Hacker News new | past | comments | ask | show | jobs | submit login

China is doing most things right according to endogenous growth theory. Exports help it grow faster but are not the most essential part of the equation. China's export is only ~20% of its 2018 GDP. https://www.theglobaleconomy.com/china/exports/

"Endogenous growth theory holds that investment in human capital, innovation, and knowledge are significant contributors to economic growth."

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

> Technology in China is still by and large imported / copied.

For many important technologies, it is either on par, a bit behind, or sometimes a bit ahead (5G, quantum communications) of the west. A few key areas where China still lacks are semiconductors, aviation, and global reaches of internet platforms. These are important but account for far less than half of its GDP.

China's numbers of patents and scientific publications have reached world's no.1 in recent years:

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

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

One can argue about the quality of those, but one should not assume that China is substantially behind the west as was the case even a couple decades ago.

China's number of STEM graduates, many of whom are sources of the progress above, is the highest in the world: 4.7m in 2016. The only country that comes close is India.

https://www.statista.com/chart/7913/the-countries-with-the-m...

> ...while Western demand (mostly US, really) and its technology are not.

US population: ~330 million; EU, ~450 million => Total: 780 million. China's population: ~1400 million. Domestic demand is clearly not China's disadvantage.




> US population: ~330 million; EU, ~450 million => Total: 780 million. China's population: ~1400 million. Domestic demand is clearly not China's disadvantage.

Population size doesn't paint a full picture. China's GDP per capita is still less than a third of the US. A lot of those 1.4 billion have absolutely appalling living standards.


That is why I mentioned they still have a significant room for further development. (Many people's quality of life in major cities, from all reports I have seen, is no worse than that of the west's middle class, except for pollution.)

If a country is economically well-governed and still developing, the quality of life for most everyone will improve over time.

Most people who have studied or traveled to one of the Asian tigers before and after its rapid phase of development can see how different 2-3 decades can make.

A 5% annual compound growth results in 3.4 times the previous GDP within 25 years.

2020 projection of GDP per capita (PPP) of China is ~$21000 according to the IMF. It's a middle-income country. If they continue to adopt and invent technologies extensively, there is no reason they cannot grow further.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_countries_by_GDP_(PPP)...

Quality of life is not a zero-sum game. In fact, when a country is richer, their trading partners are often better off too.


Population can be a burden. As the US has learned, economic systems can't grow forever; maintaining the US standard of living is a significant strain both geopolitically and environmentally. It will be much harder to provide a similar standard of living for 1.4 billion people.

I suspect that China will hit similar limits soon, if they haven't already. We do see signs of environmental and geopolitical strain there.


It depends on the direction of growth.

Antibiotics by itself improves the quality of life a great deal and does not take much resources to produce.

If a country moves toward an innovation-driven economy, its growth can be less constrained by physical resources.


Appalling living standards sucks for those people, but that doesn't make China less of a world power.




Guidelines | FAQ | Lists | API | Security | Legal | Apply to YC | Contact

Search: