What's new

How soon and at what height will China’s economy peak?

Get Ya Wig Split

SENIOR MEMBER
Joined
Feb 22, 2017
Messages
2,585
Reaction score
-2
Country
United States
Location
United States

How soon and at what height will China’s economy peak?

Estimates vary, depending on assumptions about population, productivity and prices

1683836200537.png

China has this year liberated its economy from the lockdowns, quarantines and other strictures of its “zero-covid” regime. But it has not freed itself from longer-term worries about its growth prospects. Its population is shrinking. Its epic housing boom is over. Thanks to a regulatory crackdown on e-commerce firms, the Communist Party has cowed the tech billionaires it once courted. Jack Ma, a former teacher who became one of China’s most celebrated entrepreneurs, has returned to teaching—in Japan.
The Communist Party now prizes security over prosperity, greatness over growth, sturdy self-reliance over the filigreed interdependence that distinguished China’s past economic success. Foreign investors are more wary, seeking to relocate or at least diversify their supply chains. And America is eager to limit Chinese access to some “foundational technologies”. The economics of mutual benefit has yielded to the geopolitics of mutual suspicion.
All this has led many analysts to cut their long-term forecasts for China’s growth, even as they raise predictions for this year. Some ask how much longer China’s economy can grow faster than America’s. The answer will affect far more than factory orders or personal incomes. It will shape the world order.
The previous consensus, both within and outside China, was that its economy would soon eclipse America’s. That, in turn, would allow China to become the world’s pre-eminent military power, and so supplant America as the world’s most powerful country. This remains a common view. Yao Yang, a respected economist at Peking University, believes China’s gdp can overtake America’s by 2029.
But others believe China’s economic clout relative to that of its rivals is nearing a peak. Hal Brands and Michael Beckley, two American political scientists, argue that China’s rise is already coming to a halt. The age of “peak China”, as they call it, is upon us—and it is far less Olympian a summit than most had predicted.

1683836244626.png


In 2011 Goldman Sachs projected that China’s gdp would surpass America’s in 2026 and become over 50% larger by mid-century. No peak was in sight. At the end of last year the bank revisited its calculations. It now thinks China’s economy will not overtake America’s until 2035 and at its high point will be only 14% bigger (see chart).

China’s peak looks similar in an influential forecast from last year by Roland Rajah and Alyssa Leng of the Lowy Institute, an Australian think-tank. Others see an even lower summit. Capital Economics, a research firm, argues that China’s economy will never be number one. It will reach 90% of America’s size in 2035 and then lose ground. In so far as the Peak China thesis can be captured in a single projection, this is it.

What accounts for the lower expectations for China’s economy? And how much of a reduction is warranted? The answers hinge on three variables: population, productivity and prices. Start with population. China’s workforce has already peaked, according to official statistics. It has 4.5 times as many 15- to 64-year-olds as America. By mid-century it will have only 3.4 times as many, according to the un’s “median” forecast. By the end of the century the ratio will drop to 1.7.

But China’s demographic prospects have not changed much over the past decade, even as forecasts for economic growth have shrunk. In fact, Goldman Sachs’s new predictions assume a gentler decline in China’s workforce than the old ones, because improvements in health may keep older workers at the grindstone for longer. The bank believes the labour supply in China will drop by about 7% from 2025 to 2050.

The biggest swing in sentiment relates not to population but to productivity. Back in 2011 Goldman Sachs thought labour productivity would grow by about 4.8% a year on average over the next 20 years. Now the bank thinks it will grow by about 3%. Mark Williams of Capital Economics takes a similar view. China will fall “off the path of an Asian outperformer onto the path of a solidly respectable emerging economy”, he says.

There are good reasons to be gloomy about Chinese workers’ productivity. As China ages, it will have to devote more of its economic energies to serving the elderly, leaving less to invest in new kit and capacity. What is more, after decades of rapid capital accumulation, the returns to new investments are diminishing. A new high-speed rail line across mountainous Tibet yields far smaller benefits at much greater cost than connecting Beijing and Shanghai, for instance.

