Talk:Essay: Communist China’s quixotic quest to innovate: A statist economy can’t make creativity greatly blossom

Liberal claptrap

Apparently, American foreign policy is run by a bunch of Luddites:

“

Any Chinese company innovating too quickly or succeeding too visibly now represents a “risk” in the eyes of the US government

”

• How The Chinese Beat Trump And OpenAI

How come you are always a day late and $10 inflation adjusted dollars short?

You know, if America is ever to raise up a generation of young innovators to compete with the Chinese and Russians, they need to be smarter than the author of these essays and able to read through all the false pride and cheerleading. RobS^{The Truth. Just Putin It Out There} 23:53, January 24, 2025 (EST)

As Trump said, it's a merit-based society, and not one based on birthright (cause you were lucky enough to be born American, and not Russian or Chinese).

But this seems to a habit with this author - trying to promote himself or his society by tearing others down. RobS^{The Truth. Just Putin It Out There} 23:59, January 24, 2025 (EST)

Do you ever actually do any research for the pap you pollute Conservapedia pages and Categories with?

User:Conservative: You could save both of us countless hours daily if you were to cease your trolling. Most importantly, it would be beneficial to our readers. RobS^{The Truth. Just Putin It Out There} 16:44, January 27, 2025 (EST)

• DeepSeek: Hype and Reality. Understanding the recent earthquake in AI development.

"According to a McKinsey report, AI could potentially contribute around $600 billion annually to the Chinese economy, which could equate to roughly 3.7% of China's current GDP". - McKinsey & Company, 2022[1]

What about the rest of the economy? In 2023, the USA was over 200% more productive in terms of labor productivity than China when measured using purchasing power parity.[2]

And labor productivity leads to economic stability and wealth generation. Right now China has a property crisis, deflation and high youth unemployment. China's economy is a mess so it's not surprising that the USA has over 300% higher GDP (PPP) than China per capita in 2024.[3]

After all is said and done, statist picking and choosing of winners and losers is not as innovative, dynamic, prosperity creating or stable as capitalism overall - especially over the long run.[4]

For a while, the Soviet Union and Japan were high flyers, but their economic castles were built on sand. China's deflation shows that it is at the beginning stage of Japanification which is a type of economic stagnation.[5]Conservative (talk) 18:11, January 27, 2025 (EST)

DEEPSEEK RELEASES VISUAL MODEL! This new open source model is good at picture understanding and generation! ➡️ Another blow to the billion dollar companies! "Janus-Pro is a novel autoregressive framework that unifies multimodal understanding and generation. It addresses the limitations of previous approaches by decoupling visual encoding into separate pathways, while still utilizing a single, unified transformer architecture for processing. Janus-Pro surpasses previous unified model and matches or exceeds the performance of task-specific models."

None of your lame postings and excuses will coverup the fact that (A) you don't know what you are talking about (B) your only motivation is maliciousness and vindictiveness toward another editor, and (C) you are wasting colossal amounts of yours, Andy's, mine, and everybody else's time. And ultimately, all your crap and trolling will be burnt up and deleted. RobS^{The Truth. Just Putin It Out There} 22:19, January 27, 2025 (EST)

China surpasses US in scientist numbers for the first time China surpasses the US in top scientists, with its global share rising to 28% by 2024. [6] January 17, 2025

“

According to statistics, from 2020 to 2024, the number of leading scientists in China increased from 18,805 to 32,511, with its global share rising from 16.9 percent to 27.9 percent. This indicates a significant shift in global talent dynamics. None of this is coincidental. Some foreign media outlets said that today's China is no longer just the "world's factory" or "a giant market for the world's companies;" it is increasingly becoming the "world's research-and-development laboratory."

”

Why are you forcing me to headline this stuff on MPR? It is the only way to give readers fair warning that some of the crap they find on this website is crap.

Surely there must be another way to deal with your narcissistic, emotional. self-image problems and wounded pride?

The former Soviet Union had a lot of scientists. Sputnik is proof of that. But the statist former Soviet Union fell as it did not a dynamic capitalist system to turn the science/technology into lots of profitable businesses And the former Soviet Union in the 1970s didn't even have a big demographic crisis like China has.

You and the Chinese government can keep putting your trust in big government, but you both will be disappointed.

Furthermore, the Trump tariffs will be descending on China and even some global south countries have started putting tariffs on China. China cannot export its way into prosperity. We live in a different world now.

