Small On Economy – Moon of Alabama

June 1, 2005

Small On Economy

Q: … My question, sir, is how should Americans think about China? As an ally? A rival? Competitor? Friend?

THE PRESIDENT: … And so China is a fascinating country that is significant in its size. Its economy is still small, but growing. …

President’s Press Conference , May 31, 2005

—

Rank Order – GDP – purchasing power parity – 2004 est.

1 United States $ 11,750,000,000,000

2 China $ 7,262,000,000,000

3 Japan $ 3,745,000,000,000

4 India $ 3,319,000,000,000

5 Germany $ 2,362,000,000,000

6 United Kingdom $ 1,782,000,000,000

7 France $ 1,737,000,000,000

CIA World Fact Book

Posted by b on June 1, 2005 at 20:43 UTC | Permalink

Comments

Good Find, b.
Amazing.
The guy must read comic books.

Posted by: FlashHarry | Jun 1 2005 22:07 utc | 1

And so, in my meetings with the different Chinese leaders with whom I’ve had the honor of meeting, I’ve always brought up issues such as the Dalai Lama, or the Catholic Church’s inability to get a bishop into the country, or the need for the country not to fear evangelicals, but to understand religious freedom leads to peace
somebody get chad a plane ticket!

Posted by: b real | Jun 1 2005 22:10 utc | 2

I visited a number of Chinese provincial and capital cities in the early 1990’s. At that time, my impression was that the basic infrastructure (rail, ports, power) were pretty much 1st world standard. At that time, there were still a few oldies shuffling around in Mao suits, and the general ‘drabness’ (something like say, Manchester in th UK) gave perhaps only a superficial impression of an ‘underdeveloped’ country.
At that time in Shanghai (which looked like Manchester), they were just busy tearing down the trees alongside the Bund to build the first bridge over the Huang Po River. The bridge, though, I think was a twelve lane highway. Everyone getting ready to trade in their bicycles for Hyundais. Now, it is hard to recognise photographs of Shanghai in this relatively short time.
I also wonder if even the statistics quoted represent a true picture of the relative size of the Chinese economy in comparison with the USA. What exactly is counted in the GDP figures? If the USA figures include the Las Vegas and Disneyland type of economic activity, could it be that China is already at or approaching parity with the US in some more fundamental measure of the econony? Watching Chinese news on SBS is a facinating activity even if I don’t understand a word of Chinese. Endless segments of (fairly prosperous looking people) opening up new car plants and industrial centers.
The quote from Bush that the Chinese economy ‘is still small’ is obviously absurd, but with the pace of change in the world, it may only be a few short years before America wakes up and discovers that their time has passed. PNAC or no PNAC.

Posted by: DM | Jun 1 2005 23:23 utc | 3

Boredom lead me to to click on the fact book link to see which was winning the prisons and executions contest but unfortunately the info was obtainable. Does anyone know whether the US or China has more people in prisons and which country executes the most people each year? Just in case I ever have to trade in the old liver you understand.

Posted by: Debs is dead | Jun 2 2005 1:40 utc | 4

Delusional will have a new illustration beside the meaning in the new Websters dictionary. A picture of GW Bush will have likeness in cartoon form for the illustration.
This whole White House is from some other planet. I surely can’t believe this moron has been in the WH for four years and doesn’t know China has passed Japan economically. If God is out there, please, please help us.

Posted by: jdp | Jun 2 2005 1:55 utc | 5

I’d also like to know what is included in the GDP figures, at least to see a rough breakdown by sector. Depending on who you read, the financial sector accounts for 30 – 40% of US GDP while the defense industry is another major contributor. Loans and guns. Can this possibly signify a healthy economy? Is anyone aware of a sector by sector breakdown of GDP and some analysis of the comparitive health of the economies they represent?

Posted by: lonesomeG | Jun 2 2005 2:15 utc | 6

lonesomeG……thats why they keep the wars going and run the world bank/IMF scam.

Posted by: lenin’s ghost | Jun 2 2005 3:48 utc | 7

Well, China is still poorer on a per capita basis. That’s the only reasonable kind interpretation of what he said.
Debs is dead – China wins on absolute numbers that contest, and also on a per capita basis, I think.
lonesomeG – finance does create wealth (trust a banker to tell you that…) – it does. I’ll have a post about that soon.

Posted by: Jérôme | Jun 2 2005 23:11 utc | 8

ô give me a chinese devil any day over an ape in washington. tired as i am by their tedium i await the chinese imperium eagerly – it couldn’t be any uglier or stupid than the american imperium
at this level i’d welcome tamurlaine or genghis khan or attill the hin as an improvement or some nordic giant who just barks like a mad dog

Posted by: remembereringgiap | Jun 2 2005 23:29 utc | 9

I’d appreciate your views on that, Jerome.

Posted by: lonesomeG | Jun 3 2005 3:52 utc | 10

Back to Main