China’s rulers are trying to impose more discipline on local governments, which build much of China’s questionable infrastructure. Unfortunately, they seem equally keen to impose their will on China’s private enterprises. In China, unlike elsewhere, firms earn a smaller return on their assets as they grow bigger, points out Capital Economics: “Get to a certain size and companies have to give as much thought to meeting the needs of officials as those of consumers.”

It is not just their own government that is hobbling Chinese businesses. In October America imposed controls on sales of advanced computer chips to China. This will hurt Chinese firms making products like mobile phones, medical equipment and cars. Goldman Sachs has not incorporated this damage into its long-term forecasts, but estimates that China’s GDP towards the end of this decade could be about 2% smaller than it would otherwise have been.

The tech war could go further. Diego Cerdeiro of the imf and his co-authors have examined a scenario in which America curtails its own technology trade with China, persuades other oecd members to follow suit, and forces countries outside this club to pick sides in the battle. Under this extreme scenario, China’s economy could be about 9% smaller in ten years’ time than it otherwise would be. The idea that China’s productivity growth might be closer to 3% than 5%, in other words, is not far-fetched.

Any predictions of the economic future must, of course, be taken with a pinch of salt. Forecasts often go awry. Small differences in the evolution of productivity or population when combined and compounded over many years can yield starkly different outcomes.

Forecasts are also sensitive to prices—especially the relative price of currencies. Unexpected shifts in exchange rates can make a mockery of predictions of relative economic heft. At the moment, a basket of goods and services that costs $100 in America costs only about $60 in China. That suggests its currency, the yuan, is undervalued. Capital Economics thinks this undervaluation will persist. Goldman Sachs, on the other hand, believes it will narrow, either because the yuan strengthens or because prices rise faster in China than in America. This process will, in Goldman’s view, add about 20% to China’s gdp by mid-century.

If China’s prices or exchange rate fail to rise as Goldman Sachs expects, then China’s gdp might never overtake America’s. If China’s labour productivity grows just half a percentage point slower than Goldman Sachs envisages, its gdp, everything else constant, will also never surpass America’s (see chart). The same is true if America grows half a point faster (as Capital Economic projects). If China’s fertility rate declines further (to 0.85 children per woman by mid-century), it might eke out a lead in the 2030s only to lose it in the 2050s. Even if China’s economy does become the biggest in the world, its lead is likely to remain small. It is unlikely to establish an edge over America equivalent to the 40% lead America now enjoys over it, Mr Rajah and Ms Leng argue.

It also seems safe to say that China and America will remain in a position of near-parity for decades. In Goldman Sachs’s scenario, China maintains a small but persistent lead over America for more than 40 years. Even in Capital Economics’s projection, China’s gdp will still be over 80% of America’s as late as 2050. China will remain a geopolitical rival to be reckoned with. That is crucial: if China’s peak is more Table Mountain than k2, its leaders will have little incentive to rush to confrontation before decline sets in.

 
China may never surpass US GDP and analysts are catching on. Even if China were to surpass US GDP it won't be by a significant amount. I still remember my early days on PDF when Chinese here were predicting Chinas GDP to grow 2-3X US GDP. Those dreams are long gone.
 
China may never surpass US GDP and analysts are catching on. Even if China were to surpass US GDP it won't be by a significant amount. I still remember my early days on PDF when Chinese here were predicting Chinas GDP to grow 2-3X US GDP. Those dreams are long gone.
How do you surpass an economy which prints dollars? It is just common sense. It also depends how you define the real economy.
 
China has used realities to slap western analysts like a thousand times. West world is sick. Westerners are living in a self-cheating world.
 
