since 2007 it had a high just below 120, now 2024 it is just below 16. So it went up a little in the last 4 years, not much, but way down from the high.
It is critical to remember that the two most important pieces of information here are the demographics and the other is that China exports 50 % of its GDP while the United States only exports about 8 to 17% of its GDP. This is critical. It means the United States can weather any trade war while China cannot. Plus we control all of the seven seas, the arteries of most international trade. His and George Friedman 's insights tell us how things will go in the next 100 years or so.
what the trade figures mean is that the US is a parasite on the planet. Everything I buy is made in China and increasingly designed in China by Chinese people. I don't need the US. Nobody really does now.
Wow that was an amazing lecture! Just a pleasure to the ears, every piece of information in this lecture was of immense significance to the world we are expected to have. Glad I watched everything, this man is a genius!
It's not bad but after watching his lectures for years, I think he underestimates china. He thought they would hit massive issues years ago, they are still going far far stronger than anyone else and directly challenging america economically and still growing faster by far. I would be shocked if they aren't the number 1 economy with india and america the only 2 close in the future. I know he likes rivers and all, but I doubt it will make a difference in the modern world.
@@ssssaa2 The rivers are still cheaper than flying them or driving them, so unless you know of another way to transport goods. Also China is notorious for flooding the loan and credit market during a recession. This is suppose to put the major hurt off for later. They have done this for a long time and people keep expecting for the next recession to be the one that makes them pop but they still keep giving out more loans and credit. And their growth comes from them catching up to current times. They are trying to slow down their growth as they know its not sustainable.
As of December 2018, Us-China trade war, Iran threatening to close the Persian Gulf, Ukraine vs Russia in Eastern Europe. Basically all his predicted zones of conflict. US also exports more than 11.7 thousand barrels of crude a day.
What was frightening was how accurate he was on China, this was published April 2017, about Xi picking a 'twin'. Xi Jinping on March 2018 declared himself president for life.
This is an extremely shady way to describe Lighthizer, and in the same presentation he now says the Japanese get it when he shows the slide of Abe with Trump. Yes, they get it now, security. It's not Lighthizer's fault they didn't get it in the 80s, and their economy was a threat to ours. Lighthizer is the USTR, not the we'll roll over for Japan TR. I like Peter, but he sounds like he's stuck up the USCOC's ass and a little upset that Trump pushed them to the side and hired his own killers that represent the US and not multinational interests. Lighthizer has done more than most people will ever know to protect the American economy from our competitors and from establishment groups like Stratfor and The USCOC, that Peter is connected to.
EU was never about economics but it was not wise to openly say that it was created to tie up Germany. So the cover story of economic cooperation was the official version. Economic benefits realized in the recent history were a nice bonus. Americans and Brits were never occupied so they do not understand how important it is for continental Europeans to keep EU alive no matter the cost,
It doesn't seem to have hindered Germany one iota. As for Europeans wanting the EU no matter what, I can think of several countries in the neighborhood that might disagree with you.
@Harry Lagom Let's see, the Hungarians, the Poles, the Czechs quickly come to mind. The Italians, Greek, and French aren't terribly happy, but sure everyone in Europe loves the EU project, especially the Russians, and then there are the British.
@Harry Lagom Actually, it's you who are wrong, and blind to the growing dissatisfaction. Egotistical fools are always overconfident, and that makes them careless. Time will tell though. I'd prefer to be wrong about Europe, but history says they never learn their lesson. They merely try a different tack at domination. So far, they have failed each time. History doesn't lie. At the current rate, most indigenous people of Europe will be found only in history books like the Romans.
So - If I get this right, I did hear that the .5 Trillion was going to infrastructure projects in the rust belt, then - its goes to follow - that any $$$ gained by us will go to Appalachian or Rust belt areas
In Europe countries public debt is a sum on national and local governments and all public institution debts. In US it's only federal one. What is US debt as sum of federal and states debts?
In the traditional sense of the word 3rd world, 3rd world meant any country that was not a major player of either side of the cold war (it is now used to refer to any poor countries in vernacular). I'm guessing that's what chile will be still.
