Nov 15, 2020 Daniel Gros explains why the upcoming administration should “accept China’s continued economic and technological rise,” because it is unstoppable. Beijing is closing the gap with the US in research and development (R&D) funding. Americans might not like the idea of being overtaken by China, but this “milestone” will most likely “be reached within the next decade.” In this regard “further attempts to stave off that outcome would be not only futile, but also very costly.” The author points out that China has “high savings rate – nearly 40% of GDP, or more than twice the rate in the US and Europe.” These “massive” resources allow China to invest and establish “the fundamentals for technological leadership. Notably, the country has made enormous investments in improving both the quantity and quality of education.” Future tech dominance relies on STEM (science, technology, engineering and mathematics), and China is said to outnumber US STEM graduates. Critics, including the author, agree that the American public education system has not kept up with a world, which is in a constant state of change. As a result of Republicans’ war on education, the country’s public school system faces a number of serious problems - it has failed to adjust and fallen behind. The OECD’s Program for International Student Assessment ( PISA) “suggests that Chinese secondary-school students are far better at solving problems than their American or European peers.” The author says, the “tertiary education – the real key to technological leadership – has exploded in China over the last two decades. According to the US National Science Foundation, China now produces more than twice as many engineers, and more peer-reviewed science and engineering publications, than the US. Similarly, it has surpassed the European Union in spending on research and development, and on current trends, it should catch up” to the US soon. This has changed China’s views on its state-owned enterprises (SOE), which used to dominate and enjoy perks that private companies do not, like receiving government subsidies in return for meeting the export targets - an unfair competitive advantage to the detriment of global trade. SOEs are less “efficient” and “profitable” than private companies, and they are going to take a backseat, as China’s leaders seemed to understand “the limits of state intervention.” The economy aims to tap into the vast pool of knowledge and human resources to thrive. The spectre of China’s global lead in technology is haunting the US, and it is “keen to ensure it never materializes.” Trump has pressed hard for China to make major changes to its trade practices and limit the state’s role in the economy. Tensions over Chinese tech companies are not about trade but supremacy. “Given China’s fundamentals, there is little the US could do to hamper, let alone arrest, its progress. Huawei is just one example of a firm that has capitalized on China’s pool of millions of engineers to develop new products. Even if the US manages to destroy Huawei, many other Chinese high-tech companies are destined to emerge, driven by the same talent.” China has unveiled a “dual circulation” strategy to cut its dependence on overseas markets and technology in its long-term development, a shift brought on by a deepening rift with the US. This is “set to shape China’s next Five-Year Plan... As China’s economy grows, it is… becoming less reliant on exports, and its newly minted engineers will master a growing number of technologies…the government’s plans….would probably materialize, even without state intervention.” In this regard, “the US strategy - which begins with an economic ‘ decoupling’ from China - has little chance of success. To be sure, the decoupling itself might be feasible. But it would also be counterproductive.” While trade “always implies a two-way dependency,” the style and speed of China’s growth over the past 40 years have left Western countries struggling to find the right recipe of incentives and agreements to get China to play fair. The author says, “while the US might like the idea of being ‘liberated’ from China by severing trade ties, it would pay a high cost for ‘liberating’ China from it.” The strategy of keeping Chinese suppliers out of the US market, and “limiting China’s access to some key US technologies might make a difference in the short term, but it is unlikely to slow down China’s development appreciably. The sheer scale of the human and financial resources China will be deploying over the next decade means that it is well positioned to dominate many high-tech sectors, with or without US inputs.”While the West can no longer contain a rising China, its real fear is that China’s aggressive foreign policy could unravel the current global order, and its authoritarian economic model may have the potential to rival the productive power of liberal capitalism. Americans are concerned about China ’s threat to the technological supremacy that has long underpinned US hegemony thanks to its world-leading university, military and tech sectors. But rebuffing Chinese technology and stoking anti-China sentiment will not cure the ills of Anglo-American capitalism. The roots of these problems, and hence solutions, must instead be found much closer to home.
Read MoreReply ROBERT WOLFF
Nov 11, 2020 China has created a fusion of Oriental and Occidental rationalist philosophies under the CCP that creates for them a superior social/cultural/economic/scientific based nationalistic organization (and eventually a superior military capability) that the West is unprepared to contest due to its lack of social/economic/political/religious cohesion. Western socio- political-economic-religious conflicts are prohibiting effective integration of the Western System to meet the challenges presented by China.
If Holistic Rationalism prevails over the current Western belief that Might defeats intellect and that rational cohesive organization of the Nation State defeats internal competition (Free Market Capitalism), then the author is certainly correct. China cannot be beat, except through American military action against it (Thucydides Trap).
