China Becoming Economically Stronger Than the USA But Not the US and Allies

Nextbigfuture found cost of living data indicating that China’s purchasing power parity economy is about $31 trillion. This is 30% larger than official estimates and is 50% larger than the $21 trillion US economy. In a decade or two China’s currency will strengthen to a value that matches its purchasing power level.

Japan reached per capita income levels equal to the people in the UK. This is about 70% of the per capita level of the USA. The USA will also have immigration and population growth to 400-450 million people in the mid-21st century. China’s per capita income should double relative slower-growing US and European economies over the next twenty years.

The USA will retain military superiority for several decades, especially with SpaceX Starships as reusable hypersonic weapons platforms. Large scale military conflict will be avoided. Other than economic competition and the occasional trade war, there will mainly be a peaceful future.

China could reach double or even 2.5 times the GDP of the USA. However, this will not exceed the combined economies of the USA, EU, UK, Japan, Australia and India.

Below are middle-class spending levels based on official purchasing power calculations. I think China’s PPP spending levels are $9.5 trillion.

Consumer spending power is a key aspect of global economic power. China is on track to get to about $8 trillion (regular exchange rate) in consumer spending in 2021. The US will have about $14 trillion in consumer spending. Purchasing power-wise China’s consumer spending is already $16 trillion.

China’s demographics are not good because of the one-child policy. China global economic share will peak around 2050 at around 20-25% of the world. In the second half of the 20th century India, ASEAN and other developing nations will develop and global economic share will closely match population share. China in 2100 will be about 10-15% of the world economy. 1.2 billion out of 12 billion.

SOURCES- Brookings, Wikipedia
Written By Brian Wang,

139 thoughts on “China Becoming Economically Stronger Than the USA But Not the US and Allies”

  1. Given China's predilection for spying on everyone, stealing anything, intimidating anyone, and even censoring Winnie-the-Pooh, not to mention militarizing the South China Sea and taking it over (never mind the environmental consequences), using political dissidents (anyone the leadership has decided it disapproves of) as involuntary living organ donors, moving all the Tibetans out of Tibet and colonizing it with Han Chinese (cultural genocide), practicing what amounts to real genocide on the Uyghurs (over a million in concentration, oops, I mean "reeducation" camps), it's probably just as well they are about to take what may be the biggest hit any country has ever taken.
    But the crisis isn't coming, only its effects are. Even if China can restore fertility to replacement level within 10 years after the country reaches its population peak, population will still exhibit a decline nearly half a century long, with a net population loss of over 200 million, if not more. 
    China has curtailed adoptions by foreigners, and dropped the one child policy. But it's not helping. Already, 20 to 30 million Chinese men will not be able to find wives (a legacy of millions of past atrocities), together with the economically distressed, they will constitute a large group of unhappy, dissatisfied people.
    The past four decades of demographic change will largely define China in the twenty-first century. The tsunami is already on the way.

  2. Totalitarianism is always a bad idea since it restricts freedom and is usually very corrupted. Any success is usually temporary since it depends on how good a single person is and absolute power tends to corrupt absolutely.

  3. China’s economic expansion over the past two decades took place within a highly, almost uniquely favorable demographic context.
    China's rapid economic growth relied on a number of basic factors, but foremost among these was a young and productive labor force. Births in the 1960s and 1970s were at their peak when the boom began. This luck is estimated to have accounted for 15 to 25 percent of China’s economic growth between 1980 and 2000.
    But China has exhausted its demographic fortune. The growth rate of net consumers is already exceeding the growth rate of net producers. Growth rates from 2030 to 2050 will shrink to those on a par with Japan, and far below many western nations, including the US.
    China’s population is likely to peak less than 8 years from now, below a maximum of 1.44 billion around 2029. Then comes an indefinite, possibly permanent, population decline and a period of accelerated aging. The number of workers aged 20 to 29 will drop to 50% of its 2016 figure, to 68 million from 125 million.

    In 2010, approximately 12 percent of the Chinese were 60 years and older, a figure that is forecast to rise as high as 36 percent by 2060. The old-age dependency ratio in China is expected to soar to 53 percent in 2060, implying that by then one working-age person will have to support one elderly person. This is as opposed to 7.6 workers for every elderly person in 2016.

  4. It would be difficult to structure an education like that. Once you learn to read, many possibilities open. Of course, that can be counter by teaching you not to ask questions or seek answers. Or you can just burn the books.

  5. Most long term successes are left wing socialism like the countries of North America and Europe. I don't believe socialism is binary in that you either is or isn't. To me, it is a degree defined by how much of the economy is not for profit. In the US, government spending accounts for more than 40% of all spending so I would have to say we aren't 100% capitalist.

  6. You are mostly wrong. Yes, EU with it's sensitivities think that "Trump is Hitler", but the threat against Europe is limited to what Russia might concoct.

    Now, the countries in the area surrounding China think quite differently. Japan, Sourth Korea, Australia and New Zeeland were all thankful to have an allie in Trump/USA.

