China's Economy is 60% Smaller Than We Thought
Vložit
- čas přidán 15. 05. 2024
- The first 100 people to use code MONEYMACRO at the link below will get 20% off of Incogni: incogni.com/moneymacro
This video has been sponsored and approved by Incogni.
If you appreciate the research, consider buying me a 'coffee' at ko-fi.com/moneymacro or supporting long-term for membership benefits via: / moneymacro
LIKE CHATTING ECON WITH ME?
△ Follow me on Twitter: / joerischasfoort
△ Follow me on LinkedIn: / joeri-schasfoort
△ I have a private Discord server for Senior and Chief economist Patrons / members.
Otherwise I sometimes hang out in two Discord servers:
△ Unlearning Economics's server: / discord
△ Capitalists server: / discord
SOURCES (including links to paper):
In text here: www.moneymacro.rocks/2022-10-...
CALCULATIONS:
github.com/joerischasfoort/ch...
Timestamps:
0:00 - introduction
1:22 - official figures
3:31 - evidence
5:13 - sponsor
6:31 - true GDP
8:15 - Pro's & Con's
Made Possible by Research Assistance from Carlo Humpert
In Memory of Macrocat (Henry)
Neon sign from: www.neonlights.be/discount/M&M15
Narrated and produced by Dr. Joeri Schasfoort (University of Groningen)
Studio designed by Alex Moore Via www.dmsquaredagency.com
I'm so sorry to hear about Macrocat. I've lost cats to being hit by cars before and it's really horrible. Wishing you all the best Joeri.
It’s my wife’s favorite part about these videos when I put them on in the living room. We’re both really sorry for your loss and I’m sure you gave Macrocat a great life.
keep your cats inside there are way less cars in your living room
@@Alex-ee5pl Not every cat is the same. Some are indoor cats but others need time outside.
I lost my cat last month as well. To say it sucks is an understatement.
I also join in the condolences for Henry, hope you recover from this sad event!
If this number is really in the same ballpark, that's remarkable, a 50% smaller economy is quite insane!
Its the magic of compounding growth. Overstating growth by e.g. 2% each year will produce staggering results in the long run
@@MoneyMacro I think it is a flaw to assume that wealth distribution in autocratic countries is similar to democratic countries. A country 1000 people earning 100k$ per annum will cast much much more light than an impoverished country with 10 big shots earning 10M$ per annum even though the wealth is the same. If we look solely based on light emitted it might look like the first country is richer even though the second country is clearly equally rich in terms of money.
But since China has a lot of so called "ghost-cities", wouldn't that have implications in the rate at which night lights in China grow?
@@lakshmanb5604 Did you watch the video? the paper looked at all the factors that could explain the differences, if you disagree with them maybe go read the paper fight?
No GDP data is 100% accurate. Just by looking at how big the middle class is, chinas economy has indeed exploded
Thanks for providing actual quality content while protecting the researchers values AND explaining them to everyone. The world needs more people like you!
How does it help u? Data shows that China's economy is large and this fool telling u otherwise.
Taiwan had an economic growth of 12 percent in the 1960s- 1970s so China's Gdp growth rates may be accurate.
But they kept the same economic growth for 50 years which is higher than Taiwan and South Korea. Making it the country with the highest economic growth in the world for 50 years straight seems somewhat suspicious especially when the Soviet Union also lied about its Economic growth.
@@ew-uy6cs US lied and is still lying about its gdp. Most economists estimated that US' gdp should be 1/8 of its actual claim as its gdp value is grossly overinflated by blatant overprinting of its currency and grossly over-valued stocks. In real comparison, even the daily food consumption per capita of each Chinese is 10 times better than Americans.
There is a MAJOR flaw in this paper. MOST countries that grow the fastest today are not Western Style Democracies and would be classified as "authoritarians". China, Vietnam, India, even Malaysia and Indonesia would be classified like that. Second, the MAJORITY of he poor countries of the world are to some extent authoritarian, and poor low and middle income countries tend to grow more than high income countries, where the vast majority of the MINORITY of countries that are Western Style democracies on our planet are. Simply because, contrary to what most Westerners think, the MAJORITY of planet Earth is made up by countries that would be considered "non-democratic". When it comes to low and middle income countries, where most likely you'll find a fast growing economy, that percentage is even higher. Which brings the problem of how those countries where determined to be "dictatorships" in the first place as well. In other words, most countries that grow fast would be classified as "dictatorships" (whether it being true or not). And that not because dictatorships are particularly good at making the economy grow (since most authoritarian countries are poor and people don't give a flying s** about them unless they are growing and defying the hegemony of the West) but simply because, again, it needs to be stressed again, MOST countries on planet Earth would be classified as authoritarians. Hence, in simple terms, if we will se a poor country becoming a rich country MOST LIKELY it will be a country classified that way. So the paper ASSUMES that "authoritarian countries" lie because they grow more when in fact countries that grow more in its vast majority are even as authoritarian or, at least, not mature democracies. OF COURSE the mature democracies will grow less. They are the richest countries on Earth.
I know I’m late but great vid man I’m sorry for your loss it’s never easy losing a family member who’s been with you for a long time. I’m new to the channel but I love the effort you give to these videos and your cat who was always apart of them. Best wishes and prayers for you and your cat ❤
What I would love to see is some independent studies trying to calculate the same deflation factor using different data sources. Then we could compare their error bars.
Completely agree Nin. 👍
Nobody's stopping you from doing it, Nin.
@@TheDavidlloydjones not everyone’s an economist, David
@@Sentient_Blob It's not hard to do the the math.
@@johnmorgan834 you do it then, John
There was a similar approach to research carried out by Prosper Australia looking at under reported vacant properties in Melbourne in 2017, but rather tha using lights they looked at water records which revealed many supposedly occupied properties had less water usage than a dripping tap.
Is this because a vacancy tax?
@@patrickriarchy1976 Chinese bought alot of our housing but many don't even live in it, its just a way for them to move money out of China
@@patrickriarchy1976 Partly as that creates the obvious perverse incentive to hide the fact, but vancancy rates were high in general due to a highly speculative period in Oz RE where buyers will favour liquidity over yields. Not sure how accurate estimate levels of vacancy are or were before that in general but I expect they are generally under estimated in many markets.
The perverse incentive doesn't just apply to vacancy tax. Just anecdotally here in London, UK a person 'lived' in the downstairs flat from me from 2012-15 ish, but was actually only there about 3 weekends over the 3 years they owned it. (suited me as no noise)
The reason being as it was officially owner occupied it incurred no capital gains tax on sale which would have been pretty substantial.
Create an exemption, and some people find ways to qualify for that.
@@sieuwkedevries5211 It's more that they are speculating on the growth house prices, but didn't want to deal with the hassle ir risk of having tenants and wanted to be able to market and sell the house quickly without having to deal with giving notice to the tenant or having to repair the wear and tear caused by people living there.
