China Again Boosts Research and Development Spending By More Than 10% (sciencemag.org) 53
China continued its yearslong run of double-digit percentage increases in spending on R&D in 2019, but the nation is likely to fall short of a long-standing goal of increasing R&D expenditures to 2.5% of gross domestic product (GDP) by this year. From a report: But not hitting the target "should not be considered a failure, as China has been increasing its R&D expenditure over the past several decades at a rate higher than GDP growth," says Cao Cong, a science policy specialist at the University of Nottingham's Ningbo, China, campus. Total public and private science and technology expenditures in 2019 rose 12.5% over the previous year to 2.21 trillion Chinese yuan ($322 billion), the National Bureau of Statistics reported yesterday. Spending on basic research accounted for 6% of the total; applied research, 11.3%; and development, 82.7%. The spending amounted to 2.23% of GDP, an increase of 0.09 percentage points from the previous year. The 2.5% of GDP by 2020 goal was spelled out in China's most recent Five Year Plan and in a 15-year Medium- and Long-Term Program for Science and Technology Development. For comparison, the United States spent 2.83% of GDP on R&D in 2018, according to the 5 August Main Science and Technology Indicators of the Organisation for Economic Co-Operation and Development (OECD), which covers 37 of the world's largest national economies. OECD as a whole spent 2.38% of GDP on R&D in 2018. Israel and South Korea spent 4.9% and 4.5% of GDP, respectively, in 2018.
Of course they can (Score:4, Interesting)
...when the worlds largest and richest economy ever in human history cannot for decades come close to paying for everything they WANT, and have to borrow 20-25% of their budget annually for decades from China, yes, China's going to have oodles of money just from that debt service.
China's R&D spending is mainly subsidized by US debt service.
Re: (Score:2)
We are ripping them off if that's the casse. Giving them paper dollars/monopoly money instead of something tangible. They should be demanding we give them useful things instead of cash. Why can't we give them things they can use, instead of cash and IOUs?
Re: Of course they can (Score:3)
Re: Of course they can (Score:2)
If you owe the bank ten thousand dollars, you have a problem. If you owe the bank ten million dollars, the bank has a problem.
Re:Of course they can (Score:5, Informative)
Re: (Score:3)
National Debt isn't a bad thing. However you need to invest into that Debt into activities that cause growth.
A billion dollars to fix roadways so to increase functional traffic to local towns, so they can put of small businesses, is a good use to debt, while cutting taxes without any spending cuts, hoping that the rich will invest their savings, in which they only use the money to buy back stocks, isn't a good use.
The only think I liked about Trump 2016 Campaign was the talk about infrastructure. Infrastr
And (Score:2)
That, and divesting in military adventurism. Talk about the biggest waste of money ever. Let's pay billions of dollars to ruin a country, then spend trillions unsuccessfully trying to rebuild it.
Re: (Score:2)
We do not borrow money for things we want. We borrow money to make sure these other, sometimes not friendly, countries have a vested interest in making sure the US has a strong economy. This is entirely by design.
If we owe China money, they will not take any drastic actions against the US.
This is the price of peace. I do not think anyone thinks it is a *great* plan, but it is *a* plan that has worked for a while.
Re: (Score:3, Informative)
In fact, the opposite is true. China's economy is built on exports, and it will continue to do so as domestic consumption is not enough to continuously create better paying jobs for teh 900M people stil
Re: (Score:3)
There are about 30 million in poverty in China, not 900 million. Your whole post seems decades out of date.
Re: (Score:1)
Yet clearly taking one point out of context defeats the whole argument about the
Chinese Shadow Lending market, whi
Re: Of course they can (Score:5, Interesting)
Re: (Score:2)
The problem with inflation is that if people expect continued future inflation, they change the way they save and invest. This can create a snow-balling effect. Nobody knows for sure if it will in all cases, but why risk? Instead of experimenting with inflation, tax the rich to keep the budget under control.
The rich spread the lie that they need tax breaks to create jobs, when in fact many of the wealthiest companies and individuals already have piles of cash and real-estate because consumer demand is not h
I would agree with you BUT (Score:2)
Re: (Score:1)
The military is one place to look.
Re: (Score:3)
There isn't much accurate in your post at all.
First off, you appear to be talking about the US economy and the federal budget as if they are the same thing. The US economy currently outputs about $20 trillion in GDP each year (not sure the current Covid figures though), and the federal government's budget is around $4 trillion. The federal government does currently run a nearly $1 trillion deficit, or about 25% of its budget, which is where I assume you got some of your figures from. But that is only 5% of
Re: (Score:2)
So you don't mind losing 1% of the economy every year? I'm sure that will have no consequences...
The US is not losing 1% of its economy each year. It is buying goods and services and only having to give out IOUs based on a currency which the US can literally print if it needs to. This is an advantage of being the world's reserve currency, which is an advantage the US would be smart to protect at all cost. China would rather not need to buy up US federal debt if it didn't have to in order to protect its export economy as it transitions into a more mature economy.
America's economy is only the biggest if you measure it in $US. If you measured it in stuff that people make and do. China would be much bigger. America is still much much richer and per capita way out in front. But the "US economy" hasn't been the biggest for a while now.
Nominal GDP is the standard measure of co
heh (Score:2)
Rest of the planet getting tired of developing shit for them to copy?
Re: (Score:1)
Rest of the planet getting tired of developing shit for them to copy?
Don't worry, you'll be copying their shit soon enough.
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:3)
Europe use to say that about the United States (Pre WWII).
Then we said that about Japan (Post WWII - 1980's)
Then we said that about Korea (1980's-2000's)
now China.
The thing is, once a country economy can get to a point where it is well self sustainable, the country will then invest into more risky investments. Manufacturing is a safe investment. People want X, so we will make X. The Risky investment is People want X, so we invent Y, and Z. Then we find out that the people who wanted X now really wants Y
Re: (Score:1)
False. Europe and the US industrialized at more or less the same time. While the US was copying Britain, Britain, Germany and Italy were copying each other, too. Subtle but important difference.
Also, replace "Pre WWII" with the 1800s. Japan was like 100+ years after the West. In the 1980's Japan's modern economy was booming, but industrialization took place long before that.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/... [wikipedia.org]
Re: (Score:2)
That is what they were saying like that is what we are saying about China.
While China does copy a lot of our stuff, we in America copy a lot of stuff from other areas too. That is kinda what global trade looks like.
China has been inventing and creating stuff too.
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
Not justifying it, but the west had over 200 years of free labor and resources too -- slavery and colonisation. That enabled education and funding for the industrial revolution. Eventually these were discard, so hopefully China will do the same. The way I see it is China is probably more humane than say Leopold II of Belgium (which isn't saying much).
Re: (Score:2)
And how is the 5G deployment going without Huawei equipment?
Re: (Score:2)
fuck if I care, I am still waiting for 4G to not be complete garbage
China has it right (Score:1)
Re: (Score:1)
Re: (Score:1)
Totalitarian rule is why they eliminated COVID (if they indeed did eliminate COVID) - locking down whole cities at a moment's notice with no one daring to put up a fight.
There's only one bit which is key here. China, once they realised that there was a serious epidemic reacted in a moment. The other countries, like South Korea, Taiwan and New Zealand which also managed to free themselves of COVID are also the ones which reacted instantly, however in most of these cases they are more freedom loving that the USA, for example and definitely never had the level of lockdown that China chose.
The testing rate in China is actually lower than that of the US and many other countries, which means there are large portions of the population that have not been tested,
The key question you need to be asking is what is their positive rate? WHO recommendat
Take lead while your competor is over confident (Score:4, Interesting)
The United States who still is the leader of R&D. Is now over confident in its lead, and too many people have reaped the reward from previous R&D Discoveries, that they are less willing to risk what they got into further R&D.
When ever there is a new scientific finding, there seems to be a growing group of people who go, Well what can I make with that to sell it? I can't think of anything so why am I wasting my money on this research. So they will not put their money that they may have made from previous R&D findings back into R&D.
China Sees this. So they are putting their money into R&D figuring because America is regressing, they can catch up, exceed the US and become dominate.
China is roughly the same physical size of the United States, access to a lot of resources, it has nearly 10x the population. The only thing holding them back from world dominance is their previous self isolation (aka Make China Great Again, idea) that it had opposed on itself for the previous centuries, being over confident itself on its own greatness.
Chinese government really sucks on human rights, however the US is lagging there too. So it is really investing into growth, while we in the United States Regress. With only the likes of Elon Musk to push us forward.
Re: (Score:1)
Re: (Score:2)
The United States who still is the leader of R&D. Is now over confident in its lead [...] China Sees this. So they are putting their money into R&D figuring because America is regressing, they can catch up, exceed the US and become dominate.
You have insightful parts of your post, but I'm not sure where you get this idea of China taking advantage of the US becoming over confident. The US is still spending more on R&D as a percentage of GDP and in real dollars. This story is more about China narrowing the gap, not overtaking the US. It is still an accomplishment but you seem to combine it with false assumptions that the US is falling behind in R&D.
What the US is falling behind in is percentage of worldwide R&D, which is inevitable.
Re: (Score:1)
What evidence do we have that gov't backed R&D is economically worth it? There are anecdotes of "hits" and boondoggles, but it's hard to do statistical analysis on anecdotes.
One hit was the internet, but it was publicly available info that any country could've used. And if it were made proprietary, it may not have taken off because experimenters wouldn't want to pay royalties.
New publicly-known technology does tend to benefit the USA because we have a strong entrepreneurial market that takes advantage o
Meanwhile the US (Score:3)
increased it's military spending by 5.3% between FY 2018 and 2019 - money that is essentially sunk with zero meaningful return on investment.
Re: (Score:1)
Re: (Score:2)
An alternative title (Score:1)
This title is designed to agitate you. Here are some titles that makes you feel more comfortable:
Re: (Score:1)
US Industrial Policy (Score:2)
The US is in need of a well thought out industrial policy. Without it, China is going to eat our lunch. (And, 'our' also includes Europe, and probably other places, too.)
It has taken self-serving short-sighted politicians and investors about 40 years to destroy US industrial hegemony. It will take at least half that long to fix it.
Unfortunately, there is no one on the horizon who is likely to do so. Trump, while recognizing the problem, apparently fails to understand there are no quick fixes. The left,
Mixed bag (Score:1)
Gov't sponsored R&D has a mixed record. While interesting discovers are sometimes made, they often take decades to pay off, and by then they usually benefit the world instead of a particular country. Not that such is a bad thing, but I'm not sure that's their goal.
Second, a lot of it ends up being for moot. Japan invested heavily in high-definition analog TV, but digital rose up to make analog obsolete.
Meanwhile, the US is increasing LAWYERS! (Score:2)
Consistent with previous budgets, the president’s proposal calls for the elimination of NASA’s STEM Engagement office ($120 million) and a near elimination of the Institute of Museum and Library Services, with only $23 million proposed for IMLS (FY20 appropriation was $252 million). Each of these offices currently partner in the Department of Education’s interagency agreements to support 21st CCLC programs with STEM opportunities in afterschool. But while the president has called for elimination or severe cuts to these agencies, it’s important to note here that NASA’s STEM Engagement office and IMLS each received $10 million increases from congress in the FY20 budget passed in December 2019.
STEM isn't even an afterthought in Senate: https://www.nytimes.com/2019/1... [nytimes.com]
How many does it take to change a light bulb? (Score:2)
How many AMERICANS does it take to change a light bulb?
None. Trump says we're #1 in light bulbs and the Americans chant "U.S.A!" in the dark.
I shouldn't need to reference the pandemic to point out how true this pre-pandemic joke.
Why would China need to increase spending? (Score:2)
They just steal tech from everybody else anyway. I suppose that most of the increase in R&D spending goes to hacking teams and spys.
Meanwhile, the US disinvests (Score:2)
For example, I know as a fact (I worked there until I retired last year) the GOP keeps cutting the NIH budget, which funds 60%? 80% of all the *basic* biomedical and bioscientific research in the US.
No, the companies DON'T. They take what was funded by the taxpayer and monetize it. I mean, basic research is hell on this quarter's ROI.
Freedom_of_thought vs Supremacism (Score:2)