The Plan to Avert Our Post-Antibiotic Apocalypse

[Monoriu]

Mono's great great grandfather was saying the same thing circa 1899.

A big part of China's problems back then was external.  China kept losing wars to foreign powers, and was in the process of being colonised and divided up.  So a significant part of the intellectuals and ruling elite saw the need for change.  That is absent today as China is now nuclear armed.  The threat of foreign invasion and colonisation is nil. 

[alfred russel]

China could one day become a first world state, but it pretty much has to collapse first.

Raz, you are missing the point. The BRIC countries can avoid ever reaching first world and still have economies larger than the "wealthy countries". They have more people.

[Monoriu]

"Ever since Tiananmen"?  That's what, 25 years ago?  Bit of a short launch window there, Mono. 

Oh, there'll be no collapse.  There never is.  There will always be a China, in one fashion or another.  The Chinese will just continue to do stupid short-sighted Chinese shit, like 45 million deaths in 4 years, or being the globe's largest existential ecocide, or becoming the world's biggest ticking time bomb in a gender imbalance that will imperil the nation's stability.  You can set your dynastic clock to it.

2017 is going to be quite important.  One of the reasons of the Communist Party's staying power is succession planning.  After Tiananmen, Deng did two things.  He appointed his successor (Jiang Zemin), and appointed the successor to his successor (Hu Jintao).  Over the years, they also established many succession rules.  "7 up, 8 down" means a politburo member may continue to be reappointed if he is 67 or younger.  If he is 68 or older, he needs to step down when his time is up (he can finish his 5-year term, but his term can't be extended).  Each party secretary-general may serve for 2 terms only (10 years). 

By 2017, the current secretary-general would have served one full term.  His term will be extended for another 5 years, but tradition is that he needs to pick a successor and appoint him into the politburo standing committee as sort of party secretary-general in-training.  Whether he does so or not will be telling. 

[CountDeMoney]

China could one day become a first world state, but it pretty much has to collapse first.

Raz, you are missing the point. The BRIC countries can avoid ever reaching first world and still have economies larger than the "wealthy countries". They have more people.

Enough with the more people bullshit.  A fuckton of broke ass third world poors living in abject Sally Struthers squalor doth not a western-eclipsing GDP make.

[viper37]

Not sure why you are laughing. That isn't crazy--China has basically caught the US on its own, and its growth rates tend to be a lot higher.

Western Europe, Japan, Canada, Australia, New Zealand, and I guess South Korea (if we are using a big tent) have way less people than India, Brazil, and Russia.

Brazil, Russia, India and China are dysfunctional states with economies built on graft, corruption, mismanagement, centralized failure and overall basic bullshit.

just like the actual US, according to Trump and Sanders...

[The Minsky Moment]

China could one day become a first world state, but it pretty much has to collapse first.

Raz, you are missing the point. The BRIC countries can avoid ever reaching first world and still have economies larger than the "wealthy countries". They have more people.

Yes the BRIC thesis was never really about these countries reaching full developed status.  The point was that they had high growth rates and large population such that even moderate developmental improvements could have enormous implications for markets and trade.  O'Neill was spot on: over the 10 year period he was projecting from back in 2001, the BRICs did in fact increase their share of world GDP.

[jimmy olsen]

Russia's a failed petrostate whose failure to diversify while times were good, in favor of lining the pockets of Putin's cronies, will doom them to decades more of economic irrelevance.

The current corruption fueled struggle over the Presidency in Brazil doesn't bode well for their prospects.

China's troubles and the government's failed attempts to deny the laws of economics are well documented.

I don't know much about India's economy,  but the corruption and income inequality there is off the charts.

[Monoriu]

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_countries_by_GDP_(PPP)

According to wiki, the combined BRIC GDP was $34.174 trillion (2015, by purchasing power parity).  The combined GDP of the US, EU, Japan, South Korea, Canada, Australia, New Zealand was $46.94 trillion.  BRIC aren't that far behind. 

[Martinus]

China could one day become a first world state, but it pretty much has to collapse first.

Raz, you are missing the point. The BRIC countries can avoid ever reaching first world and still have economies larger than the "wealthy countries". They have more people.

Russia has the populace only slightly higher than Japan and it is declining. Its economy is expected to contract by 1.2% in 2016 after a decline of 3.7% in 2015.

I havent bothered to check stats for Brazil, India and China but what you are saying clearly isnt true for all BRIC countries.

[Richard Hakluyt]

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_countries_by_GDP_(PPP)

According to wiki, the combined BRIC GDP was $34.174 trillion (2015, by purchasing power parity).  The combined GDP of the US, EU, Japan, South Korea, Canada, Australia, New Zealand was $46.94 trillion.  BRIC aren't that far behind.

The difference is bigger if we use nominal GDP rather than the PPP figures.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_countries_by_GDP_(nominal)

I think that for discussions on international trade the nominal GDP is probably preferable.

[Monoriu]

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_countries_by_GDP_(PPP)

According to wiki, the combined BRIC GDP was $34.174 trillion (2015, by purchasing power parity).  The combined GDP of the US, EU, Japan, South Korea, Canada, Australia, New Zealand was $46.94 trillion.  BRIC aren't that far behind.

The difference is bigger if we use nominal GDP rather than the PPP figures.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_countries_by_GDP_(nominal)

I think that for discussions on international trade the nominal GDP is probably preferable.

I'll leave it to people more knowledgeable than me to explain which one is more suitable.  But the prediction is for 2050.  There is still plenty of time

[Valmy]

I have been hearing about China's collapse for decades.  Ever since Tiananmen, people have predicted civil war, Cultural Revolution Mk 2, disintegration, regional war, financial armageddon, population uprisings, revolts, coups, whatever.  Hasn't happened yet. 

Ever since Tianamen? Hell they had not even really rose at that point. And according to you there are population uprisings on an annual basis

Anyway India and China I can get. I am not sure what the enormous optimism is over Russia and Brazil though or why those four countries should be considered some kind of bloc or alliance to be measured against the US and its allies.

[Monoriu]

I have been hearing about China's collapse for decades.  Ever since Tiananmen, people have predicted civil war, Cultural Revolution Mk 2, disintegration, regional war, financial armageddon, population uprisings, revolts, coups, whatever.  Hasn't happened yet. 

Ever since Tianamen? Hell they had not even really rose at that point. And according to you there are population uprisings on an annual basis

Anyway India and China I can get. I am not sure what the enormous optimism is over Russia and Brazil though or why those four countries should be considered some kind of bloc or alliance to be measured against the US and its allies.

Huh?  When did I say there are population uprisings on an annual basis?  There are clashes with police and law enforcement every hour, but those are minor.  Those usually have very limited objectives, like defending one's home from demolition, not paying a fine etc. 

If Tiananmen wasn't an uprising, I don't know what is

[Valmy]

I have been hearing about China's collapse for decades.  Ever since Tiananmen, people have predicted civil war, Cultural Revolution Mk 2, disintegration, regional war, financial armageddon, population uprisings, revolts, coups, whatever.  Hasn't happened yet. 

Ever since Tianamen? Hell they had not even really rose at that point. And according to you there are population uprisings on an annual basis

Anyway India and China I can get. I am not sure what the enormous optimism is over Russia and Brazil though or why those four countries should be considered some kind of bloc or alliance to be measured against the US and its allies.

Huh?  When did I say there are population uprisings on an annual basis?  There are clashes with police and law enforcement every hour, but those are minor.  Those usually have very limited objectives, like defending one's home from demolition, not paying a fine etc. 

If Tiananmen wasn't an uprising, I don't know what is

In the US those would be major issues. In China they are routine. That is what I was saying

And anyway I am still wondering why Brazil, China, India, and Russia are being lumped together.

[Monoriu]

And anyway I am still wondering why Brazil, China, India, and Russia are being lumped together.

They are all big, populous, have potential high growth rates, held back by sub-optimal governance but aren't hopeless cases like North Korea or Congo.  With a suitable dose of reform, they can become new economic powerhouses due to the sheer sizes of their population and geographic reach. 

Or somebody needs a nice acronym to sell their (overpriced) stock funds, and BRIC is catchy