U.S. CitiesCity-Data Forum Index
Go Back   City-Data Forum > World Forums > Asia
 [Register]
Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
View detailed profile (Advanced) or search
site with Google Custom Search

Search Forums  (Advanced)
Reply Start New Thread
 
Old 08-06-2014, 11:03 PM
 
649 posts, read 982,143 times
Reputation: 372

Advertisements

Quote:
Originally Posted by Camlon View Post
I think you might be confusing the terms GDP and GDP per capita. GDP per capita is the GDP divided by the total population.

China gdp per capita is not going to reach US level anytime soon, their GDP is. That is because China has a lot more people.
China only needs to have a GDP per capita of 25% to have a total GDP equal to USA. That's the scale we are talking about.

China only needs to achieve just middle class income for 30% of its people, just 30% and the total absolute number of middle class consumers with the power to purchase goods, will be more than the entire US population (that includes our working class, hobos, our blue collar, and unemployed Mexicans).

The Economist predicts that this will take place in less than 5 years, since China already has a large middle class that's still growing and a super rich class (millionaire and billionaires) that's highest in the world after the USA.

You are American, you should be used to grandeur, scale. Think everything about China in scale. And proportions.

Nobody, (but maybe just you) is confused.

The economists I know are very clear about what we are talking about. You seem to understand the difference in GDP (economy size) and GDP per capita but you seem to misunderstand their roles in reality and the requisite scenarios for what you do not want taking place.

Last edited by sadgirl80; 08-07-2014 at 12:14 AM..
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message

 
Old 08-06-2014, 11:07 PM
 
649 posts, read 982,143 times
Reputation: 372
Quote:
Originally Posted by Tall Traveler View Post
I agree the US & UK need to desperately work on reducing their debt. Regarding China's economy, it is a virtual certainty that China will surpass the USA GDP in the future. But I wouldn't brag about that as the day that China surpasses the USA GDP, china will have finally reached a point where 4 Chinese are as productive as 1 American.
.
99% of Americans look at figures like that and feel complacent as a response.

The 1% including me look at the same figures and have a different takeaway.
The difference is that we see this, and we say, this is a developing scenario. It isn't the end. If they can achieve the same thing by just 25%, it means when (and it is when, and not if) the scenario achieves full potential, they are 4 times as much and we feel alarmed. That's how an analyst thinks when he sees the same set of data.

I wasn't kidding when I say most Americans think the way you think, I've seen it expressed many times online. It is as if part of their expression is fueled by a competitiveness inside and brewing insecurity that need and want reassurance that it maintains supremacy over everybody else. Such a spirit is good, as on theory it keeps you on your toes but I haven't seen it do much else for most Americans except offer enough self deception and short sighted consolation for them.

Last edited by sadgirl80; 08-07-2014 at 12:25 AM..
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 08-06-2014, 11:24 PM
 
Location: In the heights
22,142 posts, read 23,668,851 times
Reputation: 11622
Quote:
Originally Posted by sadgirl80 View Post
99% of Americans look at figures like that and feel complacent as a response.

The 1% including me look at the same figures and have a different takeaway.
The difference is that we see this, and we say, this is a developing scenario. It isn't the end. If they can achieve the same thing by just 25%, it means when (and it is when, and not if) the scenario achieves full potential, they are 4 times as much. That's how an analyst thinks when he sees the same set of data.

I wasn't kidding when I say most Americans think the way you think, I've seen it expressed many times online. It is as if part of their expression is fueled by a competitiveness inside and brewing insecurity that need and want reassurance that it maintains supremacy over everybody else. Such a spirit is good, as on theory it keeps you on your toes but I haven't seen it do much else for most Americans except offer enough self deception and short sightedness for them to carry on in their ways.
You do have to keep in mind that much of that growth is in doing what would be considered low hanging fruit. The part that gets hard is once you get to a certain level of development and you have to eke out each decimal of growth.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 08-06-2014, 11:52 PM
 
649 posts, read 982,143 times
Reputation: 372
Quote:
Originally Posted by jm31828 View Post
Yeah, they will definitely get richer, and will probably get to the #1 spot in the world for overall economy size, but I just don't see them ever reaching the level of development of the US, because that would mean their economy would have to not only get to the total size of the US, but then would have to get to 4 times that size to end up with the same per capita GDP.
So I guess there are two different things to look at- it is very realistic to see China eclipse the US eventually as the world's largest economy, but very unlikely, maybe not even possible for them to ever get to the same developed level with a similar living standard.
China doesn't need to achieve the same GDP per capita with the US to kick the US economically to the side of the curb. It doesn't. This is a line regularly employed by nervous Americans, who have no idea the scale we are talking about.

