did win some battles). The relationship is much more complicated than just hate.

    • 回复: @Smith
  166. Smith 说:
    @Lin

    Really doubt the yanks top the score of oppression of 1000 years of chink occupation and then yearly chink invasion on top of that.

    Sorry, but viets aren’t cannon fodder for you chinks against the yanks. And born and raised in Vietnam, we all remember 1979.

    • 回复: @Lin
    , @DB Cooper
  167. Lin 说:

    Take the Philippines. China is responsible for the drug war and all the businesses are owned by Chinese-born tycoons and America has to donate food and AID while all the money goes back to China.
    China will never do anything humanitarian for anyone. Africa is similar. Black refugees pour into Europe while China strip mines Africa’s precious minerals.

    Questions:–How much drug pinoy drug money,if any,went to china? I’m sure the Chinese govt would be quite glad to help the pinoy govt to solve such drug money cleansing. I personally don’t consider late gen ‘ethnic Chinese’outside China Chinese. A recent US ambassador to Chinese is ‘ethnic’ Chinese and I doubt if anyone in china considered him a kin.
    Chinese mining minerals in Africa is quite alright if 1)The africans are paid market prices for the commodities 2)Pay no less attention to ecological issues than the western coorperations operating there 3)Give the African soft loans for infrastructure projects

    • 回复: @Jeff Stryker
  168. Lin 说:
    @Smith

    And born and raised in Vietnam, we all remember 1979

    You have my sympathy of being in such antagonized mental state.
    Agent orange definitely is a mind bending and addictive drug.
    To ease your pain, you should campaign for another viet invasion of Laos.
    https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/North_Vietnamese_invasion_of_Laos

    • 回复: @Smith
  169. @Lin

    According to a Chinese-Filipino drug dealer living in my Cebu subdivision all of it “Goes back to Taiwan laboratories”.

    This particular Chinese-Filipino was a gambling addict who never touched drugs. I was curious about the meth trade and asked him.

    You have expenses down the supply chain, however. Importers, suppliers, distributors. Locally in the Philippines. But most of the money ends up back in Taiwan. Not mainland China. The factories are in Taiwan.
    .

    • 回复: @showmethereal
  170. DB Cooper 说:
    @Smith

    You Vietnamese shit is the most aggressive people in southeast Asia. Just ask your neighbors, the Thais, the Cambodians, the Laos what they think of Vietnam. The 1979 invasion is well deserved. Vietnam has been lobbing RPG across the borders constantly and China has been telling Vietnam to stop to no avail. This is one of the reasons of the invasion (there are also other geopolitical reasons). To tell your country to cut that nonsense. And it works. After the brief invasion Vietnam got the message loud and clear and peace and tranquality is restored along the borders that persist to this day.

    The invasion is totally justified. As Deng remarked then, “Sometimes if kids don’t behave you need to spank them.”

  171. Mefobills 说:
    @Godfree Roberts

    You’re only looking at one side of the ledger.

    Yes, liabilities have expanded, but China’s banking assets more than offset their liabilities.

    天无绝人之路,

    Most people cannot understand double entry ledger mechanics, where there are offsetting liabilities and assets.

    It is an alien concept and takes some time to grasp. Economists do not really understand banking and the double entry ledger. It took Bank of England to issue a whitepaper on how bank debt creates bank credit, to then stop the infighting. BOE whitepaper shows how the ledger mechanics works. Most economists thought that banking inter-mediated money rather than creating/destroying.

    So, if supposedly educated people get it wrong, then we have to go easy on the layman.

    • 同意: Godfree Roberts
  172. Mefobills 说:
    @Hiram of Tyre

    It was the City who brought up the USA and is now taking it down. History seems to repeat with China. I am wary of Kissinger’s decade-long involvement in China.

    It was finance capitalist Jews (Sephardim) who had become rich maneuvering the stock market in Amersterdam, who then maneuvered the bank of england into being.

    In 1694, the first debt spreading bank, the BOE came into existence.

    Goldmen from Amsterdam promised X amount of gold, and also promised english goldmen stock in the bank. Of course, the Jews out of Amsterdam screwed over the English.

    Later, Rothschild got his claws into the BOE, and control further consolidated into Jewry’s hands.

