Slashdot Mirror


China Set To Surpass US In R&D Spending In 10 Years

dcblogs writes "China is on track to overtake the U.S. in spending on research and development in about 10 years, as federal R&D spending either declines or remains flat. The U.S. today maintains a large lead in spending over China, with federal and private sector investment expected to reach $424 billion next year, a 1.2% increase. By contrast, China's overall R&D spending is $220 billion next year, an increase of 11.6% over 2012, a rate similar to previous years. This finding is shared by the President's Council of Advisors on Science and Technology. 'China's investment as a percentage of its GDP shows continuing, deliberate growth that, if it continues, should surpass the roughly flat United States investment within a decade,' it said in a report last month."

34 of 233 comments (clear)

  1. Why not? by gelfling · · Score: 3, Insightful

    America has become an anti intellectual society. Particularly when talking about STEM. All the pundits like to scream how we need to hire eleventy zillion teachers and then turn around and pout and scream that they're not all social workers focused on bullying, eating disorders and special needs. And if anyone so much as suggests that all the MFA's in Italian poetry pay more in tuition to offset the cost of the courses in engineering we're told we're all redneck knuckledragging philistines.

    Someday, soon, a bunch of Federal grant wielding puppeteers will put on a show in Esperato about how we used to have fire but the inventor died.

    1. Re:Why not? by K.+S.+Kyosuke · · Score: 5, Insightful

      America has become an anti intellectual society

      That much is obvious even to the densest dim-wits since the appointment of a "Christian Scientist" as the head of the House Committee on Science, Space and Technology.

      --
      Ezekiel 23:20
    2. Re:Why not? by Patch86 · · Score: 5, Informative

      Just to be clear, he wasn't just saying "a scientist who is a Christian". Lamar Smith is a member of the sect called "Christian Science", which is an anti-science movement. Among other things, they believe that researching into disease is one of the main CAUSES of disease- that the way to reduce disease is to reduce the number of doctors and medical researchers in the world. They teach their members to avoid medicine and surgery at all cost, and to rely instead on the power of prayer and psychic healers to cure illness.

      Lamar Smith isn't one of these by accident of birth; he wrote for the church newspaper, and is married to a "practitioner". His religious beliefs are directly related to his ability to do his job. If your job involves figuring out the national strategy for funding scientific research, and you believe that scientific researchers are the cause of all the world's ills, you may just have a small conflict of interest.

      http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Lamar_S._Smith
      http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Christian_Science

    3. Re:Why not? by shadowofwind · · Score: 2

      I think it's worth drawing addition attention to the predatory nature of the Christian Science theology. It's not just that they believe in 'mind over matter', which can be a defensible position if sensibly qualified. They set it up so that top church members grow rich from the fear and suffering that their theology causes among their followers. When you're seriously sick, believing that the cause of your sickness is your faith in doctors, they'll pray for you, but for a fee. Ostensibly the fee is a 'gift', but the church even has standard rates per prayer 'treatment'. Becoming wealthy through faith is also a core part of their teaching though - belief in limitation is what stands between you and 'abundance'. So through that lens, the I'll-gotten wealth of top members is evidence of their righteousness.

      Christian Science is deeply anti-science. To quote their founder, 'matter is error'. She taught that the only thing that stands between what you and you want is the belief that nature is anything other than a mistake. With that outlook it makes no sense to study how nature works, the only thing that matters is holy will.

      Nobody can embrace a theology that is that deeply and starkly at odds with reality without being conflicted. So of course there will be Christian Scientists who are not wholly against science. But their teaching is diametrically against science, as well as being immoral. I think the fact that they choose to call their outlook 'scientific' says more about how dishonest or brainwashed they are than it says about their regard for science. But then L. Ron Hubbard used the word science a lot also.