It seems that many of the commenters are missing the point. The bottom line is that, in the long run, the USA can survive comfortably (after a painful adjustment period) completely independent of any interaction with the world should the world crash totally and fall into war and chaos. Any other factors are simply smaller details within the process, but the end would likely be the same. It is an interesting thought that the USA might actually no longer have any need or interest to care about the rest of the world other than being strong enough to thwart any potential military action against the US ... and they just walk away. PS: This is a simple comment. This is not a strong political opinion, just a comment. I don't have notifications turned on so any arguments that one may wish to have will need to find another comment. I have little or no interest in arguing over politics since none of us actually know what goes on behind closed doors of world leaders. We see what they allow us to see, not much more. Peace!
Idk if SE Asia and India count as nations with "low security threats" or "good access to energy." That sort of presumes that China goes the Soviet route and just implodes when shit goes south (if it does). I don't see the CCP letting that happen. Most of the rest of the talk seems bang on though.
Does anyone know why the Netherlands and Denmark are still in the US interest after 2020 and the other EU countries except GB are not? He talks about this at 28:00
The Dutch and the Danish are the middleman in Europe. Because of theire location they can block trade (sea lanes) from happening, because all trade need to pass trough them.. So if you want to contain somone in Europe (German, France, UK, Russia, Sweden). Having them on your side is handy, they are small coutries so they will not start wars. And Denmark still controles Greenland, lot of rich minerals.
Just one point: The demographic reduction will cause economic problems in many countries but what about the countries that will account for the growth to a 10 billion world population by 2050. What will their economic evolution look like?
He claims in other videos that we will never reach 10 billion people. People will start starving around 8.5 billion. I am not sure if that is his prediction if brenton woods falls apart, of it doesn't.
@@meganh9460 A lot of that is just based on Russia imploding because of their demographics alone, being that they're one of the largest exporters of food in the world. And now they've been shut out from the rest of the world since committing to the takeover of Ukraine, so we don't even have to wait for the implosion for the food shortages in areas dependent on Russian exports to begin...
It's the standard presentation he gives, based on the book. He's said that he gives this basic talk for the first half, then tailors the second half to the specific audience, like if he's talking to soy growers he'll talk about soy and agriculture, or if he's talking to a Texas/Mexican business association he'll talk more about cross border politics and economics, and so on. I think it's actually more like 70/30. So if you've seen his talk before, the more interesting part is the Q&A at the end.
You must be new to these kind of lectures. It's standard procedure. They all do this because these lectures are hard as hell to make. It's like making a new music album, or producing a blockbuster movie. LOOOOOTS of research, logistics, expertise, and man hours go into making them, thus, you can't expect them to recreate the presentation for every event. Plus, he did present some new info. 38:49 is completely new as far as I can tell.
Relatively new yes. Always loved history, and kinda shunned politics most of my life. I have found, however, that geopolitics and historical trends are fascinating once one can step back from the main media front and look at it from different perspectives. Peter has a great way of presenting, and hopefully he will continue.
Oh man what a rough audience, lol. Holy hot damn, that CRINGE at 43:29 . Good grief, I felt that one from here. Still an excellent lecture, and I'm glad Peter can hold his composure like a pro.
1:02:24 "Toronto has a 20% occupancy rate" : complete nonsense. The VACANCY rate for apartments in Toronto was 1.1% in 2017 (lower in outlying cities of Ontario). The Federal government and the BC and Ontario provincial governments have brought in various taxes on foreign buyers and other mild controls, and as in New Zealand it is not clear that foreign capital has a controlling influence on prices, which are perhaps more the result of demand and many years of ridiculously low interest rates, together with booming economies in the biggest cities and very high immigration levels. Property taxes in Canada are payable whether a property is occupied or not, so it encourages property owners to rent out their apartments and houses if they don't live in them. This talk is interesting, but if the other statistics are as unreliable, I wonder how secure are the speaker's conclusions. In any case, political and environmental concerns in the next few years will completely change the predictions. As an example, Canada cannot build any more pipelines due to indigenous and general public opposition to any expansion of fossil fuel extraction, and the bitumen/heavy oil from the oil sands of Alberta cannot get to market (i.e. tidewater, thence by tanker to China).