"The statement "China cannot export its way into prosperity" means that relying solely on exporting goods to other countries will not be enough to achieve sustained economic growth and prosperity for China due to factors like its large size, the need to develop domestic consumption, and increasing global trade complexities; essentially, it needs to diversify its economy beyond exports to truly prosper. As the world's largest exporter, China faces limitations in further expanding its export market share, making it difficult to solely rely on exports for growth."[7] Conservative (talk) 23:28, January 27, 2025 (EST)

Please see: China’s Economy Cannot Export Its Problems Away. Conservative (talk) 23:30, January 27, 2025 (EST)

The Trump tariff train is coming down the tracks and Communist China is tied down to the tracks by its deflation, huge housing crisis, its high youth unemployment and its demographic crisis. Resistance is futile. You must assimilate. Acknowledge that the USA will be the leading power for the foreseeable future before you have more egg on your face. Conservative (talk) 23:41, January 27, 2025 (EST)

Trump vows tariffs on nations that 'harm' US; names India, China as high-tariff countries, The New Indian Express, January 27, 2024. Conservative (talk) 00:08, January 28, 2025 (EST)

You don't understand how tariffs work. For each action there is an equal and opposite reaction. Tariffs are like warfare, with reprisals. So why don't you just STHU until you actually learn something.

No one believes your crap anyway, after three years of using Conservapedia to pitch Bidenomics and the Russia hoax. RobS^{The Truth. Just Putin It Out There} 00:25, January 28, 2025 (EST)

It's simple economics: China has 5 times the population of the United States. Each year China graduates 5 times as many scientists, lawyers, and technicians from its schools. And there is nothing racially superior about the American educational system. In fact, it's seriously screwed up.

Get a life. Get real. And stop trolling your racist crap. RobS^{The Truth. Just Putin It Out There} 00:50, January 28, 2025 (EST)

So not only is China incapable of technological innovation, it is incapable of innovation in military strategy and national security?

Defense One: The big threat left out of Xi’s parade: China’s weaponized AI startups: After militarizing civilian ships, China’s doing the same with dual-use AI companies.

Enjoy your Deepseek now. Because Daddy Trump is back home and he is taking off his tariff belt. And China is going to get a whupping for its spy balloon and IP theft.

Trump on his tariffs:

“As tariffs on other countries go up, taxes on American workers and businesses will come down and massive numbers of jobs and factories will come home,” Trump said Monday at a gathering of House Republicans at his Doral resort in Miami, during a speech in which he praised the tariff-heavy US approach at the turn of the 20th century.

“Remember, again, the word ‘tariff.’ We’re going to protect our people and our businesses, and we’re going to protect our country, with tariffs,” Trump added. He’s said to have earlier mused about tariffs of up to 20%.

The dollar rose against every major currency on Trump’s latest threats."[8]

Questions:

Trump employed tariffs in his first administration. Did it cause a problem as far as inflation?

Are you familiar with the economic concepts of "price elasticity" and "substitute goods"?

Do the sellers of goods that are tariffed sometimes eat the differential in price or a portion of the differential in price?

Could Trump's trade negotiators use the tariffs as a bargaining chip to have more fair trade betwen the USA and China?

Do tariffs bring in money for the government which could allow Trump to lower income taxes more readily?

If income taxes are lowered, could that increase people's willing to work/invest? Conservative (talk) 01:35, January 28, 2025 (EST)

Answer:

You're just a troll, and a racist troll at that.

RobS^{The Truth. Just Putin It Out There} 01:53, January 28, 2025 (EST)

You are an idiot.

Financial Times: world is moving on to trade without the US, January 27, 2025

“

While Trump has yet to deliver on his tariff promises, he is likely to do so. There is a continuing fear that the US president's aggressive stance will sow global turmoil, stifle growth and roil markets, especially if the countries targeted by the tariffs retaliate. But revenge is not the only option. The U.S. has been weaponizing tariffs for eight years now, with Biden increasing many of the tariffs Trump imposed. Some countries are taking similar measures, while others are offering concessions or challenging the measures. But most are simply quietly backing away, seeking to trade with other countries without the U.S. America may gain a dominant position as a financial and economic superpower, but lose its position in trade. Its share of world trade is already less than 15%, and it has declined sharply in the last eight years. Five of the 10 fastest-growing trade corridors end in China, and only two of them end in the United States.

”

You are incapable of intelligent debate or discussion at any level.