  2. Focus on science and science education by girlinatrainingbra · · Score: 4, Insightful

    Sadly, the USA is not focusing on science and engineering education, except for paying lip service to the concept of STEM courses in college. There are even proposals to tie tuition payments to the popularity of courses: charge more for engineering courses and less for liberal arts (which is the opposite of the right way to influence it if you're trying to coax people into the sciences and into engineering). The idea seems to be that majors which will earn more money should have a higher tuition associated with it. China sends more scholars over here. Meanwhile we have been making it harder for the best students in the world to come here for political reasons and visa bias when it would make more sense to encourage the best of the best to come here to learn and to stay here and innovate!

  3. China by Animats · · Score: 3, Informative

    Well, of course. China has 3x the population of the US.

    • First in steel production
    • First in auto production
    • First in electronics production
    • ...

    And the interior provinces aren't even fully industrialized yet. That will change rapidly as the expressway and high speed rail networks are built out.

    1. Re:China by Kergan · · Score: 5, Interesting

      Well, maybe.

      Trouble is, they're building ghost cities, they build railroads with subpar concrete (hint, since it's not explicit in the NYT article: to make proper high speed rail concete you basically need a derivative of volcanic ash, and the amount thereof produced per year is lower than the amount needed to fit the needs of China's yearly consumption, which dwarves the consumption by that of all other countries; in other words, their railway infrastructure's lifespan is roughly 10-20 years, vs 50-100 in developed countries), they need to rebalance, and so many other things can go wrong...

    2. Re:China by cheesybagel · · Score: 2

      More like 4.39x. But your point still stands.

    3. Re:China by BigSlowTarget · · Score: 2

      China has had 4+ times the population of the US for a very long time. The real reason they haven't been ahead of the US in production for many decades is that the productivity of the people was squandered by political forces within the country. It was corruption at the highest level, trading the productive potential for political stability.

      We have corruption too. Bad politicians who do sweetheart deals with contributors, crappy patent or copyright laws, lawsuits over unreasonable things with unreasonable settlements and banking malfeasance are all examples of our elements of corruption and there are many more. I think it's relative corruption that will decide if one population is a dozen times as effective as another. That means it will decide who's economy runs things in the 21st century.

  4. it only makes sense by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 5, Funny

    There no point for the US investing in R we get everything we need from China.

    Better focus on what we're really good at: creative financing

    1. Re:it only makes sense by manu0601 · · Score: 2

      There no point for the US investing in R we get everything we need from China.

      Better focus on what we're really good at: creative financing

      You are the doctor that suggests waking up the patient to give him sedative drugs

      Financial economy without a real economy beneath is the problem, not the solution

  5. Re:It's not just money by darkHanzz · · Score: 2

    that they never get close to the bang-for-buck that the US gets.

    Quite true, but what happens when China spends, say, twice as much on R&D ? They will overtake US at some point, if the current trends in both US and China continue.

  6. That is not a fair comparison... by blanchae · · Score: 2

    China's labor is 1/10 the cost of the USA so in comparison, China is spending 5x times as much on R&D as the US or $2 billion if we compare actual wages. China and the US are in an economic war and the US is losing. Free trade with no tariffs is causing the economic collapse and closure of manufacturing due to the unfair wage difference between China and the Western world.

    1. Re:That is not a fair comparison... by the+gnat · · Score: 2

      China's labor is 1/10 the cost of the USA so in comparison, China is spending 5x times as much on R&D as the US or $2 billion if we compare actual wages.

      That's only true if you assume that the entire R&D budget goes towards pay wages. In some cases this may be true, but there are an awful lot of technologies required for certain fields that don't magically get cheaper in China. Biotech equipment and consumables are good examples: a lot of these simply aren't produced anywhere besides the US, Japan, and Europe, and they're incredibly expensive. My favorite example is BGI, AKA the Beijing Genomics Institute, which has probably the largest sequencing capacity of any single site worldwide - using technology created entirely in the US and UK. Those sequencers were a huge initial investment, and excluding staff costs, these machines aren't cheap to run either. This isn't the only example: the Chinese supercomputer which was briefly at the top of the Top500 list was made using NVIDIA chips.

