1960年 - 2017年中美gdp、贸易总量的增长对比图 [美国媒体]

US CHINA ECONOMY GDP COMPARISON GROWTH FROM 1960,USA vs CHINA economy Growth 2017-2018

1960年 - 2017年中美gdp、贸易总量的增长对比图







Your Majesty
The funny thing is the biggest economy of the world in future is a developing country

有趣的是，未来，世界上最大的经济体是一个发展中国家.

Ali Waris
China Is earning from hard working .
USA from invading other countries and stealing from them.

中国正在通过努力工作来赚钱，美国通过侵略、盗窃其他国家来赚钱.



Jie Peng
If you use ppp, which is more accurate, China has already surpassed USA.

如果你使用购买力平价ppp来衡量两国的经济会更准确，中国已经超过美国.

J V
That is one measure, but a far more important indicator is GDP per capita. According to that, China is still a developing country. Not sustainable growth.

ppp是个衡量标准，但是，gdp指标更重要.
看gdp, 中国仍然是一个发展中国家, 不可持续的增长.

Yunus - Jonah
USA = shortest lived empire ever

美国 = 最短命的帝国.

Patrick Weaver
USA = has never been an empire.

美国 = 从来不是帝国.



hzhang1228
China is almost as big as Europe combined, it is made up of numerous absorbed kingdoms throughout the ages. it has always been an empire. leadership has no effect on the nation's status as an empire. a nation can employ any form of government from democracy to plutocracy to monocracy but it remains an empire if the central government rules over different formerly independent lands.almost every historian would agree that the Roman empire is an empire. but not every leader in imperial Rome was like Caesar, if the Roman senate elect a leader that held a republic title and did not hold strong powers would Roman Empire turn into a kingdom and not an empire overnight?"actually it's just not an empire" not a convincing form of argument. lol US has more permeate foreign military presence than any empire in all of history. more power and influence over foreign nations then any empire in history. but it is a democracy, freedom justice and good so not an empire? lol why is this ideology and moral high ground so important to so many during a logical debate? be real.?

中国和全欧洲加起来几乎一样大，它是由许多世纪以来被吞并的王国组成的.
几乎所有的历史学家都认同罗马是一个帝国. 但，罗马帝国的所有领导人并不都像凯撒那样（独断）.
如果罗马元老院选举一位拥有共和国头衔但没有强大权力的领导人，罗马帝国会在一夜之间变成一个王国而不是一个帝国吗 ?

你说的 "实际上它不是一个帝国" 不是一个令人信服的论点.
哈哈，美国驻外军队比历史上任何一个帝国都多. 美国也比历史上任何一个帝国都要强大.
但是，（能有此推出）它是一个民主、自由、正义和善良的国家，而不是一个帝国 ?
哈哈，为什么这种意识形态和道德制高点在逻辑辩论中如此重要 ? 真诚点.

Patrick Weaver
You really need to look up the definition of the word empire. A democracy cannot be an empire. Rome was composed of many provinces even when it was a Republic. Republics by definition cannot be an empire. The Peoples Republic of China was never a Republic. The defining feature of an empire is a single supreme authority.

你真的需要查一下帝国这个词的定义. 一个民主国家不可能是一个帝国.
罗马是由许多省组成的，而且，当时它是一个共和国.
根据定义，共和国不可能是一个帝国.
中华人民共和国从来不是一个共和国. 帝国的典型特征是单一的最高权威.

nizicike
This vedio is called :Empire fall and rise.

这个视频叫：帝国的衰落和崛起.

Claus Exile
nizicike hoppet you made it sound really sad wth

你把它说得很悲凉啊

Leo Jackman
Empires fall and rise, but China is always there.

帝国潮起潮落，但是，中国总是在那里.

巴子屠
but democracy is priceless

但是，mz是无价的.

thearchitect27
Wait until the "Made in China 2025" initiative takes off, China's pyramid will double every five years when compared with America's pyramid!

等到“中国制造2025”计划启动后，视频里中国的金字塔图形每五年就会比美国的金字塔翻一番!



Vincent Theo
A tomato costs $1 in the U.S. and less than 10 cents in China. A better way to do it would be to compare GDP PPP for all of the years. I am glad that you included a statement about GDP PPP at the end, but that isn't enough.

在美国，一颗番茄的价格是1美元，在中国不到10美分.
一个更好的（衡量中、美两国的）方法是比较所有年份的ppp购买力平价.
我很高兴你最后提到了ppp，但这还不够.