Near a decade ago I was working with US Military Intelligence when I and my compatriots recognized that if the US wanted to contend the rise of Chinese dominance that it had to act now, as Trump has done. Unfortunately, the Trump Doctrine (Nationalism over personal greed/wealth of "The Rich", e.g. "The Rich hate me" [Trump]), is similar to the belief of Our Forefathers who claimed in the 1776 Revolution against England that, to be a Patriot you must, "Put your Nation First, above your own personal interests") has not succeeded in bringing back jobs to America or keeping US created technology in America for the benefit of American Workers (because US corporations and US international banks prefer Global Profits over the survival of the American Nation.)
Given this failure of the Trump Doctrine, the only alternative is to significantly increase taxes on American investors who are becoming rich (at the expense of the American Worker Class) by sending US technology and labor to China for their own profit and self-aggrandizement.
呵呵。 【 在 beijingren5 (吃喝) 的大作中提到: 】 : The US Must Accept China’s Rise : http://www.project-syndicate.org/commentary/us-china-competition-high-tech-sectors-by-daniel-gros-2020-11?barrier=accesspaylog : Nov 15, 2020 : Daniel Gros explains why the upcoming administration should “accept China’ : s continued economic and technological rise,” because it is unstoppable. : Beijing is closing the gap with the US in research and development (R&D) : funding. Americans might not like the idea of being overtaken by China, but : this “milestone” will most likely “be reached within the next decade.” : In this regard “further attempts to stave off that outcome would be not : only futile, but also very costly.” : ...................
Nov 8, 2020 Technological innovations thrive in a culture that promotes exchange of ideas, freedom of speech, transparency in decision making and accountability for results. China’s communist party doesn’t promote any of these values, which are essential to make innovation sustainable. Best example of the repressive nature of Communist institutions is their imprisonment of the scientist who alerted authorities to the coronavirus pandemia in Wuhan. Dr. Li Wenliang, 34, was one of the first people to sound the alarm about the pneumonia. Authorities accused him of spreading rumors and “severely disturbing the social order.” Chinese officials acknowledged the threat and confirmed the outbreak too late to avoid the spread of the disease. Compare this case to Dr Fauci in US. The President of the US criticized Dr Fauci, but could not silence him by putting him in prison.
FRED CARSTENSEN Nov 8, 2020 What this ignores is that America has cut its public sector investment in basic research by 65% relative to GDP and in publicly-funded university- based research America trails SLOVENIA and ranks 18th. America is NOT competing, NOT investing in itself. Add in our rotting infrastructure--the worst of any developed economy--and we see America isn't trying to compete with China or anyone else. America has been quitting for more than 40 years (see Alden: Failure to Adjust; Hacker: The War on Government.)
Nov 9, 2020 Chinese scientists now publish more peer-reviewed articles than American scientists. That is a modest measure of quality. In a survey of cutting edge research by the Economist, China was ranked at the cutting edge in half and very strong in many of the others; America not so much.
Yes, our businesses invest heavily in commercialization--but where do the original ideas come from? Largely from high-risk publicly funded basic research. We are not longer generating the seed corn from which the private sector has derived such success. And as the breakthroughs now come in other countries, American firms will migrate to those locations to exploit the ideas.
You might disparage Slovenia's efforts, but if Slovenia and 26 other countries think public investments in basic research are more important than we think they are, I would be worried. Very worried.
傻逼发帖就是Ctrl C 然后Ctrl V？ 【 在 beijingren5 (吃喝) 的大作中提到: 】 : FRED CARSTENSEN : : Nov 9, 2020 : Chinese scientists now publish more peer-reviewed articles than American : scientists. That is a modest measure of quality. In a survey of cutting edge : research by the Economist, China was ranked at the cutting edge in half and : very strong in many of the others; America not so much. : Yes, our businesses invest heavily in commercialization--but where do the : original ideas come from? Largely from high-risk publicly funded basic : research. We are not longer generating the seed corn from which the private : ...................
Nov 7, 2020 Japan, Korea and China are geographically neighbors. But Japan has been different from the other two, historically, politically and culturally. She has developed different culture and society, segregating itself successful by the sea. Korea was militarily and culturally occupied and absorbed by China. She became an ardent admirer of China and is culturally more Confucian than China is.
All these differences have shown themselves historically and in their attitude toward the Western standards. For a few instances, Japan's course of postwar economic development was different from China's due to different international environments and different mentality; Japanese samurai leaders of Tokugawa Japan (1603 - 1867) wanted to educate and enlighten masses but Chinese leaders have kept masses ignorant throughout history; democracy was not introduced into postwar Japan, the Japanese had been developing it since 1889, men's adult suffrage was realized in 1925 but China does not have realized it yet and the CCP does not have it on its mind at all; China's self-image in the world is totally different from Japan's; a lot of Chinese young people are learning at Waseda University, Tokyo, they know the words like the Great Leap Forward and the Great Cultural Revolution but do know what Mao Zedong did, they do not know the word, the Tiananmen Square Protest, much less what happed there and they do not want to know because Chinese have not been interested in things like freedom of speech, because it is not edible, what's the use of nonedible thing?, etc.; George F. Kennan said on his 1964 visit to Japan that Chinese mandarins were refined in speech and manners but that we should not be deceived by that; a Japanese said to him, "Chinese admire flowers (blossoms) that come out on tall treed, despising flowers that bloom on the wayside, I said in my comment, It Is Not China's Fault, nov. 16. 2015, on Michael Pillsbury/The Hundred-Year Marathon, amazon usa.
Nov 8, 2020 China has its own world view or Weltanschauung of how the the world should be organized and governed. It is China's universalism. The Chinese believe it is the best possible world that can be built on the earth. "Unconscious racial and cultural arrogance and disdain for others is pronounced throughout the West. Chinese feelings of cultural superiority are monumental, deriving as they do from a three thousand year tradition (Edwin O. Reischauer, The Japanese, Charles E. Tuttle, 1978, p. 402.)" The Chinese tributary system was a political system, not an economic system, for the Sino-centric peace and prosperity; it was the Chinese device of power politics to maintain security for China. "...the reality of empire was that of a hard core of wei, or force, surrounded by a soft pulp of de, virtue... All court records praise the wisdom of emperors, they in fact behaved like Legalists...the superiority of the Chinese model in preventing war is ludicrous...(June Teufel Dreyer, China's Tianxia: Do All Under Heaven Need One Arbiter? Yaleglobal Online, October 30, 2014.)
The Australian prime minister said that China should accept a neutral international team to investigate the corona virus. China lost no time and announced that it would stop buying beef, coal, and etc. from Australia, which heavily depends on its exports to China.
I recently learned the case of Thyssenkrupp. In another case, I do not know the names of three companies, one German, two Chinese. A Chinese company sent voluminous orders to the German company, the German made a voluminous plant investment to meet the demand, the Chinese company cancelled the orders, the stock prices of the German company plummeted, a little while later a Chinese fund company offered purchase to rescue the German company. The two Chinese bodies were in cahoots. The Kawasaki Heavy Industries agreed decades ago to the Chinese repeated request of making bullet trains in China on the condition that China use the trains only for Chinese railways and do not export them abroad. China made only slight changes to the trains and exported them; they say the trains are on a Chinese own model and do not infringe on the Japanese patent.
Nov 6, 2020 The West seems to perceive itself and to act like a scientific-universal civilization. As a consequence any other is considered hostile until it is either enslaved/absorbed or terminated/killed. So there is a logical inability to transcend differences, originating in the notion of universality of the self, that leads the West to be either separate vertically, in a superior position, or separate horizontally, in an hostile position from anything different from itself. The predictable consequence is that the West, if confronted to something that it can't enslave nor kill and that happens to be larger than itself will turn itself in a distant satellite rather than becoming integrated itself as a part of something different and larger than itself, as this would terminate its very core identity. The Western identity will have to metamorphose itself completely unless it is able to dominate/enslave China or eliminate it (Arbeit macht frei model), but as complete metamorphosis is uncomfortable at best it will be a last option.
Nov 6, 2020 In human endeavors, there are many types of innovations. The most applicable to the 7.7 billion souls living on Earth, are innovations that make technology AVAILABLE. Availability means affordable prices. In that regard, China is the most important innovator on Earth in the last 20 years, and the biggest benefactor to the human race.
And the results are impressive. In about 40 years since Deng took charge, China has completed industrialization that took almost everyone else 200. Today China has the world’s largest industries in steel, cement, and aluminum, shipbuilding, autos, 90% of rare earths products, No. 1 quantum computer in the world, the fastest and biggest high speed trains network, and no net foreign debts ($1 Trillion in foreign currency debts, AND over $3 Trillion in foreign currency holdings).
Just take ONE industry out of many. Solar panels had been around for many decades, but had never been competitive with grid power. Entered China, and in a short decade, solar panel prices dropped by over 90%, and today parity is here. Multi-crystalline Si panels have dropped to something like $0.25/Wp. If that is not innovation, Aussies should try producing solar panels at that price. With the same vigor, China Price drove the cost of wind energy to below US$1.00/Wp, installed. Its the same story with energy storage. When Tesla wants to do EV and storage for real, it had to go to China.
In general, with the relentless innovative cost-down in entire swaths of industries (engineering, cement, steel, etc.), Chinese engineering companies can bid 30% lower than the “more innovative” American counterparts, and still make money. With that, China’s comparatively high rate of growth is sustainable. Unlike flighty high tech, infrastructure building guarantees the generation of millions of good jobs (by China standards, $1,500 a month engineering jobs). You cannot achieve that through copying.
Foresight, intelligent deployment of resources, innovative reordering of systems and markets, are all absolutely necessary. The world celebrates Made in China, and now innovated in China. Entire industries now celebrate the China Price. The effects are in fact accelerating in this China Century.