Oh now that's a good metric! Water is used for everything, and the more money you have the more water you will use for bathing, etc
as a chinese i can tell you China's Economy is 90% smaller.most chinese could not afford to pay for a lunch.
Hey man, sad for your loss! Remember the good work that you are doing for us millions of people and that will give you strength to carry on
Rest in peace, Henry. It's tough to lose your friends, especially before their time, so wishing you the absolute best
Thank you so much for having Henry lighten us up all this time. This wonderful cat brought joy to you and so many others here. I'm know he too is grateful for all the love you gave him.
Rest in Peace, dear Macrocat.
F
As a scientist I'm naturally a little sceptical about such a correlational study and its enormous interpretation.
2 questions please you didnt address sufficiently imho:
1) Did the author of the paper offer enough and convincing arguments as to why night light intensities would significantly relate to GDP growth in detail?
How was he actually able to exclude his many good points why it might not correlate?
2) if it was a highly appreciated study, he nust have offered alternativ and independent other methods of meassuring real GDP growth to compare with.
Did he offer such other techniques?
Thank you so much!
if China's economy is really that small they will need to explain why China consume x2 the amount of electricity and 160% more energy than the USA.
@@The136th yes that would be interesting. This would be a better meass6re than night lights.
Maybe the Chinese just better value their good sleep 🤔😅
@@Dr.RiccoMastermind the fact that the growth of consumption falls behind production in China, which is a socialist pedigree, can falsify the night lights as good indicator for real GDP growth.
@oldlamp1982 probably not if the export a significant portion of what they produce - or am I wrong?
@The136th likely because the produce a damn lot for the rest of the world, maybe not so much at night.
And they might not party so much under extreme night light shows
Yes, you are right. Please convince the US government to believe it.
They have been lying all this while you mean??
@@parnamsaini4751 China's GDP is actually only 10% true, I am Chinese, I know it, please don't be too afraid of us surpassing the United States.
@@parnamsaini4751 yes china economic is bulit by rockected real estate market instead of real industrialization, the GDP data match more with the m2 increasing if you take a closer look, its a country built itself by debt.
@@marcma42China is commonly referred to as the world's factory because so many companies are outsourcing their production to the country. Something they never would've done if proper infrastructure wasn't in place.
When you say "real industrialization", what does that mean exactly?
No he is NOT.
There is a MAJOR flaw in this paper. MOST countries that grow the fastest today are not Western Style Democracies and would be classified as "authoritarians". China, Vietnam, India, even Malaysia and Indonesia would be classified like that. Second, the MAJORITY of he poor countries of the world are to some extent authoritarian, and poor low and middle income countries tend to grow more than high income countries, where the vast majority of the MINORITY of countries that are Western Style democracies on our planet are. Simply because, contrary to what most Westerners think, the MAJORITY of planet Earth is made up by countries that would be considered "non-democratic". When it comes to low and middle income countries, where most likely you'll find a fast growing economy, that percentage is even higher. Which brings the problem of how those countries where determined to be "dictatorships" in the first place as well. In other words, most countries that grow fast would be classified as "dictatorships" (whether it being true or not). And that not because dictatorships are particularly good at making the economy grow (since most authoritarian countries are poor and people don't give a flying s** about them unless they are growing and defying the hegemony of the West) but simply because, again, it needs to be stressed again, MOST countries on planet Earth would be classified as authoritarians. Hence, in simple terms, if we will se a poor country becoming a rich country MOST LIKELY it will be a country classified that way. So the paper ASSUMES that "authoritarian countries" lie because they grow more when in fact countries that grow more in its vast majority are even as authoritarian or, at least, not mature democracies. OF COURSE the mature democracies will grow less. They are the richest countries on Earth.
I love this channel and the information it presents... but i also loved the glimpses of Macrocat. He contributed to the vibe of the channel and did a good job keeping things relaxed and not over-serious. Thank you for mentioning that he did not suffer... but my heart is still in mourning for Henry. RIP Macrocat and rest easy.
Couple of issues with this study. First, the relationship with night light and GDP has been shown to depend on the level of urbanization. For example, study by Xaquín S.Pérez-Sindín et al. (2021) found that the relationship between satellite measured night light and GDP was strongest for urban areas (coefficient of 0.71 with an R2 of 0.5 for 500K centers vs.0.57 and an R2 of 0.32 for areas with 20-50K). Although having a large population, China is still less urbanized than the US and most Western European countries. Urbanization in China is ~61% vs. 82% in the US, with the difference being much larger during the 1990 - 2010 period.
Additionally, Martinez assumes that the relationship between night light and GDP is linear. There's no reason to assume this as you might expect that increased GDP in highly developed countries might be near a saturation point; at some point this relationship will break down as economic growth is less tied to population growth and increased light generation (just an aside, health expenditure as a fraction of GPD in the US is 19% and has been a major contributor to US GDP growth. How is that tied to light generation?).
Further, the R2 values are generally low (~0.3), indicating that there are a host of other factors far greater than night light that account for changes in GDP. Again, linear regression with values this low can't be used to conclude something as specific as China lying about its GDP numbers. Finally, the use of the "Freedom Index" is a little dubious. It seems unlikely that something as simplistic and ideological as a "Freedom Index" will capture any nuance in something as complex as a modern government. Correlation is not causation. In complex systems (especially anything as complex as economies and government) one will always find an endless number of variables that are weakly correlated. However, explaining how these variables relate mechanistically and causally is the hard part, which Martinez fails to do.
When coupled with the low R2 values and low correlation there really isn't anything specific one can say about how governments lie about GDP measures. If this was a paper in a prestigious science journal it would have been rejected, not because its methods are wrong, but rather because its conclusion cannot be justified on the basis of the results and analyses presented. The only thing we can say with certainty is that there is a relationship between night light and GDP (with plenty of unexplained variance) and lots of variability between countries, regardless of whether we subjectively classify them as free or not.
Nice counter-comment. Thanks.
thanks for the counter argument, very thorough. but isn't an R2 of 0.3 quite good for a social science?
Growth in urbanization in China has been dramatic over this period, from 23% in 1990 to close to 64% in 2020, compared with 75%v to 82% in the US. Given what you say above, shouldn't we expect the night life growth to be even faster than GDP growth in China over the same period, rather than less?
@@StevenBerg123 It may very well be a good value for a social science (I'm not in the field of social sciences) but if that is your analysis and value then you have to adjust your conclusions in accordance. You can't make such specific and extraordinary claims (seriously, claiming China is lying and that its economy is 60% less than claimed because it's an autocratic government is a pretty extraordinary and specific conclusion in the field of social sciences) without extraordinary data and more specific results. If someone claimed that the US economy is half of what the government claimed based on, for example, internet usage, nobody would take that seriously without additional data and analyses. Why should we hold any claim about China to a lower standard?