Honestly, when I read this article, I do not know where to begin with the asinine crap you have posted up over the past 3 years, beginning with your extensive citations to this rag.

And historical discussions with you are useless. It was the collapse of world trade that caused the Great Depression.

It is pointless to attempt to discuss ANYTHING with you. If you persist in your trolling, I will be contacting Andy to ask for disciplinary measures. RobS^{The Truth. Just Putin It Out There} 07:17, January 28, 2025 (EST)

As to historical questions: Did Phyllis Schlafly oppose Ronald Reagan's economic program of free trade and lifting tariffs? The answer to that is "NO". If you persist in your trolling and intentional harassment to impede my productive editing, I will ask Andy for disciplinary measures. RobS^{The Truth. Just Putin It Out There} 07:35, January 28, 2025 (EST)

The NAFTA negotiations were begun by globalists under President Reagan.

Phyllis Schlafly did not oppose Ronald Reagan's anti-tariff program.

Radio Address to the Nation on Free and Fair Trade, August 31, 1985

“	My fellow Americans: Last Wednesday I notified Congress of my decision not to impose either quotas or tariffs on foreign shoe imports into this country. I'd like to talk with you about that decision because the case of shoe imports illustrates why so-called protectionism is almost always self-destructive, doing more harm than good even to those it's supposed to be helping....	”
—Ronald Reagan

If you persist in your trolling, wasting days and days of my time and impeding my productive editing with your nonsense and crap, I will be asking Andy for disciplinary measures. RobS^{The Truth. Just Putin It Out There} 07:37, January 28, 2025 (EST)

We can go into the case of Michelle Bachmann and tariffs next, whom Andy supported, if you so desire. Better yet, back off, leave me alone, and quit contaminating Conservapedia Mainspace categories on contemporary geopolitical and macroeconomic subjects that you have ABSOLUTELY no interest and understaffing of, solely motivated by a malicious vendetta toward me. RobS^{The Truth. Just Putin It Out There} 07:45, January 28, 2025 (EST)

Update: China launches another neural network. [9]

Major marketplace Alibaba presented its Qwen2.5-Max model. It claims to outperform ChatGPT and DeepSeek in many ways, while still having access to the internet and being able to work with up-to-date data. It can also generate photos and videos (this feature is not yet available) and write code. [bolden added]

well duh (again)

US Court of International Trade just declared Trump's global trade war UNCONSTITUTIONAL

🔻 NO 30% tariffs on China
🔻 NO 25% tariffs on Canada/Mexico
🔻 NO 10% universal "tax on the world"

OK smart guy, Are you going to help walk back all your spam or are you going to leave all the big smelly turds you dropped all over Conservapedia for others to clean up?

• Federal Trade Court Rules President Trump Cannot Initiate Tariffs Under International Emergency Economic Powers Act, All Tariffs Blocked.

User:Conservative: Did you bother studying this issue before you went off half-cocked again?

Are you going to follow up reporting by following the case to SCOTUS, if it ever gets there, or are you going to leave our conservative readers hanging with your propaganda BS again, proving how unreliable Conservapedia is as a source?

Or do you care that Trump's "Most Beautiful Word in the English Language" is illegal?

Is it any wonder why your writings help create the impression that Conservatives are unreasonable, illogical, stupid and fascist, not just the way you handle your material, but your arguments in support or (lack of) defense?

Even people who are no more than just "cheerleaders" of conservative causes should be attractive and sexy, not just mindless over-stuffed slobbering dimwitted nitwits. RobS^{Zelensky Must Go!} 21:07, May 28, 2025 (EDT)

Trump now boasts and takes credit for saving Chinese Communists from civil unrest

You're batting about 0-5 in just the past 36 hrs. There is no point in reporting or recording this information since it conflicts and is confusing with the millions of bytes of spam trolling you have uploaded over the past 3 years.

You trolling has limited Conservapedia content creation going forward, filled Conservapedia with erroneous and bigoted information. RobS^{Zelensky Must Go!} 21:22, May 30, 2025 (EDT)

Innovation update

See video.

Forget explosions: China’s new bomb rains death by a thousand cuts China recently revealed the Rain of Pear Blossom Needles bomb, an advanced munition designed for precision and wide-area impact. Key details: 🔴 Weighs approximately 250–300 kg (550–660 lbs). 🔴 Dropped from the H-6K bombers or launched from artillery shells. 🔴 Contains thousands of razor-sharp tungsten needles. 🔴 Saturates target zones with these needles, disabling personnel and damaging light equipment. 🔴 Capable of air-bursting fortified bunkers. Why it matters: 👉Focuses on disabling effects rather than explosive blasts. 👉 Reflects China’s growing focus on specialized battlefield munitions. 👉 Challenges US dominance with a powerful alternative to the Mother of All Bombs (MOAB) — the heaviest non-nuclear bomb in the US arsenal.