    In the late 1800’s Rothschild got on board with Zion at first Zionist conference. In effect, ZION IS FINANCE INTERNATIONAL CAPITAL. Zion is a direct lineal descendant of Jewry and Usury method going back thousands of years.

    Debt spreading and usury are the family business of Zion.

    Zion made London its home, when it jumped from Amsterdam to London. It then tried to infect the U.S. over the ensuing years, culminating in victory by 1912. ZOG now includes the anglosphere.

    The election of 1912 was a bankster funded affair, and the american publik was duped and maneuvered by the money powers.

    The city did not bring up the USA. The American System of Economy of Henry Clay was operative from 1869 to 1912. Mostly the two economic system were at war with each other i.e. industrial capital vs “international” finance capital. The war of 1812 was one of the first attempts of London to install a bank under their control (or rather punishment for their failing).

    Kissinger was only triangulating power politics in China.

  173. Mefobills 说:
    @Godfree Roberts

    In plain English, the Wall Street luminaries on the committee were asking who on earth — or in global finance — will buy this looming mountain of Treasuries?

    It is suicidal to listen to wall street luminaries.

    Treasury has to be staffed with government economists, and not a revolving door from wall street.

    This revolving door crowd of neo-liberal economists do not have the answers. They are stuck in false paradigms.

    The Treasury will have to issue debt free money to cancel old TBills as they come due. The debt free will be either sovereign dollars good for the mainland, or a different kind of dollar for external circulation.

    Also, returning overseas dollars will have to be converted to this new form of money, so they cannot buy up American assets. Let’s call them Eurodollars. Do not sell off your patrimony for a false identity of money, to then screw the future for your offspring.

    The whole “reserve currency” idea and allowing the rest of the World to use America’s money was a massive screw up. As overseas dollar trading zones collapse, as foreign banks stop using dollars as reserve, surplus dollars on the world market will want to travel to the only place that dollars are redeemed.. the mainland.

    It is not really even America’s money, it is Federal Reserve Notes, the debt issuance of private corporate banks.

    It will take good governance and law changes to overcome the coming storm, and wall street jackals are not in charge of the law. That is reserved to the people. It was the same finance crowd that got us into trouble, and they don’t have what it takes to get us out of trouble.

    Wall Street economists don’t even know that money is law, and the concept of converting money to a new type would never occur to them in a million years.

    • 同意: bluedog
  174. Vidi 说:
    @bobbybobbob

    The Chinese banking system is now over \$40.1 trillion dollars.

    Link to a credible source?

    A deflationary default crisis is baked into the cake.

    Why? Who will be calling in the loans? The Chinese have a lot of debt, but nearly all of it is strictly an internal matter. That is, one Chinese entity is loaning its renminbi to other Chinese entities, which may loan their money to even smaller entities, and so on down the line. To start the process, China’s government creates a few trillion renminbi out of thin air, gives them to the huge state banks, and is in no rush to get the money back. So who will be calling in the loans?

    Of course, few countries can increase their economic growth rate — safely — by creating massive quantities of money. The new money stimulates demand for natural resources, for manufactured goods, and so on. If the country is not nearly self-sufficient in these things, it needs to import them from elsewhere, in exchange for exports, or, in the American case, by swapping foreign goods for petro-dollars. If the country needs to import but can’t, the new money merely stokes internal inflation. Fortunately, China has many ways to pay for its imports.

    China is among the few countries that can still grow rapidly with little need to borrow from abroad. The Middle Kingdom isn’t in a debt trap.

    • 回复: @Godfree Roberts
  175. Smith 说:
    @Lin

    Huh, that’s just communist solidarity though, the coomie Lao was asking for Viet help, so Viet helped. Said coomie Lao also got the support from China, so I guess if Vietnam is guilty, so is China.

    @DB库珀
    Yes, Vietnam is so aggressive that it has to endure yearly chink invasion. Good thing they got spanked every times.

    The Lao and Cambodian have a high opinion of vietnamese too, no matter what their government says.

    And we spanked the chinks well in 1979, considering Pol Pot (a chink and USA ally) got dethroned while the chink army stomped out a bit and ended up leaving after getting beaten up by vietnamese MILITIA (the actual NVA was busy in Cambodia, dethroning Pol Pot).