    And middle east.. Well, Israel for sure prefers Trump to Biden or Obama. And it would seem that Saudi Arabia and most countries in the reagon would preferr Trump because he has stymied the rise of Iran.

    So when Biden comes in most of those countries will be pulling their hair in despair..

  7. Yes, you are correct. But, the USA will have higher growth than Europe (EU), so the economic "fall" will be slower. Plus, the USA can/could continue to be the leader in technology and military might, so the relative loss of "soft power" will only be a partial loss of "combined" power for the USA.

  8. As opposed to gold investment, which holds the gold out of production. If I spend on consumerism, I am depleting Earth resources non productively, IMHO. This won't matter in Space, later, BTW, where your *make work* consumerism is just fine. So, education is good, and we need more capital spending that results in improved productivity. Buy the stocks that will lead to that! Or do the company yourself, but that is beyond the initial question.

  9. May allow but doesn't cause it. A company will usually increase capital spending when they perceive there is a demand for more product or when there is competition.

  10. I am trying to distinguish "doesn't actually grow the economy.' gold from investment in business, stocks, assuming that is what you meant. The higher stock price allows more capital spending.

  11. You can't buy a wrong education since all education have value. The core of education is learning how to learn. Once you have that, you can always adapt to what is needed.

  12. Any economical expansion that goes on for a while will have termites eating away at its fabric until one day it will fall. A boom will always become a bust. Having said that, those who have taking the other side of the China bet have had a very long losing streak. Not saying it won't happen, if fact, I thought COVID would do it. But it didn't. It is weird, but the fall will only happen after there is no doubt of China's future success. Because that is the way booms are. Every sucker has to buy in before the Bust can happen.

    Do note, that once the bust starts the bottom will be deep. The Chinese have no idea what is waiting for them. I am afraid they will panic big time and make it worse. I am also afraid of the backlash against the people by those in power.

  13. China has shown a willingness to insert itself into European affairs, by signing strategic deals with various European countries, including Greece. Therefore European decision-makers know that to ignore China is to ultimately court problems for themselves.

  14. China learned a bitter lesson when they attacked Vietnam in 1979. The battle-hardened Vietnamese gave them a bloody nose. Sometimes it's not the size of the dog in the fight, it's the size of the fight in the dog.

  15. That in hindsight some countries managed to avoid that fate means nothing. There was simply no need to get involved and take unnecessary risks. Vietnam and Koreas ended up in protracted war due to foreign meddling. Its a stretch to call that having war for purely internal disagreement. Communist started it and then US got involved. The resulting insecurity also sustained willingness to go into either sphere of influence. Korea, Taiwan etc couldn't hope to survive communist abyss next door without US protection in the conditions they emerged. India on the other hand benefitted from head start of not being next door a communist regime (Communist won china few years later) and having democrats who enjoyed mass recognition & legitimacy from carrying out independence struggle to peacefully transfer power to.

    The large countries you think of were either rich and stable with national identity and institutions consolidated over long time (Europe) or were simply good at holding it together with repressive measures (Cuba, China etc). Being a recently decolonized country there was no interest in hosting military bases of any side and risk losing the lucky shot at sovereignty and nation building as liberal democracy. It worked as both communist and Western bloc shaped their engagement keeping this mood in mind and as much as they tried to pull India more into their sphere of influence they generally didn't feel great need to destabilize it at any cost to deny advantage to other side.

  16. Can you point out a post where a slobber over the Clintons? Because, I don't really like them. I just dislike most Republicans more.

  17. Where there any other similar countries that experienced such a problem? All the examples I can think of were places that had wars for their own reasons (North Vietnam vs South Vietnam. North Korea vs South Korea*. Parts of Africa.) And then the USA and USSR leapt in to start supporting the appropriate sides.

    And we can see multiple examples of large countries that did join one side or another and did not get turned into such a battle zone.

    *As a general rule, it's a very bad idea to name your country the same as a neighbouring county, but with North or East or something added. A war between your nations will keep being interpreted as a civil war and the western public will want to avoid helping. Eritrea had the right idea. South Sudan did not.

  18. I can see that.
    The MSM spends 3.5 years rerunning all their old complaints about how DJT was old, white, hence evil, stupid, small hands, silly hair….
    The next Republican candidate is a young*, attractive*, dark skinned, woman…
    The entire media-political complex has to pull a screeching u-turn, and they just aren't that agile or adaptable.

    Except, the US left DID manage to pull some amazing judo earlier this year when they went from the "Covid is just the flu, to be concerned about it is racist" to the opposite stance in about a month. So maybe they can whip up some argument as to why it's racist and sexist to vote for Candace Owens.

    *By the standards of politicians. I mean this isn't a Hollywood audition here.

  19. Actually the Rosenberg's were not executed for passing nuclear secrets. The most valuable stuff Julius gave the Soviets was radar and jet tech. Including a complete set of technical drawings of the P-80 Shooting Star. I recommend you take a look at the info that came out of the Soviet archives after the end of the Cold War. the KGB basically said the nuke stuff he gave them was useless. Rosenberg was basically a victim of the Red Scare. He was a spy and deserved to be punished. But any idea that he was key to helping the Soviets develop the bomb is not substantiated by the facts.

