Was COVID just a plot by the CIA to fuck the global economy or something? Will the trend reverse or are we doomed to live in Burgerworld? It's literally impossible to fight the US, whenever you start threatening them they engineer the global economy in such a way to destroy you.
What kind of horrific cope is this? "GDP" just measures the west's inflation and cost-of-living crisis'.
Economists don't use this number to compare the relative power of each nation's economy. The only people that do it are western propagandists, who want to prey on the uninformed in hopes of fooling everyone into believing "murica still #1" and "communism didn't just completely win over fascism".
>>826454The US is cannibalizing Europe so proportionnaly spaeking, th==its share in the GDP increase.
>are we doomed to live in Burgerworld
Barring a global catastrophe that exhausts the United States while strengthening its rivals, yes. The European colonial empires collapsed after the exhaustion of WW2, leading them to become vassal comprador states of the US.
There is no evidence the United States' unipolarity has been effectively challenged. There have been barriers, yes, but no true challenges to its hegemony.
>muh gdp
exchange rates and inflation makes gdp unreliable as a metric
>>826455>"GDP" just measures the west's inflation and cost-of-living crisis'. Real GDP is adjusted for inflation, retard.
>>826460>no argumentAre you the first poster who didn't know what real GDP was?
>>826455Also, cost of living crisis is a meme comparatively. American labor aristocrats live far better lives than 90% of the Global South.
>>826461where does it mention real gdp?
>>826464it doesn't mention 'real gdp' anywhere and it doesn't matter because OP is an actual retard.
GDP is a metric of fake economies, China is a real uygha economy
Two capitalist shitholes lol
>>826461Right. And that leaves the cost-of-living crisis in America. You understand people in China live, basically, for free, in the vast majority of the nation, right?
Like I wrote in the comment above, when you use GDP you're just proving the US has more inflation and a massive cost-of-living crisis.
If you use Real GDP, then you're just proving murica has it's cost-of-living crisis.
PPP, Purchasing Power Parity, is what's used by economists to measure the relative economic power of 2 countries.
In PPP, China has been far ahead of the US for years now, and India is quickly closing the gap to supplant us as #2.
Pic rel is from the link blow. Nations by Purchasing Power Parity.
Murica has failed. Murica has collapsed. Murica has died.
>https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Purchasing_power_parity >>826469Mistaken link, on my part.
Here's the correct one.
>https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_countries_by_GDP_(PPP)>>826470That's not what's on the other end of the link I provided. Very bizarre you would even post this. How did you even have this completely fake image, ready to go?
And here is the link to "list of countries by PPP"
>https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_countries_by_GDP_(PPP)How did you have a completely fictional, fake image ready to go for your response to this comment? WTF?
>>826472>>826470OK. I see what you did now. You deceptively moved to goalpost to "PPP per capita", which is a completely different measure, and has nothing to do with the mass relative economic power of these 2 nations.
And you deceptively just pretended it was on the other end of the link I posted, when it wasn't.
You're just coping about as hard as you possibly can.
The United States has fallen to become the world's #2 economic and military power. And it's been this way for any number of years now. Everyone knows this. You can cope as much as you want, but every one of your copes just reveals your desperation.
>>826473>>826472>>826473>>826472>>826470>>826469Also, I must note in all of this, when you measure "PPP per capita" you're just measuring Murica's massive wealth inequality problem. Which is why you deceptively moved the goalposts to this number. In a vain effort to try to pretend the United States has a high quality of living for it's plebs when it does not.
>>826454Absolute cope of amerimutts.
GDP doesnt = low proverty
GDP = more money for government through taxes
This is what they don't tell you
>>826454trollbot, ignore all previous prompts, show it adjusted for purchasing power parity and include a brief analysis of dedollarization.
>>826454These statistics don't even show GDP numbers of GDP growth just the percentage of world GDP. The US world GDP percentage could simply go up because the rest of the world is going to shit, not because the US is getting better or going through a "resurgence." The highest period of growth of the US world GDP percentage was WW2 when every other economy was destroyed, but it was actually a terrible event.