Nov 5, 2020 Your question is understandable, but rests on the ignorance of Chinese achievements that our media have carefully cultivated.
For the past 70 years, China has directed its formidable scientific and technological powers towards solving social problems, the fruits of which effort will be evident next June, when 100% of the lower half of its income-earners will own their homes and have incomes, medical insurance, paid vacations, safe streets, and longer healthy life expectancy than their American cousins–while the nation has accumulated one-third of the debt burden carried by the US and the EU. That's an unprecedented demonstration of compassionate intelligence.
As to new technologies, they come along only one every generation or so and their appearance is unpredictable.
Now that China is socially out of the woods, we can expect to see more inventiveness. By next June (the anniversary of Mao's founding of the CCP), expect to see the first exascale computer, a quantum computer 1000x faster than any in existence and, of course, reliable quantum communications networks and satellites. Every scientific discipline is preparing gifts for June, and doubtless some will be very innovative indeed.
On a more human scale, look for a City 2.0: a new approach to urbanization that boosts its citizens' productivity enough repay its construction cost in 15 years. It, too, will open next June.
Nov 5, 2020 The most successful attempt in hampering China must have been the British opium trade in the 18th and 19th century. In the early 18th century, China was wealthy and powerful. The British understood that the best way to destroy such a country was to make it rot from within. By getting the Chinese addicted to opium, the whole ruling class was gradually decimated. This ensured a decline in state power, to such an extent that it became vulnerable to foreign military adventure. This was a clever tactic but it took decades to play out. The US does not have the patience for such tactics, nor do they have the time. The US itself is rotting from within, and they need to destroy China or at least severely hobble its rise before they become too weak themselves. And having learned from the mistakes of the past two centuries, the Chinese leadership would no longer fall into the same trap with the modern equivalent of the Trojan horse, namely foreign social media.
“China now produces more than twice as many engineers”, 这个说法肯定有问题，按人口来算两倍的比率还差不多。中国的人口是美国的4倍。
【 在 beijingren5 (吃喝) 的大作中提到: 】 : The US Must Accept China’s Rise : http://www.project-syndicate.org/commentary/us-china-competition-high-tech-sectors-by-daniel-gros-2020-11?barrier=accesspaylog : Nov 15, 2020 : Daniel Gros explains why the upcoming administration should “accept China’ : s continued economic and technological rise,” because it is unstoppable. : Beijing is closing the gap with the US in research and development (R&D) : funding. Americans might not like the idea of being overtaken by China, but : this “milestone” will most likely “be reached within the next decade.” : In this regard “further attempts to stave off that outcome would be not : only futile, but also very costly.” : ...................
【 在 beijingren5 (吃喝) 的大作中提到: 】 : The US Must Accept China’s Rise : http://www.project-syndicate.org/commentary/us-china-competition-high-tech-sectors-by-daniel-gros-2020-11?barrier=accesspaylog : Nov 15, 2020 : Daniel Gros explains why the upcoming administration should “accept China’ : s continued economic and technological rise,” because it is unstoppable. : Beijing is closing the gap with the US in research and development (R&D) : funding. Americans might not like the idea of being overtaken by China, but : this “milestone” will most likely “be reached within the next decade.” : In this regard “further attempts to stave off that outcome would be not : only futile, but also very costly.” : ...................
The US Must Accept China’s Rise
http://www.project-syndicate.org/commentary/us-china-competition-high-tech-sectors-by-daniel-gros-2020-11?barrier=accesspaylog
Nov 15, 2020
Daniel Gros explains why the upcoming administration should “accept China’s continued economic and technological rise,” because it is unstoppable.
Beijing is closing the gap with the US in research and development (R&D)
funding. Americans might not like the idea of being overtaken by China, but this “milestone” will most likely “be reached within the next decade.”
In this regard “further attempts to stave off that outcome would be not
only futile, but also very costly.”
The author points out that China has “high savings rate – nearly 40% of
GDP, or more than twice the rate in the US and Europe.” These “massive”
resources allow China to invest and establish “the fundamentals for
technological leadership. Notably, the country has made enormous investments in improving both the quantity and quality of education.” Future tech
dominance relies on STEM (science, technology, engineering and mathematics), and China is said to outnumber US STEM graduates.
Critics, including the author, agree that the American public education
system has not kept up with a world, which is in a constant state of change. As a result of Republicans’ war on education, the country’s public school system faces a number of serious problems - it has failed to adjust and
fallen behind. The OECD’s Program for International Student Assessment (
PISA) “suggests that Chinese secondary-school students are far better at
solving problems than their American or European peers.”
The author says, the “tertiary education – the real key to technological
leadership – has exploded in China over the last two decades. According to the US National Science Foundation, China now produces more than twice as
many engineers, and more peer-reviewed science and engineering publications, than the US. Similarly, it has surpassed the European Union in spending on research and development, and on current trends, it should catch up” to the US soon.