      Of course the Chinese could eventually learn to make their own technology - if past precedent holds, they'll simply copy the western designs, which is what they're now doing for supercomputers. But they're not necessarily doing that either: in BGI's case, they're trying to simply buy one of the US companies that makes sequencing equipment, and making processors based on the Alpha chip.

    2. Re:That is not a fair comparison... by cheesybagel · · Score: 2

      There are other examples like advanced lithography or other machine tools.

  7. Re:Does not compute by blanchae · · Score: 2

    I remember in the 70s, that attitude was the same for "made in Japan" then Japan became one of the technological leaders in the world. China is doing things that the States can't even dream of considering its economic situation. They are making most every thing that you buy now under as name brands as most manufacturers out-source the actual assembly to China. We can start with the iPhone, pretty much every apple device, computer, stereo, television, network equipment, etc.. Keep your blinders on because you don't want to see the reality of the world where the States aren't the techno king anymore.

  8. Re:Does not compute by ahabswhale · · Score: 2

    How is the iPhone crap?

    Keep in mind that if it weren't for the iPhone, you'd probably still be using some piece of shit Samsung flip-phone right now.

    --
    Are agnostics skeptical of unicorns too?
  9. Re:Nonsense... by oodaloop · · Score: 2

    Exactly. Just like how the USA slowed down after the 1929 Stock Market Crash. It's a shame they never recovered from it.

    --
    Tic-Tac-Toe, Global Thermonuclear War, and relationships all have the same winning move.
  10. Re:It's not just money by houstonbofh · · Score: 2

    We are going backwards, and they are going forwards... The rate does not change the end result, only the time to get there.

  11. Re:Does not compute by slashmydots · · Score: 2

    I'm going to take a wild guess that Apple's US R&D designed it, China just builds it.

  12. Re:It's not just money by blanchae · · Score: 3, Interesting

    They are spending more than twice now if we compare wages. Their $200 billion gets a lot more R&D then the States $400 billion. There is such an inequality in wages in the order of 10 to 1, that I would guess that they are actually getting the equivalent of $2 Trillion in State's R&D.

  13. Re:Does not compute by Funky+Jester · · Score: 2

    "Give us a product at the lowest possible cost so we can maximize our profit. Damn the consumer." ...They make crap because American corporations ask them to make crap.

  14. Re:maybe by cheesybagel · · Score: 3, Informative

    1) A lot of that US land area is Alaska.
    2) Population is more relevant to GDP as Japan can amply demonstrate.

  15. Re:Nonsense... by Kergan · · Score: 2

    They eventually did, after a world war that destroyed half of the world's production capacity -- the other half being, for all intents and purposes, in the US. I dearly hope that such a scenario isn't on the table today.

  16. Their problems isn't research spending by Sycraft-fu · · Score: 4, Insightful

    It is cheating. Basically the culture in China right now is one of do whatever you want to get ahead. Cheating, lying, all ok, expected even. So it goes on in research all the time. Straight out fabricated results and such. The problem is, as Feynman said, Nature cannot be fooled. So you can have all kinds of results that say X causes Y, but if X doesn't in fact cause Y it isn't helpful.

    It is a societal thing that will need to change before they start to produce more useful research.

  17. Re:R&D Stealing by Kergan · · Score: 2

    Methinks you're fantasizing. China needs the US and the EU as much as the US and the EU needs China for cheap wares. If the the US and the EU go down and crash, China will crash even more. They've no interior market/consumption to speak of, and need to rebalance.

  18. Re:R&D Stealing by Runaway1956 · · Score: 3, Interesting

    Fantasizing, you say? Whatever. The fact is, the wealth of the world is being redistributed, and the US and EU are coming up losers. China is gaining. The real catch to all this redistribution is, the world's central banks are reaping the lion's share of the profits. For each ten dollars we lose, China gains a dollar, and the banks steal nine dollars.