  20. Jeez, that is not me saying that. It is Orange Julius saying those things. They are practically catch phrases. Dense much?

    Just FYI, I could never stand Mrs. Clinton and I wasn't a big fan of Bill either.

  21. Just because you believe it, doesn't make it true… THAT is for certain…. But that's entirely beside the point and a total distraction, shipwreck, because your entire premise is that Trump was incompetent, yet yet can't demonstrate one concrete example of it. All you can do is give an opinion.

    But what's not an opinion, for Americans like me, a service member who had a security clearance, faith was totally lost when Hillary Clinton was given a pass on her incompetent use of a private email server to received classified SIPRnet data.

  22. Those that can't shall rightfully fall by the wayside and make room for those that can. The choices of the irrational and the inept has and will always lead to ruin. If you wanted better outcomes, you should have made better choices. Loon town should stop blaming China and phantoms for their failures and look into a mirror.

    Even with this carnage caused by the inept, life is pretty good for competent people and getting better every decade.

  23. It is good that Chinese population will decrease. Resources are not infinite. It is unclear how a bigger population would be advantageous. Instead, the first country that really masters robotics will be the one that industrializes general intelligence labor. That will be the winner.

  24. " but as other more populous regions start to grow, EU will become ever
    more unimportant. And, with deminishing relative economic size, so will
    the "soft power" of Europe diminish"

    True, just like in case with USA

  25. Yeah, demography says China's is on the way out. A few more years and this will be readily apparent. More old people than young people is going to be a problem. They will be a giant of the future, a giant problem, probably for everyone.

  26. The only thing Trump was competent at was destroying Americans faith in their own government. He was definitely top notch on that.

    He was OK on trade, mostly because he let others handle it (Lighthizer).

  27. You mean "too" many, or "spoken to" many? More reading would help you with English. Try primaltherapy dot com

  28. No, it's zero part of the recipe. China was doing as well as the Soviet union until they allowed capitalism of sorts.

  29. Europe is not really a technology leader, the USA is. If things continue on the track as now, China will step in to the ring with USA to fight it out who will have the cutting edge in technology. But not Europe.

    Culture? Well, my guess is that american movies outsell european movies in the world by a factor of 100. So no, not a super power in that respect either. Music is less clear cut, but even here the USA outsells Europe by at least an orders of magnitude.

    Military. Well, as of now the EU does not have an army and cannot project power abroad. We will see if and when the EU will get an army. My guess is that if EU builds an army, it will be used to chaperone migrant boats into ports of Europe so that they do not perish on the mediterranian sea. I don't think the EU will defend their oil transports any time soon, let alone intervene in any foreign confict.

    Economy and soft power. Well, the EU has a large combined GDP, but as other more populous regions start to grow, EU will become ever more unimportant. And, with deminishing relative economic size, so will the "soft power" of Europe diminish.

    And that about raps it up.

  30. Well, one can always hope that China will be stymied by a demographic "crunch", but as you say, it may become irrelevant due to reasons of new technology on earth. If China gets a hold of general AI, then they may use it to create the perfect totalitarian state that will last thousands of years.

    As for space making earth conflict obsolete…No. There are a billion reasons for this. First off, humans are not logical. Second, the vast majority will still live on earth an compete for resources here for the next centuries at least. Keep in mind that the vast majority of earthlings will not migrate; I would be surprised if the total non-earth human population would surpass 100 million in 50 years. Perhaps it will more like 10 million. And that's a drop in the ocean…

    Even if resouces are plentyful in space, I don't see how you could "get them down here" in a cost competitive manner. Concrete costs about 75 USD per ton and steel is about 540 USD per ton. When will a space transport to earth be cheaper than that, per weight? Prices would have to come down three orders of magnitude… And energy cannot be transported in a practical manner.

  31. I am not so sure that the citizens ever were in control, it's just that now the interests of the general people and the elites are polar opposites.

    In earlier times, the elites of a country were "pro" their own population and culture, now the elites are hostile to the "average Joe" and would like to replace them with a better and more interesting population: more minorities, more LGBTQ, more foreign cultures, etc.

    So it's the same as always and yet totaly different…

  32. China is on track to get to about $8 trillion (regular exchange rate) in consumer spending in 2021. The US will have about $14 trillion in consumer spending.

  33. Out of the whole article only this sentence has any meaning: "China is on track to get to about $8 trillion (regular exchange rate) in consumer spending in 2021." PPP numbers are meaningless when comparing economic power between countries.

  34. Several conspirator were executed. Julius and Ethel Rosenberg for example. Unlike USSR the US had something of rule of law and punishment depended on evidence. Weak evidence and role led to weak punishment for some.

  35. Being dragged into colossal fight between USSR and America and ending up as unstable puppet regime fighting some silly war instead of peaceful development.

