China Has Taken a Great Leap Forward in High Tech Manufacturing
Thomas L. Friedman
NYT I just spent a week in Beijing and Shanghai, meeting with Chinese officials, economists and entrepreneurs, and let me get right to the point: While we were sleeping China took a great leap forward in high-tech manufacturing of everything.
“China had its Sputnik moment — his name was Donald Trump,” Jim McGregor, a business consultant who lived in China for 30 years, told me. “He woke them up to the fact that they needed an all-hands-on-deck effort to take their indigenous scientific, innovative and advanced manufacturing skills to a new level.”
Here’s what Noah Smith, who writes about manufacturing, posted the other day, using data from the United Nations Industrial Development Organization:
In 2000, “the United States and its allies in Asia, Europe and Latin America accounted for the overwhelming majority of global industrial production, with China at just 6 percent even after two decades of rapid growth.” By 2030, Smith wrote, the U.N. agency predicts “China will account for 45 percent of all global manufacturing, single-handedly matching or outmatching the U.S. and all of its allies.
“This is a level of manufacturing dominance by a single country seen only twice before in world history — by the U.K. at the start of the Industrial Revolution, and by the U.S. just after World War II.” Smith wrote, “It means that in an extended war of production, there is no guarantee that the entire world united could defeat China alone.”
Xiaomi’s SU7, which is manufactured in a formerly abandoned plant that used to make gasoline-fueled cars — was the talk of the Beijing car show last April. Meanwhile, BYD, the famed Chinese battery company, which already had a car-making subsidiary, doubled down on automobiles. I rode all over Shanghai in super-comfortable BYD electric cars operated by Didi, China’s Uber. BYD now offers a subcompact E.V., the Seagull, that starts at less than $10,000.
In an effort to export its large inventory of cars, China has begun construction of a fleet of 170 ships capable of carrying several thousand automobiles at a time across the ocean. Before the Covid-19 pandemic, the world’s shipyards were delivering only four such vessels a year. That is also not a typo.
Because China has essentially a national electric grid, it has installed charging stations all over the country, which is why more than half of new car sales in China are of E.V.s. Apple talked for 15 years about making an electric car. Has anyone driven an Apple car?
But don’t worry, folks, help is on the way. Trump has vowed to make America great again by doubling down on drill-baby-drill gas guzzlers and ending U.S. government subsidies for Americans who purchase electric cars.
So, what do you think is going to happen? The rest of the world will gradually transition to Chinese-made self-driving E.V.s, “and America will become the new Cuba — the place where you visit to see old gas-guzzling cars that you drive yourself,” as Keith Bradsher, the Times Beijing bureau chief and an auto industry specialist, mused to me.
If that happens, one day we’ll wake up and China will own the global electric vehicle market. And since fully autonomous driving technology only really works with E.V.s, that means China will own the future — the self-driving-cars market as well.
As an article in the state-run China Daily explained: “From steel plates and mobile phones to household motors and rocket ignition device parts, more business lines in China are using artificial intelligence to power their production and have introduced ‘dark factories’ with their 24-hour uninterrupted and unattended production capabilities. Dark factories, also called smart factories, are entirely run by programmed robots with no need for lighting.”
In the last seven years alone, the number of babies born in China fell from 18 million to nine million. The latest projection is that China’s current population of 1.4 billion will decline by 100 million by 2050 and possibly by 700 million by the end of the century. To preserve its own standard of living and be able to take care of all its old people, with a steadily shrinking working population, China will drive the robotization of everything for itself — and the rest of the world.
Unfortunately, we live in a country dominated by billionaires who are only interested in increasing their own wealth. China is dominated by an authoritarian regime that is primarily interested in China's wealth.
ReplyDeleteThe great challenge to that wealth was self-inflicted, their one child policy which has led them to the demographic catastrophe of having to support so many old people with so few young people.
Becoming the great automated production factory for the whole world solves both their internal and external problems. They can support their aging population while keeping themselves independent of the rest of the world while the rest of the world becomes dependent upon them both for raw materials and manufactured products.
China will have its day in the sun but eventually will become subject to climate change as will everyone. AI and robotics are energy guzzlers. Extrapolation is always risky, especially when predicting unlimited growth. Also, will the China of the future be the China that developed itself into an economic and manufacturing powerhouse? Or will social changes wrought by technology undercut what they have always been? But, yeah, no good future for the USA, either.
