Joe Biden: China will never surpass US stolen (1971) $-printing (i.e. US nominal GDP). Peter Klevius: He's right. No one can beat a counterfeiter, except the police and justice - in this case Chinese R&D superiority based on meritocracy and talent!

A recorded public time-line of Peter Klevius original research on evolution, consciousness, existencecentrism, anthropology and sociology 1979-2012 - and some thoughts about self-citation  

Read Peter Klevius in-depth research on The Psychosocial Freud Timeline.

Read Peter Klevius Origin of the Vikings from 2005 - now again available after Google deleted it 2014 and again in February 2024. 

Read how climate change made human evolution possible in SE Asian volatile archipelago - not on a continent like Africa. 

Peter Klevius opposite reading and correction of Greenland data compared to researchers biased with climate hysteria.

 Read how two craniopagus twins born 2006 solved the "greatest mystery in science" - and proved Peter Klevius theory from 1992-94 100% correct.  

 Read Peter Klevius thesis Pathological Symbiosis in LVU on how a hoax child-psychoanalytic concept is still used by the Swedish social state to abduct children on subjective grounds.  It also reveals (see email correspondens in appendix) how legislators were lured to pass a Human Rights violating law which was then blinked by ECHR because it was seen as below the "margin of appreciation".

When will UK get that it's an impoverished* puppet state of $-thief (1971-) US? And when US has bought all of it (US already controls most of UK) with stolen $, then UK will be totally excluded from superior tech from China, while US itself will welcome Chinese tech out of necessity.

* UK is a better run copy of US, yet has roughly only half (proportional to population) the nominal GDP (which is defined on US criminally stolen $-printing monopoly). Nominal GDP

China's real GDP is of course much higher than US controlled IMF's report. After all, a simple comparison of what's going on in China already, puts US far in the shadows. And of course CCP wants to tone it down because unlike US, China benefits from peace and trade in superior consumer goods and infrastructire.

How ignorant (or worse) is BBC's Sarah Montague when she thinks US is the leader in AI?!

Why is BBC's Sarah Montague so eagerly misinforming people about China?

It's very simple, When US 1971 stole the world-dollar by violating with impunity the Bretton Woods agreement from 1944, it ended an already for long ongoing embezzlement to cober up for Vietnam war, arms and space race etc., which made it impossible for US to keep its promise to peg the dollar to gold. However, as a consequence, instead of declaring bankruptcy, US pushed its own overdraft on the rest of the world by keeping full control over the printing and interest manipulation over the world dollar.

UK's economic suicide rests on "our closest ally" and "special bond" delusion.

UK needs China for growth and development. Only then will UK be able to connect to US on an equal footing.

While using its $-hegemony to impoverish its "allies", US adds insult to injury by also demanding them to increase their military spending, of which most will end up in US pockets.

US stolen dollar feeds the Wall Street balloon and the Pentagon arms shop (which forces "allies" to buy outdated US arms tech), while hindering real development.

US has 7 infra-structurally tired cities with more than a million population - China has 105, and most with cutting edge infrastructure.

According to UN definition China has 18 mega cities, India 2, and US none. 2030 Shanghai population will exceed 130 million.

Contrary to US led Western China-hate doomsday ranting about population decline, China has roughly the size of one whole US population of rural people (20% out of 35% rural total) ready to move to the cities. These people also tend to be younger and have more children.

Rural population: China 35%, India 64%, UK 15%, US 17%, Sweden 11%, Finland 14%.

China and US infrastructure strategies differ markedly.

Comparative analysis of US and Chinese infrastructure projects shows significant differences between the parties in terms of planning, implementation, and initial capabilities. With a high degree of probability, the US will not implement programs to create transport infrastructure, seeking to duplicate existing or emerging Chinese projects.

At the same time, in the context of the fourth industrial revolution and the development of the digital economy, emphasis will be placed on the digital infrastructure. Differences in approaches to the creation of such projects come down to the principles of their financing, management, and the number of partners involved. If China acts unilaterally, the US plans to actively push the G7 countries in its desired direction. In addition, US partners are expected to raise significantly more funds than the US in this endeavor.

The US infrastructure strategy is reactionary and aimed at curbing Chinese initiatives. The reason is that Washington has become a hostage to the mechanisms of neoliberal globalization, which are becoming less effective in the current unfavorable conditions. At the same time, attempts by the US to create projects like China’s are facing objective difficulties. One of them is Beijing’s qualitatively different strategic planning system, which enables it to implement more effectively multiyear comprehensive strategies for socioeconomic development, including in the field of global infrastructure.

It can be assumed that, in the event of negative dynamics in the development of US projects, that it will face the real threat of losing its status as the leader of the world-system, which will lead to intensification of the struggle for markets and resources of the periphery and will also cause a comprehensive destabilization of international relations. If this option is developed, it is possible to predict a high probability of the militarization of the US–Chinese rivalry in various regions of the world.