Sure, but it also means that in the early stages of growth, when China's was a more rural society, light measures were a very poor indicator of economic growth. My point was that the level of light and GPD growth will not be linearly related since a country's level of urbanization will change over time, especially a country undergoing rapid development. So, for example, in the early period, when China was more rural and light levels were poorly correlated with GDP, the value would be weighed differently than values when the country was more urbanized. Hence, the relationship between light and GDP will not be linear across time and economic development as assumed by the study. Hence a low value with lots of unexplained variance doesn't really provide any mechanistic insight to reported GDP and light, especially since the definition of what is being compared (autocratic vs. democratic) is so vague and poorly defined. If you read the original study, Martinez also excluded a lot of autocratic countries that don't fit the trend because he claims they don't have any incentive to lie about GDP (mostly West African countries that receive aid and are friendly to Western interests). Why do this if you think autocratic governance is the major motivator for exaggerating GDP numbers. Clearly, things are way more complex than this.
thanks for sharing this paper and gives a insightful remarks.
Very intriguing. Thank you for sharing buddy
Great video Joeri. Very sorry to hear about your cat. I hope you are doing well.
@Patrick - I always watch your channel. Great to see you here!!!
Another reason (in addition to the one I posted on air quality) for China's night lights not growing as fast as gdp could be that a lot of Chinas economic activity was building "Ghost Cities" and properties that were not inhabited, but instead held as a second home. These would not generate as much light, as only infrastructure surrounding the uninhabited skyscrapers would be lit.
Ah, yes, the infamous "styrofoam buildings"...
They can also be useful as a tax write off as they are guaranteed to produce negative returns.
That right, but also can be worse, the ghost cities can qualify as wasted money, second home for vacation or work can be an asset, but those uses aren't realized in China, compounding the fact that many of those house are leases, that in 70 years will be lost money anyways
The problem there is that so many of these secondary homes are rotten tail projects, homes that have not started or completed its construction phase and the original mortgage is essentially stolen into China's Ponzi scheme. Many citizens are being asked to essentially pay a full second mortgage to resume construction, with many of these projects having serious problems, such as concrete of such poor quality that you can break it by hand, not reinforced with rebar, etc. It is not like say here in the US where when you buy a secondary home, you then have the actual home. In China, the "house" is more of a "promise to build a house with substandard construction."
Why would lights be on in night in residential area anyway?
So no China Threat right? Yeah! Let's get back to enjoy our lives!
Solid video, keep up the work.
Very sorry to hear about Macrocat. He seemed very happy and content. I'm sure you did a good job taking care of him. We too lost our cat Paul unexpectedly this past Easter. It's never easy when you love and care for them.
My condolences for your loss. For me Macrocat was one of the highlights of the show, thank you for sharing him with us through your channel. He will be missed.
Hi, great video! One question I have though, is how is it not more noticeable and has no evidence other than the fact it has less lights than expected? I could see how it makes sense for even something like 20%, but more than half of a country’s economy being fictional is bound to make people notice sooner and in more forms, isn’t it?
Sorry if I missed this point but did you discuss if the paper based its figures on the GDP numbers of China when taking into consideration the devaluation of the Yuan? I’m curious to know if the paper considered the relative size of China’s economy using their valuation or our valuation based on what the US believes the size to be if the Yuan were pegged to other currencies. That would theoretically skew the numbers.
the truth is, a coutnry's growth is not mrerely measure by its GDP number. And statement like " Yuan were pegged to other currencies. " has no evidence, it may be a fact, but none to know by US govt or any economists. It's backdoor deal that China and its allies make that others cant be know. which is actually a strength in currency, no data, no analytic , and thus no strategic can be make directly against Yuan.
It's fundamentally tracking growth over time. It's not tracking exact figures. PPP calculations also tend to hold steady over time and include currency exchange rates. In fact, tracking via nominal GDP is why it's more consistent of a value over time than consistently adjusting for exchange rates or PPP. Not to mention PPP is just a multiplier for the initial measurement anyway which means that it's added after, not before.
TL;DR It's all tracking for the nominal GDP, and PPP is a multiplier added after
This kind of real question asking followed by open consideration of both the alternatives and implications of the inquiry is what science, finance, and policy making needs more of today. Great video! Sorry for your loss with Henry's passing, he was great as Macrocat.
Exactly! I was skeptical after the first few minutes. Still somewhat skeptical but far less when many of the nuances were covered
Goddamn...that ending got me. We are nothing without love, and the only way we can have love in our lives is by accepting it's brutally honest traveling partner, tragedy. RIP Rumi...please show Macrocat a good time.
Just started the video but I'm going to go ahead and agree. Tragedy is the environment that makes love possible. A great deal of people train themselves to not see tragedy and love shallowly as a result. Imo.
Thank you so much! You did a great work! HYJ
Always good to get uncorrelated sources of data to back up your main observation. Other growth indicators are oil and gas, steel, copper, and electricity generation. Though changing technologies and the balance of service industry to production would modify those. One other satellite measure might be to measure infrared emissions as well as almost all economic functions generate heat. Anyway interesting take.
They’ve literally downscaled steel and coal since 2016 as stated publicly?? In an intentional move to service industry??
Rest in peace, Henry. This was my first ever video I've seen from this channel and Henry brought joy to my heart.
x2
Very sorry for the loss of Henry! Thank you for your videos, I show them to my buddies who are finance/politics wonks, they are very high quality and informative. I hope you are doing alright in the wake of this tragedy.
中华人民共和国万岁，习近平总书记是全世界最伟大的人，他带领全世界人民走向光明
have been researching all this while for a digital asset to invest in and I found the crypto market to be the most profiting of them all, I'm definitely bouncing on it
Wow, Her scores are
everywhere😮
I imagine folks don 't like china, and that is why there is popularity with these estimates. The underlying assumption is pretty stupid tho. We can't compare china with other countries. More accurately, we should compare countries next to china, and with similar bloodline and culture as China: Taiwan, Japan, Korea, and Singapore etc.. China is exceptional because it got an exceptional population. Secondly, the correlation between gdp growth and light intensity isn't linar. It is linear up to a point, but diminish in return as a approximation of national output.
WOW SIRR VERY DANGEROUS !!😠😠😠 BUT THIS WHY IM SO LUCKY LIVE IN SUPER INDIA 🤗🇮🇳 THE CLEANEST COUNTRY IN THE WORLD , WE NEVER DO SCAM AND WE GIVE RESPECT TO ALL WOMEN THEY CAN WALK SAFELY ALONE AT NIGHT AND WE HAVE CLEAN FOOD AND TOILET EVERYWHERE 🇮🇳🤗🚽, I KNOW MANY POOR PEOPLE JEALOUS WITH SUPER RICH INDIA 🤗🇮🇳🤗🇮🇳🤗
One of the reasons may indeed be that ghost cities were counted in GDP but once built turn into a mere deadweight. Another (and more speculative) one is that China may have overstated its population, especially the number of working age people.
