Jump to content
Sign in to follow this  
nathan_debate

Will America keep up with China and India in terms of competitiveness???

Recommended Posts

I watched a summary of a new-ish documentary called 4 Million Minutes which compares the big three powers (US, China, and India...or at least the 3 that are likely to big the largest powers)

 

I realize we have an edge in entrepreneurship education and culture...which they are slowly getting.

 

And likely a democratic president + congress means that our borders policy will liberalize over the next couple years--allowing more immigrants with PhDs to stay here thus slowing down this trend.

 

What are competencies where we have an edge? Where india or China have an edge? Who will win in 5, 10, 15, 25, 50 years???

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

The problem with those types of projections is that they tend to just extrapolate off of current economic growth rates and tendencies. While an okay indicator for the future there is a great deal of potential inaccuracy because it is based upon the assumption that this sort of growth is sustainable. China has a large number of problems with poverty, education, illiberalness, an aging population etc that may cripple its ability to maintain a high rate of growth

 

Check this paper out: http://www.hoover.org/publications/policyreview/3439671.html Its about the demographics among powers in Asia. Demographics are important for looking at longer term economic potential because the size and age of the work force are essential to determining economic output. The US does pretty well when placed next to China and Russia.

 

Also this paper is pretty good. It gives an interesting look at the prospects for growth between liberal India and illiberal China and proposes that democracy might be the key to sustained growth: http://www.foreignpolicy.com/story/cms.php?story_id=4345

 

This last article is also interesting. Rather than make projections about growth rates it attempts to analyze the way in which the economy is evolving and then looks at which power will be best suited to take advantage of the economic conditions that maximize growth: http://www.foreignaffairs.com/articles/63722/anne-marie-slaughter/americas-edge

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
The problem with those types of projections is that they tend to just extrapolate off of current economic growth rates and tendencies. While an okay indicator for the future there is a great deal of potential inaccuracy because it is based upon the assumption that this sort of growth is sustainable. China has a large number of problems with poverty, education, illiberalness, an aging population etc that may cripple its ability to maintain a high rate of growth

 

Check this paper out: http://www.hoover.org/publications/policyreview/3439671.html Its about the demographics among powers in Asia. Demographics are important for looking at longer term economic potential because the size and age of the work force are essential to determining economic output. The US does pretty well when placed next to China and Russia.

 

Also this paper is pretty good. It gives an interesting look at the prospects for growth between liberal India and illiberal China and proposes that democracy might be the key to sustained growth: http://www.foreignpolicy.com/story/cms.php?story_id=4345

 

This last article is also interesting. Rather than make projections about growth rates it attempts to analyze the way in which the economy is evolving and then looks at which power will be best suited to take advantage of the economic conditions that maximize growth: http://www.foreignaffairs.com/articles/63722/anne-marie-slaughter/americas-edge

 

Yo could you post that slaughter article? I've read excerpts of it but i don't have a Foreign Affairs subscription

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Wow. I'm sure local provencialism with not a ton of accountability + ad-hoc government rule + bureaucracy doesn't help either.

 

>>>The economic consequences of these reversals were substantial. The 1990s saw depressed growth in household incomes relative to GDP, which means that the average Chinese person was losing ground. The employee share of GDP —the income going to the general population—peaked in 1990, at 53.5 percent. By 2002, it had declined to 45 percent of GDP. At 45 percent, the Chinese economy in 2002 was benefiting its people less than it was in 1978, when its employee share of GDP stood at 48 percent. Similarly threatening for the poorest Chinese is a development that has garnered almost no attention: The country is backsliding on literacy. On April 2, 2007, the state-run China Daily published an article with an unusually frank title, “The ghost of illiteracy returns to haunt the country.” It reported that the number of illiterate Chinese adults increased by 30 million between 2000 and 2005. In 2005, there were 115.7 million illiterate Chinese adults, compared with 85 million in 2000. The roots of the problem began in the 1990s. Consider how literacy is defined—the ability to identify 1,500 Chinese characters by the age of 7 to 9. An adult reaching into the illiterate group by 2005 received all his or her primary education in the mid-1990s. In addition, immunization rates against DPT and measles—rising throughout the 1980s—began to decline in the 1990s. In time, China will pay dearly for these colossal failures.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

People love to point at the social, political, and demographic challenges facing India and China and discount their future rise to global supremacy. But something these pundits are forgetting is that in looking at sheer percentages (i.e. percent in poverty, percent illiterate, etc) they are missing the tangible numbers. You have countries like India graduating more engineers in one year than America has total. Many of whom are overqualified for the jobs they are holding in service industry jobs like Dell help desk call centers. But as capital infusion flows from East to West, and as the West continues to exploit the labor pool (in effect training their workforce in the ways of American productivity), and as the entrepreneurial growth creates a middle class, you will have both India and China sitting in a position America enjoyed in the 50's - a strong manufacturing base with low wages due to a massive labor pool, a healthy middle class driving domestic expenditures and growth, and a large GDP affecting global politcs.

 

The global econopolitical rise of China and India is inevitable. The question isnt if, its when.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Thanks Brad. That article was pretty sick. It even answered the # of engineers argument.

 

I though reading "competiveness not zero sum" and extending with this....

 

No risk of your scenario and Asian rise good--helps US influence.

>>

All told, Asia's rise should present more opportunities than threats. The region's growth not only has lifted hundreds of millions out of poverty, but also will increase demand for Western products. Its internal fissures will allow the United States to check the geopolitical influence of potential rivals such as China and Russia with manageable costs and risks. And hopefully, Asia's rise will provide the competitive pressures urgently needed for Westerners to get their own houses in order—without succumbing to hype or hysteria.

 

Although it might make more sense as an analytic argument--because the ev. isn't stellar.

Edited by nathan_debate

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Join the conversation

You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.

Guest
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Paste as plain text instead

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.

Loading...
Sign in to follow this  

×
×
  • Create New...