Ask HN: How do you deal with the end of globalization?
With China and Russia trying to isolate themselves from the world....Cold War 2.0 is coming
I believe the era of growth is over. What are your preparation for low growth era?
I believe the era of growth is over. What are your preparation for low growth era?
85 comments
[ 2.1 ms ] story [ 162 ms ] threadThis would be a blessing. I think we can trace most of our problems back to the end of the cold war. If we have some common thing to fight against we stop fighting each other (see Watchmen- ironically though it was about ending the cold war but a level down it works)
More realistic is a 1984 style "continuous but meaningless war" that lets the various parties pursue their ideological aims without fear of revolt from inside. Though I have no idea how to prepare for this
That never happened during the Cold War from what I've read, and from what I observed starting in the early 1970s it steadily got worse.
Except for that whole Jim Crow thing in the south…
This was hundreds of years ago. My still living parent grew up during segregation.
> Cold War 2.0 is coming
I don't think the US can "win" that Cold War, so maybe it shouldn't pick the fight this time.
[1] https://www.investopedia.com/terms/b/brics.asp
Poised... how? This graph from a recent economist article doesn't inspire much confidence: https://www.economist.com/img/b/400/436/90/media-assets/imag...
Also, wouldn't be a bad time for defence-related startups...
Before we address something like this, you would need to show evidence that it is happening, such as: Imports and exports are halting for a majority of the countries. Termination of diplomacy and communication between countries.
To assist in this, you might consult some definitions of globalism.
How dare you have an opinion! This is the internet! SapporoChris is going to require journal published studies, probably several, before granting you the unbelievable kindness of acknowledging your question.
Could you start with the "facts and data" of where it is specified that there is requirement for "facts and data"?
Having been a member here for 7 years, I can assure you that most posts do not contain "facts and data" and there is no requirement or implication of a requirement to post with "facts and data". In fact, a vast majority of everything written here is completely subjective and unsubstantiated.
See. I'm not going to prove that with any facts or data at all. I'm just going to assert it.
Ironically, you have a variation on breaking one of the actual written post guidelines in this very post:
> Please don't post comments saying that HN is turning into Reddit. It's a semi-noob illusion, as old as the hills.
https://news.ycombinator.com/newsguidelines.html
https://www.marketplace.org/2022/05/02/u-s-trade-representat...
The US will continue to grow modestly but steadily with decent governance, lots of resources, and a growing population.
Would appreciate insight into this.
In the long long term, probably will only end with legislation, revolt, or dystopian outcomes.
We can build all the $B factories we want in the rust belt but shareholders will move it to places like Mexico at the first sign of profit.
I'm seeing a real flow of software jobs to mexico too in the coming decades.
If they don't provide you with labor, (e.g. because they want it for themselves or they do not want to pollute their land) what will you do, raid them?
That's the early 20s century model perfected by the Brits.
Obviously it didn't last long but at least it made sense.
I guess it's time for them to actually turn up to work.
I read this article earlier today which I thought provided some pretty insightful answers to this question:
https://themarket.ch/interview/russell-napier-the-world-will...
The End of the World Is Just the Beginning: Mapping the Collapse of Globalization by Peter Zeihan
I’m going to add the usual disclaimers here about everything that comes with listening to a guy who has been predicting doom for a decade. He is very entertaining though and he has some unique insights and some unusual data comparisons - it’s fun to read.
To be fair, he did predict events in Ukraine a few weeks before they happened [1]. That counts for as much credibility as one can have with a title of “geopolitical strategist”
[1] Jump to 7:45 https://youtu.be/UA-jOLF2T4c
As an example, early in the Russia-Ukraine war, he claimed that Russia wanted to secure one of the geographical gateways into the country and could be expected to invade Poland and Romania circa this coming winter. He said that these gateways have been historically important for Russia's defense for hundreds of years and that they want to defend them before their population becomes too old to bear enough soldiers to take them.
This is exemplary of both the good/bad with Zeihan:
- He is entertaining and has unusual takes, as you said.
- He tends to have an essentialist worldview: Russia is obsessed with its own topography so it invaded Ukraine, China is isolationist so Xi doesn't care about what goes on in other countries, etc.
