[rsync]

"The question is whether the power and influence of the U.S. will grow similarly over the next 150 years as it has over the last 150."

No, I think the question is more subtle ...

Will the relative power and influence of the US grow similarly.

... and I think that may be a very good bet.

The three closest "competitors" - the Eurozone, China and Japan - are, in their own unique ways, dysfunctional basket cases:

Europe's northern savers and taxpayers have to pay for southern workers to retire at 60 ... and southern workers need to eat benefit losses to avoid further (br)exits. This is a not-insignificant economic and cultural mismatch and the results of even minor adjustments are riots in the streets[1] ... or boring, orderly referenda[2].

It is unknown whether the CCP can survive any meaningful slowdown in growth and whether much of the growth of the last 10-15 years (enormous empty cities) was substantive or useful at all.

Japan is undergoing civilizational and cultural collapse.

So ... while there is much dysfunction - both economically and politically - in the United States, it is an enormous, resource rich country that can exist wholly independently from the rest of the world.

It also enjoys absolute control of the worlds oceans and brutally dictates economic and geo politics[3].

In a world of troubled and fraught investments, the US is probably the least troubled and fraught.

[1] https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Yellow_vests_protests

[2] https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Dutch_withdrawal_from_the_Euro...

[3] https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/2022_Nord_Stream_pipeline_sabo...

[bwanab]

For a civilizational basket case, Japan's GDP/capita has held up pretty well. Their industrial output is very strong for a country with sparse internal resources.

Europe's problems are not unlike the U.S. internal problems where the tech and financial centers mainly on the coasts subsidize the rest of the country. The difference of course is that the states of the EU can exit, where the American states cannot. I'm not sure which situation is preferable.

China is a black box, but so far recent history has indicated the populace will go along with a lot of pain to avoid chaos.

[scythe]

Japan's real limitation here is primarily that they're relatively small (1/3 the size of US/EU), and their most "aligned" neighbors (Korea, Taiwan, Phillippines) don't like them very much. It's not like you could reasonably fit many more people on the islands as it is.

US wealth distribution is much flatter than European. The GDP/capita ratio between Mississippi and Connecticut is less than 1:2, while for Germany to Hungary it's more like 1:4.

China is... China. You can't call yourself the Communist Party and run the global financial system. The world can only tolerate so much contradiction.

The open question now is whether the dollar can be dethroned by nothing: can a basket of currencies become the default reserve?

[bwanab]

<The world can only tolerate so much contradiction.>

My guess is the world can tolerate it as long as everybody is making money off it. When that stops, the contradiction might seem intolerable.

The world needs a default reserve that's not tied to any single central bank. For all the upsides there are also real downsides for the US having its currency as the default reserve.

[neffo]

It does exist. See SDR/XDRs:

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Special_drawing_rights

[another_story]

Taiwan and Japan are pretty close, actually. You'll find few people in Taiwan that dislike Japan. The rest, yah.

[milton0825]

Yeah this is true

[patrick451]

> Europe's problems are not unlike the U.S. internal problems where the tech and financial centers mainly on the coasts subsidize the rest of the country.

Perhaps, but you could as easily make the argument that the interior subsidizes the stomachs of the coasts. That seems more like a symbiotic relationship than the parasitic one you seem to be implying.

[dirtyid]

>may be a very good bet

Trend last few years is PRC closing gap and approaching parity in indicators like GDP (already exceeded by PPP), % of global gdp / trade, science and innovation indexes, value chain upgrades etc. Even PRC military development and diplomacy is sufficient to get countries hedge / not commit to US alignment, which was unthinkable 10+ years ago. IMO US will find it difficult to maintain relative "lead" when, in the words of state department, "China is the only country with the economic, diplomatic, military, and technological power to seriously challenge" US order. That said, I think US has headroom via dictating economic and geopolitics within her relatively wealthy bloc and grow at the expense of others.

>It is unknown whether the CCP can survive any meaningful slowdown in growth and whether much of the growth of the last 10-15 years (enormous empty cities) was substantive or useful at all.

Western fixation with PRC real estate waste as proxy indicator of China (econ) collapse is particularly stupid. It's like suggesting US who spends ~20% of GDP on healthcare (approximately PRC real estate) with suboptimal result is spinning development wheels. Same with PRC wasting a few trillion in suboptimal real estate when significant (majority) resources being invested to bring up other (above) indictators that has substantively contributed more to PRC "comprehensive national power". Like US isn't initiating unprecented PRC containment policies because of a bunch of empty of housing units.

[DiogenesKynikos]

> whether much of the growth of the last 10-15 years (enormous empty cities) was substantive or useful at all.

I don't think anyone who has seen the development in China over the last 10-15 years first-hand would say this.