China may never surpass US GDP and analysts are catching on. Even if China were to surpass US GDP it won't be by a significant amount. I still remember my early days on PDF when Chinese here were predicting Chinas GDP to grow 2-3X US GDP. Those dreams are long gone.
China already did for almost 10 years.
 
China may never surpass US GDP and analysts are catching on. Even if China were to surpass US GDP it won't be by a significant amount. I still remember my early days on PDF when Chinese here were predicting Chinas GDP to grow 2-3X US GDP. Those dreams are long gone.

$26.8tril*3/1.4bil people = $57K GDP per capita.
HK's GDP per capita = $52K.

Lol even if the whole of China reach the GDP per capita of HK, they won't be 3x of US's GDP. And that's assuming China still has 1.4bil people by the time they reach HK's GDP per capita in today's dollars.

I personally think that China can potentially reach around 1.5x of US's GDP, assuming they reach the same level of GDP per capita of Taiwan/South Korea/Japan. But it seems that China has slow down dramatically over the past decade.

China's GDP per capita is currently around 17% of the US's. When Taiwan/SK was at ~20% of US's GDP per capita in the late 1980s, they were still growing at 8-12%. China is currently growing at 5-6% at ~17% of US GDP per capita, so if current trend continues it's hard for them to reach Taiwan/SK GDP per capita levels. If so, then they might not reach 1.5x of US's GDP.


That said, I still think they will surpass US's GDP in the 2030s, just that not by a large margin. And in the 2040s, the US and China will probably reach parity in growth rate, and there will be a new economic equilibrium maybe until the 2060s.

Assumption in the 2040s: both grow at around 2%.
US > 1.5% productivity growth + 0.5% labor force growth.
China > 3% productivity growth - 1% labor force growth.
 
It is the good things on China that they found impossible to avoid telling you anymore that would reveal the truth.

So, instead of China collapsing, it is now China growing,

BUT.. BUT.... IT IS GOING TO PEAK SOON !!!
 
US GDP is a farce, depending on inflation and money printing, it doesn't translate into better standard of living, more Americans are struggling than the past, over half of the population can not cover $1,000 emergency bill, Many Americans in China say that they only managed to save money after they moved and worked in China, they were never able to do so in US, if the dollar domination is gone or exchange rate for dollar dramatically falls, US will become a poor country overnight, it buys everything from foreign countries.
China's economy is backed by its unrivaled manufacturing might and trade, it won't be affected much by the change of certain currencies.
 
Last edited:

How soon and at what height will China’s economy peak?

Estimates vary, depending on assumptions about population, productivity and prices

View attachment 929146
China has this year liberated its economy from the lockdowns, quarantines and other strictures of its “zero-covid” regime. But it has not freed itself from longer-term worries about its growth prospects. Its population is shrinking. Its epic housing boom is over. Thanks to a regulatory crackdown on e-commerce firms, the Communist Party has cowed the tech billionaires it once courted. Jack Ma, a former teacher who became one of China’s most celebrated entrepreneurs, has returned to teaching—in Japan.
The Communist Party now prizes security over prosperity, greatness over growth, sturdy self-reliance over the filigreed interdependence that distinguished China’s past economic success. Foreign investors are more wary, seeking to relocate or at least diversify their supply chains. And America is eager to limit Chinese access to some “foundational technologies”. The economics of mutual benefit has yielded to the geopolitics of mutual suspicion.
All this has led many analysts to cut their long-term forecasts for China’s growth, even as they raise predictions for this year. Some ask how much longer China’s economy can grow faster than America’s. The answer will affect far more than factory orders or personal incomes. It will shape the world order.
The previous consensus, both within and outside China, was that its economy would soon eclipse America’s. That, in turn, would allow China to become the world’s pre-eminent military power, and so supplant America as the world’s most powerful country. This remains a common view. Yao Yang, a respected economist at Peking University, believes China’s gdp can overtake America’s by 2029.
But others believe China’s economic clout relative to that of its rivals is nearing a peak. Hal Brands and Michael Beckley, two American political scientists, argue that China’s rise is already coming to a halt. The age of “peak China”, as they call it, is upon us—and it is far less Olympian a summit than most had predicted.

View attachment 929147

In 2011 Goldman Sachs projected that China’s gdp would surpass America’s in 2026 and become over 50% larger by mid-century. No peak was in sight. At the end of last year the bank revisited its calculations. It now thinks China’s economy will not overtake America’s until 2035 and at its high point will be only 14% bigger (see chart).

China’s peak looks similar in an influential forecast from last year by Roland Rajah and Alyssa Leng of the Lowy Institute, an Australian think-tank. Others see an even lower summit. Capital Economics, a research firm, argues that China’s economy will never be number one. It will reach 90% of America’s size in 2035 and then lose ground. In so far as the Peak China thesis can be captured in a single projection, this is it.

What accounts for the lower expectations for China’s economy? And how much of a reduction is warranted? The answers hinge on three variables: population, productivity and prices. Start with population. China’s workforce has already peaked, according to official statistics. It has 4.5 times as many 15- to 64-year-olds as America. By mid-century it will have only 3.4 times as many, according to the un’s “median” forecast. By the end of the century the ratio will drop to 1.7.

But China’s demographic prospects have not changed much over the past decade, even as forecasts for economic growth have shrunk. In fact, Goldman Sachs’s new predictions assume a gentler decline in China’s workforce than the old ones, because improvements in health may keep older workers at the grindstone for longer. The bank believes the labour supply in China will drop by about 7% from 2025 to 2050.

The biggest swing in sentiment relates not to population but to productivity. Back in 2011 Goldman Sachs thought labour productivity would grow by about 4.8% a year on average over the next 20 years. Now the bank thinks it will grow by about 3%. Mark Williams of Capital Economics takes a similar view. China will fall “off the path of an Asian outperformer onto the path of a solidly respectable emerging economy”, he says.

There are good reasons to be gloomy about Chinese workers’ productivity. As China ages, it will have to devote more of its economic energies to serving the elderly, leaving less to invest in new kit and capacity. What is more, after decades of rapid capital accumulation, the returns to new investments are diminishing. A new high-speed rail line across mountainous Tibet yields far smaller benefits at much greater cost than connecting Beijing and Shanghai, for instance.

China’s rulers are trying to impose more discipline on local governments, which build much of China’s questionable infrastructure. Unfortunately, they seem equally keen to impose their will on China’s private enterprises. In China, unlike elsewhere, firms earn a smaller return on their assets as they grow bigger, points out Capital Economics: “Get to a certain size and companies have to give as much thought to meeting the needs of officials as those of consumers.”

It is not just their own government that is hobbling Chinese businesses. In October America imposed controls on sales of advanced computer chips to China. This will hurt Chinese firms making products like mobile phones, medical equipment and cars. Goldman Sachs has not incorporated this damage into its long-term forecasts, but estimates that China’s GDP towards the end of this decade could be about 2% smaller than it would otherwise have been.

The tech war could go further. Diego Cerdeiro of the imf and his co-authors have examined a scenario in which America curtails its own technology trade with China, persuades other oecd members to follow suit, and forces countries outside this club to pick sides in the battle. Under this extreme scenario, China’s economy could be about 9% smaller in ten years’ time than it otherwise would be. The idea that China’s productivity growth might be closer to 3% than 5%, in other words, is not far-fetched.

Any predictions of the economic future must, of course, be taken with a pinch of salt. Forecasts often go awry. Small differences in the evolution of productivity or population when combined and compounded over many years can yield starkly different outcomes.

Forecasts are also sensitive to prices—especially the relative price of currencies. Unexpected shifts in exchange rates can make a mockery of predictions of relative economic heft. At the moment, a basket of goods and services that costs $100 in America costs only about $60 in China. That suggests its currency, the yuan, is undervalued. Capital Economics thinks this undervaluation will persist. Goldman Sachs, on the other hand, believes it will narrow, either because the yuan strengthens or because prices rise faster in China than in America. This process will, in Goldman’s view, add about 20% to China’s gdp by mid-century.

If China’s prices or exchange rate fail to rise as Goldman Sachs expects, then China’s gdp might never overtake America’s. If China’s labour productivity grows just half a percentage point slower than Goldman Sachs envisages, its gdp, everything else constant, will also never surpass America’s (see chart). The same is true if America grows half a point faster (as Capital Economic projects). If China’s fertility rate declines further (to 0.85 children per woman by mid-century), it might eke out a lead in the 2030s only to lose it in the 2050s. Even if China’s economy does become the biggest in the world, its lead is likely to remain small. It is unlikely to establish an edge over America equivalent to the 40% lead America now enjoys over it, Mr Rajah and Ms Leng argue.

It also seems safe to say that China and America will remain in a position of near-parity for decades. In Goldman Sachs’s scenario, China maintains a small but persistent lead over America for more than 40 years. Even in Capital Economics’s projection, China’s gdp will still be over 80% of America’s as late as 2050. China will remain a geopolitical rival to be reckoned with. That is crucial: if China’s peak is more Table Mountain than k2, its leaders will have little incentive to rush to confrontation before decline sets in.


Ah, the psychological effect, the low animalistic instinct, because of unhappiness seeing other people succeed.

When will the human economy reach its peak? And then falling down, down, and down never arise again, forever and ever?

The answer, as long as the human is still sane, we will never see the peak.

Is today's economy already near the top, in the middle, or still at the very bottom?

I hope we are still at the very very bottom, and there are still a lot of bright futures for humanity that are far beyond anyone's imagination.


But according to the prophecies, in this era, the human economy almost reaches its peak.

After that, we will return to the middle age.

There will be a brief economic improvement after that, for around 1000 years.

Then it's falling again down to the level that humans will become animals.

Then the world will be restarted, and the next generation of humans will rule the world, and the economy of the world will start to rise again slowly.
 
I see the excuses already flowing and the PPP little pinks coming out of the woodwork. There’s not enough copium in the universe for you.
 
Inflation based US GDP in reality

View attachment 929253

Inflation has declined every month for almost a year now. And outside of the first year of Covid, US dollar gdp growth has outperformed China for the last decade.

Chinese will continue to find excuses as to why China can’t surpass US GDP and then reality will set in that it never will.
 
Inflation has declined every month for almost a year now. And outside of the first year of Covid, US dollar gdp growth has outperformed China for the last decade.

Chinese will continue to find excuses as to why China can’t surpass US GDP and then reality will set in that it never will.
10 years construction and 2 billion dollars for a crude, crappy less than 3 kilometer's city subway, this is how US generates its GDP.

 
The Chinese claim US GDP is only ahead due to inflation, yet the US has maintained a consistent $7-8T+ GDP lead for the last decade.:lol:
 
Related article:
If the authors of the Economist article, or advocates of the “peak China” theory or some other contrarian view are serious about their claims that the US is leaving its peers in the dust, I suggest they find a colleague and make a bet like the one I’ve offered my colleagues at Harvard. Specifically, I’m prepared to bet up to $1000 on the proposition that in 2023 US GDP will not grow faster than China’s. Indeed, I’ve made bets that the US will not grow half as fast as China this year.

Before putting their money down, however, I suggest those tempted to make a bet first review the facts. The consensus forecast for 2023 includes the IMF, the US CBO, the major investment banks, and most academic economists. All of these foresee the US economy growing at somewhere between 0.1% and 1.6% this year, and China’s growth as between 4.8% to 6%. My best judgment is that when the books on 2023 are closed, China will have grown more than three times the rate of the US.
 

Back
Top Bottom