Excellent analysis! Well done!!
This channel deserves millions of subscribers, top quality.
Thanks Tijl!
Shitty resources and information collecting, more like deserves much less subscribers
@@MoneyMacro Truly is! Best macro content. One tiny little tip I wanna give is to improve audio a little.
It can sound a little muffled sometimes compared to some other top channels. Maybe just a little eqing in the top end can already do the trick :)
I am so sorry for the loss of Henry. The Loss of a pet is usually underappreciated by other people, but he was clearly very important to you and the people who watch this channel. I wish you the best.
Just discovered your channel. Like the content. Loved the cat. Then tragedy. I'm so sorry for your loss.😪
I'm sorry to hear about Henry. He looked like he enjoyed his life while you presented economic videos. He will continue to bring us joy!
I haven't read the paper, but one variable to look into is population density in cities. Most urban growth in China seems to be "vertical", that is in tall skyscarpers that will emit proportionally less light per unit area than a growth based on sub-urban sprawl.
That makes sense for residential and office space, but they're also rather less relevant than industrial and retail space when it comes to GDP. retail effectively has a limit to how far up you can go (due to the logistics of getting both products and customers in and out), and industrial just doesn't really compress like that unless you start doing rather noteworthy and exotic things. Or at least, such is my understanding.
Sounds logical, but look at the lights on any map of Manhattan, and they are the brightest. For me, to see how China has manipulated data for decades with reporting GDP of 6% one quarter, 6.1% the next, then 6.2% the next. No legitimate country would report numbers in such a steady manner. Look at the democratic countries and they are 4.0% one quarter, 2.5% the next, 3.2 the next. China has their municipalities report that growth to make their numbers stay the course and have steady growth for their "image", not reality. Soon reality will catch up with them. Can you imagine any legitimate country missing out on a GDP report? That's what China has done because they are slowing down and don't want to admit it or not until the CCP party is over.
@@robinsoncrusoeonmars8594 I think you're not quite familiar with the usual grography of chinese cities(spoiler it's totally different from Manhatta)
For starters, Manhattan is extremely small and has a population density of over 72,000 people, no city in mainland China is that dense; it has been fully occupied for over 100 years, the only way to buil new stuff is by tearing old stuff down, theres barely a centimeter of undevelopped land in Manhattan.
For contrast, cities in china have enormous land area, also being the center of administration of dozens of villages and smaller towns, so the population density is always relatively low; this one might sound a bit astonishing to you if youre from the US, but the average residential building in China is still taller than most buildings in Manhattan(because most of it was built a century ago, when there was no better technology. Also contrary to the popular belief, appartaments in mainland China are actually quite spacious, they only got a bad reputation because of Hong Kong and Macau); if you look on google maps you'll notice that in general urban areas in China are covered by HUGE parks, sometimes built right in the downtown areas, which is probably why it's not as bright as you'd expect.
Also, Manhattan has a per capita of over 100,000USD, theres no reason to compare it to anywhere in China anyway.
@Keyboard Emperor To build empty ghost cities and get itself into a major debt crisis. Good job! Btw the US build more aircraft carriers in 10 years than China in 2000 years.
China also has vertical residential facilities, but so do other countries.
Since the more vertical, the higher the population density, so this can be verified through population density.
According to that, the population density of India is higher than that of China.
Many cities, such as Delhi in India, New York in the United States, Shanghai in Egypt, and Seoul in South Korea, have higher population densities than China.
Well, yeah. Houses usually turn off the lights for sleep at night. Right?
If so, the facilities that shine even at night are probably factories.
But factories usually don't build high. The reason is.... The reason has been explained by many others. lol
Then, China's GDP statistics should not be different from other countries.
Because every country in the world has the same height of factories.
+)
How did the idea that only China build skyscrapers and live on?
Zoals steeds: zeer professionele video. Interessant onderwerp, goede en duidelijke uitleg. Je weet heel goed de aandacht vast te houden. Heel erg dat Henry naar de overzijde is gegaan. Hij heeft een leven van een prins gehad. We zullen macrokat missen in de volgende filmpjes!!!
Wie is Henry?
@@johnwt7333 de kat.
Absolutely fascinating insight to assess economic growth in relation to night time lighting... inspired
9:18 What is that!? It's like an oil refinery with giant Christmas lights. That's hilarious, and adorable, kinda
Hey bud,
Sorry about Henry. Pets become family and their loss is huge. I know editing the end won't have been easy.
Sending my love out champion. We're here for you.
Thanks for the video. I've been saying something similar for a few years now.
Thank you. It wasn't an easy edit for sure. But, in the end, I felt blessed to have the opportunity to do something like this for him.
@@MoneyMacro None of us are permanent, unlike the growth of CCP GDP. Look after yourself please mate.
I've lost two brothers to cars. Still miss em dearly but life is for living not being sad. You can do that later.
My biggest concern is the paper's claim to be able to control for confounding variables. Not just are there so many crucial factors to consider but it's easy to see how they might correlate strongly with a countries status of democracy. However, your comparison between India and China seems very interesting. It should be much more doable to examine the reasons for their specific discrepancy in light to gdp growth rates.
India has plain sight brothels open at night, China hasn’t, it’s all hidden…
India Standard Time is 2.5 hours behind China Standard Time. Meaning if you measure the light intensity of Indian cities at their peak values, ~8:00PM, most Chinese have already gone to bed. This, of course, assumes those images weren't modified.
Forget satellite photos, just look at power generation numbers. China generally produces more than 5 times that of India, or about twice as much as the United States.
@@qgyunyc yes and thats why streetlights must've been closed too. Makes sense only if its sarcasm.
China is the only developing country to successfully prevent informal settlements, i.e shanty towns, being built. Over 1 million people live in basements in Beijing whereas India has large slums built entirely above ground.
The correlation on the graph he shows for china vs india seems to be incredibly low though. Like, I haven't checked the math, but just look at it, there's no way the data gives strong support for those lines
So exports actually make up 50% of China's GDP. That's mighty impressive.
Nope it means domestic consumption is not enough to keep up the economy
It makes economy more vulnerable to foreign consumption and external conflicts
This is what led Germany into recession
Great analysis 👍
Light is one indirect measurement, but I wonder if these findings can be verified using different proxies (energy consumption? emissions? trade balances?)
