I think they’re comparing the 2nd derivative of GDP; the growth rate is the 1st derivative.
The claim is roughly:
The US is growing slowly, but doing so at a consistent pace. It will keep growing 2% indefinitely.
China is growing faster now, but the rate is slowing year over year. They will grow 5% this year, 4% next year,… The implication is that they’ll eventually settle domewhere below the US for (preferred boogeyman reason)
Of course the premise is low value speculation, but the math concepts can be parsed.
yeah they’re talking about the rate of the rate of growth… which maybe helps them with cognitive dissonance by still being able to find some negative thing about why China still seems to be doing just fine
This is IMF forecast data. Check how it looks like for the G7. Spoiler: it’s far worse than this forecast for China. How does the forecast of 1% US growth in 2024 fit into your “stable growth of the US”?
China is still growing far faster than the G7 so you missed the point entirely.
The US is growing slowly, but doing so at a consistent pace. It will keep growing 2% indefinitely.
I’m not claiming this. Nothing can.
China is growing faster now, but the rate is slowing year over year. They will grow 5% this year, 4% next year,… The implication is that they’ll eventually settle domewhere below the US for (preferred boogeyman reason)
Pretty much this, without the boogeyman reason. I’m not claiming a reason. I don’t even think it’ll be below US levels necessarily, but it won’t keep growing as fast as it was. The trend is pretty steady, for the US and China, though things of course change and it’s probably logarithmic I’d guess, not linear. It’ll steady out somewhere. (Edit: Well, it’ll steady out per capita probably, which is part of why GDP is so useless. It’s not measured per capita.)
There’s no need to make things up. Either China (and any other country) can stand on its own or it can’t. People shouldn’t be mislead. Now, I don’t think GDP is that useful, but I didn’t start the thread about GDP.
I think they’re comparing the 2nd derivative of GDP; the growth rate is the 1st derivative.
The claim is roughly:
The US is growing slowly, but doing so at a consistent pace. It will keep growing 2% indefinitely.
China is growing faster now, but the rate is slowing year over year. They will grow 5% this year, 4% next year,… The implication is that they’ll eventually settle domewhere below the US for (preferred boogeyman reason)
Of course the premise is low value speculation, but the math concepts can be parsed.
yeah they’re talking about the rate of the rate of growth… which maybe helps them with cognitive dissonance by still being able to find some negative thing about why China still seems to be doing just fine
I don’t need to find anything negative with China. I don’t have an issue with China. Look at this graph and tell me it’s going up.
https://www.statista.com/statistics/263616/gross-domestic-product-gdp-growth-rate-in-china/
This is IMF forecast data. Check how it looks like for the G7. Spoiler: it’s far worse than this forecast for China. How does the forecast of 1% US growth in 2024 fit into your “stable growth of the US”?
China is still growing far faster than the G7 so you missed the point entirely.
I’m not claiming this. Nothing can.
Pretty much this, without the boogeyman reason. I’m not claiming a reason. I don’t even think it’ll be below US levels necessarily, but it won’t keep growing as fast as it was. The trend is pretty steady, for the US and China, though things of course change and it’s probably logarithmic I’d guess, not linear. It’ll steady out somewhere. (Edit: Well, it’ll steady out per capita probably, which is part of why GDP is so useless. It’s not measured per capita.)
https://www.statista.com/statistics/263616/gross-domestic-product-gdp-growth-rate-in-china/
There’s no need to make things up. Either China (and any other country) can stand on its own or it can’t. People shouldn’t be mislead. Now, I don’t think GDP is that useful, but I didn’t start the thread about GDP.