There has been massive development in nearly every area, both in quantity and quality. Just to give one example, anyone who follows the scientific literature in just about any field will be aware of the massive increase in high-quality publications coming out of China over the last decade.

There are one or two examples of "ghost cities" (though most supposed "ghost cities" actually become populated over time), but that doesn't negate the massive, real development that is visible everywhere in China.

[dmarucco]

Are you sure that southern workers retires at 60? I don't think so ...

[sgu999]

If they are sure, they are wrong. Spain and Sweden retire at the same age. Italy, Greece, Denmark and Norway as well. [1]

Yes, France retires at 62 but that'll change very soon...

Writing that the "north pays for the south" by looking at the GDP per capita instead of the GDP is... naive. [2]

[1] https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Retirement_in_Europe [2] https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_sovereign_states_in_Eu...

[was_a_dev]

The French rioting is just another Tuesday.

[malandrew]

China is also expected to see population collapse. They are rapidly aging and there’s no sign that that is reversing.

[dirtyid]

IMO population "collapse" or demographic "decline" not right lens for unevenly developed country with massive population and high import dependency especially in context of "relative power". TBH it's surface level PRC collapists narrative.

What will happen (by design or not) is PRC demographics is being "strategically optimized" with the greatest demographic uplift/upgrade in recorded history. Roughly replacing 2 low skilled, under-educated workers with 1 skilled worker with additional automation. Every ~10 years for the next few decades, PRC will be upgrading / swapping the human capita potential of 1 Nigeria for 1 Japan, it's less people, but much more productive people. With PRC pop base effect this is still multiple more educated labour pool per year than US or other blocs can generate with immigration, and 100s of million more in net talent. Less people also alleviates import dependency, PRC with 1B (400M less) people would have substantially more strategic space to operate. It works towards close relative power potential. CCP wants to smooth out the pyramid with more births for better managed transition, which structurally/culturally PRC with some of the highest house hold savings rate and minimal expectation for safety net is positioned to weather, but long term PRC comprehensive national power is best improved by having less net people, with more % skilled people.

[cman1444]

I think this is a pretty optimistic take. I know there's a constant barrage of articles these days about the demise of China, but it's pretty hard to make the case that such a drastic decline in population is a good thing for their economy or geopolitical power.

Yes the Chinese population is becoming more skilled, but I think you're underestimating how much of a drag on the economy and aging population is. Old people don't innovate and require much more healthcare spending. They also cause heavy burdens on their children/grandchildren who must take care of them (see the 4-2-1 family structure).

There's also a lot less juice to squeeze out of urbanizing the population which is what drove a lot of GDP growth in the past few decades. About 65 percent of the population is urban now and the rate is starting to level off.

[dirtyid]

Or just not that pessimistic.

> pretty hard to make the case

It's easy when drastic decline in population leaves behind a still massive country, with more productive potential and less security vunerabilities - PRC's future strategic posture will improve with respect to US relative to where PRC is now. PRC pop projection is 1.4B to 800M by 2100 in geography can barely sustain current 1.4B (1/3 of country is desert, 1/3 is plateau), with central gov working over drive to free agricultural resources in crowded 1/3 that's left. 800M is still an incredible amount of people for internal market and global competition. If higher % of population becomes educated/skilled over generations that in aggregate PRC will have more skilled labour pool with 800M than current 1.4B, then IMO she would be significantly better positioned geopolitically. It's still 200M more brains / bodies than US pop projection in 2100. 800M with current electrification efforts is PRC with feasible energy and calorie security, and combined with hammering automation at current rate, much more productive capacity.

>underestimating, urbanization

First important to recognize PRC currently has 600M+ of excess, relatively unproductive mouths that's taking up already scarce resources. Cohort skews old, are undereducated, unskilled - the ones left behind by modernization. The PRC demographic decline narrative vastly overestimates how much innovation / productivity this cohort of aging out demographics were / are capable of. ~600M in informal economy making subsistent tier ~2000 USD per year, bluntly they're excess people that doesn't substantively contribute to development let alone drag on economy by being even less productive when they retire, assuming they can. 100s of millions are already economic drag by merely living - part of reason why SOEs are so inefficient, or Chinese agriculture so labour intensive (200M+ farmers) when PRC only really needs 1/50th that amount with mechanized equipment, is to maintain 100Ms of make work jobs for folks that simply can't be integrated into modern economy. They're being replaced by new gens who can. Since 2000s education reforms, PRC has been generating 10-20 years worth of pre 2000 talent per year. They're the one's doing the high tier innovating and growth. Really look at SKR, JP, TW, all have grown developed to advanced economies while having terminal tier TFR simply by new generations being disproportionatedly educated / skilled. Even the economic case for integrating / urbanizing these unproductive corhorts are poor, urbanization drives growth when you're clustering productive people. Real reason to herd them into cities is short / medium term, state needs to consolidate land to improve food security, because again, too many mouths.