This has changed China’s views on its state-owned enterprises (SOE), which used to dominate and enjoy perks that private companies do not, like
receiving government subsidies in return for meeting the export targets - an unfair competitive advantage to the detriment of global trade. SOEs are
less “efficient” and “profitable” than private companies, and they are
going to take a backseat, as China’s leaders seemed to understand “the
limits of state intervention.” The economy aims to tap into the vast pool
of knowledge and human resources to thrive.
The spectre of China’s global lead in technology is haunting the US, and it is “keen to ensure it never materializes.” Trump has pressed hard for
China to make major changes to its trade practices and limit the state’s
role in the economy. Tensions over Chinese tech companies are not about
trade but supremacy. “Given China’s fundamentals, there is little the US
could do to hamper, let alone arrest, its progress. Huawei is just one
example of a firm that has capitalized on China’s pool of millions of
engineers to develop new products. Even if the US manages to destroy Huawei, many other Chinese high-tech companies are destined to emerge, driven by
the same talent.”
China has unveiled a “dual circulation” strategy to cut its dependence on overseas markets and technology in its long-term development, a shift
brought on by a deepening rift with the US. This is “set to shape China’s next Five-Year Plan... As China’s economy grows, it is… becoming less
reliant on exports, and its newly minted engineers will master a growing
number of technologies…the government’s plans….would probably materialize, even without state intervention.”
In this regard, “the US strategy - which begins with an economic ‘
decoupling’ from China - has little chance of success. To be sure, the
decoupling itself might be feasible. But it would also be counterproductive.” While trade “always implies a two-way dependency,” the style and speed of China’s growth over the past 40 years have left Western countries
struggling to find the right recipe of incentives and agreements to get
China to play fair.
The author says, “while the US might like the idea of being ‘liberated’
from China by severing trade ties, it would pay a high cost for ‘liberating’ China from it.” The strategy of keeping Chinese suppliers out of the US market, and “limiting China’s access to some key US technologies might
make a difference in the short term, but it is unlikely to slow down China’s development appreciably. The sheer scale of the human and financial
resources China will be deploying over the next decade means that it is well positioned to dominate many high-tech sectors, with or without US inputs.”While the West can no longer contain a rising China, its real fear is that
China’s aggressive foreign policy could unravel the current global order,
and its authoritarian economic model may have the potential to rival the
productive power of liberal capitalism. Americans are concerned about China
’s threat to the technological supremacy that has long underpinned US
hegemony thanks to its world-leading university, military and tech sectors. But rebuffing Chinese technology and stoking anti-China sentiment will not
cure the ills of Anglo-American capitalism. The roots of these problems, and hence solutions, must instead be found much closer to home.
Read MoreReply
ROBERT WOLFF
Nov 11, 2020
China has created a fusion of Oriental and Occidental rationalist
philosophies under the CCP that creates for them a superior social/cultural/economic/scientific based nationalistic organization (and eventually a
superior military capability) that the West is unprepared to contest due to its lack of social/economic/political/religious cohesion. Western socio-
political-economic-religious conflicts are prohibiting effective integration of the Western System to meet the challenges presented by China.
If Holistic Rationalism prevails over the current Western belief that Might defeats intellect and that rational cohesive organization of the Nation
State defeats internal competition (Free Market Capitalism), then the author is certainly correct. China cannot be beat, except through American
military action against it (Thucydides Trap).
Near a decade ago I was working with US Military Intelligence when I and my compatriots recognized that if the US wanted to contend the rise of Chinese dominance that it had to act now, as Trump has done. Unfortunately, the
Trump Doctrine (Nationalism over personal greed/wealth of "The Rich", e.g. "The Rich hate me" [Trump]), is similar to the belief of Our Forefathers who claimed in the 1776 Revolution against England that, to be a Patriot you
must, "Put your Nation First, above your own personal interests") has not
succeeded in bringing back jobs to America or keeping US created technology in America for the benefit of American Workers (because US corporations and US international banks prefer Global Profits over the survival of the
American Nation.)
Given this failure of the Trump Doctrine, the only alternative is to
significantly increase taxes on American investors who are becoming rich (at the expense of the American Worker Class) by sending US technology and
labor to China for their own profit and self-aggrandizement.
So, I voted for Biden.
习猪头运气好。 碰到了川胖这个无能之辈！
呵呵。
【 在 beijingren5 (吃喝) 的大作中提到: 】
: The US Must Accept China’s Rise
: http://www.project-syndicate.org/commentary/us-china-competition-high-tech-sectors-by-daniel-gros-2020-11?barrier=accesspaylog
: Nov 15, 2020
: Daniel Gros explains why the upcoming administration should “accept China’
: s continued economic and technological rise,” because it is unstoppable. : Beijing is closing the gap with the US in research and development (R&D)
: funding. Americans might not like the idea of being overtaken by China,
but
: this “milestone” will most likely “be reached within the next decade.”
