Remix.run Logo
MrSkelter 3 hours ago

Your comment seems rooted in fear and anger.

Americas technological domination was based in the fact it was the largest rich country for the last hundred years. That’s it. Just raw statistics.

Now China has a middle class as large as the US population, and continues to bring people into that class.

With triple the US population Chinese dominance is certain. Not by nefarious means, it’s just statistics. There is nothing special about Americans. There is nothing special about the Chinese. It’s just the more well educated people you have the better you will do.

China also benefits from efficiency. America wastes people and resources duplicating work and trying to protect companies from competition. Just the excess of lawyers can be considered a drain on the country. So many could contribute more in other fields.

As long as China keeps trying they will win. Big beats small.

Germany was the intellectual world leader until WW2 and the US only outperformed Germany in terms of Nobel Prizes in the 21st century. Many of Americas flagship technologies were built by German born and educated immigrants.

Americas anti immigration stance is accelerating American decline. The US has always drawn the world’s best via access and funding. Without that America can only rely on home grown talent and that is a huge disadvantage due to the way American schools are structured.

GuB-42 2 hours ago | parent | next [-]

As a non-American, I think that Americans are special in that they have the right combination of hard work and personal initiative and efficiency. To oversimplify, Europeans are efficient workers, but unlike Americans, they use their efficiency not to produce more but to work less and enjoy life. East Asians are hard workers but they tend to favor group cohesion over maximizing individual potential, which is not as efficient.

I am not saying that one culture is better than another, but I think the American way is particularly productive, particularly stressful too.

jermaustin1 an hour ago | parent [-]

I feel this is true of Americans and Europeans. And as an American, I've been migrating myself more and more into the European mindset. I put in my 8 hours, and I'm done, then I do non-work related activities for the next 8 hours, then I sleep for the next.

andyjohnson0 2 hours ago | parent | prev | next [-]

> Your comment seems rooted in fear and anger.

It's rooted in neither. Care to explain why you came to that conclusion? Fyi I'm neither American nor Chinese.

I was replying to a commenter who used "how we approach everything" and "Chinese way of thinking" when explaining China's economic dominance. I was questioning whether there is any such "national thinking" in any society, still less in a society of ~1.4bn people.

Fwiw I think that China's achievement, since the mid 20th century, of lifting so many people out of extreme poverty in such a short time is extremely creditable. As is its recent action on deploying clean energy technology. I'm much less impressed with its authoritarian political system. And of course I worry about military conflict.

maxglute 9 minutes ago | parent [-]

It's the story the new generations tell themselves that's taken hold last few years. IIRC context is SMEE chairman (maker of PRC litho machine) said EUV is made by man, not god. Became rally for PRC industry and national confidence. X is made by man, not god for anything PRC needs to catchup on. Which circles back to Qian Xuesen, foreign people can build rockets, why can't we. Or more recently, foreign people are good at XYZ events, why can't we. AKA anything they can do we can do.

The bigger undercurrent is divide between faction of people who think EUV impossible or possible. Between boomer/doomers (older, never do better than west types) and young techno-optimists, faction generation/education divided. TLDR PRC technical talent skews young, and techwar as spurned wave of scifi optimists, techno nationalists and industrialist party way of thinking. It's not homogeneous but it's dominant, especially in S&T after quick ascendancy.

jorts 30 minutes ago | parent | prev | next [-]

China is in a bad place long-term with an inevitable population decline.

maxglute 7 minutes ago | parent | next [-]

Long term is after you and I die, before that they'll reap the greatest high skill demographic dividend in human history that can put everyone else in a bad place long term first.

adrianN 13 minutes ago | parent | prev [-]

Which developed country doesn’t have a demographics problem?

LiquidSky an hour ago | parent | prev | next [-]

You’re not addressing the parent’s question about how any of this is about the “Chinese way of thinking”. In fact, in offering a purely material explanation for China’s success, that it simply has more people and resources, you’re actively arguing against the idea.

dangus 3 hours ago | parent | prev | next [-]

I think the places where American inefficiency is most visible is in construction, urban planning, and healthcare.

America blows a significant amount of its money by having its citizens drive everywhere with no option to take a train, bus, bicycle, or low-speed e-scooter. Americans take a crazy percentage of their income and just dump it into the stagnant automotive industry. Americans blow between $5,000-10,000 a year on transportation. It’s so crazy that there is a pretty long list of American cities where moving from the suburbs to the most walkable part of the metro area of that city will net you more square footage in your dwelling after removing the $750/month expense of owning a personal vehicle.

Then you can’t even really fix this problem in America because construction costs are wildly inflated. China can build a high speed rail network for the entire country for the price of a handful of miles of subway in manhattan. Projects take an insanely long time, e.g., California high speed rail. Multiple US cities have a housing cost crisis because houses aren’t being built fast enough, and that’s more money in the economy being blown on rent and financial products rather than productive endeavors.

Hangzhou metro has 12 subway lines. In 2014 they only had one.

Finally, healthcare. America just blows double the amount of money on healthcare of the next most expensive country, with worse outcomes in part because they sit in their cars all day.

I don’t even think some of the problems you’ve brought up with America like the school system are as big of problems. America has really good public schools and universities, so good that Chinese people still come to the US to get educated en masse, even at pretty standard and average state schools.

The current government doing stupid shit like discouraging research and immigration is certainly not helping though.

cbm-vic-20 2 hours ago | parent | next [-]

Regarding your last point, back when my political views were "evolving", I had thought about if, instead of handing foreigners diplomas and kicking them out of the country as fast as possible, we should do the opposite: have student visas require that the recipient stay in the US at least five years after graduation, and then fast-track them through the permanent residency -> citizenship pipeline. It made no sense to me why we'd educate someone to get a degree in chemical engineering, possibly from a rival nation, and then send them back to where they came from. We should "brain drain" other countries, not the other way around.

pegasus 2 hours ago | parent | next [-]

Those foreign students usually pay for the education they receive, they might not be willing to do so (or as much) if there are strings attached. Besides, I don't think any country should aim on brain draining any other country, that kind of selfishness will be counterproductive long-term. Who knows, might be what we're seeing right now (the US self-sabotaging). Karma's a bitch.

mcculley 2 hours ago | parent | prev | next [-]

I like the idea of incentivizing people to stay, but I don’t know how we could “require” it. I don’t want the U.S. to implement exit visas or egress control.

dangus 2 hours ago | parent | prev [-]

That seems like a pretty good idea that’s worth trying.

I think the current logic is that foreign students pay the full unsubsidized sticker price, so it’s basically a profitable transaction.

soared an hour ago | parent | prev [-]

Show me these magical cities where an extra $750/mo in rent lets you both move from the suburbs to downtown, and increase your sq footage!

senordevnyc an hour ago | parent [-]

Seriously, delusional take. I live in Manhattan and I’m considering a move to Westchester (large suburban county just north of NYC). Average cost per sq foot to buy in Manhattan is about $1500, and it’s about $400 in Westchester. That’s before you touch the other differences in cost of living (taxes, childcare, groceries, etc).

mc32 2 hours ago | parent | prev [-]

So some or even many people explain America’s success as a result of diversity. If that’s true then either China will need to import a diverse population (axis of diversity is uncertain), or else diversity is irrelevant and they will succeed as a more or less undiverse population (whether people are actually Han doesn’t matter so long as they believe and the government classifies them as Han). It’ll be interesting to see.

maxglute 2 hours ago | parent | next [-]

Diversity is just short hand for US needs to brain drain from around the world, the success is system that disproportionaly increase size of US skilled workforce vs rest, so people better play nice with each other (worked well until not). When PRC went from making 1% of of global technical talent to 50%, and able to retain them or in this case redrain them, they win talent game for generations (at least until 2070s). They will output more stem in next 20 years than US will increase population, births + immigration, i.e. their technical workforce will be 2-3x US. "Diversity" can't brain drain enough to make a dent on those ratios.

scilro 2 hours ago | parent | prev [-]

"diversity" is an overbroad concept that covers many disparate social practices, a lot of which have nothing to do with technological progress.

I guess that the more focused question is whether China needs to import some amount of tech talent to succeed, at least temporarily. The reporting on this EUV prototype does suggest that that is what they did, giving foreign researchers special visas and whatnot.