    But, the situation with the central banks don't affect the fact that China is ascending, while we descend.

    China may be dependent on us today, but what happens in fifty years, or a hundred? We're selling off our great grandchildren's future.

    --
    "Windows is like the faint smell of piss in a subway: it's there, and there's nothing you can do about it." - Charlie Br
  19. Re:R&D Stealing by dbIII · · Score: 2

    No interior market? That's actually where a lot of their growth has been and why they didn't go completely belly up when the US economy sneezed a few years ago.

  20. Re:Can't Compare by the+gnat · · Score: 3, Interesting

    If the talent is better and equal or cheaper in cost then this game is over

    I guess the next question is "does this game actually matter?" Germany's population is about the same fraction of the US population as the US is of China, and presumably their R&D budget is much smaller than ours. But you never hear the Germans wailing about how the US has surpassed Germany in R&D spending; indeed, Germany's economy is one of the strongest in the world (especially Europe), with a large manufacturing sector and excellent technology, despite relatively high labor costs. Which doesn't mean that Germany is perfect or doesn't have problems - just that being overtaken in R&D spending doesn't automatically turn you into a third-world country.

  21. Re:Can't Compare by hhawk · · Score: 2

    This maybe stereo typing but I think in general German engineering is really top quality in terms of building products to a set specification in a reliable and predictable manner. Given that they have been able to hold onto manufacturing jobs is also a plus..

    --
    http://www.hawknest.com/
  22. Re:R&D Stealing by fast+turtle · · Score: 2, Insightful

    and it's got absolutely nothing to do with spending. Instead the problem is with our educational system preferring to not teach our kids how to think for themselves. The continual dumbing down of America is happening each and every day in our schools when they refuse to teach Civics, Geography, Math - when so called high school grads working at McDonalds can't even count back change w/o the damn computer telling them how much of what type of change to give back. Hell I've watched the same kids getting their change and they don't even know how to count it anymore.

    --
    Mod me up/Mod me down: I wont frown as I've no crown
  23. Re:Just think... by ahabswhale · · Score: 5, Insightful

    What does debt have to do with capitalism? There is nothing about debt that precludes capitalism.

    Had we let the auto companies fail, what would have been created in its place? Nothing. The expense of setting up a new car company is unbelievably expensive. All we would have gained by letting them fail was the loss of over one million jobs and the death of the American auto industry. I fail to see how that helps capitalism.

    You make a point of singling out unions but fail to mention all the banks that were too big to fail and have no unions. Should we have let them fail? By your logic, we should have. But by all accounts we would have entered a full blown depression (ala 1939). Keep in mind we were losing over 700,000 per month at the time. Are you pro capitalism at the cost of a depression? I hate to tell you this but unrestricted capitalism is what caused the problem in the first place. Saving the banks (as disgusting as that feels) is what saved capitalism. The reason social programs like medicare exist is to save capitalism. Study history and you'll understand why.

    What most capitalism purists fail to get is that there are no pure systems and that includes the economic system of capitalism. Do you think the stock market is a free market? Not even close. Such things just don't exist.

    --
    Are agnostics skeptical of unicorns too?
  24. Re:maybe by AK+Marc · · Score: 2

    1) Yeah, what of it, punk.

  25. Re:R&D Stealing by Smauler · · Score: 4, Insightful

    The fact is, the wealth of the world is being redistributed, and the US and EU are coming up losers.

    The wealth of the world being rebalanced so everyone has more equal wealth is a good thing, in my opinion. I'm not sure how it isn't, in any way at all.

    Now, if you're saying that corporations are taking most of the money, and distributing the wealth unequally, that's a different issue, which is a result of our current system, which they've adopted to some degree.

    More equal wealth will allow manufacturing and farming to actually exist in the west without subsidies, too. At the moment we're clinging on to high tech specialised manufacturing, but I doubt that will last for that long.