> healthcare, dependency ratios,

PRC has one of the highest home ownership / house hold savings rates, elders from poverty era culturally know they need to largely support themselves and there's little expectation for comprehensive safety net. Western analysis seems to project expectation that PRC would be crushed by welfare burdens like currently in west with typically onerous welfare systems with increasingly poor long term prospects, the reality is, most Chinese will simply make do with very little state support. Like most of humanity throughout history. PRC will have to accept life expectancy in high 70s (about US level) vs pouring in resources to reach low / mid 80s. Old also knows how to "eat bitter". That said there's plenty of room to up current 6% of GDP healthcare spending.

Sizable % of single kids will get dragged into support family, but this is where income disparity mitigates issue because burdens between rich (educated/skilled) and poor will be different. Folks doing strategic / important work that advances country up value chain and make decent money likely got their because they're priveleged and likely receiving end of support, or they weren't which means their high income will stretch far assisting family back in tier 3/4+ cities. These folks aren't going to be quitting fancy jobs to caretake. They'll pay for help or if it's anything like hollowed out country side where youth left, old people take care of each other. PRC still has lot of communal cultural elements that makes these kind of grass root social systems possible (also see how people organized for zero covid). Burden is going to be disproportionately shifted on that massive underclass, who again bluntly, don't substantively contribute to development / or the components that will increase national power. Really not too different from west. 1% does very well, top few quartiles do well, rest struggles. There's also considerations like when the 4-2 dies, multiple inheritences will go to the 1, and there's prediction of consumption and baby boom when resources eventually concentrate, which will be in the already affluent, talented and productive cohorts. Big reason PRC is having problem pivoting into consumption economy is savings redirected for nest eggs.

[acchow]

> Japan is undergoing civilizational and cultural collapse.

Certainly doesn't seem this way when you visit Japan. Sure, they haven't experienced wildly growing excessive consumption like some American states in the past couple decades, but their society is far from undergoing any sort of collapse.

[pedrosorio]

> Europe's northern savers and taxpayers have to pay for southern workers to retire at 60

Using the yellow vests as representative of "southern workers" makes me doubt how well you've researched this answer. Paris is hardly in "southern Europe", and the rest of the southern European countries have retirement ages comparable to those of the "northern savers".

[vl]

([3] link)

Are you implying that US sabotaged Nord Stream?

[rsync]

Yes. Or that it was sabotaged with our blessing.

It was a Keyser Soze move that basically destroyed Russias bargaining position.

At the same time, it was an enormous fuck you to EU citizens and, in particular, Germany: "Oh yes you will buy our gas ..."

It appears to be panning out in a non-destructive way for the EU citizenry as they muddle through this winter but it was not obvious that would be the case and this (relatively) benign outcome could not have been predicted.

If I were an EU citizen (particularly a German) I would be upset. Even as an American I am disturbed ...

EDIT: You know that thing ... that crazy thing that Dick Cheney said in that interview[1] ? About how there is no reality and reality is whatever we say it is:

"We're an empire now, and when we act, we create our own reality."

... every day that goes by I become more and more convinced that he could be right. NS2 sabotage makes it hard to argue with him.

[1] https://www.theatlantic.com/daily-dish/archive/2009/04/were-...

[lostlogin]

> "We're an empire now, and when we act, we create our own reality."

There is an argument going on in the thread about empires size and distance from the capital.

The person who makes out the US is an empire which controls a bulk of the globe is getting down voted - I think you are needed there.

https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=34275668

[speakfreely]

Another one of those interesting discussions that the news seems to have forgotten. It seems Ukraine had the most to gain, but from my limited understanding it's not so easy to robotically place explosives at the bottom of the sea in a precise, destructive manner unless you have a really well-funded naval force.

It kind of reminds me of the polonium poisoning that has become a Russian signature move. Despite not taking credit, the number of actors who have the capability to do it is so limited that it's basically outing them regardless.

[DontchaKnowit]

No one seems to want to bring up the press conference where Biden said that if Russia invaded Ukraine there would no longer be a nord stream pipeline. When asked to clarify he said something like " oh youll see"

Everyone just forgot that happened. Strange.

[calgarymicro]

Nobody "forgot". Germany shut it down in February[1], like he said they would. The White House celebrated those words coming true literally the day after.[2]

[1]https://www.nytimes.com/2022/02/22/business/nord-stream-pipe...

[2]https://www.whitehouse.gov/briefing-room/statements-releases...