The thing that chills me is not all the info barf he throws into our faces, although very interesting, but the fact that he nonchalantly says war is inevitable. Not sure how long the US can stay aloof and isolated when this great war begins. Always thought being in America would be the worst place to be if another great war was upon us. But now I am thinking it might be the best place to be if you wanna survive, or at least have a chance at surviving. Places like Europe, Central Asia and the Middle East will get the worst of it. All those lives lost because the need of resources to sustain one self as a nation state. Maybe it is for the best, over population and all. Cruel thing to say.
I think more along the lines of proxy and cold wars. Russia has done OK in Georgia and Ukraine. China owns the China Sea and even the USA would find it difficult to remove Chinese presence in that area. Its a mistake to think along ww2 lines, although not unthinkable it is unlikely.
I find his attitude toward the inevitability of war to be pretty naive. Certainly some kind of cataclysm will happen that will precipitate war and some are more predictable/inevitable than others, but how foolish to assume that Russia is going to invade Europe and expand its borders because they have a massive demographic problem. This talk is, in the end, just another tunnel-vision superlative projection of the world while abdicating the factoring of huge unknowns e.g. deeper problems of morality and religion, internal cultural conflict, technological innovation, and the incredibly diverse consequences of social upheaval will certainly present. For example, what happens if a white nationalist platforms emerge in Europe due to the economic disintegration that Zeihan cites? This is exactly what happened the last time in the 1920s and 30s when people reevaluated 'socialism' to embody the sharing of resources that corresponds with a racial denominator. What would then the implications be for the large white populations around the world that are quickly seeing themselves supplanted by large waves of immigration? I guess this hypothetical scenario is not mutually exclusive with the talk that Zeihan presents, but I think his 'steady state' model of the current world is a naive projection of our current vector, one that can quickly and violently veer from course with very slight input adjustments.
@@robertr.hasspacher7731 Hes not going into detail of each countries political issues. And yes war is very certain. The Chinese have had every opportunity to join the international community and partner with America in global leadership, why haven't they. They play by their own rules, and bide their time. Last year an economist in China wrote a paper about how glorious China was and how they have over taken the United States as the worlds number one economy..... He was then condemned by no less than 80 other economists. They do not like the attention. They want to rewrite the rules. They don't believe in a free press, you can look that up yourself they admit that. They don't believe in western values, aka individualism and prefer a more collectivist method. So the USA has two options, bow out and set up Regional powers and 'let' China have Asia. Or war.... It will be war.
reconcidering what he talked about, your comment About his stance on Fashion sheds some light on how we got that far down the slope. I sincerily hope Worlds Society has more IQ to offer.
As space cowbow said Lin Mai, but as usual Chinese only look 5 years ahead not 100 your economy crashes to the point of the middle ages and at LEAST half your population starves to death without the United States supporting China. If I were you, forget communism, and learn to pray for American success. For once look at your country's situation with LOGIC not nationalism. Nixon and Kissinger may have been assholes, but they understood that using China as leverage against the Soviet Union was only PART of their strategy. Keeping China from being a real threat while doing so at the same time was genius. If you don't want to believe me, read Kissinger's book about his interactions with Mao. He knew even then keeping China on an economic leash was the better way to contain China without a shot fired.
Ayy, we all have our pros & cons - that San Andreas fault could be a bitch too, lmao. Other than those lil things though, not too bad, not too bad at all!
You are misunderstanding the lecture. If you want theories about who bombs who go to a conspiracy website. This is the future without large events that change it.