    Come to Vietnam again and get your well-deserved spank again.

  176. Lin 说:

    咦?

    that’s just communist solidarity though, the coomie Lao was asking for Viet help, so Viet helped. Said coomie Lao also got the support from China, so I guess if Vietnam is guilty, so is China

    You want to quote a web of politics which is a lot more complicate than the fate of agent orange babies and millions of death to prove your point? You’re just mentally disturbed.

    The Lao and Cambodian have a high opinion of vietnamese

    The Laotians I communicate on the web hate viets with passion.

    Come to Vietnam again and get your well-deserved spank again.

    Huh? Your chest thumping really shows your insecurity

    • 回复: @Smith
  177. Smith 说:
    @showmethereal

    Vietnam were never a part of China. Vietnam was colonized by China.

    And yes, Vietnam times and times again defeat China. The Qing did jackshit against the french.

    • 回复: @GammaRay
    , @showmethereal
  178. Igor Bundy 说:

    US GDP is mostly made of hot air like its financial system of trading back and forth that outputs nothing of value. How much does US produce? A small wodden house in the US costs \$1 million while that \$1 million would get you a brick mansion in places like china. While the US adds \$1 mil to its GDP output in the useful figure.. Now with flippers you have \$3 millions there.. A Russia S400 costing \$2.5 Billions is equivalent to a \$20 Bil US system that the saudi’s paid for.. It does less but they did pay for that so again an inferior non working industrial productive output that costs 10 times as much but basically worthless junk.. The Saudi’s did pay that much but they used something worthless, the Oil which they paid someone to pump out and pay for.. They sure did not work for it.. Makes its value only as much as someone is willing to pay for.. So like monopoly money buying expensive worthless junk and it all added to the GDP numbers..

    • 回复: @showmethereal
  179. melpol 说:

    Total war with China has become unthinkable. Cooperation is necessary to have both nations live in prosperity. But the US is burdened by useless baggage that need to be supported. It is not fair that the useless are counted as US nationals. In the need to be friendly to China and be as an equal the US has to unload those that are an eyesore and drag on its economy. The prosperous of both nations have to stand up and be counted, the downtrodden have to be thrown under the bus.

  180. GammaRay 说:
    @Smith

    the fact that you are so persistent about vocalizing your dislike of “chinks” betrays the immense amount of butthurt and insecurity you feel with regards to them. You unconsciously display your own weakness and impotence everytime you post something outrageous and vitriolic about china or chinese people.

    as the old saying goes: “doth protest too much”

  181. Realist 说:
    @Just passing through

    Although it is true Chinese cities are very clean, the more rural areas are not and I say this from experience.

    They don’t have blacks or hispanics .

  182. Smith 说:
    @Lin

    How exactly am I mentally disturbed? China also supported the coomie Lao in said very struggle, does that mean China is also guilty?

    Also, Lao and cambodia have a shitton of viets in here. Chinks might buy the government but solidarity persists between Lao-Cambodia-Viet.

    @伽马射线
    The fact you are butthurt at the word chink amuse me, chink.

    • 回复: @Lin
    , @GammaRay
  183. Lin 说:
    @Smith

    SoCal, you’ve such silly rhetorics

    How exactly am I mentally disturbed?

    Self explanatory. And I ain’t the only person with that impression

    China also supported the coomie Lao in said very struggle

    我认为没有错。

    solidarity persists between Lao-Cambodia-Viet

    As I said many Laotians, cambodians don’t share that passion
    Rather I would rephrase it:

    solidarity persists between China and Vietnam

    Guess what, Vietnam has been importing electricity from china for many years,not just recently.
    Be reminded that VN is a strip of land on the eastern coast of indo-china. North VN coastline is within 400 km of china’s Hainan island. Central VN is entirely within 400 km of Hainan.

    • 回复: @Smith
  184. @Smith

    Do you even have a clue of how Vietnam formed???

    And you are obviously very very ignorant if you don’t know Vietnam asked the Qing Dyansty – and received – help to push out the French. Whether they succeeded or not is not the issue. But I know some people prefer ignorance.