I understand China used to release lots of other measures that could be used as a proxy for GDP, however one of the first things Xi Jinping did was to reduce the amount of statistics released
The Chinese centralized state already does approximations of energy consumption + emissions + trade balances to adjust the "official regional report" down because the central government wants to know the true growth numbers for their 5 year plans. The regional governments caught on over time and adjusted these other numbers in accordance with their fake growth. However light pollution is a new metric that isn't used so that shows the true growth. However now that this paper has been published I'm sure the central government will use it to adjust local figures down which will result in corrupt local officials doing stupid stuff like forcing new buildings and companies to install brighter lights to fake more growth or something like that. There was the scandal of fake solar and wind installations in shenzhen city a couple of years ago as well.
Fire/heat maps can also be used for this exact measure.
No they can not... China consumes 60-70% of global production of concrete, for instance... And there are many more metrics lite this. And this "light" metric is absolute and total BS. Also author of video conviniently forgot to say that access to this article costs 30$! That is all you need to know about how Western GDP is generated and calculated.
@@joey199412 They might, but that would require more electricity, which would require more spending and a higher GDP to sustain such a thing. Though they could just do it by making more debt to that would hasten a collapse.
Thank you for your analysis, as always, and I am so so sorry about Henry. May the little guy rest in peace 😿.
Your all videos are very interesting
TLDR also used night light as a measure of GDP. Your broadcast was both informative and entertaining.
Wait, if they're economy was like half the size they say it is... Shouldn't that be like blindingly obvious and everyone should agree? Like it's not a small lie.
I am thinking about that too, if it’s that different, then people wouldn’t consider it a threat
One trip to China and you'll know it will overtake the US economy. Channels like these are just coping because they cannot accept that very obvious fact. What is not made in China these days? 1.4 billion highly motivated people who work hard to produce products and services will of course overtake a much smaller population, no matter how exceptional the US is, or was.
His method is very unreliable. In hard sciences it would have never passed review
Yes and No.
If certain interest groups, in the West aside from the CCP stand to make a ( financial) killing by pumping up the bubble, and then exit at the right time just before the bubble bursts and the gullible people have deposited all their money into the ( sinking) hole, then they will turn a Nelson's eye.
It’s also believed that china overstated their population size as well. So it’s not surprising the GDP is fake and off the mark.
As to why provinces fake their population numbers, love govts can get more salary cheques and farm/school subsidies from faking the numbers. Population growth targets are also assigned to local govts as a KPI of performance
It’s very difficult to audit the true number in a dictatorship as any attempt will get you a one way ticket to prison
Light surely also depends on things like population density and wealth disparity. The US typically has fairly spread out suburbs compared to the high-rise flats seen in China's cities. Surely this means one model for light intensity can't just be flatly applied to the other country and extrapolated from.
Yeah overall this model just seems too simplistic. A rough estimate is fine, but to present the calculations as anything concrete is a bit irresponsible since it misses out on way too many factors like population density/concentrations, industries involved, how high-rises affect perceived luminosity at night, and not to mention the sample size used in the original study only extends until 2008.
@@o-654 did you read the paper? or are you just assuming that the people who peer-reviewed were not aware of such basic things?
As a chinese, I am aware of how Marco says the GDP number could be fabricated, I know that well my family member told me a lot and I think many Chinese would joke about it too(by exchanging your old shoes with your friends many many times, now you get a high GDP) but I would also doubt the measurements of just using light intensity to measure GDP. And you are right I think it might be due to there are taller buildings which covers up individual light useage
There are several possible other reasons I come up with my friends: 1. Chinese people stay up less at night because of culture of longevity than westerners. Westerners can stay up all night partying. Chinese people value sleep cycle more. Although, yes there are many Chinese people who still stay up late playing majiang or clubing but few. 2. electricity is not cheap. 3. retailing and face-to-face buisnesses are less and less popular because the digitalization and e-commerce, most people can stay at home not going out and live a life. So retailers which emit light is less.
While this model is very rough, it makes sense. This is especially so given that China has had the largest transfer of population from rural areas to urban areas in history over the past 2 decades. They should have very intense increases of light at night in and around their urban areas, and if they don't then something is not right. If even the Chinese Premier looks at power consumption levels rather than official economic data to make his judgement on economic growth, then the theory spoken of in this video makes even more sense.
Your misconception is that use think in absolute light transmission, while you have to think in relative changes.
7:40 kitty 😻(oh noes ;___; RIP baby) This was interesting! Appreciate the nuance of your takes and the data being presented here.
Sorry for out of topic but what watch do you wear?
Condolences 😢.
Thank you
I'm so sorry for the cat
I’m really curious, have you ever step foot into china??!?
I'm so sorry to hear about Henry. You're doing a great job, Joeri. Thank you very much for making macroeconomics more accessible and doing it in a such elegant, knowledgeable and accessible way!
WTF is wrong with you, folks‽ Here's a serious topic being discussed, and you whine about a cat?
I imagine folks don 't like china, and that is why there is popularity with these estimates. The underlying assumption is pretty stupid tho. We can't compare china with other countries. More accurately, we should compare countries next to china, and with similar bloodline and culture as China: Taiwan, Japan, Korea, and Singapore etc.. China is exceptional because it got an exceptional population. Secondly, the correlation between gdp growth and light intensity isn't linar. It is linear up to a point, but diminish in return as a approximation of national output.
WOW SIRR VERY DANGEROUS !!😠😠😠 BUT THIS WHY IM SO LUCKY LIVE IN SUPER INDIA 🤗🇮🇳 THE CLEANEST COUNTRY IN THE WORLD , WE NEVER DO SCAM AND WE GIVE RESPECT TO ALL WOMEN THEY CAN WALK SAFELY ALONE AT NIGHT AND WE HAVE CLEAN FOOD AND TOILET EVERYWHERE 🇮🇳🤗🚽, I KNOW MANY POOR PEOPLE JEALOUS WITH SUPER RICH INDIA 🤗🇮🇳🤗🇮🇳🤗
My deepest condolences and greatest respect for the loss of your dear companion. Rest well, Henry.
interesting way to calculate a country's GDP, not totally convinced me but it's very interesting and valuable. Nice video!
Well, he didn't realize Chinese city residents live in very tall apartments. The light on those tall builds projecting to the space are not proportional to a single-story house.
They are certainly smaller than official reports, but 60% seems too much. I would bet 30-40% compared to official numbers.
The metodology also has a vague point, after a certain threshold of development, more electricity and more energy will not just occupy more space, several sweatshops producing clothes in Bangladesh can easily emit the same light Google's headquarters does. Economies speciallize and grow in extremely complex products, not just size and volume. After some point, you Will not just detect more light.
Great video as always Joeri.
I agree, to me this paper is using the worst possible estimates to get attention and clout. It seems very unlikely to me that so much of China's economy is basically faked, but I could be wrong.