: In this regard “further attempts to stave off that outcome would be not
: only futile, but also very costly.”
: ...................
美国有胡萝卜和大棒
完全接受中国撅起
有人愿意996干活驾车狂奔，让他领跑就是了，他累了再换别人
顺势而为
JOSE OYOLA
Nov 8, 2020
Technological innovations thrive in a culture that promotes exchange of
ideas, freedom of speech, transparency in decision making and accountability for results. China’s communist party doesn’t promote any of these values, which are essential to make innovation sustainable. Best example of the
repressive nature of Communist institutions is their imprisonment of the
scientist who alerted authorities to the coronavirus pandemia in Wuhan. Dr. Li Wenliang, 34, was one of the first people to sound the alarm about the
pneumonia. Authorities accused him of spreading rumors and “severely
disturbing the social order.” Chinese officials acknowledged the threat and confirmed the outbreak too late to avoid the spread of the disease. Compare this case to Dr Fauci in US. The President of the US criticized Dr Fauci,
but could not silence him by putting him in prison.
FRED CARSTENSEN
Nov 8, 2020
What this ignores is that America has cut its public sector investment in
basic research by 65% relative to GDP and in publicly-funded university-
based research America trails SLOVENIA and ranks 18th. America is NOT
competing, NOT investing in itself. Add in our rotting infrastructure--the
worst of any developed economy--and we see America isn't trying to compete
with China or anyone else. America has been quitting for more than 40 years (see Alden: Failure to Adjust; Hacker: The War on Government.)
FRED CARSTENSEN
Nov 9, 2020
Chinese scientists now publish more peer-reviewed articles than American
scientists. That is a modest measure of quality. In a survey of cutting edge research by the Economist, China was ranked at the cutting edge in half and very strong in many of the others; America not so much.
Yes, our businesses invest heavily in commercialization--but where do the
original ideas come from? Largely from high-risk publicly funded basic
research. We are not longer generating the seed corn from which the private sector has derived such success. And as the breakthroughs now come in other countries, American firms will migrate to those locations to exploit the
ideas.
You might disparage Slovenia's efforts, but if Slovenia and 26 other
countries think public investments in basic research are more important than we think they are, I would be worried. Very worried.
傻逼发帖就是Ctrl C 然后Ctrl V？
【 在 beijingren5 (吃喝) 的大作中提到: 】
: FRED CARSTENSEN
:
: Nov 9, 2020
: Chinese scientists now publish more peer-reviewed articles than American
: scientists. That is a modest measure of quality. In a survey of cutting
edge
: research by the Economist, China was ranked at the cutting edge in half
and
: very strong in many of the others; America not so much.
: Yes, our businesses invest heavily in commercialization--but where do the : original ideas come from? Largely from high-risk publicly funded basic
: research. We are not longer generating the seed corn from which the
private
: ...................
YOSHIMICHI MORIYAMA
Nov 7, 2020
Japan, Korea and China are geographically neighbors. But Japan has been
different from the other two, historically, politically and culturally. She has developed different culture and society, segregating itself successful
by the sea. Korea was militarily and culturally occupied and absorbed by
China. She became an ardent admirer of China and is culturally more
Confucian than China is.
All these differences have shown themselves historically and in their
attitude toward the Western standards. For a few instances, Japan's course
of postwar economic development was different from China's due to different international environments and different mentality; Japanese samurai leaders of Tokugawa Japan (1603 - 1867) wanted to educate and enlighten masses but Chinese leaders have kept masses ignorant throughout history; democracy was not introduced into postwar Japan, the Japanese had been developing it since 1889, men's adult suffrage was realized in 1925 but China does not have
realized it yet and the CCP does not have it on its mind at all; China's
self-image in the world is totally different from Japan's; a lot of Chinese young people are learning at Waseda University, Tokyo, they know the words
like the Great Leap Forward and the Great Cultural Revolution but do know
what Mao Zedong did, they do not know the word, the Tiananmen Square Protest, much less what happed there and they do not want to know because Chinese
have not been interested in things like freedom of speech, because it is not edible, what's the use of nonedible thing?, etc.; George F. Kennan said on his 1964 visit to Japan that Chinese mandarins were refined in speech and
manners but that we should not be deceived by that; a Japanese said to him, "Chinese admire flowers (blossoms) that come out on tall treed, despising
flowers that bloom on the wayside, I said in my comment, It Is Not China's
Fault, nov. 16. 2015, on Michael Pillsbury/The Hundred-Year Marathon, amazon usa.
不接受也没办法啊，
就像院子里的树长得太高，如果不接受就只能把它砍了。
一个国家能砍得了吗
YOSHIMICHI MORIYAMA
Nov 8, 2020
China has its own world view or Weltanschauung of how the the world should
be organized and governed. It is China's universalism. The Chinese believe
it is the best possible world that can be built on the earth. "Unconscious
racial and cultural arrogance and disdain for others is pronounced
throughout the West. Chinese feelings of cultural superiority are monumental, deriving as they do from a three thousand year tradition (Edwin O.
Reischauer, The Japanese, Charles E. Tuttle, 1978, p. 402.)" The Chinese
tributary system was a political system, not an economic system, for the
Sino-centric peace and prosperity; it was the Chinese device of power
politics to maintain security for China. "...the reality of empire was that of a hard core of wei, or force, surrounded by a soft pulp of de, virtue...
All court records praise the wisdom of emperors, they in fact behaved like
Legalists...the superiority of the Chinese model in preventing war is
ludicrous...(June Teufel Dreyer, China's Tianxia: Do All Under Heaven Need
One Arbiter? Yaleglobal Online, October 30, 2014.)
The Australian prime minister said that China should accept a neutral
international team to investigate the corona virus. China lost no time and
announced that it would stop buying beef, coal, and etc. from Australia,
which heavily depends on its exports to China.
I recently learned the case of Thyssenkrupp. In another case, I do not know the names of three companies, one German, two Chinese. A Chinese company
sent voluminous orders to the German company, the German made a voluminous
plant investment to meet the demand, the Chinese company cancelled the
orders, the stock prices of the German company plummeted, a little while
later a Chinese fund company offered purchase to rescue the German company. The two Chinese bodies were in cahoots.
The Kawasaki Heavy Industries agreed decades ago to the Chinese repeated
request of making bullet trains in China on the condition that China use the trains only for Chinese railways and do not export them abroad. China made only slight changes to the trains and exported them; they say the trains are on a Chinese own model and do not infringe on the Japanese patent.
EMANUEL MüLLER
Nov 6, 2020
The West seems to perceive itself and to act like a scientific-universal
civilization. As a consequence any other is considered hostile until it is
either enslaved/absorbed or terminated/killed. So there is a logical
inability to transcend differences, originating in the notion of
universality of the self, that leads the West to be either separate
vertically, in a superior position, or separate horizontally, in an hostile position from anything different from itself. The predictable consequence is that the West, if confronted to something that it can't enslave nor kill
and that happens to be larger than itself will turn itself in a distant
satellite rather than becoming integrated itself as a part of something
different and larger than itself, as this would terminate its very core
identity. The Western identity will have to metamorphose itself completely
unless it is able to dominate/enslave China or eliminate it (Arbeit macht
frei model), but as complete metamorphosis is uncomfortable at best it will be a last option.
BEI DE ZHU
Nov 6, 2020
In human endeavors, there are many types of innovations. The most applicable to the 7.7 billion souls living on Earth, are innovations that make
technology AVAILABLE. Availability means affordable prices. In that regard, China is the most important innovator on Earth in the last 20 years, and the biggest benefactor to the human race.
And the results are impressive. In about 40 years since Deng took charge,
China has completed industrialization that took almost everyone else 200.
Today China has the world’s largest industries in steel, cement, and
aluminum, shipbuilding, autos, 90% of rare earths products, No. 1 quantum
computer in the world, the fastest and biggest high speed trains network,
and no net foreign debts ($1 Trillion in foreign currency debts, AND over $3 Trillion in foreign currency holdings).
Just take ONE industry out of many. Solar panels had been around for many
decades, but had never been competitive with grid power. Entered China, and in a short decade, solar panel prices dropped by over 90%, and today parity is here. Multi-crystalline Si panels have dropped to something like $0.25/Wp. If that is not innovation, Aussies should try producing solar panels at
that price. With the same vigor, China Price drove the cost of wind energy
to below US$1.00/Wp, installed. Its the same story with energy storage. When Tesla wants to do EV and storage for real, it had to go to China.
In general, with the relentless innovative cost-down in entire swaths of
industries (engineering, cement, steel, etc.), Chinese engineering companies can bid 30% lower than the “more innovative” American counterparts, and
still make money. With that, China’s comparatively high rate of growth is
sustainable. Unlike flighty high tech, infrastructure building guarantees
the generation of millions of good jobs (by China standards, $1,500 a month engineering jobs). You cannot achieve that through copying.
Foresight, intelligent deployment of resources, innovative reordering of
systems and markets, are all absolutely necessary. The world celebrates Made in China, and now innovated in China. Entire industries now celebrate the
China Price. The effects are in fact accelerating in this China Century.
GODFREE ROBERTS
Nov 5, 2020
Your question is understandable, but rests on the ignorance of Chinese
achievements that our media have carefully cultivated.
For the past 70 years, China has directed its formidable scientific and
technological powers towards solving social problems, the fruits of which
effort will be evident next June, when 100% of the lower half of its income-earners will own their homes and have incomes, medical insurance, paid
vacations, safe streets, and longer healthy life expectancy than their
American cousins–while the nation has accumulated one-third of the debt
burden carried by the US and the EU. That's an unprecedented demonstration
of compassionate intelligence.
As to new technologies, they come along only one every generation or so and their appearance is unpredictable.
Now that China is socially out of the woods, we can expect to see more
inventiveness. By next June (the anniversary of Mao's founding of the CCP), expect to see the first exascale computer, a quantum computer 1000x faster
than any in existence and, of course, reliable quantum communications
networks and satellites. Every scientific discipline is preparing gifts for June, and doubtless some will be very innovative indeed.
On a more human scale, look for a City 2.0: a new approach to urbanization
that boosts its citizens' productivity enough repay its construction cost in 15 years. It, too, will open next June.
ADRIAN WU
Nov 5, 2020
The most successful attempt in hampering China must have been the British
opium trade in the 18th and 19th century. In the early 18th century, China
was wealthy and powerful. The British understood that the best way to
destroy such a country was to make it rot from within. By getting the
Chinese addicted to opium, the whole ruling class was gradually decimated.
This ensured a decline in state power, to such an extent that it became
vulnerable to foreign military adventure. This was a clever tactic but it
took decades to play out. The US does not have the patience for such tactics, nor do they have the time. The US itself is rotting from within, and they need to destroy China or at least severely hobble its rise before they
become too weak themselves. And having learned from the mistakes of the past two centuries, the Chinese leadership would no longer fall into the same
trap with the modern equivalent of the Trojan horse, namely foreign social
media.
少了心平气和
炖炖炖
既然热战打不起来，那么承认中国崛起，共谋发展就是唯一合理的选择。可惜美国没有高瞻远瞩的政治家，看不到这一点。川普只是一个目光短浅，为了点短期利益就沾沾自喜的小商人。
你不能说秦始皇统一六国就崛起了。真正的崛起是文艺复兴。中国刚吃饱饭，距离意识形态的崛起还早，等一党专政结束之后吧。
虽然能力低 遇到了个更差的
美帝自己傻逼了
【 在 caiyiyii1 (黑子) 的大作中提到: 】
: 习猪头运气好。 碰到了川胖这个无能之辈！
: 呵呵。
: but
“China now produces more than twice as many engineers”, 这个说法肯定有问题，按人口来算两倍的比率还差不多。中国的人口是美国的4倍。
【 在 beijingren5 (吃喝) 的大作中提到: 】
: The US Must Accept China’s Rise
: http://www.project-syndicate.org/commentary/us-china-competition-high-tech-sectors-by-daniel-gros-2020-11?barrier=accesspaylog
: Nov 15, 2020
: Daniel Gros explains why the upcoming administration should “accept China’
: s continued economic and technological rise,” because it is unstoppable. : Beijing is closing the gap with the US in research and development (R&D)
: funding. Americans might not like the idea of being overtaken by China,
but
: this “milestone” will most likely “be reached within the next decade.”
: In this regard “further attempts to stave off that outcome would be not
: only futile, but also very costly.”
: ...................
老将独运轮气急败坏
问题就是美国不愿意接受，所以以后几年甚至几十年都是多事之秋，美国的华人处境尤其不好
屁股撅起了吧，三个学伴，逼经人你献上你的姐妹了吗？
这话说的，奥巴要乐抽了！！
【在 caiyiyii1(黑子)的大作中提到：】
：习猪头运气好。 碰到了川胖这个无能之辈！
：
五矛，一个残酷压迫人民的毒才政府崛起是世界的坏消息。
崛起如同勃起，老将独运轮没办法控制
老将独运轮已经把鸡脖切了
不需要控制
【 在 EagleMeadowd (EagleMeadowd) 的大作中提到: 】
: 崛起如同勃起，老将独运轮没办法控制
老子仔细一看，撅起的不过伪娘的肿菊，贱货逼耳！
真正勃起的还有腊肉的蜡萧，仲勋的吊而已。
【 在 beijingren5 (吃喝) 的大作中提到: 】
: The US Must Accept China’s Rise
: http://www.project-syndicate.org/commentary/us-china-competition-high-tech-sectors-by-daniel-gros-2020-11?barrier=accesspaylog
: Nov 15, 2020
: Daniel Gros explains why the upcoming administration should “accept China’
: s continued economic and technological rise,” because it is unstoppable. : Beijing is closing the gap with the US in research and development (R&D)
: funding. Americans might not like the idea of being overtaken by China,
but
: this “milestone” will most likely “be reached within the next decade.”
: In this regard “further attempts to stave off that outcome would be not
: only futile, but also very costly.”
: ...................
【 在 suanxiangge (蒜香哥) 的大作中提到: 】
: 老子仔细一看，撅起的不过伪娘的肿菊，贱货逼耳！
: 真正勃起的还有腊肉的蜡萧，仲勋的吊而已。
: but