Hacker News Board Hacker News, browsed like a classic message board
Live data from Hacker News

The Changing World Order

principles.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

71–80 of 117 posts

Re: The Changing World Order

#71

Post by dforrestwilson »

eointierney wrote: post #68

The world order, in terms of socio-economic and politico-legal structures, is for sure changing, but it's more a matter of demographics and communication. We have shattered certain assumptions about the world economy to ensure the continuing welfare of the oldest of us. This is an unprecedented act of selflessness by everyone younger than seventy-ish, because we love our elders so. The real change in the world order…

Lots of people seem to believe that Ray Dalio knows anything, with anymore certainty than we do.

In financial circles the man is not taken seriously, and allegations of fraud have been whispered for years now.

I would be curious to know why anyone believes that Ray Dalio should be taken seriously here?

Re: The Changing World Order

#72

Post by dchyrdvh »

adaisadais wrote: post #47
basch wrote: post #29

Earlier quoted context omitted.

What does declining mean in this context? Getting worse? More rudderless? Not improving as quickly? Overvalued? The US could be improving and be overvalued at the same time. There is still a lot of innovation coming out of the US despite it maybe being a bit inefficient.

Declining as in the machine that is the U.S. is broken and there is no apparent fix in sight. This generation won’t experience famine or regress into a developing nation but we will experience a decoupling of some of the preconceived notions of what being an American is. I believe if we make some changes we can push the U.S. back to being the beacon of freedom that it has the potential to be. We have a lot of brillia…

I have a controversial hypothesis about what creates freedom in nations: it's the self sacrifice of people willing to make others free. In the US it was the independence and civil wars. Then the lazy descendants carelessly waste this freedom until none left, and the nation folds into an authoritarian black hole or enough people start the new cycle by sacrificing themselves. In some sense, creating freedom is like donating all your money to a neighbor and they dying on streets.

Re: The Changing World Order

#73

Post by hylaride »

cheez wrote: post #45
hilbertseries wrote: post #34

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Yeah, but so is Russia’s GDP. For reference, Canada has a higher GDP.

It's roughly the same but per capita, definitely worse. IMO, Russia will bide her time. They have a lot of intelligent, entrepreneurial people. Just need the government to loosen up a bit. Or perhaps, most of the economy doesn't need GDP.

As a whole Russia’s entrepreneurs are leaving because they know if you get big enough, the corruption will come into play.

Their government needs to do more than just loosen up.

Re: The Changing World Order

#74

Post by m3kw9 »

Unless the US losses a major war either economical or physical they are hard to upend because of globalization. Everything is very dependent on the US dollar and switching it will take a lot of persuading. Like losing a world war type persuading.

Re: The Changing World Order

#75

Post by nopinsight »

airstrike wrote: post #2

> a rising world power (China) challenging the overextended existing world power (the US) This is a pretty bold claim, at least for now. People have been claiming this is the case for decades, but I still don't see it. Western (US / EU) demand is what drives China's growth. Technology in China is still by and large imported / copied. The West can move manufacturing back home (or anywhere else with cheap labor) and Ch…

China is doing most things right according to endogenous growth theory. Exports help it grow faster but are not the most essential part of the equation. China's export is only ~20% of its 2018 GDP. https://www.theglobaleconomy.com/china/exports/

"Endogenous growth theory holds that investment in human capital, innovation, and knowledge are significant contributors to economic growth."

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

> Technology in China is still by and large imported / copied.

For many important technologies, it is either on par, a bit behind, or sometimes a bit ahead (5G, quantum communications) of the west. A few key areas where China still lacks are semiconductors, aviation, and global reaches of internet platforms. These are important but account for far less than half of its GDP.

China's numbers of patents and scientific publications have reached world's no.1 in recent years:

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

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

One can argue about the quality of those, but one should not assume that China is substantially behind the west as was the case even a couple decades ago.

China's number of STEM graduates, many of whom are sources of the progress above, is the highest in the world: 4.7m in 2016. The only country that comes close is India.

https://www.statista.com/chart/7913/the-countries-with-the-m...

> ...while Western demand (mostly US, really) and its technology are not.