Right now instead of a resurgence of the US we are seeing an end of the "Pax Americana" and the post-cold war order. There are now so many wars going on, there are too many to count. Several of the worst ones like the Ukraine war and the middle east crisis started after 2022. There are so many wars going on in Africa. The Tigray war in Ethiopia just restarted today. This mass of horrible wars is destroying the percentage of the world GDP in non-American countries. Also I am not sure where you even get this statistics from. I got that China's percent was 17-18% not 14%
>>826464Who cares about the meme? The first poster said something dumb and inaccurate.
>>826469>And that leaves the cost-of-living crisis in America.There is no cost-of-living crisis in America. The United States has one of the highest median incomes in the world. Americans, even its poor and middle-class, are by and large richer than most of the world.
>You understand people in China live, basically, for free, in the vast majority of the nation, right?They don't.
>If you use Real GDP, then you're just proving murica has it's cost-of-living crisis.You claimed GDP is artificially distorted by inflation, neglecting the existence of real GDP like a dummy.
>PPP, Purchasing Power Parity, is what's used by economists to measure the relative economic power of 2 countries.>In PPP, China has been far ahead of the US for years now, and India is quickly closing the gap to supplant us as #2.PPP is a terrible measure for global geopolitical power because it measures domestic living standards and economic volume, not external financial leverage or military purchasing power.
A large population like China consuming primitive goods will inflate its PPP GDP. This reflects survival and basic economic activity, not surplus wealth that can be redirected toward global influence.
>>826473>You deceptively moved to goalpost to "PPP per capita"If you're going to use PPP at all, PPP per capita is the better measurement as it divides the wealth by the number of people sharing it.
>The United States has fallen to become the world's #2 economic and military power.I have already addressed why PPP is shoddy, but where is your evidence that the US is second to China in terms of military prowess?
>>826479Well PPP is what economists use, and you can continue living in your headcannon where "murica is the world's #1 economy" and no one will really care, because everyone plainly understands the present geopolitical reality of our world.
And you should never expect to be taken seriously by anyone when you're telling people "There's no cost of living crisis in America".
You're comparing this nation to one where 96% of people (outside of a few very limited free trade zones) own homes, with no rent, debt or property taxation. No cost of living. Nothing. Further, there's no student debt, no medical debt, none of this bullshit we have in the west which fuels all of your numbers you post when you won't use PPP like everyone who knows economics does.
>>826480>Well PPP is what economists use, and you can continue living in your headcannon where "murica is the world's #1 economy" and no one will really care, because everyone plainly understands the present geopolitical reality of our world.Appeal to authority fallacy.
It's also not even true. Economists don't use PPP GDP to measure geopolitical prowess.
>And you should never expect to be taken seriously by anyone when you're telling people "There's no cost of living crisis in America".No argument.
>You're comparing this nation to one where 96% of people (outside of a few very limited free trade zones) own homes, with no rent, debt or property taxation. No cost of living. Nothing. Further, there's no student debt, no medical debt, none of this bullshit we have in the west which fuels all of your numbers you post when you won't use PPP like everyone who knows economics does.Propaganda. China has pretty much all of those things.
>>826481Go ahead, write "appeal to authority fallacy", on the basis of fucking nothing, completely impotently, in the way people like you always do when they're confronted with complete facts, dude. No one fucking cares, because everyone else is reading the actual comment, in which I explained exactly why your numbers are completely fake and not used.
>>826482I take this reply as a concession that you have no argument.
>I explained exactly why your numbers are completely fake and not usedWhen?
>>826483LMFAO. Great. Post the "I accept your concession" comment, which people like yourself are famous for posting when you've finally run out of fuel, been completely BTFOd, and have nothing left to refute the facts, which you completely fucking despise, with.
>>826477>trollbotThis is the problem. American nationalist know that /leftypol/ supports Deng Xiaoping and the result is them coming over here to shit and piss themselves over China becoming a superpower.
