Comments by "Peter Jacobsen" (@pjacobsen1000) on "China Update"
channel.
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
@drdiabeetus4419 "they could be taking the real numbers and inflating them to the same degree as the population". Yes, that is true, but there are some numbers that are verifiable, among them trade figures. Those figures come to light on both sides of the trade equation. Both the buying country and the selling country keeps track of this. So we can be pretty sure that China's trade figures are relatively accurate.
So if GDP is only half of what the Chinese say, but trade figures are what we see, that would mean that China's annual GDP growth is twice what we're being told, ie. 10% rather than 5%. China had a trade surplus of $1 trillion (verifiable numbers) in 2024, so if their GDP is only $9.5 trillion, it would mean growth is 10.5%.
Many other figures are verifiable: Agricultural imports, oil and gas imports, etc. If China's population is so low, they would be consuming twice the amount of calories/capita we are being told, and burn twice the amount of fuel/capita we're being told, both of which would indicate a very wealthy economy.
You simply cannot make up your own numbers without it skewing the picture somewhere else. You MUST be able to make all the numbers fit into a bigger equation.
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
@DuxSupremus "So China is already cultivating more land than the US is. "
I think you may be misreading the numbers:
USA
Total area (metric, I'm European): 9.8 million sqkm. of which 16.8% is arable. Of the arable land 44.5% is farmland, which gives
Arable: 1.64 million sqkm
Farmed: 0.73 million sqkm
China
9.6 million sqkm. of which 11.3% is arable. Of the arable land 54.7% is farmland
Arable: 1.08 million sqkm
Farmed: 0.59 million sqkm
So the total farmed area in China is 80% the size of that in the US.
In any case, the population of China has always been very large, because even in ancient times, they were able to feed a very large population. This is due to the very fertile soil and good climate conditions in China. The US obviously also has excellent soil, but not quite as good climate. Yet, the US could easily feed a population twice or three times its current size.
As for China, 1.4 billion is probably surpassing the point at which the land is not longer able to feed its population, so there's no doubt they have problems.
Communists have always had an obsession with self-sufficiency. They were very focused on that in USSR, and today in N. Korea, China, Cuba, etc. There's a certain level of paranoia inherent in communism, especially in relation to food, as if they are constantly worried that other countries will not want to trade with them.
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
Re. The AI wave: It is possible that one or two AI giants will eventually emerge, but it is equally possible that it will all fizzle out like so often before: Many years ago, when media in the US started talking about nano-tech and nano materials, the word 'nano' suddenly started popping up everywhere in China. Supermarket shelves would be stocked with nano-toothpaste, nano-shampoo and nano-socks, and more companies would start subsidiaries with the word nano in their name. That eventually all came to nothing. Later, when Bill Gates mentioned the 'Internet of Things', everything became about IoT for a number of years, and now we no longer hear much about that, either.
In the end, the success of Chinese AI ChatGPT, at least as a consumer application, will depend on whether they can monetize it, and whether they can make it popular. Time will tell, but I am a little skeptical.
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1