The Rise And Fall Of America
- Thread starter triggertrader
- Start date
.That is an illuminating chart, thanks. This clearly shows that in terms of national GDP China is ascending and the U.S. is declining. I think it's an apples to oranges comparison not to normalize that for GDP per capita though, since you're obviously going to spend a lot more of your GDP of X supporting a population of 1.3 billion vice 310 million, especially when absolute GDP is roughly the same. And as I alluded to earlier, the danger of graphs is that the human brain loves to extrapolate the last trend out as if it will continue at that slope for the next X years, which in China's case one could argue isn't really supportable.
BTW I actually think the coolest part of the graph is the far left side, that's some surprising information I guess based on my eurocentric education bias.
According to Putin - the country that gets the upper hand in AI will rule, but for how long ?
It might be a surprise to some Americans that the US had staunch allies. But with the gratuitous insults and the " America First" program, the US's allies are fewer than before and less keen to be dragged into US lead wars.
It might be a surprise to some Americans that the US had staunch allies. But with the gratuitous insults and the " America First" program, the US's allies are fewer than before and less keen to be dragged into US lead wars.
No-one cares about how you feel, little snowflake.
imo, overall GDP and overall GDP/Capita have been a bit outdated measures.
More meaningful could be using measures for the well-being of the lowest (say) 10% people.
In other words, many people might think it'd be practically better and happier in a low GDP/Cap country where can provide better living to the lowest 10% GDP/Cap people for well-being in terms of low-cost-medical/ drinking-water/ economic-food/ low-cost-rental/ etc than otherwise.
They probably don't want or think to move to much higher GDP/Cap countries if they cannot enjoy the same level/kind of well-being.
Say, if the US can help Mexico build a few cities in a Mexico special zone where offers low-cost-medical/ drinking-water/ economic-food/ low-cost-rental/ etc, why would the Mexicans want to pass the US border when the US cannot offer the same well-being conditions?
Perhaps the special zone budget even saves a lot of US federal money ($1.6 Billion wall construction plus extra annual petrol/ maintenance) as well! lol
More meaningful could be using measures for the well-being of the lowest (say) 10% people.
In other words, many people might think it'd be practically better and happier in a low GDP/Cap country where can provide better living to the lowest 10% GDP/Cap people for well-being in terms of low-cost-medical/ drinking-water/ economic-food/ low-cost-rental/ etc than otherwise.
They probably don't want or think to move to much higher GDP/Cap countries if they cannot enjoy the same level/kind of well-being.
Say, if the US can help Mexico build a few cities in a Mexico special zone where offers low-cost-medical/ drinking-water/ economic-food/ low-cost-rental/ etc, why would the Mexicans want to pass the US border when the US cannot offer the same well-being conditions?
Perhaps the special zone budget even saves a lot of US federal money ($1.6 Billion wall construction plus extra annual petrol/ maintenance) as well! lol
Last edited:
There are all sorts of interesting measurements that people have attempted to use, instead of GDP... It's a work in progress.
That's exactly my point. Delta is a first derivative, the slope of the line. Gamma is the second derivative, or acceleration of that slope. Both of those assume that the slope will remain accelerating in the current direction at the current rate well into the future and well into a bigger and bigger economy. That's just not realistic in China. It was immeasurably easier to go from a medieval level of development to early industrial revolution level in the late 20th century, especially when you didn't care about pollution, have few medical and pension obligations, don't spend 57% of your discretionary budget on your military...than it will be to continue to increase the current economy at the current rate.Think of GDP as option delta, and GDP per capita as option gamma.
*Now* do you see what China poses currently, next decade, next century?
"Yipes!!"
To take just one piece of this concept, this is a typical day, not night, day, in Beijing, and none of that is from the weather. And that's only the air pollution you can see, it doesn't take into account the water and ground pollution. That's simply not sustainable as is, let alone growing at the same "gamma" as China's economy!
Last edited: