The problem is that China is still self sufficient. Huge country with a single timezone and great infrastructure and now has the expertise to produce for itself and enough people to buy its own products. Sure there's going to be some instability but even then the dictatorship is helping in preventing people to go too crazy. There's a reason musk is pushing for babies: the US is mostly empty land with a few large cities.
Fascist movements usually crusade for more babies and venture into (futile) nationalistic pro-natalist policies to try and drive up birth rates. Sometimes they fully commit to eugenics programs. It's a thing. But there's a catch.
Some kinds of babies are good and other babies are bad (in their view). They only want "good" babies.
Trump's unconstitutional executive order targeting birthright citizenship tells you all you need to know about who they think the bad ones are.
And though many have tried, no country has figured out how to meaningfully drive up birth rates with pro-natalist policies.
There's only one proven way to get more babies and sustain economic growth when native birthrates decline: MORE IMMIGRATION.
If immigration to the US continues apace, we surpass China's total population within decades and continue strong economic growth comfortably. If TrumpElon really manage to kill the golden goose, welp... it's been real.
I don't get your comment. You are saying immigration is the solution to more babies because we haven't figured out yet how to make the local populace make more babies? That doesn't hold. You can't just say there is no solution to a problem because a solution hasn't been found yet.
First, I'm saying Musk's apparent interest in birth rates is best understood as a component of the neo-fascist, authoritarian project in which he's embedded himself, the likes of which we've seen many times throughout history, and is the kind of thing that often culminates in large scale atrocity.
Second, I'm saying for anyone who is truly interested in driving population growth, the last thing one would do is inhibit immigration. Instead, you'd open the floodgates.
First article: "China's economy expanded in the third quarter at the slowest pace", second article, "Growth in the world’s second-largest economy is slowing "
These quotes do not support the claim of "on the decline", they show the rate at which the economy is growing is not as fast as before, but still at perfectly respectable rates:
"It has been a grim month for the Chinese economy: A slew of recent data has revealed the world’s second-largest economy is slowing faster than expected, causing analysts to predict it will miss its relatively modest 5 percent growth target this year."
"This week’s disappointing Chinese GDP (gross domestic product) numbers showed that Chinese economic growth has slowed to 4.75 percent from the very rapid annual economic growth rate of seven to eight percent during the 2010s"
"China’s economy is performing dreadfully. The post-pandemic bounce was far smaller and briefer than the Chinese government had anticipated. Despite recording a respectable, if diminished, official growth rate of 5.2 percent in 2023, the reality may have been much slower, with some analysts estimating growth was no more than 1-2 percent."
"China’s economy grew 0.7 percent in the second quarter over the previous three months, below the expectations of most economists. When projected out for the entire year, the economy grew at an annual rate of about 2.8 percent — a little less than half the rate in the first three months of this year."
The USA, by comparison, was 2.5% in 2023.
If China is "in decline" from these numbers, so is the USA.
Behind this there is the wrong assumption that there must be a replacement for all.
For sure there will be gaps filled by other powers, but it's not necessary, we just got used to it.
That's the point. There will be no on 'policing' things (even imperfectly), and so anyone who wants to do a power grab will make an attempt.
"Those in positions of power do what their power permits, while the weak have no choice but to accept it." — Thucydides, History of the Peloponnesian War, 5.89
There will be no one 'policing' things (even imperfectly)
Pirates (like actual sea pirates, not kids downloading warez) definitely look forward to this.
Although, that's a specific part of the "world policing" role that I can see China stepping into.
They certainly have the manpower and the shipbuilding capacity, and they certainly have the incentive to protect international shipping so they can sell their goods everywhere.
I don't think China (yet) wants any part of the other bits of world policing, like deploying armies and/or funding proxy wars on the other side of the world.
For the forseeable future I think China mostly wants to stay as neutral as possible and make as much money as possible by selling as much crap as possible to as many countries as possible.
I don't think they want the US as an enemy. It's not good business for them.
I have a 100% unsupported belief that 100% of the public messaging from all sides regarding Taiwan is complete BS. I think that behind closed doors, all parties (except maybe Taiwan themselves) are working out a deal so that Taiwan winds up back in China's hands in the next 10-15 years without a war and everybody gets to save some face. I think that the CHIPS act, TSMC foundries on US soil, etc are all part of this process. It is the most mutually beneficial situation for the US and China: they get Taiwan; we get non-traumatic continuity for our chip supplies, everybody gets to save face, etc. (I'm not endorsing it or decrying it or even touching the morality or lack thereof)
> For the forseeable future I think China mostly wants to stay as neutral as possible and make as much money as possible by selling as much crap as possible to as many countries as possible.
China is thinking long term and building capabilities:
> Except then a war comes, and suddenly you find that B2B SaaS and advertising platforms and chat apps aren’t very useful for defending your freedoms. Oops! The right time to worry about manufacturing would have been years before the war, except you weren’t able to anticipate and prepare for the future. Manufacturing doesn’t just support war — in a very real way, it’s a war in and of itself.
> For the forseeable future I think China mostly wants to stay as neutral as possible and make as much money as possible by selling
I think that you're probably correct, but that goal will be in tension with the corollary "... And Russia next door is buying lots of raw materials and miliary hardware, even at an above-market price".
Yeah, I think they're going to play a classical "make money from both sides" role. They'll titrate the amount of commerce they do with all parties so that everybody is equally unhappy but equally dependent on China.
china is playing the long game, because its leader (and/or whoever will come next) does not have to bother about being re-elected and essentially doesn't have to bother with political antagonists.
i'm not saying it's good or bad, but i think this is a thing that most people don't seem to be recognizing/acknowledging.
> I think that the CHIPS act, TSMC foundries on US soil, etc are all part of this process.