  36. So electing Joe Biden is the cure?

    Joe Biden has been in the US federal government for 40+ years, and Donald Trump had only been there for 4 years.

    Donald Trump didn't cause any additional problems. He attempted to solve old ones. No new wars and have you seen the number of Arab countries who've agreed to closer relations to Isreal?

    People like you use the word "incompetence" as a buzzword. You really don't have a specific thing you can point to as incompetent, so you just repeat it and hope everybody will go, "yeah yeah… incompetent."

  37. We are at the big inflection point. Some must enter Space for the reason Musk wants to go to Mars, before we use similar level tech to wipe out all. And we must make progress with understanding and lessening Repression even then. Ideally, we can forget about the wipe out if we get interested in the future. Space has the advantage as to "good immigration". Not sure authoritarians are going to prosper in Space, hard to jam Janov info there.

  38. This would appear to indicate that the authorities may not have agreed with the position that it was the single most important military secret ever. Nine years in prison would seem to be a pretty light sentence for such a crime.

  39. The Chinese are doing a good job of antagonizing the countries around them. The more aggressive their actions, the more incentive those counties will have to band against them. In some ways it appears to me that another cold war is in the offing. Ultimately, the US will use the strategy of containment against China just like it did to the USSR.

    Ultimately, the Chinese prospects are not good. No country, i.e. Nazi Germany, Napoleonic France, the USSR, etc has been able to achieve world domination. In each case, a group of countries banded together to defeat the aggressor nation. If China chooses to go to war, it will be defeated the same way.

  40. War is not about logic. It's about the human id and ego. It's a struggle of ideas, ideologies, politics, and policies. War is about human emotions, desires, competition, and fears. War is about who gets what and how much. The notion that war will end here on Earth because we expand to space fails to understand the underlying forces that create and drive human conflict. Where there are humans there will always be disagreement. All things are relative, especially when the human ego is involved. No matter how much resources there are, there will be always be those who get more and those who get less. And thus where there is disagreement there is conflict. Where there is conflict, there is war.

  41. The simple fact is that it only takes one determined individual to give away a huge, history changing secret. Even in cases where the populace is largely supportive of govt policies.

    A good example is the German Enigma device (sold to a Polish agent by one greedy German officer in the 1930s). Without that one act the Allies may never have been able to break German secret codes during WW2.

    Another good example is Colonel Oleg Penkovsky, who was disgruntled about being passed over for promotion. Despite living in a totalitarian country he was able to contact US agents and sell info on Soviet nuclear missile sites in Cuba during the 1962 Missile Crisis. His actions undoubtedly averted a nuclear war.

    In the case of the atom bomb, it was a German refugee, Klaus Fuchs, who was involved in the Manhattan Project that gave info to the Soviets. There is much debate about whether the info was actually useful to them. It's likely they would have developed the atom bomb on their own even without espionage. They were already knew about nuclear fission and had started work on a bomb in the early 1940s. Most likely the info they gained from the US sped up their development timeline. Ultimately though they would have got the bomb without the tech secrets they stole. It just would have taken them longer. Interestingly, Fuchs confessed to being a Soviet spy in 1950. He was sentenced to 14 years in prison. He only served 9. After his release he emigrated to East Germany.

  42. Modern earthly powers will be small fry compared with the upcoming space-faring powers.

    And the one with the most daring, investment favorable space program wins.

    But it will also require all the human capital they can muster. America will have to be favorable to "good immigration" (qualified and hardworking people) again sooner or later.

    Because on this, China still has a clear advantage. Unless the demographic trap catches on with them.

  43. And anyone in 1930 who claimed to be analysing what the future was going to be like, who didn't look in detail at Germany, would have been completely wrong.

  44. The fact that the secret of nuclear weapons was handed over to the USSR within a couple of years has long been my go-to proof that the US Government isn't, and can't, be keeping any really juicy secrets.

    If during World War 2, when everyone was operating at a level of patriotism and unity that dwarves anything we see today, the USA was still unable to prevent the single most important military secret ever from being spread to an obvious Bad Guy like Stalin, even for a handful of years, then what are the chances that UFO technology or whatever could actually be kept secret for decades?

  45. I agree with you.
    I voted Trump and think he's been a good President, but I don't think he will run again when he's 82. I want someone with Trump's tenacity, but a with thicker skin, and a good head on their shoulders.
    Owens 2024

  46. nah, population will not decrease that much, and jobs of those 100m or so than can dissapear from workforce around second half of the century will be automated, not only that, most jobs of rest of that still huge worforce (700m+) also will be automated, Chinese and also all other people from all over the world

    Second, you must take into account aging reversal. We will have it in 2040's.

    Third, China is still creating 12m-14m new jobs is cities per year
    Basically new generation (college graduates) are creating knowledge economy jobs in cities, their parents who all were farmers and factory workers type workforce and retiring, their jobs being automated by robots.

    In advanced countries only 1% of worforce produce food for everybody, in China still around 20%. Kids of those farmers will join modern XXI century workforce and create hi-tech jobs, services

  47. That was true when they were catching up, but recently they caught up and are just starting the new phase of development when original innovation appears, It was the same with US(stole tech from Europe, after stole everything which was worth stealing, US started phase of original innovation), the same with Japan, Korea, now with China and will be with others

    Argument that poor country cant innovate is ridiculous, countries need to reach certain stage of development and wealth accumulation, educate masses to start innovate, you cannot expect cutting edge, expensive innovation from nation of 1,3 billion farmers and uneducated simple laborers which China was all that time until now. First year of China modern innovation on large scale will be 2021, you will see it, tech-sci news will be all over the place, including this blog

    I am following tech-sci news from China closely, in just last few months a lot happened and I think this is just beginning

  48. It is and will be more and more connected, integrated in near future,will have an army soon
    Sorry to disturb your world view

  49. China has 7 trillion dollars in bad commercial loans outstanding and currently 3/4ths of new loans are to pay interest on old loans. Estimates say that 1 in 4 homes in China are empty and are just real estate speculation. And, Chinese Agriculture (with is more like gardening) is on it's heels. Those gardens are heavily dependent of imported oil and fertilizer. Without that, yields will drop to the point of starvation.

  50. Biden will not fill out his term in office and Harris will preside over the last administration of the old republic. Regardless of what happens thr unpleasantness that the u.s. is about to experience will insure that it decouples from the world. As for China the CCP has made too many critical mistakes and China will be able to hold onto what it has let alone take advantage of America's near term distractions.

  51. America is shooting itself in the foot while China is investing in infrastructure. The result is that China will become more and more productive while America stagnates.

  52. Money spent on stocks and gold only bids up the prices of those commodities and doesn't actually grow the economy. As for education, Americans spend more per capita. The money best spent is capital spending that results in improved productivity. After that it is consumer spending since if gives people what they want and provide jobs.

  53. LOL
    China has been copying MOST of their technology from the United States for the last several decades; same as was with Japan before them. You think that stereotype of the Japanese tourist with a camera was for nothing?
    They are mostly imitators, not innovators.

  54. You are absolutely full of it. The only thing Trump did was make NATO's member states pay more than they were. That is hardly pushing our allies to the wayside. If anything, it strengthens NATO, which Russia has not been a fan of ever as that is why NATO exists.

  55. Euro couldn't replace dollar so Yuan is even more long shot. As much as size of economy its about rule of law. There's also that CPC relies on capital control for political control so their willingness to internationalize Yuan with all the vulnerability it entails is limited. A combination of international skepticism and CCP's political priority will maintain dollar dominance for decades. And we haven't even factored American willingness to maintain dollar hegemony forcefully. Its a long way for Yuan.

  56. It was something of a surprise to see things like Trump’s withdrawal from the TPP not ending it. Rather than being a US initiative that allies Unenthusiastically complied with, it became purely their own choice out of self interest. Under Trump, much of the world came to miss a competent US they had just assumed would always be there.

    China, less restrained, further alienated and alarmed nations in it’s sphere of influence and made it clearer that it really had no real allies, only a strange and strained relationship with North Korea.

  57. In some ways Trump’s incompetence and isolationism let US allies see the importance of US leadership more clearly rather than taking it for granted.

  58. Yeah, keep beating that drum. Remember what happened to China the last time they opened the yuan to the world? $500 billion in Chinese money fled to the west. They shut that down in a hurry and I doubt they will try it again in the near future.

    No country in the world except the US has an economy big enough to support a global currency. China could try a regional (east Asia) currency but arbitrage between that currency and the dollar might kill it.

  59. Yeah, that phase is over. Demographically, China is peaking right now. The future is going to be one slow nasty slide down hill. This is what happens when you have more old people than young people. Turns out that the 1 child policy wasn't such a good idea … for the Chinese.

  60. I hate to brake it to you but the EU is a trade organization. It doesn't have any armed forces. Countries have armed forces. Some of the countries in the EU are also in NATO. Some of those countries even have armies and navies worth mentioning.

    But no, the EU is not a superpower. Given the demographics of the area it might not even be a trading block in 10 years.

  61. In this sense, the US and G7 countries have 'self-actualized' – achieved a state where they can be as successful or complacent as they want depending on how the most recent election and the current demographic 'feels'. From this, I would say that most people in these systems have a great level of control and after reasonable effort, will find themselves living a life 'they deserve', for better or worse – further, the society on which they live, in control, maintains reasonable abundance (and for outlier values to exist). Most remaining countries in the G20 (and others) have not 'self-actualized' and struggle to balance the desire for individual choice, desire to have general abundance, and desire to compare themselves with Others (a somewhat miserable but not deal-killing existence). If we are still in a dik-measuring contest and want to compare: I would suggest a metric that includes social-mobility, Gini co-efficient, the impossible to find 'realizable potential' (are you living the life you deserve based on resources available), and as a minimum standard the United Nations Human Development Index, but we could lean left and include Genuine Progress Indicator and Fordham Index. When it comes to political and religious freedoms – you can take it or leave it — ('left alone' being the minimum and 'made to conform' the unacceptable)

