Going back to 19th century honor-based, symmetric protectionist bilateral trade duels is going to go down as the most spectacular economic own-goal in history if it is pursued to the bitter end. It will eclipse the previous most spectacular own-goal: China’s pre-modern one.
-
-
What’s better than a superpower that knows how to actually create wealth? TWO superpowers that know how to do it. Even better if it’s with two distinct playbooks. Hedge bets. There are problems with the rise of China, but they’re climate/environmental, not zero-sum political.
Show this thread -
China is probably iterating and learning faster than the US in a few key areas, like batteries and solar or something. Maybe semiconductors in the future. But so long as the rest of the world can benefit from cheap Chinese innovation spillover, it’s good.
Show this thread -
Vast wealth was created around the world via cheap spillover of a century of US innovation. It’d be nice to have a twin-engined global innovation economy. It’s certainly needed to beat climate change, drive development in Africa, beat aging population problem with robots, etc.
Show this thread -
Even with its fatal ideological flaws and a flawed economic doctrine, the USSR did a ton of wealth-creating innovation. So did Japan. Whether Chinese playbook works or not politically/ideologically, we’ll probably end up with some good rewards from the grand Chinese experiment
Show this thread
End of conversation
New conversation -
Loading seems to be taking a while.
Twitter may be over capacity or experiencing a momentary hiccup. Try again or visit Twitter Status for more information.