Because you ignore factual evidence, your war propaganda just looks like racist liberal claptrap.

I think we should just agree to disagree.

For example:

2025: "The United States’ lead in global innovation further strengthens its structural power. U.S. firms generate over 50 percent of the world’s high-tech profits, whereas China captures only six percent. This innovation edge positions U.S. companies at critical points in supply chains, enabling Washington to twist production networks, as demonstrated by its coordination of multinational semiconductor restrictions on China." - Australian Journalist Martin Plout in his 2025 article A long, hard look at America’s strengths and weaknesses as Trump comes in again. Well worth a read. Conservative (talk) 16:43, July 27, 2025 (EDT)

Huh? You didn't post Martin Plout. You posted Michael Beckley The Strange Triumph of a Broken America: Why Power Abroad Comes With Dysfunction at Home.

Sheesh.

I'll spare you the personal invective going through my mind. RobS^{Zelensky Must Go!} 17:37, July 27, 2025 (EDT)

China Healthcare Breakthroughs: Ending Diseases and Challenging Big Pharma

Meritocracy and shared prosperity drive innovations that Western healthcare systems can’t match.

Critics—often with ties to the Western pharmaceutical-industrial complex—raise concerns about China’s transparency, ethics, and regulatory oversight.¹¹ These may be valid in part, but they also conceal a deeper anxiety:

What happens when the cure for cancer doesn’t come from Harvard or Oxford—but from a lab in Guangzhou?

If China cracks the code first, it won’t just be a medical milestone. It will mark a geopolitical shift—a soft-power coup that challenges global narratives about leadership, innovation, and moral authority. [10]

You missed the boat. You could have participated in discussion of some of the vital issues of the time. But you excluded yourself.

"It's better to keep your mouth shut and let people think you are fool than to open it and remove all doubt." - Mark Twain

“	For lack of vision the people perish	”
—Proverbs 29:13

Looks like again you have entirely missed the point and context, and quintupled down on stupidity. RobS^{Zelensky Must Go!} 13:50, August 26, 2025 (EDT)

This racist response by you is absolutely idiotic. It shows (A) you have no understanding what inflation is or how it operates in global macroeconomics; and (B) this response by you as it relates to the field of healthcare and cancer research is sickening. It makes you look like a Nazi concentration camp guard boasting about how much money you saved the state budget in healthcare and food stamp costs. I do not doubt for an instant that that's how your brain and critical thinking skills operate. RobS^{Zelensky Must Go!} 21:59, August 26, 2025 (EDT)

Let's assume your response to China winning the war on cancer is true - that Bill Gates and his ilk get 17.3% of the "profits" from "high tech" to spend at Epstein Island; does your share, which is eaten up in taxes, go to prosecuting Gates & Epstein? Sheesh, you are dumb as a rock. RobS^{Zelensky Must Go!} 22:18, August 26, 2025 (EDT)

More stupidity: The argument that the "United States" received 17.3% of the profits from high tech is Communist - I didn't see a dime of it. Do the oligarchs and shareholders who made all that money live in the US? Do they pay taxes to the US government (unlike your communist hero Bill Browder)?

Can there be one cure for cancer or do the many types of cancer likely require there to be multiple cures so all the types of cancer are cured?: "That’s a great question. The short answer is: It’s very unlikely that there will ever be one single universal cure for all cancers, because cancer is not one disease—it’s a large family of diseases with very different causes, behaviors, and vulnerabilities."

You seem to put the profit motive over humanitarian concerns of cancer victims and their families. It figures.

Next you wrote: "You could have participated in discussion of some of the vital issues of the time. But you excluded yourself." And then you ranted via talking about shutting up and going on spurious personal attacks. The bottom line is that you do not engage in discussions.

You have excluded yourself, with your racist rants and screeds over the past several years, when the subject here is the hypothetical question: "If China cracks the code first, it won’t just be a medical milestone. It will mark a geopolitical shift—a soft-power coup that challenges global narratives about leadership, innovation, and moral authority." [11] We already know where you stand with your bigoted views. Big mistake, showing your hand first for all the world to see.