I agree with your statement except even 30% seems extreme
The argument in the paper and yours can only imply intentional and nefarious lying and to successfully dupe the entire globe for so many years jist seems entirely too far fetched. Even 30% of their GDP is such a colossal number that concrete and irrefutable evidence would be had years ago
@@FutureBoyWonder At no point is that statement extreme. It has been a trend all throughout history to exaggerate economic growth to keep people content; it's not nefarious as it is short-sighted for the sake of political stability. There are no barriers to stop such things and thus it becomes far too attractive to not do so.
Noticeably, I said exaggerate, not completely make up. As long as people in China FEEL some improvements, then the real economic numbers don't matter all that much and can easily be justified. It doesn't take much to dupe the world when the world takes a country at face value. GDP is not something you can find with evidence, you can only discern it by parsing through the data of an entire country which only said country's government can accomplish. So the end result is; any attempts to disprove said stats can only come from within, which is impossible for China due to government control over media, or be judged through a less accurate but more honest method like the paper made.
He said 60% of the size of current AKA 40% smaller. 30-40% of the size of current would be 60-70% smaller.
China's GDP is certainly smaller than what they claim it to be, however if it was 60% smaller it would have massive implications because you can lie about statistics; but this true to a certain extent due to these "numbers" exposing an economy that it's not true at all.
In my country, Spain, if the offical gdp fake was around what France has it wouldn't make sense because the median annual wage is around 25k while France is closer to 35k (maybe a bit more); it is also important to take into account that these 2 countries have different ammount of inhabitants; but still, my point is that you can't present a flawed number if that precise number is showing an opposite reality or very different atleast... and as far as I'm concerned China GINI is 38,2 therefore gdp is moderately distributed and not kept by a small percentage of the population
What you do with the figures of in port and export figures they are officially polished by others countries.
Please keep future Macrocats indoors. Indoors live longer, obviously. Great and wonderful, educated guesstimates based off of 'official' reported data and collected data of both related and unrelated sources.
Thank you for your considered, researched and scrutinizable content. Always well received. Also, much love to you on the passing of Henry. I hope the knowledge that his presence in your videos obviously brought a smile to many helps bring a smile to yours when you think of him 🙂
Good stuff
Oh man, that end Memoriam made me tear up as hell!! 😭 I'm so sorry to hear about Macrocat's passing.
There is one concern with nightlight data that you could mention : saturation. It doesn't mean that the calculation is wrong or anything like that, but rather than a straight line it's likely that the relationship between nightlight growth and GDP growth is concave in GDP (when GDP becomes larger, light intensity is more saturated so it grows slower for the same growth rate of the economy). So my only concern with the paper is that the relationship is overstated because Chinese economic growth is concentrated in rich areas where saturation is more of a thing. It would be cool to check the relationship for different provinces in China as a robustness check if you have the data !
Honestly, it sounds like you've got a chunk of money sitting in China, and this is a rationalization to make yourself feel better rather than any logical conclusion or argument.
@@diegomartinez6100 Nah I'm an academic doing economic research using nightlight as well so I was just pointing out the caveats that we all face when working on this !
What an aggressive tone !
@@abd5596 Apologies if I came off that way, the Chinese economy is like the recent American election, subject to a lot of hype and incorrect numbers because of vested interests. A lot of the analysis regarding China has felt like people rationalizing their beliefs as opposed to anything factual, especially when you take into account the irregularities regarding their economy and population as well, both of which have been inflated by people on the ground that just want more funding for their particular municipality/regional government. Personally, I expect the CCP to spend the next couple of years dealing with threats to it's very existence, akin to '89 and this time furthered by the advent of the internet. People now can see what the other side lives like, and Xi has neither the chutzpah nor the balls to push China back to a pre-Deng Xiaoping sort of society.
I agree with most of the above, but a different approach. In the video the question was: Do you trust China's numbers or this research? I would trust the numbers of almost anybody over the official numbers of China. Most importantly I observed a few years ago how shipping went down and two big shipping companies went bust (around 2015/16 iirc). China's exports faltered but the official gdp growth numbers were +6.5% as forecast. I don't think so. And they fudged the numbers for decades. So yeah, I believe the research 100%.
I worked in both US and China. When I worked in US, we left all lights on for thew whole night even nobody in the office building. In China, we have to turn off lights before leaving. Chinese is very conservative on energy consumption.
Very sad news to hear of the loss of Henry, I always enjoyed seeing him in your videos. My condolences to you, Joeri, he will be missed. RIP ❤
WOW SIRR VERY DANGEROUS !!😠😠😠 BUT THIS WHY IM SO LUCKY LIVE IN SUPER INDIA 🤗🇮🇳 THE CLEANEST COUNTRY IN THE WORLD , WE NEVER DO SCAM AND WE GIVE RESPECT TO ALL WOMEN THEY CAN WALK SAFELY ALONE AT NIGHT AND WE HAVE CLEAN FOOD AND TOILET EVERYWHERE 🇮🇳🤗🚽, I KNOW MANY POOR PEOPLE JEALOUS WITH SUPER RICH INDIA 🤗🇮🇳🤗🇮🇳🤗
@@indiasuperclean6969 Okay bot.
This can be one tool to evaluate GDP reporting, yes. However, it must be used in concert with many other such alternative, creative, GDP-derivative indicators to be able to make any reliable calculations.
I'll bring this up in my econ classes for my MBA.
When I first moved to Canada in 2010, I was so shocked at my high school not turning off lights at night.
Canadians are proud it and are contributing more to Global warming ?
Not only the school, almost all the company don't.
In China, most buildings turn off lights at night. Only street lights are left on. I bet Mr. Martinez will have to write a second paper to adjust his conclusions.
do china's high shcool students study at night with candle?
@@kzmino4923 是的中国很落后的，都是用蜡烛有的时候还要用木头点起篝火来学习。
I'm so sorry for your loss (Macrocat). It's the first video I see of yours and I immediately subscribed to your channel. I am certainly not qualified to refute any of the points in the document, and I must admit that I am glad to believe that China is far from imposing itself on the world economic power.
Looking at PRC's GDP from another perspective, if one assumes that exports are the same proportion of GDP as Germany's ( 40%), we get a figure of about $9trn. Half the official figure. That seems reasonable to me. Any thoughts?
Great analysis
I heard about this study and had some questions about the methodology. I appreciate that you covered a lot of the details of the study.
This night light GDP analysis has been going on since 2005 and Martinez's 2018 paper has been peer reviewed but the video did not report on the results of the reviews. Economists said this type of night light GDP analysis falls under bad-faith analysis and often inaccurate. I think there is a 2022 paper from an University in New Zealand that debunked this analysis.
I'm a data scientist and trying to find a correlation between a country's GDP and satellite surveillance of a country's night life and calling it a "calculation that's rough around the edges" is an understatement lool.
Energy output. More energy requires more resources to sustain, which requires more money.
