> For starters, the US is a free economy and the China is a centrally planned one.
USSR was a centrally planned economy, China is not. Do you mean subsidies (like the IRA and CHIPS Act in the US) for certain industries, which act as guidance to local governments and state banks? Is that what you call "centrally planned"?
> can China deliver on long term expectations for its economy? Do the trends support the argument that it will become a leading developed economy? I don't think they do. If they don't, then is it an issue with the current economy plan that can be solved with a better plan or is it a systemic issue that can't be solved in the near to medium term?
That's your opinion that they can't, and it's your right to have one. There were people 10 years ago saying exactly what you’re saying now. Time showed they were wrong.
> China is growing slower than historically and slower than forecasts which were it at 5%. Look at this chart and tell me if it points a rosy picture or a problematic one:
Oh come on, 4.8% vs. 5%? As for the chart, it's the most incredible growth in the history of mankind. No country has achieved something like this. It's fully natural for it to decline in percentage terms, especially when another major power is implementing legislation to curb that growth, forcing capital outflows, imposing technology embargoes, etc.
> China is in dire straits and I don't expect it to recover before the crisis gets worse.
Time will tell. What I can say is that over the last 20 centuries, in 18 of them, China was the cultural and technological center of the world. So from China’s perspective, what they are doing now is just returning to their natural state. In comparison, the US is only 2 centuries old. Every human organization, whether a company or state, will sooner or later be surpassed by another human creation, there are no exceptions to this rule in all of human history. We have had many empires throughout our history. The Roman Empire was even greater at its peak than the US is now, and there were also the British Empire, the Spanish Empire, etc. Where are they now? Everything is cyclical. All of these empires lasted a few centuries and started to decline after around 200-250 years, much like the US now.
> I'm arguing there's no rivalry.
Come on, there is obvious rivalry. Just listen to US political elites and look at their actions—legislation. It's all about geopolitics and global influence to secure their own interests.
USSR was a centrally planned economy, China is not. Do you mean subsidies (like the IRA and CHIPS Act in the US) for certain industries, which act as guidance to local governments and state banks? Is that what you call "centrally planned"?
> can China deliver on long term expectations for its economy? Do the trends support the argument that it will become a leading developed economy? I don't think they do. If they don't, then is it an issue with the current economy plan that can be solved with a better plan or is it a systemic issue that can't be solved in the near to medium term?
That's your opinion that they can't, and it's your right to have one. There were people 10 years ago saying exactly what you’re saying now. Time showed they were wrong.
Here is a famous article: https://hbr.org/2014/03/why-china-cant-innovate
And here we are 10 years later:
https://itif.org/publications/2024/09/16/china-is-rapidly-be...
https://www.economist.com/science-and-technology/2024/06/12/...
> China is growing slower than historically and slower than forecasts which were it at 5%. Look at this chart and tell me if it points a rosy picture or a problematic one:
Oh come on, 4.8% vs. 5%? As for the chart, it's the most incredible growth in the history of mankind. No country has achieved something like this. It's fully natural for it to decline in percentage terms, especially when another major power is implementing legislation to curb that growth, forcing capital outflows, imposing technology embargoes, etc.
> China is in dire straits and I don't expect it to recover before the crisis gets worse.
Time will tell. What I can say is that over the last 20 centuries, in 18 of them, China was the cultural and technological center of the world. So from China’s perspective, what they are doing now is just returning to their natural state. In comparison, the US is only 2 centuries old. Every human organization, whether a company or state, will sooner or later be surpassed by another human creation, there are no exceptions to this rule in all of human history. We have had many empires throughout our history. The Roman Empire was even greater at its peak than the US is now, and there were also the British Empire, the Spanish Empire, etc. Where are they now? Everything is cyclical. All of these empires lasted a few centuries and started to decline after around 200-250 years, much like the US now.
> I'm arguing there's no rivalry.
Come on, there is obvious rivalry. Just listen to US political elites and look at their actions—legislation. It's all about geopolitics and global influence to secure their own interests.