  185. @Igor Bundy

    You are correct… Aside from PPP – when you measure the “real economy” versus the “financial economy” – China’s size vs the US economy becomes even more apparent. Same thing with China’s R&D and military spending… China’s R&D almost matches the US in US dollar terms… But because a dollar goes much further in China – it’s no surprise the things we see now. Military wise – you brought up a good point about the S400. The same goes for all military spending. Compare the cost of one of China’s brand new destroyers versus the cost of a US one. As a US tax payer – it makes me get a headache… Not because of “fear”… But because my money is wasted.

    • 同意: Godfree Roberts
  186. @Jeff Stryker

    Well I can’t say I know the current situation you speak of but if you go back in history – Taiwan had a history as a drug factory back during Japanese colonization. That was one of the main money makers for Japan. Of course most organized crime fled the CCP and ended up in Hong Kong and Taiwan – so they had their drug dealing connections… Of note – during the “Air America” CIA campaigns – some KMT officers and soldiers “trapped” in the Golden Triangle were making big money off the opium trade. Of course that money was to be used to fight the communists while the US looked the other way (But we know drug dealers don’t like to give up lucrative rackets). The last part is in the book “China Hands” but an ex CIA

  187. GammaRay 说:
    @Smith

    The fact you are butthurt at the word chink amuse me, chink.

    im not the one who goes in the comments of every article related to china and spams “chink this and chink that”. You obviously are very butthurt and very insecure, its pretty sad man.

    also im not chinese 😉

    • 回复: @d dan
  188. d dan 说:
    @GammaRay

    Most of us come here to argue, debate, convince, be convinced or to learn. “Smith”s behavior indicates none of the above desire. His obvious objective is to irritate, insult and provoke.

    Added to the fact that he keeps advertise his “Vietnamese” ethnicity, even when nobody was asking and has no iota of interest, we probably can deduce his deeper mission as a paid troll: to spread hatred and conflicts among Chinese and Vietnamese.

    Further, his handle may be used with multiple persons (due to subtle variation of the styles of writing), and being switched with different names. He doesn’t know nor care what those info reveals. In one instance, “Smith” claims to be in Brazil. In another, he defends white people against the invasion of Indio from Bolivia. Clearly not a very smart nor careful person.

    • 回复: @GammaRay
  189. GammaRay 说:
    @d dan

    thanks for the heads up, I didnt realize these facts before.

  190. It’s true, of course; China has already surpassed the United States in all the really important economic measures. Apart from the fact that the US dollar is still the no. 1 global currency – which is the only thing that lets the Americans maintain their current lifestyle at all at this point.

    Donald Trump is going through the motions of a trade war, since he promised his voters one. But nothing is going to come of it, as both the United States and China know that:

    1) The US has too little domestic manufacturing ability left to stand on its own without cheap Chinese imports, and

    2) China owns so many dollar-denominated assets that a crash in the US economy would crash their economy as well.

    https://www.twilightpatriot.com/2019/09/nobody-will-win-trade-war.html

    So the status quo will continue for now, since even though China has a greater economic output than the United States (not that surprising when you consider how it has 4x more people), countries are heavily dependent on the other for their economies to function.

  191. Erebus 说:

    2) China owns so many dollar-denominated assets that a crash in the US economy would crash their economy as well.

    不同意。

    The ~U\$1.1T held in China’s reserves make up about ~35% of the PBoC’s U\$3.1T total official reserves. However, unofficially China has been buying gold with both hands for at least the last decade. For the most part, that gold hasn’t shown up on the PBoC’s ledger.

    Though there is no telling how much “non-monetary” gold they hold, credible estimates based on gold import and transaction data indicate the amount could be as high as 20kT. If so, replacing their collapsing USD holdings by moving non-monetary gold into official reserves would be a matter of some ledger entries.

    In the event, one could expect the gold price to jump substantially, but even at the current gold price the USD could blow up tomorrow and there’d be little impact on the PBoC’s reserve holdings. As the US absorbs ~18% of China’s exports, if that trade blew up along with the USD China’s economic activity would definitely take a hit. It is likely that China’s economy would go into recession, but collapse would remain a long way from that.

    China’s export markets are now so diversified, its domestic economy so robust, its currency swap agreements sufficiently widespread that collapse would take a lot more than the demise of the USD.