US population: ~330 million; EU, ~450 million => Total: 780 million. China's population: ~1400 million. Domestic demand is clearly not China's disadvantage.

Re: The Changing World Order

#76

Post by airstrike »

nopinsight wrote: post #75
airstrike wrote: post #2

> a rising world power (China) challenging the overextended existing world power (the US) This is a pretty bold claim, at least for now. People have been claiming this is the case for decades, but I still don't see it. Western (US / EU) demand is what drives China's growth. Technology in China is still by and large imported / copied. The West can move manufacturing back home (or anywhere else with cheap labor) and Ch…

China is doing most things right according to endogenous growth theory. Exports help it grow faster but are not the most essential part of the equation. China's export is only ~20% of its 2018 GDP. https://www.theglobaleconomy.com/china/exports/ "Endogenous growth theory holds that investment in human capital, innovation, and knowledge are significant contributors to economic growth." https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/En…

> US population: ~330 million; EU, ~450 million => Total: 780 million. China's population: ~1400 million. Domestic demand is clearly not China's disadvantage.

Population size doesn't paint a full picture. China's GDP per capita is still less than a third of the US. A lot of those 1.4 billion have absolutely appalling living standards.

Re: The Changing World Order

#77

Post by dang »

plainOldText wrote: post #65
dang wrote: post #59

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Generic dissing of other commenters just adds noise to HN. If you know more than others, why not share some of what you know so we all can learn? (Edit: I originally wrote "one of the worst ways to add noise". That was overkill; it gets worse.)

I beg to differ. The comment was perfectly reasonable in my view. I also learned about someone new, namely George Friedman.

You're talking about a different part of the comment.

Re: The Changing World Order

#78

Post by Alekhine »

justinzollars wrote: post #66
airstrike wrote: post #2

> a rising world power (China) challenging the overextended existing world power (the US) This is a pretty bold claim, at least for now. People have been claiming this is the case for decades, but I still don't see it. Western (US / EU) demand is what drives China's growth. Technology in China is still by and large imported / copied. The West can move manufacturing back home (or anywhere else with cheap labor) and Ch…

> Technology in China is still by and large imported / copied. When I visited China, I felt like I was in the future. We have fallen behind, and we literarily have shipped the "Arsenal of Democracy" to China. Their airports are bigger and better, the high speed rail was amazing, and the subway system was simple to navigate. China has innovated in important ways - they have beat us to 5G, and they have weapons systems…

Who gives a damn if their infrastructure is new and modern? Was that technology developed in China? It's possible, but I doubt it.

And what kind of visit was this where you were inspecting their weapon systems, and ascertained that they could take out the best of what the American military has, based on some knowledge of military technology you magically have?

Re: The Changing World Order

#79

Post by tootie »

cheez wrote: post #31
tootie wrote: post #9

Lost me in the first paragraph. Examining a history of money supply and debt that predates Bretton-Woods is simply not relevant. Everything I read could have been lifted from a comment thread in /r/Libertarian 10 years ago. The last financial crisis was the ultimate test for fiat currency. One that was pointed at as the moment that debt-driven currency would crash and burn by a lot of gold bugs. Instead, a deluge of…

debasement happens all the time https://money.visualcapitalist.com/currency-and-the-collapse...

That's utterly preposterous. It's the exact same gibberish that Ron Paul used to try to convince us the Fed action was going to cause massive inflation. He said it for years. Then we struggled to crack 2% with gigatons of helicopter money.

Re: The Changing World Order

#80

Post by mark_l_watson »

m3kw9 wrote: post #74

Unless the US losses a major war either economical or physical they are hard to upend because of globalization. Everything is very dependent on the US dollar and switching it will take a lot of persuading. Like losing a world war type persuading.

I think that the “de-dollarization” can happen gradually, with the dollar slowly becoming a smaller portion of a bucket of currencies used for international transactions. Even countries that want to get out from under the dollar tax probably want this to be a slow transition.

That said, I have no idea what the next few years will look like economically. Probably income inequality will greatly expand and I wouldn’t be surprised if new national alliances occur.

Post reply on HN