  62. I think we are not defining national (or personal) success in a compelling or useful way.
    Though, I wasn't around to truly understand the capitalism vs communism debates (which is the better system) of the 1950s-ish to 1980s-ish, I got the sense that there were discussions of the personalities/ intentions/ motivations of the People, what community meant, what technology and goods were available and to who, what it means to control production and distribution, which system was more robust in the face of problems, which system enabled best/ first in the sense of ideas/ technologies, how one provides services to State, etc., etc., ad nauseam…
    But that's to miss the point. Different systems enable different peoples to achieve success in different ways… and I am doubtful that many on 'any' side are sitting on the edge of their seats monitoring which country is winning which statistical 'event' (at least not emotionally healthy people) as if this was the Olympics medal count. I think it is ok to generalize and say that certain cultures are pre-disposed (as is evident in families, institutions, etc.) to individualism, collectivism, liberal values, State as Father values, tribalism, religious, etc. To me the only somewhat universal metric is Choice. The ability to choose your profession, friends, your interest in social mobility up/down, your living circumstances, and then allow that Choice (dynamic) to lead to a predictable 'lifestyle' set in a society of abundance.

  63. US ally as China is their regional rival and threatens their borders (Indians have worked with US against China in past) but Indians love fencesitting to prioritize their own narrow regional and developmental interest (that's how they survived last cold war) so don't expect them to go along with everything hawkish US comes up with.

  64. Don't worry, social injustice isn't going anywhere.
    That's something to be dealt with by a certain —soon(projected ~2045) to be newly minted— minority class. May we live in interesting times.

  65. Have more kids, build more infrastructure, enact education reform, get society off of social justice, or else the US will be last.

  66. "Let's hope" is an admission that you have no more moves, the battle is already lost, and you beg for divine providence to tilt the scales in your favor.
    Of course, US citizens no longer have any say in such matters.

    The speed of USA's downfall was indeed breathtaking.
    Nowadays, with its corrupt ruling class complete with a China puppet being installed as president and a major neomarxist faction that gains in power and boldness, its major ideological, social and demographic disfunctions, you should be worrying about personal safety and survival during the incoming interesting times.

  67. What did you expect ?, China is becoming the giant of the future (it's just a matter of demography), so a blog about the future will have to switch more and more focus towards China.

  68. Duh… Those who hate America always seem to imagine a USA against the world paradigm as it applies to China, but the reality is quite the opposite.

  69. True but Chinese and American are actually repeating USSR's story to an extent. FDR much like some presidents of late @CCP thought Stalin could be turned into some sort of stakeholder in jointly managed world peace. Some of FDR's closest advisors were reds on Moscows payroll.

    Throughout FDR's long presidency Americans took approach of appeasement and Stalin effortlessly infiltrated and copied/imported American technology and experts to achieve parity with US. So much that they even managed to get hands at super secretive nuclear technology. It was only when cold war broke out and change in leadership that US tightened lid on what slips to Soviet side. Lets hope US will again be able to get together a sustainable act of containment.

  70. No, the US was number 1 because we'd had a free economy that rewarded innovation. "Had", past tense. We hit a level of wealth where our elites started valuing relative position over absolute growth of wealth, and spiked the economic engine to keep on top. That allowed China to pass us, which they never could have done if we hadn't abandoned the race.

    It's a modern story: Once a country gets wealthy enough, the people in charge get fat and happy, and value control more than growth. And the former economic champion becomes an economic couch potato.

    Our political class don't WANT a robust economy. That creates alternate power centers in the private sector. The economy is big enough for them to be comfortable already, now they value stability over growth, and especially stability concerning who's in power.

  71. "Its becoming increasingly difficult for China to industrial espionage its way out of middle income trap."

    Starting a few weeks from now, it's going to become a heck of a lot easier, keep that in mind. The USSR could only have wished to have compromised governments as thoroughly as the Chinese have succeeded at doing, and come January 20th, the US policy of resisting them comes to an end.

    But China is in a bit of a demographic trap at the moment, their 1 child policy was easier to turn on than turn off, and they ended up badly skewing their sex ratio, too. That's the biggest worry here: A whole generation of single child boy brats with no real prospect of marriage because there aren't enough girls to go around; It's a traditional recipe for revolution and/or war.

    Let's hope revolution crosses the finish line first.

  72. China is only the next big future in the dystopian futures. Like Germany was the next big future in the 1940's, and the USSR the next big future in the 1960's.

  73. Europe isn't a superpower since fall of colonization. Having potential is not same as being one. Becoming a superpower that can independently flex its muscle will require sovereign military that can project power beyond European backyard and that takes bases to have launching ground. Unless you like arriving when conflicts are over. Soft power is not a replacement for hard power. You can't push back Russia from Ukraine by showing them European movies. EU is unlikely to consent to that because their progressive politics will not digest high military spending over free healthcare and they have incessant obsession with standing out apart from American style of doing things. They are still coalition of independent state some of who will feel threatened by such idea. Today they follow American lead, tomorrow they might follow Chinese. They are used to such arrangement.

  74. China is still in rapid catch up phase, do not forget where they were in late 70's, they were as poor as Subsaharan Africans, it takes time to catch up to nations that are developed for decades and all those years had tens of times larger sci-tech budgets. I think that China is now in ending phase of catching up and when it'll more or less finish this process we will see tons of original innovations, starting in 2021 or 2022. Lets' just wait and see, 2020's will give us ultimate anwser to theory if communism can't innovate or if that theory is complete nonsense.
    So far we didn't have the answer because we never had rich country with such system, you need to be rich to be innovation powerhouse, China will become high income country in 2021, first communist nation(in modern times) to become rich.

  75. Futurist optimism is fine but present has to be dealt with as it is until that happens otherwise that's just finger in ears escapism. Imagine refusing to anticipate and act on Soviet actions because pretty sketches about space colonization around the corner were floating around. What happened? it wasn't spaceships that liberated people behind iron curtain. How did optimism about internet and tech connectivity undoing nation states worked out? just look at monstrous Chinese surveillance state.

  76. Its illogical to fight as it is now but here we are with Chinas wolf warrior diplomacy and occupation of South China sea. CPC isn't going to act differently on moon. They will likely turn their anti-satellite weapons to keep their population from escaping to space.

  77. EU already is superpower and was for a long time, technologically, in terms of science quality and output, soft power (culture, movies, games, food, tourism and so on), economically, even militarly (has nukes) and other advanced miliatry tech, can built hi-tech jets, create a lot of cutting edge AI, has ESA – sends rockets, probes, cutting edge space telescopes and so on.

    Saying EU is not superpower is as weird and crazy as saying US is not a superpower
    Maybe you think you need to have bases all over the word to be proper superpower but Europeans are not like that. This is so XX century, ancient way of thinking, in today world it's all about science, technology, AI, innovation and Purchasing Power

  78. Money is not all to it and billions of other people have failed to innovate as much mainly because they don't prize competition and freedom to innovate forcing their best and bright to US or perish at home. Those that did, managed to innovate as ably as Americans – Japanese for example. Chinese have tons of money yet struggling to outdo small nation like Taiwan in chip manufacturing. US tech companies are also able to access bigger market beyond domestic one which CCP prevents by prioritizing its paranoia. Just look at Jack Ma getting persecuted.

  79. When it comes to geopolitics, economic power and even science and innovation, China is the next big future. Study the country a bit more and you would be surprised how much progress it has made and is making.

  80. It may turn out like you say, with one exception. Europe will not be a super power.

    There is no will in Europe to make the necessary reforms for a faster economic growth. In general, the european leadership thinks that if they pool a sufficient amount of money and hand it out to science projects this will , pooff, result in miracle economic growth.

    What is out of the question is to reduce tax on labour, reduce tax on capital and remove regulations. This and the pervasive "progressive" ideas of schools that will continue to errode the quality of education, will keep Europe at an anemic growth for decades to come.

  81. one of a few smart comments here, all others are still stuck in XX century trends and ways of doing things and think it will be like that forever

  82. One can wonder if nativity will be as important if / when AI and robots reach human parity. Aging is also going out of fashion if one is to believe NextBigFuture predictions.
    Another potentially disrupting factor is human expansion beyond earth. When that becomes real, all these planet bound little territorial conflicts will be obsolete. There is a lot more energy and resources out there. So much in fact, it's illogical to fight over them.

  83. Maybe they'd be liberated, but it wouldn't be by China. If China did anything to them it'd be absorb and replace them.

  84. yes…. because magically only 320m Americans can innovate right? other 7,5 billion people somehow cannot create new things on their lands. Only reason why US dominated innovation in previous decades was that it had largest innovation, R&D budget, orders or magnitude larger than anybody else and largest market at the same time to breed large tech companies. Now China and other big nations are rising fast and will have more and more resources for innovation. You already see that in case of China, others will follow soon. Also US is quite broke, wasting money on weapons, other nations with less debt and not wasting $ on weapons and military even with smaller budgets will be able to create more and more useful innovations.
    US need to fundamentally change to stay in the game.

  85. Another factor to insert into these calculations is what the money and resources are actually spent on. If one society spends a large part of the consumer resources on stocks, education, gold etc. and the other is spending an equal amount on pizza, hamburgers and cosmetic surgery for their dogs, there will be significant long term economic differences.

    Perhaps the most important consumer metric is energy efficiency in the consumption chain. If energy is wasted, it's not good. Nature shows us that the genes resulting in the best energy efficiency will dominate.
    The biggest energy consumer objects are housing and transportation. Both China and the US were known for bad metrics in these departments.
    What's the current status?

  86. oh yes the MSM will try to sabotage Trump in every way they can. They are already churning out pieces on his re-run. So long Trump will be in race we won't get a preview of other potential candidates. But we can be confident that populism will be part of arsenal of whoever shows up next. Painting a target on CCP is now mainstream in US politics.