- He is a bit of a state department shill (probably necessary for his career, he seems to make a good amount from speaking gigs for these people).
- He fixates on age demographics and draws many (probably too many) conclusions from them. Big props to him for introducing me to the population pyramid though: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Population_pyramid
- He stopped making this claim around ~summer and I'm sure will never reckon with the fact that he sincerely said he thought Russia would invade a NATO country within a year in early-mid 2022, on multiple podcasts.
I have heard him spout too much nonsense for me to listen to consistently at this point but I still check in on him just to hear what he has to say regarding major world events (like the NS1/2 pipeline bombings).
I frequently wish people could read their words but with my reactions to them
China can’t go do what the West does by meta colonizing (economically colonizing) South America, India, Africa and South East Asia because their people need the low wage jobs too.
The West will just go elsewhere. If China and Russia don’t want the business, someone else will. And when suddenly those other someones become the growth story, China/Russia will adapt and reprice (as in, they will stop the shenanigans).
This will sort itself out. Amoral industries will find the geopolitical jockeying by the growth economy leaders as a liability.
So, if this is the end of the line, we simply have to start again from zero in other economies. Start with the Nike sneakers all over again in some other part of the world, and don’t ever let it get so far where they also make your technology.
Now, knowing something about populations of countries, you might ask yourself, why there? Why not Pakistan, Indonesia, the Philippines, or Nigeria? They all are bigger than Bangladesh, and all appear to have better trade links and geography (ports, location, and such).
Finding out the answers can deepen your understanding of the world.
I doubt it. It's a shame to see China isolating itself, but at the end of the day the manufacturing could just be moved somewhere else like India or Vietnam. Economically speaking, isolation is never the way forward, and China will likely fall further behind. Any sort of aggression on their part will only ensure that this happens
If anything, the extreme differences between China/Russia and the US will just bring the US (and the Anglosphere) closer together. I'm convinced the west has reached a stage of post war society where it's understood that it's better to grow up rather than out
What will be interesting to see is how Putin handles the current situation, considering they're losing ground and poorly prepared
Ofc I'm speculating here, and my position is highly US-centric
It is as if US wants to rollback globalisation, because they feel it is starting to disadvantage them.
But for many companies Apple for example, a globalised world is better, in both ways in terms of efficient supply chains and getting access to markets.
International trade is a magic bullet in economics.
India and China: OK at that point (before Modi and Xi had really started micromanaging, and before Covid hit trade).
Brazil, Russia, and South Africa: get a participation certificate and commiserations.
The acronym "BRICS" was a western invention in the early 2000s, shorthand for a list of good places to invest. Nothing more.
1. https://www.researchgate.net/figure/Annual-GDP-Growth-of-BRI...
Russia,
India,
China,
South Africa.
Tell me, besides Russia who managed to align with both China and India in some way and is their intermediary (no kidding, Russian diplomacy was top tier before they attacked), which of this country do you think will align with each other against the US?
China managed in five years to be hated more than UK and France in Africa (Russia however is very well viewed there, again their diplomacy and PR). Brazil managed to create a pretty good sphere of influence but Bolsonaro by himself massacred that (his recording about abusing underage venezuelan refugees do not help, but the trend was downward before).
If i based myself solely on demographic and the concept of demographic dividends, i would be worried for most Brics. Luckily, I've read a bit about hidden migration and i now understand where the wives and sisters of Gulf countries and Singapore 'workers' are send (doing a different kind of 'work'), so i think China will do just fine. Probably the others will too once they fix their political troubles.
https://www.newsweek.com/nearly-90-percent-world-isnt-follow...
China has a very public long standing policy of engaing in global economic colonialism via its "one belt | one road | silk road 2" strategy.
China having less(?) to do with the USofA in no way translates to China withdrawing from the world - rumour has it there are many other countries other than the US.
For now, imagine what a Trump second term might achieve, particularly given the real life example of Truss in the UK:
> The past six weeks have been not so much a cautionary tale as much as a textbook example of what happens when political ideologues are let off the leash, allowed to shut out anyone with opposing views and given the keys to the kingdom
( Rob Harris, Sydney Morning Herald )
Your linked WSJ article indicates that China's plans are coming to roost sooner rather than later:
> ... have left countries struggling to repay their debts to China.
as this is pretty much the point of economic colonialism, just as the British once ended up with Hong Kong as an outpost for a century so too will China end up with a ring of outposts spanning the globe for a century forward, ideal for those distributed ground stations for its space programs coupled with duty free ports for trade.
The things built are mostly not well used (and unsuited to the local country, being designed to serve Chinese-licensed mines or similar), and the loans are looking fairly shaky. There's antipathy in the victim countries because the promised jobs for the locals never eventuated, or worse, they were hired and then sacked in short order. One commentator said something along the lines of "rather than 5-dimensional chess it looks more like financial naïveté, and a soft power disaster."
Still, the majority of educated labor flow is moving towards the US and China/Russia make it comparatively incredibly hard for immigrants to move btwn these locations. Moving between China and India would be difficult, whereas all of these countries generally can largely rely on English being their common language esp India and S Africa, where English is one of the national languages.
I think limited ability to share labor/culture/etc will limit this alternative western economy and the US has not abdicated its position yet`
If you're the best of the best in machine learning in China or India and are looking to make a move, or write a book...it'll likely be to the US and in English rather than to Brazil and in Portuguese.
That's false as well
First, China is already outpacing US in both quality and quantity of research https://physicsworld.com/a/china-overtakes-the-us-in-terms-o...
China is also outpacing US in number of STEM graduates now, many of top STEM universities in the world are now in China
https://cset.georgetown.edu/publication/china-is-fast-outpac...
This shouldn't be a surprise to anyone given that China has a strong education system that's free and a population of 1.4 billion people.
Furthermore, there is already a huge brain drain happening from US to China thanks to xenophobic policies US has been enacting lately
https://www.scmp.com/news/china/science/article/3196372/reve...
China alone is a comparable population to US and Europe. Russia also has a strong education system inherited from USSR, and has some of the top tech talent. For example, companies like Yandex and VK managed to outcompete US companies like Google and Fb in Russia. This hasn't happened anywhere else in the world.
- no debate on population and the ability to grow STEM graduates at a faster clip
- no debate on the general availability of education
- many folks debate whether there is enough innovation or space to execute on research that isn't in line with whatever the political stance is at the moment. This is a long debate and anyone with a proper understanding of US history can find many instances where the US government has also shut down innovation. That being said, foundational efforts that we all rely on daily have come from DARPA, NSA, CIA and other government funding sources and made it into global consumer goods
This is from the physicsworld.com article you posted: "They found that 1.67% of papers with Chinese authors were in the top 1% most-cited articles in 2019 compared with 1.62% of papers with US authors." This is not what one would call "outpacing".
To your other points re: Yandex and VK. I assume you know the below, but lets discuss:
Russia has fully blocked its competitors and built in-country players as has China. Not quite the same as growing invasively the way FB, Insta, Whatsapp, Paypal etc have from an external position. The government has advantaged their own players, which is fine but not the same. This I can say from reading and from first-hand experience having worked on growing Paypal in Russia and other emerging markets.
1. Will we have hyperinflation at some point?
2. Will we have all-out war?
Everything else can be answered by the standard "don't spend more than you make, invest in a broad-market index, keep your reserves available".
But if you have those things covered, you may want to consider thinking about what you could do to mitigate 1 and/or 2. You don't have to go bunker-prepper, but you can do things that could help in those cases (and even in boring emergencies like hurricanes) - for example, change your eating habits to always have 2 weeks-6 months of food on stock, rotating through it, things like that.
There’s at least one or two month blockade somewhere in our future where trade halts between the super powers, where we all glimpse into the economic center of the earth that we know certainly exists. Economic morbid curiosity.
Then we’ll all sit back and go “woah what a world, economic death does exist, US is a big deal, so is China, so are all these other countries, let’s diplomatically settle this, we’ve had our exploratory mushroom trip in the desert, as all people need to, you know, find themselves”.
But no war, we’re all far too weird for that now at this point.
Wait, I just realized I rhymed. We did the same nonsense with the nukes during the Cold War. There’s something magical about human natures curiosity for “we just wanted to see what it would be like, but we would never …”.
Russia and Ukraine has already caused massive secondary effects throughout the world, and that's a "relatively" minor conflict.