Stormspirit97
PPP is better for standard of living and Nominal is better for influence in the global economy you can say, at least as far as financial institutions are concerned. India PPP is twice that of Japan and almost 4 times that of UK or France but it is not as important as france, UK, and Japan combined to the global economy. It's nominal GDP is only about UK or France in size and quite a bit smaller than Japans. In fact, in PPP India is now half of the USA economy but it is not half as important globally as the USA. By the same saying, Indonesia has an economy larger than UK's PPP, but it is not as important to the global economy and is much lower nominally.There are advantages to having higher nominal. In India you can live decently off of 10% the average american income but you won't be able to vacation in USA or buy many American products easily. The average American can go to India and be extremely wealthy by local standards. Part of that is because Americans can also buy more in America on average than Indians can in India, but a lot of it is because the same money is just worth more in India. Also means it is easy for USA to buy Chinese products because they are so cheap compared to American products. And buying stuff denominated in US Dollars like oil is easier for usa and aligns better with nominal than ppp gdp. I know people who moved to USA from the Philippines and said that American's don't understand how valuable their money is in the rest of the world, and that the average American could hire servants easily in Philippines, even though they would be viewed as at best middle income in USA. Probably true of other developed countries too. Wages in some developed countries is like 20 times that of the average wage in Philippines in nominal terms so if you save up and move you will be able to buy a lot more than you would in USA and live wealthier (albeit in a country that is probably less developed in certain ways).I also know a guy from South Africa who had a good job and saved up money for 6 years, and realized when he sold all his stuff and left his job to move, he had less money than what an average income American would have made in just one year at the same savings rate. Someone in South Africa making half of what an American makes in nominal income but the same amount in ppp income could buy the same amount of stuff in South Africa (with exceptions like Iphones which would be very expensive) as the American in America, but if the two both moved to say the Phillipines, the American would be twice as wealthy. For some countries this would be more extreme even (Like India). Also if they both invested in a foreign company, the American would own twice as much of it which is why high nominal GDP matters in global influence.I think overall PPP could be viewed as more important in citizens lives and for domestic activities but it can't be said that nominal does not matter. One other interesting thing is since YOUTUBE ad revenue is dollar denominated, you can make $10,000 On youtube a year in a country that is inexpensive and live very well, whereas it's not easy to do that in USA, and I wouldn't even think about trying to do it in Norway or Switzerland. A medium sized youtube channel creator makes more than doctors in some countries, but barely minimum wage in USA. Maybe even less. I heard that In Russia where the ruble is worth so little people want to make money in US dollars online if possible because it is worth so much more when converted to ruble than what Russians are paid in rubles for the same amount of work.?

ppp更有利于衡量各国的生活水平，名义gdp更有利于衡量一个国家对全球经济的影响，至少对金融机构而言是这样的.

印度的ppp总量是日本的两倍，几乎是英国或法国的四倍，
但印度在全球经济中的重要性不及法国、英国和日本的总和.
印度的名义GDP只有英国或法国那么大，比日本小很多.
事实上，现在，印度的ppp是美国经济的一半，但它在全球的重要性还不及美国的一半.
同样，按ppp, 印尼经济规模比英国大，但它对全球经济的重要性并不大，名义gdp则要低得多.

名义gdp高是有好处的，在印度，你只需花美国人平均收入的10%就能过上体面的生活.
但在美国的话，你就无法外出度假了，也不能随便买很多美国产品.
一般的美国民众到印度，按照当地的标准，他们会非常富有.
部分原因是美国人在美国的平均购买力比印度人要高，
但是，更重要的原因是同样的钱在印度更值钱.

这也意味着，美国人很容易购买中国产品，因为中国产品比美国产品便宜.
对美国人来说，购买以美元计价的商品如石油就比较便宜了，gdp就比ppp好使.

我知道来自菲律宾的人搬到美国，说美国人不知道自己的美元在世界其他国家是多么的值钱.
一个普通的美国民众在菲律宾的话，也能雇得起菲佣，这个普通美国人的收入，比菲律宾的中产阶级还好. 其他发达国家的民众也是如此.



K7LIAN MBAPPE
impressive work from china a great example to the world

来自中国的令人印象深刻的作品给世界树立了一个很好的榜样

MIU MIU
China and USA are the biggest country in the world ! (economies and cities)

中国和美国是世界上最大的国家!(经济和城市)

saikiran syan
INDIA will be world no.1 by 2050... then no countries can cross indias... gdp...

到2050年印度将成为世界第一…..........然后无人再能超越印度....GDP...

Stormspirit97
China is more important than India. You are lying to yourself if you do not believe this. Or you do not know enough about china. This will not change in the next few decades. India will not have to compete with the USA, by the time it is competing with USA economically china will be number one anyway so India will still be behind. I believe India will be one of the 3 most important countries this century, but I am not foolish enough to believe it will easily outpace the other 2. Especially the similar but further ahead china. India can't rely on population size alone to surpass china. And to be blunt that's all it has over USA which might allow it to. There are dozens of nations outside of the developed world who are closer to competing with the USA per capita than India. It is their largely their size that makes these 3 nations important. USA is also very large population for it's young age and has room to grow much larger and still provide for everyone. If North America wasn't so isolated from the main human civilizations for so long, it would probably hold over 1 billion people today.

中国比印度更重要，而且这种局面在未来几十年都不会改变.
如果你不相信这一点，那么，你要不就是自我欺骗，要不就是根本不了解中国.

印度将不必与美国竞争，等到在经济（规模上）印度能比肩美国时，中国也早已是世界第一了，所有印度仍然落后于中国.
不过，我相信印度将成为本世纪最重要的三个国家之一，
但我不会愚蠢到相信它会轻易超过另外两个.



Alexandre Goncalves
americans gave the world enormous gifts ...china does squat ....gamble and argue ...and feet smell....

美国人为世界贡献了很多礼物……中国？ 恩，中国蹲、赌博、争吵........臭脚气......