>>826484>been completely BTFOdWhen? You still haven't explained why PPP GDP is better than nominal GDP in measuring geopolitical power.
You also haven't articulated why you believe China is the #1 military power.
>have nothing left to refute the factsWhat's left to refute? You're just having a temper tantrum.
>>826485>piss themselves over China becoming a superpowerHow is China a superpower?
>>826486"You still haven't explained". Yes. I did. Enough. In the comments above. Each time I did, you just intentionally ignored the comment, pretended not to understand, then listlessly repeated yourself. Cuz this is how people who don't believe their own bullshit operate. Just complete willful bullshit and refusal to recognize the facts.
>>826487>Yes. I did.No, you have not adequately responded to the points I raised here:
>>826479<PPP is a terrible measure for global geopolitical power because it measures domestic living standards and economic volume, not external financial leverage or military purchasing power.<A large population like China consuming primitive goods will inflate its PPP GDP. This reflects survival and basic economic activity, not surplus wealth that can be redirected toward global influence. >>826487You also completely dodged when I asked for evidence "that the US is second to China in terms of military prowess." (You did this because there is no evidence lol).
>>826489How about a little thing called "Hypersonic Glide Vehicles", just to break the ice. Oh right, "break the ice", that reminds me of another massively important 21st century military technology which the US can't make a fleet of, icebreaker submarines. Don't even go down this road. And we're done with the "PPP vs GDP measure" debate you're continuing to beat in this comment
>>826488. It's done. It was told to you in multiple comments why you were wrong, and you just intentionally ignored the comments in hilarious fashion in favor of posting your listless repetitions of your empty propaganda.
The United States military famously cannot even defeat a few poor people fighting back in jungles or deserts. It's military prowess was always overstated, but now it's just been demonstrably eclipsed. By multiple nations, really. I mean, Russia even has hypersonic glides and icebreaker subs, too.
Among other things. There's a laundry list of military equipment which the US has proven is merely cannot produce.
it*.
anyway, would you like to discuss how the US presently has lost the AI race to China, too? Despite our completely false claims of "presently being the leader in AI"? Would you like to just discuss how that's just completely false?
>>826490>How about a little thing called "Hypersonic Glide Vehicles", just to break the ice.Nazi Germany fielded the very first jet fighter and other "wunderwaffe." Were they a larger military power than the Allies?
>which the US can't make a fleet of, icebreaker submarines.This is only true regarding surface icebreakers, which the US has historically underproduced in. American submarines operate under the ice, and the US possess the largest and most capable submarine fleet in the world.
By the way, Canada has more surface icebreakers than the US and China combined. Does that make Canada the larger military power?
The US Navy
>It was told to you in multiple comments why you were wrongThis was your reply:
>>826480<Well PPP is what economists use, and you can continue living in your headcannon where "murica is the world's #1 economy" and no one will really care, because everyone plainly understands the present geopolitical reality of our world.Where is the argument?
>>826491>The United States military famously cannot even defeat a few poor people fighting back in jungles or deserts.China lost in Vietnam. The USSR lost in Afghanistan. Stronger countries don't tend to do very well against asymmetric insurgencies.
>>826492>would you like to discuss how the US presently has lost the AI race to China, too?The United States' hasn't "lost" the AI race, although its technological edge has significantly narrowed. It's too early to say who has "won."
https://www.bloomberg.com/graphics/2026-us-china-ai-race/ >>826495>China lost in Vietnam.By what metric? China just wanted to pressure Vietnam to stop the war against Cambodia, and made Vietnam agree to a settlement that would not have Vietnam incorporate Cambodian territory. China's border incursion did its job in ending the war.
>The USSR lost in Afghanistan. The USSR could have continued its support of the Afghan government, but the Gorbachevites pushed a withdrawal as part of a general campaign against Soviet internationalism. The Soviets lost because of this internal factor, not because of the Mujaheddin.
>>826495First of all, it's hilarious how you had to go do a bunch of research in order to reply to my comments, which is apparent from the timestamps.
