Looks like China will be the only major country with positive GDP growth this year.
Now we have skyrocketing debt, a gridlock congress and covid likely to last many years in our country.
Do you think China will be the world’s biggest economic power in 10 years?
| +50 | Interviews Are So Fake | 33 | 3s | |
| +33 | 2024 UK Election - Tories finished? | 21 | 1d | |
| +29 | ADHD ! | 12 | 18m | |
| +28 | Being Christian in investment banking | 14 | 2d | |
| +26 | Non-Competes Banned | 28 | 1h | |
| How do I become Sigma | 15 | 16h | ||
| +19 | Moelis has the cutest Analysts? | 4 | 1d | |
| +18 | Best NYC neighborhood for single 30M | 12 | 3d | |
| +16 | Underage intern, drinking? | 7 | 2d | |
| +13 | Secretive vs Universal Prestige? | 7 | 2d |
Career Resources
Get instant access to lessons taught by experienced private equity pros and bulge bracket investment bankers including financial statement modeling, DCF, M&A, LBO, Comps and Excel Modeling.
No, stop fear-mongering.
.
Obviously yes
Very likely. China just joined the world’s largest free trade zone. After US cut ties with our allies, China become their new economic partners. We lost too much in past 4 years. Now it’s going to be hard to catch up.
Gotta alienate our firends and so that we can be great again.
Reality vs your explanation:
Thanks for sharing!
In past two weeks, Chinese ADR share price skyrocket. RMB keeps its appreciation momentum. Looks like more capital is flow into China.
No question about it. Strong decline vibes from America
Most likely within the next 10, not 20. Last 4 years with our war on trade and war against science, has demolished our standing on the global stage. We can rejoin some of those programs like Paris Trade agreement Iran nuclear deal and others but it’s too little, and we’d be operating out of a position of weakness where the terms we set would rather be had with other countries who don’t have the US premium.
It's inevitable. Economists have always viewed population size as a major determining factor for economic power/size. Their's is 3x larger than the US, so it's only a matter of time as long as they continue to grow.
Economists have to explain how China, which had 30% of the world GDP in 1800 ended up being partitioned in economic sphere by Western powers, which altogether didn't have half of the Chinese GDP and population size.
Btw, China's economic partitioning has the ominous name of Open Door Policy.
They had technology stagnation due to closing off the world, which led to them taking the backseat to the West, which rapidly expanded technology and economic productivity during the exploration and industrialization periods.
Being forcefully open to everything made them slaves, so maybe we can spare the liberal mantra that openness is unquestionably good for a second?
That being said, as it turns out, GDP and population numbers aren't necessary to become a world leader. Do we agree?
Lol. Dude, what is this? I thought you were talking reasonably here. Like, you do realize on that chart, it shows "GDP share" going back to before year 1000, right? Like, China's share of GDP would've decreased if world GDP increased rapidly during the 1800s to today. Lol, like, I don't think you are looking at the whole picture. You have a narrow lens through anti-"liberal agenda".
I'm dying laughing at this
Confirm that you think we're in an argument about openness and population size.
When I say "economists" I'm talking about Adam Smith, Mills, Malthus, etc
Well, we are both laughing then. I'm laughing at arguments like:
1) It's inevitable! Just look at their populations size!
Virtually never in Western history a Western power relied on sheer population size for its success. From Ancient Greece to the UK, they achieved far more than most other more populous geographical areas. That's seriously one of the most ridiculous oversimplifications one can make.
2) Muh fucking GeeDeePee. Same as above. Again, the history of how Europeans conquered the world says GDP doesn't really matter that much.
3) China fell behind because ''they closed off to the world''. That is factually incorrect to begin with (they traded via modern Guanzhou), they had a trade policy that wasn't really much different from any Western nation, since everyone had their favored trade partners. That being said, the answer is also ideological and wrong.
I'm anti-bullshit and the first two points are bullshit arguments by social scientists that oversimplify the world and overstate the importance of their discipline. The third is just ideological bs. So yeah, if you want to keep laughing and repeat similar idiocies, feel free. They aren't even your own grain, so no reason to discuss with a parrot.
tl;dr, anyone who thinks the US can't compete with China because of a dong measuring contest in population, is an IYI.
Dude, wtf are you talking about? The post is about GDP. At least stay on topic. GDP growth has always correlated with population growth. Why is that relevant to who will have higher GDP? Because if the US and China consumed the same way, China would consume more. That simple.
Your ability to just quickly brush by all your own points is baffling. You're doing a good job of saying nothing, just like the typical unproductive GOP politician.
China was different in how much interaction they had with the outside world. European powers "conquered" by deploying government sponsored militias and weapons. Most world history that led to the next phase in economic change was initiated through wars at varying levels. Even in the "open doors policy" you mention consisted of wars fought between China and Europe and had undertones of potential war between America and Europe over China's resources.
Because GDP is the topic of this post, not "world power", by comment still stands. You're the one with a hardon for "world domination" ole pinky and the brain having ass boy.
I will say even after China become the largest economy in the world, the US economy will still be strong.