  87. I don't think there's friendship between nations, nations are like giant companies, we're talking here about interests, business. More will China buy from nation X, make it wealthier, offer better deal, it will become new best friend of that nation.
    Simple as that
    In short(5-10years) term I think it will ''steal" Korea and Japan from West sphere of influenece, in longer term(around 10 years or less) even EU will become independent and will act like independent superpower, looking at its own intrests not other powers interests

  88. I have a prediction. The media will keep dumping on Trump during the next four years just to make sure he does not make a comeback as a presidential nominee in 2024. And if he does, they will be unloading on him from the minute he shows his face. Plus, now we know that Fox News will be part of the dumping…

    But will another populist appear? I don't see one in the american political sphere. But I would be happy to be proven wrong…

  89. Interesting points about India and Vietnam. Let us wish for a very strong indian economy and a growth that rivals that of China!

    Completely agree about the idiocracy of handing over the power over european energy to Russia. This is mostly driven by Germany, that for some reason has a positive view towards Russia. I was there when Russia cut of a piece of Georgia and my german colleagues all "saw the perspective of" of Russia. Germans are also unsympathetic towards the baltic countries and their will to shake off russian power and influence.

  90. US will decouple and so will rest. China will leave them no choice. If Biden won't take the lead then someone else will down the road. American elite sell outs can't prevent another populist like Trump from coming to scene. The status quo was easier to maintain in past when CCP believed in hiding strength and insisting on being a nice kid. Now they have taken the route of wolf warrior diplomacy and any politician appeasing them will damage his election odds.

  91. Only up to a point these countries can afford to play Chamberlain. Escalation of conflict depends on Chinese restraint and given their arrogance it seems less and less likely they will manage to pull out with limited gains before leaders in surrounding region are forced to take harder stance on China. Their greed only grows every time they manage to get away with imperialism. This year they managed to tip major Asian countries into NATO like alliance on an express basis. Something that had not happened despite their gobbling of South China sea in past decade.

  92. India is already paying economic price for standing up to China and they are in no mood to be sidekick of China in Asia. India and Vietnam and others have continued to stand against Chinese aggression for decades even when US looked away for cold war calculation. Europeans on the other hand might not do lot more than verbal protest because China is faraway enough to be not their existential problem. They can't even stop themselves from handing over their energy security in hands of Russia next door.

  93. True, China is in small conflicts all around their borders. South Chinese sea, Kashmir… But seing that China is the regional bully, I don't think anyone will dare to escalate any of the minor conflicts. I.e. China will be allowed to steal a bit of land here and a bit of ocean there. And nobody will dare to do anything.

    I really, really hope that China will not be able to increase their nativity. Being slowed down by an aging population would be the best and most peaceful solution to the problem of a super powerful communist dictatorship. But I would not count on it.

  94. The question is how allied the allies of the USA are to USA? What if India would have to pay an economic price for standing up to China, would they still choose to do so? And now the Biden administration is coming in, so I guess all efforts to curb IP-theft are once again abandoned. How will the suposed allies react to a Biden administration? If the USA will not fight, why should they?

    And Europe… Don't get me started. Europe has absolutely zero spine and will do whatever is politically correct and convenient for the moment. Europe has no will to fight for anything; freedom, freedom of speech or even economic growth. Europe are obsessed with the sufferings of muslims in Europe, but completely ignore the "work camps" and forced sterilization of the chinese Uigurs. And you are counting on Europe to stand up to China??

  95. lol CCP is courting large scale military conflicts with almost everyone around it and here Brian thinks there will be a mainly peaceful future. I guess last cold war was mainly peaceful event. At best China will have slightly larger economy than US for a while before falling behind. Its becoming increasingly difficult for China to industrial espionage its way out of middle income trap. The authoritarian system and CCP's arrogance both are unsuitable to match US productivity that can tap into better alliances. Sooner or later CCP will run out of room to build railways to prop growth.

  96. with creative powers, USA can still be the number one for centuries and attract talents and capitals.

    -> Oh boy!
    No the USA is sinking.
    The USA has been no 1 due to the dominance of its currency, the dollar
    Soon the dollar will be replaced by the yuan and the USA dominance will be over
    China will rule soon.
    In 2026-2028 they will be the largest economy and they are already promoting the yuan
    The USA empire soon be dead.
    Iran, Venezuela, Afghanistan and other countries will soon be liberated

    Just saying

  97. why worries about china.
    USA president just has to do two things to make American happy.
    1/ recall army back to save unbearable military budget, and keep buying arms to create jobs.
    2/ ensure the enterprises to pay taxes including overseas profits.

    with creative powers, USA can still be the number one for centuries and attract talents and capitals.

  98. Large scale military conflict will be avoided. Other than economic competition and the occasional trade war, there will mainly be a peaceful future.

    This sounds right. It was looking possible that the US would economically decouple from China but it seems less likely with a pro-China Biden administration about to come in. Trade with China has been an economic disaster for most of the US but the status quo works for America's wealthy elite class (people like Bezos and the Walton family) so don't expect any change.

Comments are closed.