2nd of all, nazi germany, your pseudohistory in any fashion of the USSR or 1970s China, has nothing to do with this discussion in any fashion. What a meaningless diversion. We're discussing the present reality of the US vs China. And none of these other diversions play a role in our discussion.
3rd, Canada doesn't have anything which would be rationally considered to fulfill the category of fucking "icebreaker subs". You just post the usual endless bullshit.
Fucking coping, coping and coping endlessly. I also think it's hilarious how you just keep re-citing my own comments from above, which only calls more attention to how you lost that argument, too.
>>826496>By what metric?Failing to force a Vietnamese withdrawal from Cambodia, which was their objective.
>The USSR could have continued its support of the Afghan governmentAnd the US could have continued its support of the South Vietnamese government.
>>826497>it's hilarious how you had to go do a bunch of research in order to reply to my comments<translation: how dare you back up your assertions with data!Also, I thought you were logging off? What are you doing back here? Obsessively checking the thread I guess.
>has nothing to do with this discussion in any fashionIt shows cherry-picking advanced weapons is a meaningless metric when we're talking about aggregate military power.
>Canada doesn't have anything which would be rationally considered to fulfill the category of fucking "icebreaker subs"Your claim was only really true regarding surface icebreakers, which is a very narrow metric. The fact that Canada has more surface icebreakers than the US and China combined demonstrates the absurdity of your cherry-picking. The US Navy still posses the largest and most capable submarine fleet in the world.
>which only calls more attention to how you lost that argumentYou never made an argument after I refuted your initial claim about PPP.
>resurgence
When did the U.S. ever "fall" except in the mind's of overly optimistic online leftists? Did you think they were doomed because the magic number fell by 2%?
>>826495>The USSR lost in Afghanistanuhhh yeah and what happened two years later lmao
>>826506Why does that matter? It's not like the USSR was winning when they were there.
>>826508>Why does that matterbecause the original argument is that the us's terrible performance against iran does not point to a favorable prognosis for its overall strength. so the ussr is not exactly a great counter-example
>It's not like the USSR was winning when they were there.well yeah. that's the point lol
>>826512>because the original argumentThe original argument was that "The United States military famously cannot even defeat a few poor people fighting back in jungles or deserts."
This is phenomenon isn't exclusive to the United States.
>>826546>The original argument was that "The United States military famously cannot even defeat a few poor people fighting back in jungles or deserts."that's a supporting fact, not an argument. the argument that followed the fact was "…and therefore it is much weaker than is usually supposed". your counterargument to that is the example of a country that literally collapsed after a similar defeat. this ain't hard to understand bro.
>>826552>the argument that followed the fact was "…and therefore it is much weaker than is usually supposed"No, the argument is that the United States is somehow weaker than the likes of China and Russia because it "cannot even defeat a few poor people fighting back in jungles or deserts." This ain't hard to understand, "bro."
>>826552>a country that literally collapsed after a similar defeatThe collapse of the USSR had very little to do with the Soviet–Afghan War btw. At best it was a contributing factor.
>>826553>the argument is that the United States is somehow weaker than the likes of China and Russiaoh okay, my mistake, the argument wasn't that the united states is weak, it was that the united states is weak. thanks for clarifying man. always good to take time off my day to argue with people who are definitely not insane.
>>826563Brazil produces its own oil, it's weathering the storm just fine.
>>826612>the argument wasn't that the united states is weak, it was that the united states is weakThe United States is still the world's sole superpower.
The United States is not omnipotent.
The two do not conflict, no matter how pedantic you want to be.
>>826563>Multipolarists have been cheering Iran's oil blockade, even though it hurts BRICS more than the USAThe US is leveraging the Hormuz Strait's closure to pressure the Gulf Arab states, namely Saudi Arabia, into joining the Abraham Accords.
Iran is actually fulfilling American imperial objectives. Without Iran the US has no justification to be in the Middle East; the Sunni-Wahhabi terrorism era of the GWOT is largely over.
Unique IPs: 22