UK was the world’s economy superpower a century ago. But now even after UK no longer the world leader, it’s economy is resilient.
It is China’s century now. But who knows what will come after? India or Southeast Asia?
You've highlighted some of the challenges that the US will face going forward, but what about China's problems? Debt/GDP is 300% and household and corporate debt levels are concerning - and this is in the face of pre-pandemic growth already slowing. Also, on growth and economic performance - there have always been questions about the accuracy of their economic reporting. See: UK Hedge Fund Nevsky Capital's 2016 closing newsletter citing unreliable macro data from emerging markets (specifically from India and China) as one of the reasons for their closure. Last year, Brookings also published research ("A forensic examination of China's national accounts") that corroborated that their growth has been slower over the past decade than they have reported.
I also don't think we can fully appreciate the trade implications of the pandemic at this point, but I don't think companies mulling and opting for supply chain shifts bodes well for China with regard to FDI flows. There was already a decoupling of sorts that was taking place because of Trump's hawkish stance and overall de globalization trends, so shifting supply chains further compounds these problems for export-reliant China. China clearly sees the writing is on the wall which is why they recently signaled that they are pivoting to a "dual circulation" strategy where they will look more inward, but it remains to be seen how effective this policy will be.
I also don't think China is without political problems either. Xi's power struggles and purges are well documented.
Not saying that they won't surpass USA but China has its own set of problems and I'm also not fully sure if they will successfully change a sticky global financial system architected by America, so agree with the poster that says America will still definitely be a presence economically. Would love to hear someone chime in on the reserve currency under threat sentiment that has been floating around for some time too?
How do you think Kyle Bass’s bet on shorting RMB/HKD? Do you think this trade will make him the next legendary big short?
Honestly had no clue who Kyle Bass was until you mentioned, so I searched him and found a couple Youtube videos of him. I have to say that that the Real Vision interview he did with Michael Pettis was one of the most informative things I've seen all year. It pretty much highlights most of the issues I mentioned + more and goes into detail much better than I ever could! As for the trade, I have no clue how it's going to pan out but I'll be paying attention.
Why is it surprising? Go look world’s largest capital market deals in recent years and many of them are Chinese companies
Looks like US banks executives are all busy licking Chinese government’s ass
Lol
Millions of Chinese families rush to settle in the likes of Australia, Canada and the US, but not vice versa. No one leaves home to attend Chinese universities, no one is watching Chinese movies, reading Chinese books or listening to Chinese music, outside of a handful of names in tech China has zero respected brands and no widely recognised thought leaders. China might end up with the largest GDP but the West will still have all the soft power.
China will become the biggest economy in the world in 10-15 years if Xi keeps the economy going; the per capita number still makes it an emerging country, but as a whole, it is almost a sure thing that it will surpass the US's economy. The transition from a manufacturing-oriented economy to a consumption economy will make it happen.
Many people on the forum and western media in general just doesn't have a clue about China's, or any other countries for that matter, development cuz they might not even have a passport for international travel...
Having said that, I do agree that China will not have the same soft power as the US, but the domestic market is so big that it doesn't really need to convince people in other countries to consumer their movies, music, etc.
US dollar will still probably be the reserve currency for a long, long time though.
The WSJ had an interesting opinion article over the weekend on US foreign policy on China under the Biden administration in relation to the Trump policies and longer term challenges, particularly with US businesspeople and conflicts of interests between American values and access to the China market.
https://www.wsj.com/articles/beijing-targets-american-business-11616783268?mod=mhp
For those without a WSJ subscription, the author states that US / Western business interests want to steer away from the ideological conflict yet this is inevitable. The result is a binary choice: help China or the US, especially when options for diplomatic/government compromise/ influence are waning - pressure on the business community will escalate.
The opinion piece highlights a new battlefield that is forming and that is decoupling of economic dependency and supply chains. The US interests are a “selective or strategic” decoupling from China’s manufacturing. The counter is China’s push to reinforce the dependency and make it tougher to decouple. Decoupling involves diversification of manufacturing to other nations, particularly to key industries. Both US and China leaders see economic dependency being the most important leverage outside of military action.
This often creates a conflict of interests with national interests (particularly the home market of global companies) and shareholder interest for businesses. This will be a key battleground in the boardrooms that lead to national strategic interests. Will be interesting how business leaders navigate, particularly since in Western society companies have acted more on shareholder interests, individualism, and opportunism above national / collective interests. There is reason to believe this is a losing proposition for the West unless there is a shift.
Ut a ut nostrum qui eum quis libero. Sint et in aut eius sit mollitia omnis. Laborum praesentium et laboriosam esse asperiores et.
See All Comments - 100% Free
WSO depends on everyone being able to pitch in when they know something. Unlock with your email and get bonus: 6 financial modeling lessons free ($199 value)
or Unlock with your social account...
Culpa ipsum iste et amet ut eius. Molestias eius esse voluptatem temporibus cumque aut ut. Similique sit quasi deleniti esse tempora aliquam rerum fugit.