  192. Smith 说:
    @Lin

    How exactly is it silly though? So you are saying Vietnam was bad for “invading” Laos when China was also supporting the same Lao movement that asked for Viet invasion? And no, I don’t think you know the influence of Vietnam in Laos and cambodian.

    And China and Vietnam trade extensively, but so does China and Japan, and China and the US. I guess China should stop shit-talking US and Japan and US and Japan should stop shit-talking China? Nope, problems exist and political correctness solves nothing.

    And yes, Vietnam is a tiny a strip of land off the coast that has times and times again countered chink invasion. Chinks to this day do not even DARE to even invade Vietnam again, they can only occupy the sea and islands.

    @showmethereal
    Vietnam was formed by vietnamese. Does chink history teach you differently?

    And yes, Vietnam asked the Qing dynasty, in fact, the Nguyen dynasty chose to isolate itself like the Qing dynasty, and surprise, the Qing dynasty, being a corrupt shithole, couln’t do shit against the french. And no, right back at you, the fact Vietnam asked Qing dynasty for help isn’t the issue here, when Qing dynasty couldn’t do jackshit to protect itself, let alone Vietnam.

    @GammaRay:
    Well, bruv, sound like you are a bit obsessed.

    You can be a spiritual chink.

  193. @Vidi

    China’s \$40 Trillion Banking System Learns a Lesson on Risk …
    21年2019月XNUMX日– http://www.bloomberg.com › news › articles › china-s-40-trillion-banking-s…

  194. FRMS 说:
    @Jason Liu

    If certain Chinese values and sociological understandings were packaged in the right way, conservatives in this country would gobble it up. I don’t think it WILL ever be properly packaged, and to do so would probably violate the gentlemen’s agreements between the leaders of our respective countries, but there are so many people here intellectually drowning in egalitarian jive, and desperate for a breath of oxygen, that it could be a big hit.

    Every culturally left-wing American should have the opportunity to live in China and be told, “Ha, ha! We had all those -isms here too back in the 70’s. It was a lot of fun, but no one ever really believed in it.”

  195. ritchiet 说:
    @A123

    when I noted that Zerohedge has Gordon Chang as a regular contributor on China issues I decided Zerohedge was not worth my time. Next I came across this https://www.bloomberg.com/news/articles/2020-02-01/zero-hedge-permanently-suspended-from-twitter-for-harassment Ok Zerohedge is out!

  196. Erzberger 说:
    @eah

    “the migration flow, as opposed to the tourist flow, is still pretty much unidirectional.”

    Please keep in mind that China has already built the wall, a long time ago, and does not want Westerners, or any non-Chinese to live there (I think there are no more than 200 000 white people living in China, if that, and most of them are married to a Chinese person). That is the main reason why the immigration flow is unidirectional. In the US, it would be called racism – because the US, unlike most of the rest of the world, is, nativism notwithstanding, a country of immigrants, or of “laws, not men “ (i.e. people of any particular ethnicity or religion). China is pure “blood and soil” like virtually all Asian countries

  197. Dr. Charles Fhandrich [又名“ C. Fhandrich博士”] 说:

    Yet, think about this–worlds largest economy in terms of strength, the E.U. has the richest, largest and most promising economy in the world. True, it’s made up of several nations, yet if there was more cooperation, Europe would be the biggest economic power on earth by far, with the freest people to boot. Unfortunately, the U.S. has hindered Europe for years with its foreign policies. The U.S. elite, play much the same game of “balance of power” politics with Europe as England did in an earlier time. China, although in nominal terms would always be an economic power, would pale in comparison to a fully united and free Europe.

  198. Look at the typical American classroom. It’s embarrassing. Now look at the typical Chinese classroom. These children are respectful of their teachers, eager to learn, perform at a high level. The Chinese teachers are competent and well respected members of their society. In America, good teachers are mocked and treated poorly by students, parents and administration.

    Which country has a future? Which one doesn’t?

当前评论者
说:

发表评论-对超过两周的文章发表评论,将在质量和语气上进行更严格的判断


 记得 我的信息为什么?
 电子邮件回复我的评论
$
提交的评论已被许可给 Unz评论 并可以由后者自行决定在其他地方重新发布
在翻译模式下禁用评论
通过RSS订阅此评论主题 通过RSS订阅所有John V. Walsh的评论