They did create a baseline by doing the same research for a lot of countries to be able to see patterns so maybe a bit less rough on the edge than you might suspect. But of course, if you add a few more metrics to the data set you would be more accurate, but what else can you measure when the official data owners are also the data manipulators. The number of smartphones or something?
@@royarnehansen you can't use smartphones as a metric, more people on the planet own a smartphone than they have running water and a toilet!
@@royarnehansen 1. energy consumption 2. trade balance 3. emissions
Thank you for another great video! So sorry for your loss.
I expected this video to be "China will colapse in 3 days" levels of clickbait. Was met with a reasonable analysis of an academic paper. Great content!
So sorry of your great loss. Rest in peace, Henry. You’ll be missed.
Sorry about the lost of Henry, it is hard to loss a family member. Wishing you the best Joeri.
Thank you for a really good video. R.I.P. Henry ...
So sorry to hear about Henry. Great videos.
I was born in China and moved to the UK with my parents when I was 10, I went back to China every couple of years to visit my grandparents and everything I was astonished by how much the city has changed, and this has been happening in the past 15 years. This could be the fact that my parents are living in the coastal region of China where the trade flourished, whereas the development of the middle and west part of China is lacking behind, but I tend to believe the development at least in my region, is real.
First and second tier cities likely have real development. The other lower tier and more rural places have bad incentives for economic growth like building apartment buildings that nobody lives in and endlessly funding unnecessary construction so they meet central government GDP quotas.
I believe the development to be very real too; however, not as rapid as is presented by official data
I agree with your subjektive impression. I often visit Ningbo and it is astonishing if you look the New buildings. But as soon as you go into a the company than it is shocking how inneffective the production process is. Better production and less expensive building would convince me more.
Most definitly devolopment is real. China can claim the biggest economic miracle that ever happened. Even in this portrayed scenario China still would be the second largest economy, just not as close to the US as their own released data would make it seem. We will certainly know in 10 years or so :D
Some parts of China definitely experienced development. The research piece is not disputing that. It’s just saying that that development was overstated.
That's a brilliant point, pun intended. There have been a lot of concern regarding china's GDP figures for at least the last 10 years and I used to talk with my professors about it at University looking for a smoking gun. Nice work and thanks for sharing
Actually if you have not worked in a Chinese company for a long time in China, it is difficult to know some truths.As i see,people usually do a lot of private transactions for tax evasion, and these transactions usually account for 30%-50% of the company's turnover.And there are many tax-free items that are difficult to describe, and the Chinese government does not count them at all.So in fact GDP is underestimated.
@@f0rgetwasure105 No the government already overestimates the economy to account for those things, but mostly the estimates are roughly consistant with metrics such as electricity consumption or trade volume
Aside from light activity, I think there has been other metrics used such as food production/consumption, steel usage, and other commodities that people can try to rely on for GDP growth
I can't say there's enough information to form a strong conclusion.
From a casual observational standpoint, one of the first things I'd want to know is how strong the correlation is between economic activity and lights visible by satellite.
This is pretty basic, and I'll assume it's addressed in the actual paper. I would have liked to see some R squared values in the graphs though.
Rest In Peace macrocat, you were loved by your owner and thousands around the world 😢
💖
Few MAJOR red flags with this paper:
> Data was originally collected by the U.S. Air Force on behalf of the MIC - untrustworthy collector, potential data manipulation
> Luminosity measurements recorded during mid-eve period (8:30-10pm) across the year *rather than an early eve period closer to standard working hours* (e.g. 6pm-9pm), measured as averaged pixel intensity measurements - a time period that would correlate more to household electricity use than industrial electricity use
> No positive control used as another correlate of GDP (e.g. tax data)
> No 'null hypothesis' - the paper opens with the premise that autocratic regimes *do* (rather than *may*) exaggerate GDP once surpassing the GNI per capita threshold for claiming benefits through the International Development Association (IDA)
> No negative control used - e.g. the author could, and in my opinion should, have been also using NTL to correlate GNI per capita with household electricity use, for which the mid-eve period he measured would be a better correlate.
This is because GNI per capita is the threshold at which regimes may claim financial aid from the GNI, so the incentive for low-income developing countries would be to fudge the statistics for as long as possible to maintain aid - another indicator of regime untrustworthiness.
To his credit, the paper's author did rigourously collate and analyse this data, and shows in Table C4 the year at which countries became ineligible for IDA assistance. China became ineligible in 2000, 4 years behind of Indonesia (dictatorship until 1999) but 10 years ahead of democratic India and 13 years ahead of Pakistan (dictatorship in 1999 gradually democratised in the 00's and 10's)
Bet you have investments in China and talk your book. Bulletin: all Chinese stats are bull.
@@oldernu1250 As the old saying goes: there are lies, damned lies, and statistics :D
@@oldernu1250 I don't get why western people are scared of China, so what if they have a different government; it clearly works for them. It feels like the western media just wants to see China fail. Why don't we want to help each other succeed?
@@oldernu1250 That sounds like someone who has investments in the US or EU
@@oldernu1250 And just like the paper, your opinion is hardly something I'd call unbiased
I think it is a fascinating. Thank you.
saw in EE's comments that you critise him occasionally
instantly subscribed, keep up the good work
It's in the U.S.'s best interest to assume China is a threat regardless of the reality. This is how we are kept on our toes and hopefully out of complacency.
China is beyond ungrateful for retaliating against the US. Don't forget it was the US that made China second in the world. How would you feel if the person you fed betrayed you?....
Because humans will fight humans? Always the same
Exactly underestimating China is the main reason we're here, fentanyl on one hand, Taiwan on the other, Countries ditching dollar and siding with China and Economic collapse as more & more bow and kneel to China
Never underestimate your enemy
@CrescentPrince Kronos from the start the CCP (共产党) have been calling for the death of Americas for over 70 years now , if you call America an enemy expect America to take your threat seriously
Great analysis and presentation as always. But it must be heartbreaking to lose Macrocat (Henry)!!! I'm soooo very sorry for him, you and everybody else that he brought joy to!
Came from EE. very interesting topic
As a Chinese, I agree. Our GDP is 96% smaller than reported figures. We can't even afford to eat. Every lunch time, we all need to walk to India for free curry just so we can survive until the following day.
hhhhhhhhh
at least you can't afford babies😂😂😂
so that's why you guys eat bats 💀💀
@ karmathefirst1945 No one eats bats in China. This is all false news. The virus came from the United States. It was leaked by the laboratory there. You can look it up. E-cigarette pneumonia.