ReplyDeleteSo wasn't Elon Musk supposed to be the the EV genius? What happened to that? Not that I thought he was any kind of genius. But I'd prefer him to concentrate on electronic cars rather than wrecking our government.
ReplyDeleteElon or his EV company hasn’t delivered anything new as of late. Last thing was that goofy origami cybertruck. The Chinese electric car has good reviews and is a fraction of the cost. Problem is that Musk’s company can’t make an affordable EV. Just another flash in the pan.
ReplyDeleteSaw an ad yesterday for a Honda Prologue, which is an EV. Just out of curiosity I looked up prices. It appears that they are in the $40-50K range. Which is plenty, but it is new price, since 2024 is the first year they sold them. We won't be buying one, because we never buy brand new, and anyway we don't need an SUV. But it is a nice looking mid-sized vehicle. I think it is probably less expensive than a Tesla.
ReplyDeleteI think the other manufacturers can compete with the Chinese EVs if they don't drop the ball. I wouldn't feel safe in one of those micro mini Chinese things.
Toyota's big bet is on hybrids rather than EVs. The price points are comparable to traditional gasoline-powered vehicle prices.
DeleteFor people who don't live in cities, the hybrids make more sense. If you're going to be driving where it is a long way from charging stations, it's good to have gas back-up.
DeleteI don't read Friedman very often, but I understand he has been known to have a bit of a blind spot regarding China.
ReplyDeleteI think the prediction of the US becoming the new Cuba is a minority view.
I don't think the US is becoming the new Cuba either. I'm a little more worried about it becoming the next Hungary, though.
DeleteI read Friedman off and on. He's got several blind spots. Years ago I read his book "The Lexus and the Olive Tree". Reality unfortunately did not turn out the way he predicted.
I worry about it becoming Hungary too.
DeleteOne thing I learned working in international economics is that things change. They are all based on assumptions that don’t take into account “exogenous shocks” - those unforeseen events that occur outside the economic models. One example of several I could relate.
Thirty years ago Lester Thurow wrote a book called Head to Head. I was asked by a client to read it and summarize it. I also wrote a critique. He was one of America’s best known economists at the time. He had been a Rhodes Scholar, PhD in economics from Harvard, Dean of MIT’s Sloan School of Management, Economics columnist for the NYT, author of multiple books, a co- founder of the Economic Policy Institute etc. I disagreed with his arguments. He was forecasting that the future dominance of the global economy would be a battle between the US, Japan, and Europe. He thought that with the end of the Cold War and the freeing of Eastern European economies, including Russia, that Europe would win. Stanley recently mentioned the loss of institutional memory if 4000 experienced federal employees are replaced with novices. I felt that Thurow was overestimating the likelihood that Eastern Europe would quickly become as developed as Western Europe and that the combination would be an unbeatable powerhouse. But - Eastern European nations had no developed private economy infrastructure, including financial (banking), management or entrepreneurial. There were no institutions existing that had experience starting and managing private businesses. Innovation was not rewarded. No institutional memory. And Russia itself was quickly overtaken by billionaire oligarchs. Nobody buys Russian cars or electronics or even clothing outside of Russia. But they do have oil and gas.
When trump pulled out of the TPP he pretty much handed the Pacific nations to China. Pretty much every country outside of North America prefers small cars. The US won’t become Cuba, and hybrids do make more sense here than EVs. One of our sons has a hybrid and a Tesla. They use the hybrid for road trips and the Tesla for LA freeways. I’ve made seven coast to coast road trips in the last 30 years and I would never depend on finding charging stations when needed outside the cities. Sometimes I was more than 100 miles away from the nearest gas station!
Right now it looks like China will eventually dominate. But China is a bit like Japan at its peak - they encourage conformity and China enforces it by law. Neither Japan nor China innovate nearly as much as America and European countries. Instead they take western innovations and do them faster and/or cheaper. The quality may suffer and other countries like South Korea are already taking up a lot of the manufacturing of consumer goods, electronics, appliances, cars, clothing etc that China produces.
It turned out that the famous economist was wrong 30 years ago. I was right about Europe then but didn’t envision how fast China would grow once it freed the economy. However, they also miscalculated - they couldn’t feed their too fast growing population and enacted the one child policy. They also didn’t foresee then that many female fetuses would be aborted, resulting in a great imbalance of men and women, and fewer marriages and children that they would now like to have. Stay tuned.
