[refurb]

One of the drivers of economic development is stability and predictability.

Singapore understands this.

Ownership rules are clear, and if under dispute, the courts are viewed as reasonable and fair. Business rules are predictable, you don't have to worry about making an investment based on assumptions that no longer hold next year.

China is the opposite as of the last few years. It's no surprise capital goes elsewhere.

[gary_0]

> It's no surprise capital goes elsewhere.

Is it, though? China isn't immune from bad economic policy, but its per capita GDP growth still remains globally impressive[0]. In spite of recent difficulties they're still on an amazing trajectory.

Sure, maybe their chickens are about to come home to roost and they're finally in for a reckoning. I feel like that's the wrong take, though. We've spent the last 30 years with a smirk on our face waiting for China to realize their mistake of eschewing democracy and liberal economics. Somehow they've become the second most powerful nation in the world instead.

They're playing an entirely different game, over there. We underestimate them at our own peril.

[0] https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_countries_by_real_GDP_...

[chairmansteve]

I saw a comment somewhere that China uses free markets for the benefit of the state, whereas the USA uses free markets for the benefit of private capital.

[signatoremo]

China mint the most numbers of millionaires and billionaires in the 21st century.

[pragmomm]

China also has 800 million people making less than $100/month. where do you think the millionaires and billionaires in China skimmed their wealth from?

[ricochet11]

source? or did you mean $1000/month?

[pragmomm]

https://www.cnbctv18.com/economy/china-has-over-600-million-...

the updated 2023 estimate is in mandarin

[dyauspitr]

Yep they’ve figured out a viable alternative to liberal economics. I’d say the only weakness is if whoever in charge isn’t a benevolent dictator. Democracy is more robust when it comes to this but the trade off is slower growth and much more inefficiencies.

[pragmomm]

viable alternative for maybe 20 million upper class people in China. 800 million others are making less than $100/month.

[DiogenesKynikos]

There are more than 20 million people in Shanghai alone, not to mention Beijing, Guangzhou, Shenzhen, Tianjin, and all the other rich cities in China.

The average income in China is around $1000/month, and I frankly don't trust your claim that more than half the population lives on just 10% of that.

[refurb]

> Somehow they've become the second most powerful nation in the world instead.

I think you are mistaking total GDP with "most powerful".

[gary_0]

Note that I said second most powerful. And yes, the size of a country's economy is one of the major factors when considering its geopolitical influence (though obviously not the only factor).

If you disagree, which country is #2 if not China?

[refurb]

If i look at military power id say Russia is #2 consider its international.

If you mean geopolitical influence, id say the major European countries are ahead of China.

[gary_0]

> If i look at military power id say Russia is #2

Russia, that just tried to take over a country with 1/14th of the economy and 1/4th of the population, failed, and is at this very moment having its own territory invaded in turn? Meanwhile, China has roughly double the military spending, 50% more active personnel, more weapons, and almost definitely more morale and discipline. And while China's military might be less tested, Russia's was just tested and it broke.

It was also really funny when their elite mercenary corps turned around and bum-rushed Moscow.

> If you mean geopolitical influence, id say the major European countries

China's Exim Bank finances more than the total export financing of the G7, combined[0]. China's foreign aid program rivals members of the G7 as well.

But it's not fair to compare the G7 or the whole European bloc against a single country. So let's say Germany. Sure, they're popular with the US and their continental brethren, but their influence on countries outside that sphere, particularly developing countries, does not match China's.

For instance, they don't have anything like China's $100-billion Belt and Road initiative. China has also invested all over the world in everything from infrastructure to mining projects, even in G7 countries. And in spite of the West's pullback, they're still the "world's factory", while Germany has had difficulty keeping its (recently declining) manufacturing industries competitive against China's[1]. Germany, like many countries in the world, also relies on China as its largest trading partner.

So given the data I've seen, I can't say any one European country, or even a handful, matches up to China. This would make sense given China's much larger population, staggering industrial capacity, aggressive worldwide investment strategies, and leadership among dozens of developing countries.

[0] https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Export%E2%80%93Import_Bank_of_...

[1] https://www.reuters.com/breakingviews/german-consumer-is-poo...