战忽局哪都有啊，hhh
I appreciate that you take non-partisan dives into the evidence and accept criticism. When discussing a question like this, it's very easy for content creators, or even researchers to be heavily biased - like when oil execs pay researchers to understate or outright deny climate change. A lot of China critics work off of faulty evidence, but you took an even deeper dive into a well-renowned paper, supplementing further evidence and including disclaimers. So, thank you. It's really been hard for me to find unbiased news and research.
that doesn't happen, you just don't like contrarian views from people on climate change, sometimes funded by the Oil Boogeyman that you try to demonize........even when the people making contrarian claims have a long, established record of credibility in the field..........and weak diversion attempt from China's GDP lies
Or when environmentalist get funding from solar and electric lobbyists and outright lie about biomass and biofuel, same thing
I imagine folks don 't like china, and that is why there is popularity with these estimates. The underlying assumption is pretty stupid tho. We can't compare china with other countries. More accurately, we should compare countries next to china, and with similar bloodline and culture as China: Taiwan, Japan, Korea, and Singapore etc.. China is exceptional because it got an exceptional population. Secondly, the correlation between gdp growth and light intensity isn't linar. It is linear up to a point, but diminish in return as a approximation of national output.
WOW SIRR VERY DANGEROUS !!😠😠😠 BUT THIS WHY IM SO LUCKY LIVE IN SUPER INDIA 🤗🇮🇳 THE CLEANEST COUNTRY IN THE WORLD , WE NEVER DO SCAM AND WE GIVE RESPECT TO ALL WOMEN THEY CAN WALK SAFELY ALONE AT NIGHT AND WE HAVE CLEAN FOOD AND TOILET EVERYWHERE 🇮🇳🤗🚽, I KNOW MANY POOR PEOPLE JEALOUS WITH SUPER RICH INDIA 🤗🇮🇳🤗🇮🇳🤗
@@phillip76 There are interest in these estimates because the CCP is an authoritarian government who controls media and censors speech in their country. It is difficult to get accurate information about what is actually happening, like their GDP growth.
Please explain why race has anything to do with economics? but sure compare china to Taiwan, Japan etc they have all performed much better economically and present accurate statistics, which is nice
First time coming across your channel and you seem very knowledgeable and open to it possibly being wrong. You got another subscriber here! RIP to your buddy Macrocat:( It made me cry to be honest.
Hey Joeri! Excellent work. It looks like you found the perfect balance. May MacroCat requiem en pace.
One must also consider the switch to LED street lighting. LED light can be directed down and throws less light into the night sky which could affect the results.
A very intresting point. In order to reaffirm the data, maybe a few more data points should be collected:
-infrared radition into space (= Energy consumption)
-foreign trade
-money spent by Chinese tourists abroad (via credit card and ATM withdrawl)
-car traffic
-cargo traffic on chinese rivers, railroads and freeways
The problem that I see, is that a direct correlation between economic power and light emitted is probably very difficult. The light-emission curve is probably very steep at the beginning when people start to afford electricity, but once people's need for light has been satisfied, I doubt that further GDP-groth will lead to substainial further light emission groth.
Also Chinese cities tend to grow upwards not outwards. As most live in tower apartment blocks and not inefficient sprawling suburbs. This study just sounds like a desperate cope and more fuel for the anti-China train.
@@primeradiant827 the light intensity would show, that's the issue; you can't come here like a 无毛 and call him "anti-共产党" , he's just asking a question that has come to light from a research paper, other developing nations with growing economies also prefer constructing high rises and apartments instead of villas and houses, and you can also see the light intensity growth as their gdp is reported to increase, I lived and worked in China closely with the government as an advisor, and I do know they like to change statistics for their own interests.
Money spent by Chinese tourists is used to purchase luxury brands which they sell back in the mainland since the luxury items are cheaper in the west than China, although illegal; many 阿姨's do this business to sell for profit. Also ypu can't collect that information since Union Pay is chinese and does not allow any organisation besides the chinese financial body to observe transactions in real-time (live), foreign trade is already accounted for , and it has been dropping ever since 2018, since more regulations have increased product and labour cost, many companies are now looking to other developing countries to start manufacturing.
@@EzraMerr Thank for the info. And thanks for responding in an academic matter. Having a civilized academic disscussion on the Internet is really hard...
Yes, most of the data points I suggested are probably much harder to collect than light emission.
However, I like the approach to collect data that is hard to manipulate. There should at last be data on infra-red radiation that would allow to meassure the energy consumption.
The correlation between energy consumption and GDP is pretty reliable.
Trying to reflect a complex and unfamiliar society by creating simple iconic indicators. Is this person naive or lazy? I have a question. The infrared emission of LED bulbs is much lower than that of other bulbs. China has fully used LED bulbs many years ago and banned the sale of tungsten bulbs for lighting. Street lights are also fully LED, so you think your data Will it be correct?
As an architecture student who had lived in China in the past, I am not sure I believe the findings of this paper to quite the extent as you do.
I think urban typology is heavily important when considering nightlight growth, countries like the US, Canada or Australia rely heavily on auto dependent suburbia with low density housing and large distances involved, American cities are the physically largest cities in the world by quite some margin, even with medium sized populations.
China meanwhile and much of east Asia and other autocratic states like Russia or places in the former USSR are definitely poorer than the US, however, their cities are characterized by high density pedestrianised tower complexes with rarer but larger arterial roads with few exceptions. We have few examples of western style suburban development in authoritarian states outside of places like Dubai.
To put things simply, a standard Chinese residential tower can house say roughly 500 people, a small cluster of 6 towers can house a whole towns worth of people but they may only need say 20 street lamps for the whole development which is typically pedestrianised, more so, that development won't take up a lot of land so won't seem very big when viewed from space. That same town in the US would have perhaps 900 detached houses, with each on average having a suburban road connection and a streetlight in close proximity to the door to the house, this is not even considering roof lights or skylights or garden lighting, which are far more common in suburban developments. The American development might take up to 20 times the area of the Chinese development and as a result emit nearly 20 times the light, even though both developments have the same population. Dense tower based developments do not emit nearly as much light as typical Western suburbia in large part due to the limitations imposed by the typology of building emitting the light.
Don't get me wrong, I still think China is inflating it's GDP figures, but 60% seems far too much to me.
A comparison with japan , india and Vietnam would certainly make it clear whether the GDP growth/ night light growth theory has any truth to it .
Imo it 20 % smaller than official figures compared to 60% smaller as such fraudulent data would've already been caught by world bank or imf or even usa.
Thank you
You made it sound like only poor nations don't follow American style suburbias which is laughable and not true.
When a country is run by autocrats who want to be the largest economy you'll find that it's easier to fudge the numbers than actually grow. Ask D.J. tRump, the inflator in chief.
Chinese bots everywhere nowadays. How much rice you got writing all this?
We always remember to turn off the lights when left the office and never get a bulk stack of napkins from McDonald's when we just order a happy meal.
Curious about the color scheme chosen. In one chart you chose Green for Autocracies and Red for Democracies. In another chart at the end showing only Chinese data, you chose Green color for Red Chinese ?
@macrocat.
Dear Henry, you are now in a better place without all the worldly nonsenses... take care..