I trust this clarifies matters. Conservative (talk) 23:54, August 26, 2025 (EDT)

Go back and read the OP - China Healthcare Breakthroughs: Ending Diseases and Challenging Big Pharma before you post anymore racist screeds to 5 more pages - they already found a cure for diabetes - cheaper than Big Pharma.

I trust this clarifies matters. RobS^{Zelensky Must Go!} 00:17, August 27, 2025 (EDT)

If, if, if, if, if. Well, if wishes were fishes, we would all have a fry. Conservative (talk) 00:44, August 27, 2025 (EDT)

That was the whole point. I posted the hypothetical to bail you out. Instead, you doubled, tripled, and quintupled down on your congenital stupidity and racism on no less than 5 pages. RobS^{Zelensky Must Go!} 01:05, August 27, 2025 (EDT)

Haven't you posted extensively on leadership, innovation, soft-power, geopolitics and moral authority? Instead of taking the bait to clarify your views, you quintuple down spamming more anti-Chinese racist rants on 5 pages.

You may think that's smart, and Andy may call it "productive editing", but it's not. It's trolling.

And you wonder why I don't take your IQ challenge.

I trust this clarifies matters. RobS^{Zelensky Must Go!}

Question: Did your father call you an idiot according to your own testimony? Conservative (talk) 01:46, August 27, 2025 (EDT)

Yah, when I was 7 years old. It bears repeating for you cause you obviously are an idiot: "If you don't like being called an idiot, stop acting like one." RobS^{Zelensky Must Go!} 01:53, August 27, 2025 (EDT)

Now let's clarify your views: Do you still cling to your oft stated view that China and the Chinese people are incapable of innovation, leadership, soft-power, or moral authority? RobS^{Zelensky Must Go!} 01:58, August 27, 2025 (EDT)

Two weeks. No response. I win. Ole! Ole! Ole!. RobS^{Zelensky Must Go!} 12:47, September 7, 2025 (EDT)

China’s GIANT DRONE that has NO EQUIVALENT in the WEST!

If you want to continue looking like an uninformed, brainwashed fool, please put you name on your Essays and stop reflecting that lazy, non-competitive, proud ignorance on the rest of us. Thank you. RobS^{Zelensky Must Go!} 04:33, September 7, 2025 (EDT)

My rebuttal

1. Primary point

Consider:

2025: "The United States’ lead in global innovation further strengthens its structural power. U.S. firms generate over 50 percent of the world’s high-tech profits, whereas China captures only six percent. This innovation edge positions U.S. companies at critical points in supply chains, enabling Washington to twist production networks, as demonstrated by its coordination of multinational semiconductor restrictions on China." - Michael Beckley, Associate Professor of Political Science at Tufts University, See: A long, hard look at America’s strengths and weaknesses as Trump comes in again. Well worth a read.

In 2025, the United States has 4.2% of the world's population and China has 17.3% of the world's population. And yet as can be seen above, U.S. firms generate over 50 percent of the world’s high-tech profits, whereas China captures only six percent.

2. Secondary point

• What are the odds that China will suffer Japanification, 9-7-2025 Conservative (talk) 11:00, September 7, 2025 (EDT)

References

My response: If you are hellbent on provoking war, you need more than just pride & hubris.

Second point: You still haven't figured out that your redundant spam postings of earlier writing hasn't improved your thinking. RobS^{Zelensky Must Go!} 12:05, September 7, 2025 (EDT)

What is the probability of China's giant drones being able to effectively attack the mainland USA?: Summary: "The probability of China’s giant drones effectively attacking the U.S. mainland is currently low (<10%) due to logistical challenges, U.S. defenses, and the high risk of escalation."

Using objective evidence and facts, what is the probability of User: Conservative at Conservapedia, whose user page is at https://www.conservapedia.com/User:Conservative and whose contributions are at https://www.conservapedia.com/Special:Contributions/Conservative and whose essays are at thttps://www.conservapedia.com/User:Conservative%27s_essays being a neocon or a warmonger? User: Conservative wrote these 3 essays: https://www.conservapedia.com/Essay:_Isolationalism_is_growing_in_the_United_States._Is_this_a_good_thing%3F and https://www.conservapedia.com/Essay:_Why_wars_and_hyper-militarism_often_make_a_country_weaker and https://www.conservapedia.com/Essay:_Business_is_more_powerful_than_military_might._All_REAL_Americans_know_this!:

Summary: Based on objective evidence from the user’s profile, contributions summary, and the three specified essays, User:Conservative is highly unlikely to be a neocon or a warmonger. The essays critique excessive militarism, prioritize economic power, and entertain isolationist ideas, all of which are at odds with neoconservative ideology or warmongering tendencies. The user’s focus on Christian values, cultural conservatism, and rational thinking further supports a non-interventionist, restraint-oriented worldview." Conservative (talk) 07:50, September 29, 2025 (EDT)

What a trolling narcissist - how you manage to put yourself in the question. RobS^{Zelensky Must Go!} 01:40, October 1, 2025 (EDT)

Question: Are Trump Tariffs part of the "free market" capitalist system, or do they deny consumer choice?

?

Considering the widespread existence of tariffs in the world, does Trump's tariffs give the USA more bargaining leverage to negotiate better trade terms for the USA? If so, how much does it increase the probability that the USA will increase overall trade for the USA?:

Summary: "Trump’s tariffs significantly enhance U.S. bargaining leverage by exploiting economic asymmetries and pressuring trading partners to negotiate better terms, as evidenced by deals with the UK, Japan, and others. However, the probability of increasing overall U.S. trade is tempered by retaliatory tariffs, economic costs, and global disruptions. I estimate a 30-50% probability of increasing total trade in the short term, rising to 50-70% in the long term if negotiations succeed and reshoring materializes. The outcome hinges on the administration’s ability to secure deals without triggering prolonged trade wars or domestic backlash." —The preceding unsigned comment was added by Conservative (talk)

False premise, Troll. The question is specifically, "Do Trump tariffs limit consumer choice?" RobS^{Zelensky Must Go!} 01:40, October 1, 2025 (EDT)

The War Zone: Large Stealth Flying Wing Appears At Chinese Test Base

When we all get nuked, we'll have you to thank for the lethargy & false sense of security you generated. RobS^{Zelensky Must Go!} 17:22, September 19, 2025 (EDT)

Do you get masochistic pleasure out of making yourself look like a fool?

🤖🇨🇳China now has more industrial robots than anyone in the world and the US isn’t even in second place

China has a total of over 2.02M industrial robots, installing 295k over the past year, according to new data by the International Federation of Robotics (IFR).

Share of new industrial robot installations:

🇨🇳China - 54%

🌏Asia - 74%

🇪🇺Europe - 16%

🌎Americas (including the US) - 9%

🇯🇵Japan: 44,500 new industrial robots installed, bringing its total to ~450,500

🇺🇸US: 34,200 new industrial robots installed, 393,700 in total (five times less than in China)

The IFR expects China’s industrial robot deployment to continue to grow, citing potential for 10% growth per year until at least 2028, and, in a first this year, Chinese manufacturers selling more robots than foreign companies operating in China (57%).

The industry group attributes China’s success to the country’s 2021 comprehensive national robotics strategy.

Rebuttal

Questions:

1. Do we live in a multidimensional world or a one-dimensional world where a country's manufacturing base and associated degree of robotization is the only factor as far as a nation's economic/national strength/stateness? See: The Periodic Table of States In 2025, the USA has a higher stability score in the Periodic Table of States. 20.65 for the USA, 19.51 for China

2. How is China's general economy? See: Essay: It's time to be very bearish about China's long-term economy

3. Is the USA reindustrializing? If so, what are its prospects in this regard? How fast is the USA expected to reindustrialize?, Grok, September 2024

4. What is the probability that China will escape the middle-income trap?, 2025: Summary: "Synthesizing these, the probability that China fully escapes the middle-income trap—crossing to high-income status and maintaining above-4% per capita growth through 2035—is roughly 40–60%."

5. Is India economically growing? Is India giving China more and more competition? If India is economically growing and becoming a stronger economic competitor, does this make it harder for China to escape the middle-income trap? If so, percentage-wise, how much does it decrease the odds of China escaping the middle-income trap?: Summary: India’s growth indirectly complicates China’s escape by diverting investment and market share, potentially reducing China’s odds of reaching high-income status by an estimated 10-20%."

6. If China does not escape the middle-income trap, will that make innovation easier or harder for China? If easier, why?

7. How important are services when it comes to an economy escaping the middle-income trap?, 2025

8. Is it true that innovation in one sector of the economy, such as from the services sector, can cross-pollinate into other sectors of the economy? If not, why not?

9. Are economies that are well-diversified more resilient and do they have more opportunities for the aforementioned cross-pollination? If not, why not? See: Essay: Diversified economies, resilience and stability

Please also see: Are economies that are well-diversified more resilient and does this include having a well-developed services sector and do they have more opportunities for innovations in various sectors to spread in the general economy via cross-pollination?, 2025

10. What are China's biggest challenges when it comes to diversifying its economy via developing its service economy? What is the probability that China will overcome these challenges? Consider Xi Jinping's leadership, his chances of being replaced and China's economic challenges.: Summary: "China faces formidable challenges in diversifying its economy through the service sector, including overreliance on manufacturing, a real estate crisis, weak consumption, regulatory hurdles, demographic constraints, and political resistance to reforms. The probability of overcoming these challenges in the next 5–10 years is 30–40%, contingent on significant policy shifts toward consumption-driven growth and market liberalization, which are currently misaligned with Xi’s priorities."

11. Is protectionism increasing in the world or decreasing? How fast is protectionism increasing or decreasing in the world?, 2025

12. If protectionism is rising in the world, does this make selling robot-produced goods easier or harder? If easier, why is this so?

How much does protectionism rising in the world reduce China's chance of escaping the middle-income trap? In terms of probability, how much does protectionism rising in the world reduce China's chance of escaping the middle-income trap?: Summary: "While precise quantification is elusive, it’s reasonable to estimate that protectionism reduces China’s probability of reaching high-income status by 10–20 percentage points, lowering a baseline of 40–50% to approximately 25–40% over the next 10–15 years. To mitigate this, China must accelerate domestic innovation, strengthen regional trade ties, and implement structural reforms to boost productivity."

I trust this clarifies matters. Conservative (talk) 04:03, September 29, 2025 (EDT)

You use words and concepts you do not know or understand the meaning of cause you think it makes you look "intelligent".

See Essay: Why User:Conservative is a disruptive troll in the fields of international politics and economics.

You did not successfully run my 12 question gauntlet for hyper-Sinophiles and hyper multipolarists. See: 12 question gauntlet for hyper Sinophiles and multipolarists

Do we live in a bipolar world with the USA and China being the strongest powers or do we live in a multipolar world? What is the probability of each model being true?, Grok, September 2025. 60% for the bipolar model being the most explanatory, 40% for multipolar world view

The United States will be the leading power in the world for the foreseeable future

"Running the gauntlet" means enduring a series of challenges, obstacles, or criticisms, often in a grueling or intense manner. It refers to facing a tough ordeal where one must persevere through difficulties or opposition to achieve a goal or prove oneself."[12]

As much as I hate to do it, on behalf of all lovers of the United States, capitalism, freedom and truth, I declare total victory! Olé! Olé! Olé! Conservative (talk) 13:31, September 29, 2025 (EDT)

Grammarly usage data of User: Conservative

Personal remark removed

As can be seen above, apparently RobSmith is angry that User: Conservative has a large vocabulary. Sad! Conservative (talk) 15:23, September 29, 2025 (EDT)

Is that yours or Andy Schlafly since AI has been proven to confuse Andy with a neo-nazi?

A normal person would be trying separate the two and protect the innocent, not trying to further promote themselves.

It's obvious you have no regard for other people's rights. RobS^{Zelensky Must Go!} 17:46, September 29, 2025 (EDT)

I think it's fairly obvious you don't even know what conservativism is, let alone words like "socialism", "fascism", "war" and a host of others. RobS^{Zelensky Must Go!} 20:37, September 30, 2025 (EDT)

See above - you do not know what inflation is. Elsewhere in several pages, you have no understanding of deflation, either. The more spam, the bigger of a fool you make yourself. RobS^{Zelensky Must Go!} 01:45, October 1, 2025 (EDT)

How many American boys will die because you lulled them to sleep with a false sense of security?

• China has leapfrogged the US in terms of successful adoption of electromagnetic catapults for launching some of the world’s most advanced and heaviest carrier warplanes.

My rebuttal

Douglas MacArthur

Questions:

Are naval ships expensive to maintain? See: Are naval military ships expensive to maintain?, 2025

How is China's economy? See: Essay: It's time to be very bearish about China's long-term economy

If naval ships are expensive to maintain and China's economy is going in a bad direction, is it possible that China building out its navy will put it in a deeper economic hole? If not, why not?

Is the Pacific Ocean generally considered to be big or small? If it is big, should Americans be concerned or unconcerned that the Chinese will launch an amphibious invasion of the USA mainland?

Also, "There is no security on this earth; there is only opportunity." - General Douglas MacArthur. Conservative (talk) 10:37, September 29, 2025 (EDT)

What a trolling idiot. That has nothing to do with the Chinese innovation & America's inability to keep up. RobS^{Zelensky Must Go!} 01:42, October 1, 2025 (EDT)

China Conducts Successful ICBM Test with Hypersonic Elements

Reports confirm China (PRC) has executed a successful intercontinental ballistic missile (ICBM) test featuring a depressed trajectory launch, potentially incorporating hypersonic boost-glide technology for enhanced maneuverability and speed. Videos circulating online depict the low-altitude flight path, which could evade traditional detection systems. [13]

How many American boys will die because User:Conservative lulled them to sleep with a false sense of security?

China Conducts Successful ICBM Test with Hypersonic Elements. Does this mean that it is more innovative than the USA and that a statist economy can make creativity greatly blossom? What is the probability that this statement is necessarily true?: "...the probability is 0%. It's a plausible hypothesis worth monitoring, but far from a logical necessity."

Consider creating a counter essay to my essay "Communist China’s quixotic quest to innovate: A statist economy can’t make creativity greatly blossom" if you feel that you have a strong argument. Conservative (talk) 10:34, September 29, 2025 (EDT)

This is my "counteressay", you midwit. RobS^{Zelensky Must Go!} 10:38, September 29, 2025 (EDT)

You never learn. You begin with a false premise based on false assumptions, and lock yourself into stupidity which everyone sees. You are just masterbating with words, and make a mess all over the place. RobS^{Zelensky Must Go!} 10:42, September 29, 2025 (EDT)

If this talk page is your counter essay, then kindly inform Andy that I wish him to provide a stronger sparring partner when it comes to China. Conservative (talk) 11:14, September 29, 2025 (EDT)

What makes you think I ever agreed to being your "sparring partner"? Another false premise based on false assumptions, and total disregard for the rights other people. And it's a bit unethical for me to beat up a retarded kid who doesn't understand pragmatic language. RobS^{Zelensky Must Go!} 11:34, September 29, 2025 (EDT)

The problem here

The problem here is, this is leftover Cold War rhetoric from the 1980s. This "innovation" pitch and other rhetoric was used in the Reagan era to develop things like the cell phone & internet (which the Democrats opposed). The world has changed.

It worked to get Congress to fund DARPA Research & Development, Wall Street to invest in things that could only be imagined, and bring down the stale Soviet Union. But China now (since it won MFN status and a whole bunch of other factors) is a different animal.

This "ideological" rhetoric (and it actually isn't even that) as a propaganda tool is 40 years out of touch with the real world. RobS^{Zelensky Must Go!} 05:33, September 30, 2025 (EDT)

China studied closely what brought down the Soviet communist system (lack of innovation, for example) and is determined not to make the same mistakes.

The fundamental flaws and assumptions in this Essay are not limited to this Essay. The flaws and assumptions originate in a stale mindset (like Marxists in the late Soviet Union had - an unwillingness to keep up with developments and change because their ideology dictated them so). RobS^{Zelensky Must Go!} 05:54, September 30, 2025 (EDT)

On somewhat related topic since Russia and China are allies and since wars help cause propaganda, see: How innovative/resourceful/tough are the countries of Ukraine/Russia? How socially conservative are the countries of Ukraine/Russia? On a per capita and total number basis, which country has a bigger neo-nazi problem - Ukraine or Russia? On fairly broad set of socioeconomic measures, how does Ukraine compare to Russia?. Conservative (talk) 08:12, September 30, 2025 (EDT)

• Share of young adults living with parents at Great Depression levels. But yeah, let’s celebrate GDP.
• Dot-Com Redux: The AI frenzy has gotten so out of kilter that 76% of the gain in real GDP was accounted for by feverishly surging investments in AI-oriented GPUs, network gear, server farms and data centers.

And in Stockman's analyses above, he doesn't even go into the electrical grid needs to keep AI running by 2030 which is about 4 times greater than what we have now. So we have to buy uranium from Russia, which is under sanctions (unless you wanna kill us all with carbon emissions from coal burning plants).

So go ahead, keep posting you narcissistic claptrap about yourself from AI, or what you think is "analysis" that makes you look "intelligent". RobS^{Zelensky Must Go!} 21:39, September 30, 2025 (EDT)