China does not need to raise the living standards of some peasants in Hainan or Jilin province up to the standard of some Swiss farmer. The scale we are talking about is, China simply has to push its first tier mainland cities, currently Shanghai, Beijing, Shenzhen, Tianjin up to the GDP per capita of Hong Kong (currently higher than most of the western world), and it's done.

I'll give you the best analogy that could possibly be had.

When America was puffing up like a balloon to its full potential in the late 1890s to early 1920s, and then again in the 1950s, the world, and most of all, Britain watched in part awe and part confusion. The pre-eminent world leader at the time, Britain had no idea about the scale at hand back then, but no doubt the smartest Brits knew and foresaw.

Today, Britain's population is 1/5 of America's like how America's population is 1/5 of China. The Brits (and the rest of the world) only understood what it looked like, after it happened. China has four times the population and potential market size of America. This is the scale we're dealing with. The Brits were saying the same thing back then. And America did take over the Brits and surpassed Britain in all areas.

If you wanna wax lyrical about per capita income, the same can be sad about the US. What is the "standard of living" of states like MS, WV and AL.

Among the super rich, China has more millionaires and billionaires than any country in the world besides the US. http://blogs.wsj.com/chinarealtime/2...y-but-the-u-s/ So rest assured, its middle class is growing. In sheer numbers, China probably has a lot more people who have surpassed the per cap income of everybody in MS and WV. Even if China doesn't do anything about the poorest 50% of people, its farmers in Heilongjiang and Hainan and wherever, it can easily have as many people as there are people in America (just 20% of its population), who make the median income of all Americans, and then another 10% (10% of 1.4 billion is a whooping 140 million) who are upper class income ($100k a year) and 1% of super rich. China has a low GDP per capita because of its massive population (and it will remain low for a long time), so massive it's four times the size of America. Not achieving the same GDP per capita means squat.

Even my Dutch friends know this, and some have moved to China.

The massiveness of China is something has to be experienced first hand to be understood. Reading about it on paper gives you a theoretical image, that you can "sort of" grasp to paint an unclear misty picture, if you are very smart. The diversity of the society is so large due to the massive population and large land mass, that actually very few black and white blank statements (generalizations) ever apply to China accurately as a result. That's why I chortle whenever I read the very many blanket statements made about China on Facebook by trolls. Eg "They are poor" "They eat dogs" or "They must live 200 in a house" or "Wow his whole family must have pooled money together to send him here to study".

It's not just about money. China is so large that any blanket statement made about an entity as labeled "China" is stupid.

I know rich kids, both female and male in China, whose parents' net worth, is sufficient to buy and sell these people a few times over.

The number of people in China whose parents are upper-middle class and earn more than enough to send their children to the US for higher education, is a higher number than everybody than resides in the states of the people who commented.

Anyway I know somebody whose business partner in Singapore set up a day care center that combines a bi-lingual curriculum for middle class toddlers in a city in Zhejiang province - a second tier but affluent province where founder of Alibaba.com Jack Ma is based (In 2012, two of Alibaba’s portals together handled 1.1 trillion yuan ($170 billion) in sales, more than competitors eBay and Amazon.com combined). The center is fully booked and it costs each parent $1,800 a month to have one kid there.

Last edited by sadgirl80; 08-07-2014 at 12:39 AM..
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 08-07-2014, 12:45 AM
 
649 posts, read 982,143 times
Reputation: 372
And I wonder why we comfort ourselves with this GDP per capita line, when we should be, of all people, familiar with it.

Even amateur economists know that it is very easy to bridge the inequality of a tiny sample size. And it is very difficult to do so for large sample sizes. Why do you think our GDP per capita is outstripped by a bunch of small countries? Go look at the ranking. Countries like Qatar, Monaco, Luxembourg, Singapore, are ahead of the US in GDP per capita. These are a bunch of tiny weeny microstates and non-countries. Of course they're going to appear like they are so rich. And then after this group of microstates non-countries, we have the small countries contingent (Denmark, Norway). They have 1/100 or 1/50 the task to achieve that figure. The fact that they only edge out the US by such a small margin says much more about them than us. They need to buck more more.

The top 10 countries with the highest GDP per capita, America is the only one that has a population above 40 million (the next highest is Canada at 35 million), its a joke. And America has had to do achieve that GDP per cap with 300 million. After the microstate non countries contingent, the small countries contingent, Canada and Australia make up the large-small country contingent.

The reason the US is an economic powerhouse is because we have both a large population and a high GDP per capita. We aren't one of the shrimpy new-arrival states that are now pretending to be all-that. These two factors combine to form the largest economy in the world. That is why immigrants flock to the US to achieve the American Dream. The ones that can't get into the US are filtered to Canada, where they have 1/10 the market size to take their risks and give it all they have, and 1/10 the number of cities to choose from.

We can't beat China in size. So we have to employ other devices. We have a number of advantages of them. The chief of all is human capital from the rest of the world. They have four times the human capital and four times the top brains, taking into account the top brains everywhere is the top 1 percentile, IF we continue our destructive immigration policies and turn off intelligent and high-skilled immigrants. Attracting the best from the rest of the world and drawing the top 1 percent of the rest of the world. We need to kick the tea baggers out, need immigration reform, and need to draw even more top brains and pass off their achievements as our own (what we have been doing but at a subdued rate due to broken immigrant policy).

THIS
Quote:
Originally Posted by OyCrumbler View Post
The American primary education system seemed to work much better overall in the past when there was a somewhat stronger emphasis on rote memory of things in order to establish a better basis for creative thinking. It takes some fantastically creative and free thinking in order to make genuine breakthroughs in all kinds of fields, but before that it often takes a lot of goddamn hours to just learn the fundamentals in order to have the tools to wield in a creative way.

The US does make a lot of tech breakthroughs, but much of it, especially lately, has been due to its relative prosperity attracting talent from other countries whether for the university systems or for major corporations. At some point that relative prosperity might level out compared to other nations and emigration to the US would become less attractive. What would be the safer bet for us in the US would be to invest heavily in studying and improving the US primary and secondary education system which may include reinstating a lot more "rote memory" sort of learning.

Last edited by sadgirl80; 08-07-2014 at 01:59 AM..
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 08-07-2014, 12:59 AM
 
649 posts, read 982,143 times
Reputation: 372
Quote:
Originally Posted by Hawaii4evr View Post
China is overestimated by the West-and much of the rest of the world-as a superpower. It lacks the military might to be called a superpower. It also fails to culturally-influence the world, or draw immigrants in, to the same degree that the USA, or former superpowers like Russia, Britain, France, Spain, Rome, Greece, or Portugal have done. The same, to a degree, goes for India. The Chinese military not only lacks the proper training, but also is not as equipped as well as other nations. Japan has a far better navy than China. India's first aircraft carrier was built in India, as opposed to the Chinese purchase of a former Soviet carrier. China has a big military, yes, but what good is that when several enemy/rival nations (India, South Korea, Japan, pretty much all of Southeast Asia, and even Russia, to an extent) surround you? Not to mention that the USA, and after them, Russia, are far more powerful in terms of military might!
Russia, South Korea, blah blah, all the countries you named, are not China's "enemies". Brush up your foreign policy and international relations knowledge.

South Korea would not survive if it isn't for the US and China. Little South Korea is being propped up by US and China, geopolitically and economically.

Russia is by and large an ally of China. In fact they just signed a trading treaty recently.http://america.aljazeera.com/article...-bankdeal.html

The only country in Southeast Asia that has an enmity with China is the Philippines but China can kick the Philippines to the curb and squash its balls. Philippines is a non-event in this discussion. It's like a hobo talking about the last $5 in his wallet wanting to acquire a building from Donald Trump. Singapore is an ally of China.

Even Taiwan has strong trading links with China and Taiwanese businessmen are sucking up to China. The Taiwanese know the best position to take regarding their bank accounts, since as ethnic Chinese, they're born to be businessmen. http://www.wantchinatimes.com/news-s...00094&cid=1202

All large and powerful countries have outstanding issues with one another with multi-faceted, multi-dimensional, but inextricably linked dynamics. It doesn't mean they are at war. The whole thing is an imagination of tea bagger, war-mongering, Murican redneck types who have no clue about the geo-politics of the region.

Japan has the HIGHEST number of foreign expatriates in China. That's not a sign of two countries about to go to war in the next 100 years.

China is a close economic partner of Japan, US, UK, Australia, and is on paper, an economic ally of the US when classified by the State Department. Read, and learn. http://atlas.media.mit.edu/profile/country/chn/

China does not need immigrants. It has enough people. That's what I asked my friends who have lived in China for five to seven years. I asked so is there any permanent residence program that you can apply to? They said in a matter-of-fact tone "China has enough people honey".

What China does have, is a lot of expatriates there to make a fortune, as well as there to witness the rising dragon as it is rising. They want to be in the thick of things and witness it. China, in turn, is making use of these people as human capital to power their economy.

China has no interest in surpassing the US militarily. The US has a defense budget that outstrips the next 10 countries. So nobody else is interested also. China is just sitting by watching the US spurred by tea baggers, pump money into the military to generate artificial GDP and pile on debts by waging foreign wars and take on the role of "global policeman" as it grows its economy and buys our junk bonds. If it weren't for China buying our junk bonds because it has to park its money somewhere, your grandmother wouldn't have a dime in her social security. China parks its money in US bonds and other assets because it has so much stored up cash reserves, it has enough to buy over the entire federal debt of the United States.

Don't even compare Greece or Portugal with China and bring either to this discussion. It's retarded, to the rest of us who know international relations and geo-politics and economics. Greece and Portugal in this discussion is like enrolling two paraplegics in the Olympics.

Last edited by sadgirl80; 08-07-2014 at 01:58 AM..
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 08-07-2014, 01:13 AM
 
649 posts, read 982,143 times
Reputation: 372
Quote:
Originally Posted by botticelli View Post
hardly any country in the world reach the levels of Americans.

Did the British, Japanese, Australians, Germans? No. If you compare average wage and local cost of living, west Europe, Japan and Australia are all much poorer.

America's moderate population and massive resource make it richer than any other country. Norway may boast a much higher GDP per capita, but try to live in Oslo for a year and tell me you have a much life than in Los Angeles.
You are correct.
Only Norway has a higher per capita GDP than America. All the rest in your list, have a lower per capita GDP, lower wages and higher taxes. Add Canada to the list also. List of countries by GDP (nominal) per capita - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

The US appears to have more poor people than other developed countries when foreigners visit, because it has a far bigger population, as explained above about sample size and income inequality. The income inequality of the US is not high for its population size and median income achieved. The US has 10 times the population of Canada, 12 times of Australia. More than 60 times of Norway, Switzerland or Denmark. The comparison is retarded. It is for this reason the US does not adopt socialist policies of these countries. It does not work. And it doesn't and shouldn't need to. The cost of living is lower than all these countries because of the socialist (and therefore taxation) policies of these countries that we must avoid. Unless somebody willfully does not want to work, he shouldn't have a problem affording a good life with a fully paid up single family home (we have second largest median home size worldwide and the cheapest for a developed country) and a car, given how much land we have. We have hundreds of low cost cities to choose from. Some of these countries are on the list because of socialist policies. Other are just plain rip off because they are tiny microstates and have no land. It's not because they have any social welfare. LOL.

Last edited by sadgirl80; 08-07-2014 at 01:47 AM..
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 08-07-2014, 12:54 PM
 
10,847 posts, read 11,265,341 times
Reputation: 7586
Quote:
Originally Posted by sadgirl80 View Post

The reason the US is an economic powerhouse is because we have both a large population and a high GDP per capita. We aren't one of the shrimpy new-arrival states that are now pretending to be all-that. These two factors combine to form the largest economy in the world. That is why immigrants flock to the US to achieve the American Dream. The ones that can't get into the US are filtered to Canada, where they have 1/10 the market size to take their risks and give it all they have, and 1/10 the number of cities to choose from.

We can't beat China in size. So we have to employ other devices. We have a number of advantages of them. The chief of all is human capital from the rest of the world. They have four times the human capital and four times the top brains, taking into account the top brains everywhere is the top 1 percentile, IF we continue our destructive immigration policies and turn off intelligent and high-skilled immigrants. Attracting the best from the rest of the world and drawing the top 1 percent of the rest of the world. We need to kick the tea baggers out, need immigration reform, and need to draw even more top brains and pass off their achievements as our own (what we have been doing but at a subdued rate due to broken immigrant policy).
it seems everyone is aware of US's immigration policy mess. Canada is deliberating taking advantage of it by encouraging those who have trouble staying in the US to go north.

U.S. bickering on immigration reform benefits Canada, Jason Kenney says | Toronto Star

Once a graduate student in the US, it boggles my mind why the country is determined to make it difficult for highly educated talents to stay and contribute to the US economy. Let's compare

In the US, after getting your MS/phD, you have a few month to find a job, otherwise you get the hell out of the country. Note finding a job for these students is 20X more difficult than for an American. Only about 20% employers sponsor their work visa (usually the first question is do you have a green card, and most conversation needs here if the answer is no). And you can't work for any employer - it has to be related to your degree. ; in Canada, upon receiving such a degree, you are automatically given a three-year work visa, which allows you to work for any employers. if you have a phd in finance and wants to work in retail, no problem.

In the US, your employer is your life/your Jesus because your H1B depends on the company you work for. If you get fired, you are immediately "out of status" and need to find another employer who is willing to sponsor you right away, or you have to sign on with some random community college and switch to student visa to buy some time in order to find a job. In Canada, since the work visa is independently yours, you can change jobs any time you want.

In the US, most MS/PhD graduate need to wait a long time to obtain their greencard (as long as 7-10 years for Chinese and Indian citizens, which is like majority of those new graduates), during which time you can't lose your job and even change company, otherwise you start all over again. In Canada, two years into your phD program in science/tech, you are qualified to apply for the PR. Or you can work for a year and apply under Canadian experience category, which gets processed fast (1 year, or as fast as 6-8 months).

The US seems to be doing everything they can to kick high talents out of the country, I guess to make rednecks happy, or to please those who imagine those MS/PhDs have stolen their job, as if they are capable of doing the same job. Go to the headquarters of Apple, or Google, or Amazon, and see what percentage of those hard working engineers are Chinese/Indians, and America acts as if the country is better off without them. Instead, it makes it easier for illegals from Latin America to come and stay.

Can you believe it takes less time for an illegal or refugee (many are not real ones) immigrant to get PR than a typical Chinese/Indian student who finished his phD in computer science from Berkeley? I am sure the large number of Hispanic voters are happy - and I guess America's competitiveness lies more in gardening and babysitting than electrical engineering.

The situation got so much worse that nowadays those students need to win a lottery in order to secure a work visa. This is probably why more and more Chinese are returning upon graduating, plus the wage in China has been rising rapidly (it is not rare to have a starting salary of $50-80K in big Chinese cities for these new graduates nowadays, plus the benefit of being closer to families).

But who cares about (long term) competitiveness. All that matters is more votes in the next election.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 08-07-2014, 01:27 PM
 
10,847 posts, read 11,265,341 times
Reputation: 7586
Quote:
Originally Posted by OyCrumbler View Post
I can see there being recessions, but it's incredibly unlikely for China to be singularly in a collapse--it would, at this point, mean a worldwide slump rather than a singular economy going down. China is at this point either the number one or number two import and export partner of the Philippines and a collapsed Chinese economy would mean a double digit recession for the Philippines and many other countries in the world. It'd also mean a collapse of many industries and something seriously going haywire for everyone given China's export.

Here's the thing. China's economy is massive and the number of well-educated people and the number and sheer expanse of areas with fairly matured infrastructure means that a globalized economy puts China as a very important node. Hopefully China doesn't screw it up terribly (a brief recession might be okay as we've seen in the US where other countries, including China, were able to pick up the slack), because if you are asking for one of the primary nodes of the global economy to truly terrible levels, then those closest to ground zero and those who already have a pretty terrible HDI and GDP per capita such as the Philippines would be in absolute collapse as they would not be able to weather such a thing nearly as well.
It is stupid for Americans (or most westerners) even want China to collapse.

Honestly, why do you want the world's second large economy to collapse? Feel threatened? Afraid US/west can't dominate the world anymore? It is pathetic and it is too late. If China does collapse, the chain reaction to the world will be 100 times more than the collapse of Lehman Brothers and the effect will be unthinkable. People don't realize how important and how closely linked the Chinese economy is to the world, including developed countries.

What will happen to Australia? Its resource based economy will be in free fall. What about the big American companies who get all the growth in China - GM, GE, Caterpillar, Walmart, Apple etc.? Losing the Chinese market equal losing all the growth - and therefore the employment and profit associated with it. Do you expect the French or Greeks to buy more GM cars? Or Canadians to consume all the Iphones? Or India to buy all the Boeings?

Most economists and even politicians are not that stupid. They know China how massive and important China is. The UK used to criticize China a lot on the Tibet issue and insisted meeting with Dalai Lama (what a fu88ing stupid move!), then China chose to push it aside when it comes to big purchase orders and a couple of years later, Cameron quickly learned to shut his mouth and be friendly with Beijing (I doubt any British or French leader will ever dare meet Dalai ever again) because he can't afford vexing the big bosses.

This is why size matters, and per capita GDP is not. China's sheer size makes it too important a partner for any sensible country to lose. You want to decouple from China, good luck, start tomorrow to not use Chinese products, and see how many days you can last.

China does have a lot of internal problems, but nowhere near collapsing economically. There are still about 500M farmers (more than the entire US population) waiting to move to the urban areas. It vast central and western provinces still remain to be under-developed. Its labour force is increasingly educated and still young. Its economy is increasingly open, research and development on the rise. It still has the world's largest forex reserve and saving rate is high. Policy is easily implemented compared with the US.

China is not Japan in the 1980s. Rest assured. Only a fool today would want China to "collapse" due to some ideological BS reasons.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 08-08-2014, 08:45 AM
 
Location: Bothell, Washington
2,701 posts, read 4,671,793 times
Reputation: 3676
Quote:
Originally Posted by sadgirl80 View Post
China doesn't need to achieve the same GDP per capita with the US to kick the US economically to the side of the curb. It doesn't. This is a line regularly employed by nervous Americans, who have no idea the scale we are talking about.

China does not need to raise the living standards of some peasants in Hainan or Jilin province up to the standard of some Swiss farmer. The scale we are talking about is, China simply has to push its first tier mainland cities, currently Shanghai, Beijing, Shenzhen, Tianjin up to the GDP per capita of Hong Kong (currently higher than most of the western world), and it's done.

I'll give you the best analogy that could possibly be had.

When America was puffing up like a balloon to its full potential in the late 1890s to early 1920s, and then again in the 1950s, the world, and most of all, Britain watched in part awe and part confusion. The pre-eminent world leader at the time, Britain had no idea about the scale at hand back then, but no doubt the smartest Brits knew and foresaw.

Today, Britain's population is 1/5 of America's like how America's population is 1/5 of China. The Brits (and the rest of the world) only understood what it looked like, after it happened. China has four times the population and potential market size of America. This is the scale we're dealing with. The Brits were saying the same thing back then. And America did take over the Brits and surpassed Britain in all areas.

If you wanna wax lyrical about per capita income, the same can be sad about the US. What is the "standard of living" of states like MS, WV and AL.

Among the super rich, China has more millionaires and billionaires than any country in the world besides the US. China Now Has More Millionaires Than Any Country but the U.S. - China Real Time Report - WSJ So rest assured, its middle class is growing. In sheer numbers, China probably has a lot more people who have surpassed the per cap income of everybody in MS and WV. Even if China doesn't do anything about the poorest 50% of people, its farmers in Heilongjiang and Hainan and wherever, it can easily have as many people as there are people in America (just 20% of its population), who make the median income of all Americans, and then another 10% (10% of 1.4 billion is a whooping 140 million) who are upper class income ($100k a year) and 1% of super rich. China has a low GDP per capita because of its massive population (and it will remain low for a long time), so massive it's four times the size of America. Not achieving the same GDP per capita means squat.

Even my Dutch friends know this, and some have moved to China.

The massiveness of China is something has to be experienced first hand to be understood. Reading about it on paper gives you a theoretical image, that you can "sort of" grasp to paint an unclear misty picture, if you are very smart. The diversity of the society is so large due to the massive population and large land mass, that actually very few black and white blank statements (generalizations) ever apply to China accurately as a result. That's why I chortle whenever I read the very many blanket statements made about China on Facebook by trolls. Eg "They are poor" "They eat dogs" or "They must live 200 in a house" or "Wow his whole family must have pooled money together to send him here to study".

It's not just about money. China is so large that any blanket statement made about an entity as labeled "China" is stupid.

I know rich kids, both female and male in China, whose parents' net worth, is sufficient to buy and sell these people a few times over.

The number of people in China whose parents are upper-middle class and earn more than enough to send their children to the US for higher education, is a higher number than everybody than resides in the states of the people who commented.

Anyway I know somebody whose business partner in Singapore set up a day care center that combines a bi-lingual curriculum for middle class toddlers in a city in Zhejiang province - a second tier but affluent province where founder of Alibaba.com Jack Ma is based (In 2012, two of Alibaba’s portals together handled 1.1 trillion yuan ($170 billion) in sales, more than competitors eBay and Amazon.com combined). The center is fully booked and it costs each parent $1,800 a month to have one kid there.
I'm not concerned in a negative way about what their economy becomes overall- the sheer numbers they have are of course staggering, so it will be no surprise that they will eclipse the US, even if it means only a small fraction of their overall population actually gets into the modern/middle class.

I was looking at the angle of it being a more attractive/equally developed place to live for people than places like the US (or Canada, or Australia, etc.) The simple fact is that even in the more developed cities there such as Beijing, Shanghai, Guangzhou, etc, they still look obviously far, far from being fully developed. Even the middle or upper middle class people in those places live in conditions we here in the US would think are unacceptable. I know, I have been there many times as my wife is from there and all of her family lives back there in Guangzhou. Even the ones there that make more money in true dollar comparisons than me (such as my wife's friend back there who manages a luxury car dealership) think we are lucky for the living standard we have here, with the nicer home with more amenities we consider standard that are unheard of there. Many of my wife's friends and their family members are pretty well to do or even rich over there, and many have moved (not just bought investment properties, but actually moved) to the US or Canada because it is just by far a better living experience here. The rich are moving out of China in alarming numbers- so they are not hedging their bets on things even if just in the big cities getting to the same standard of living as the US any time soon, they are bailing to bring their kids and families to these other places for a better life.

So I am in no way hoping for China to collapse- as has been mentioned, that would be bad news for all of us, and I don't even wish that upon the Chinese people (obviously). I am just speaking out against those who see this as meaning China is turning into the place to be, replacing places like the US or other western countries for where everyone is going to move- as if becoming the biggest economy is somehow going to turn it into a desirable place with the highest living standard that everyone is going to flock to. Due to China's size we have two separate sides to this- yes they'll be the biggest economy, will have a seat at the head of the table on a global scale, but at the same time it will still not be a great place for people to actually go to live, and the average person there will still not have as good of a living standard as the average person does in the fully developed countries.

Last edited by jm31828; 08-08-2014 at 08:55 AM..
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
Please register to post and access all features of our very popular forum. It is free and quick. Over $68,000 in prizes has already been given out to active posters on our forum. Additional giveaways are planned.

Detailed information about all U.S. cities, counties, and zip codes on our site: City-data.com.


Reply
Please update this thread with any new information or opinions. This open thread is still read by thousands of people, so we encourage all additional points of view.

Quick Reply
Message:

Over $104,000 in prizes was already given out to active posters on our forum and additional giveaways are planned!

Go Back   City-Data Forum > World Forums > Asia
Follow City-Data.com founder on our Forum or

All times are GMT -6.

2005-2019, Advameg, Inc. · Please obey Forum Rules · Terms of Use and Privacy Policy · Bug Bounty

City-Data.com - Archive 1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6, 7, 8, 9, 10, 11, 12, 13, 14, 15, 16, 17, 18, 19, 20, 21, 22, 23, 24, 25, 26, 27, 28, 29, 30, 31, 32, 33, 34, 35 - Top