It doesn't seem far-fetched that China could outstrip the West in a particular category of goods like EVs. That said: since the COVID years, the US economy as a whole actually has been growing faster than both China and the EU.
DeleteI know I am a dinosaur in many ways. I still think there is something to be said for the idea that countries that have thick trade ties are less likely to go to war against one another. To be sure, China has proven to be a less-than-trustworthy trading partner - and in the age of Trump, there is a risk that the US could squander its reputation as a place of stability where the rule of law prevails. And tariffs are a move in the wrong direction.
Jim - “ I still think there is something to be said for the idea that countries that have thick trade ties are less likely to go to war against one another. ”
DeleteThank you. I have believed this for the last 40:years or more. It’s one of the reasons I favor global free trade. It’s also better for the economy even when we trade with countries who cheat a bit. A friend of mine was panicked when she learned how many US Treasury securities are held by China. I asked her if she really thought that China would hurt itself by selling its US Treasuries? And where would they put that much money? There is no other money market that is large enough and stable enough to absorb it all. Cultural links, educational links, trade links, business links, tourism links - all of those links help to reduce the chance of war because it’s not in the best interests of either the US or China . A trade war would be a really bad thing - not just for us but for the world.
Out of topic but did anyone see what pro-feminist pro-choice Nancy Pelosi just did to her sister AOC? Made behind-the-scene phone calls to put a 74 year old man as head of the Oversight Committee instead of AOC. This after AOC has bent over backwards to align with the traditional Democratic leadership. Savaging Jill Stein, voting for antizionism equals antisemitism, etc. I guess old guard solidarity beat out gender solidarity. That’s the award AOC got for sucking up and selling out to the old barracuda. I had a lot of hope for AOC but she has sold out in so many ways. The main lesson remains that the Democratic Party is irreformable and unchangeable. If a new progressive party can’t take hold, there will be NO progress. Even considering the catastrophic loss they just suffered, the old guard will continue doing what they’ve been doing. The old leadership would rather be duchesses and dukes of a declining fiefdom than give up power. And I just don’t understand why women don’t support women in a concrete way. My male nurse friend sees it in the nursing profession. In many places, they can’t even form unions. No solidarność.
ReplyDeleteI hadn't heard about that. Last I heard Nancy Pelosi was recovering from hip replacement surgery in a US military hospital in Germany after she took a hard fall and broke her hip while in Luxembourg. I guess they were there on some kind of diplomatic meet and greet.
DeleteI actually have a lot of admiration for both AOC and Nancy Pelosi, for different reasons. But the sausage making of government gets pretty ugly sometimes. I wish it wasn't that way.
DeleteThis is a good article by Matthew Yglesias: https://www.slowboring.com/p/aoc-deserved-the-oversight-job?utm_source=post-email-title&publication_id=159185&post_id=153307094&utm_campaign=email-post-title&isFreemail=true&r=1mpwi5&triedRedirect
DeleteHe agrees that AOC should have had the job.
Yglesias believes that things will be better if the “reformers” give up their leftist views and move to the center. My philosophy is based on canoeing. If you have people in the canoe leaning all the way to the right, you lean far to the left to keep it from overturning, not sit straight up. Yglesias wants AOC to become a nice, domesticated corporate Democrat and she pretty much has. I want American voters to have more choices and range for the steering wheel. I am not happy Pelosi broke her hip. I am not happy CEO Brian Thompson was killed. But can I wish that a flying saucer would take these people to a nice, beautiful planet on the other side of the Milky Way Galaxy?
DeleteThere are a lot of people I wouldn't mind sending to that planet on the other side of the milky way!
DeleteCome to think of it, wasn't it one of Elon Musk's bright ideas to terraform Mars? He should take a few billion bucks and go there.
Katherine, I don’t know if you watched the Netflix movie, “Don’t Look Up”, an allegory about climate change and society. Something like that happens with an ending I found a truly guilty pleasure.
Delete"And I just don’t understand why women don’t support women in a concrete way. My male nurse friend sees it in the nursing profession. In many places, they can’t even form unions. No solidarność."
DeleteHoo boy.
Better go sit in the corner and
think about what you said, Stanley. While you're there, count the girl-boy ratio in this picture of nurses at my hospital system on the informational picket line:
https://www.lansingcitypulse.com/stories/shorthanded-um-health-sparrow-nurses-consider-strike,118726