With due respect Megan H larllarfleton is not completely correct but neither are you. If the United States stays out of the wars, any nuclear exchanges stay localized or regional. Bad globally for sure but not an end of the world event. As horrible as that sounds, at least humanity has a future. Another issue that he has not addressed as far as I've seen is at least a possibility of civil war in the United States. But even that pulls us off the world stage for the next 30 years. Just as Peter has predicted. But look at the current issues with Iran. His statements on these problems are meant generally not specifically. But if you look at the world stage right now, he's been 100% correct. The USA military pull outs are accelerating now, as it should. I may be an arm chair general myself, but I'm not too worried, however I'm sure some idiot WILL find a way to screw it up lol. And as much as it pains me to say this, Trump seems to understand this issue better that his advisors. Think about this, if Trump does pull us out of these areas like he said he would, the world burns. But the hemisphere does not. Right or left if you look at the President's ACTIONS he kept his campaign promises better that just about every President we've had since Teddy Roosevelt. Just take away Twitter and he'd be seen as a great President. I'm gagging saying that by the way.
@@Narukosaki With respect I really don't think they will be used...on a strategic level. If I understand his reasoning right, with the USA NOT being involved, the nuclear exchanges stay localized. I'm not implying that these would have no effect on humanity as a whole, but not a world-ending event. Think about it this way, for whatever bluster Russia or China may throw our way, they have no chance to defeat the USA militarily. So in that case strategic release would be their ONLY option. But with the USA not involved, the exchanges SHOULD be limited. It's very much a gamble of course, but if we are not belligerents, they would have no real reason to launch. For an example Russia has complained for years about the USA not honoring the ABM treaty, but they have just announced they will abrogate the INF treaty. Why you may ask, the INF treaty deals ONLY with specifically with land based cruise and short range ballistic missiles. All of the missiles ranges listed in that treaty max out at 3000 miles. So that would support Peter's case that these moves are meant for Europe. Which is why NATO is pushing the USA to deploy more anti-ballistic systems.
@@meganh9460 Peter said " wars in the persian gulf and wars with Russia turn it into this" " the asians have their own war" hardly small events. Also 'conspiracy theory' does not mean wacky, far fetched nonsense. Many conspiracies actually manifest. By definition this man gave a conspiracy theory. World leaders conspire everyday
Chinese direct investment to the US fell to $4.8 billion in 2018, down from a high of $46 billion in 2016. What's the explanation for this? China doesn't seem to have collapsed yet.
Those are effects, not causes. What caused it to have a homogenized and highly skilled population? Zeihan says that flat land is necessary for a place to be wealthy.
@@3506Dodge No, he says that good farmland plus good transport is necessary to produce wealth. Switzerland sells security to those that produce wealth.
@@3506Dodge Only secure countries can enforce neutrality. Switzerland can't project power, but between its mountains and its armed citizens, Switzerland is plenty secure.
Even if the Iranian pipeline/silk road did make a dent in energy needs and provide a market for their finished goods, it still does nothing for their foreign agriculture dependence, debt bubble, and demographically driven end to competitive labor.
OBOR/BRI is a branding endeavor. THey are taking all spending over two decades and calling it Silk Road. They started the endeavor and do not have the capital to see it done. Chinese spending on OBOR/BRI last year, was only slightly more than Thai FDI to the rest of ASEAN. The reason they had this hype, is because to actually do it they need global capital; which means US, Japanese and EU. Especially since the loans and debt repayment is denominated in USD. Foreign Reserves in China are flat, not growing. Foreign Reserves are the Assets, a portion of them, that sit on the Asset side of the Chinese Central Banks Balance Sheet (PBOC). Supposed spending is higher than all of China's Reserves. China needs reserves to buy Soybeans, Oil, Copper, Iron, everything it imports. Can't do OBOR in RMB, because they have a closed financial system. No one can get the RMB, through exports, because China trades in USD, and tries to export as much as it can, or source as much as it can internally. There is no trade in RMB, no-one can pay the loans for OBOR. Have to use USD, have to use New York r EuroDollar London, global capital really not that excited. Central Asia is largely unpopulated. Seaborne transportation is cheap. Land expensive. OBOR/BRI, nothing but PR.
they don't have the money to waste, OBOR spending was only 14 billion last year. OBOR relies on foreign capital, not Chinese to execute, and global institutions to rectify over-indebtedness, Pakistan and IMF, not AIIB requiring Pakistani debt, but profligate spending, requiring IMF to rectify, amazing.
He is a really good lecturer, ...but please, somebody tell this generation X guy about artificial intelligence, carrier killer missiles, blockchain, robots, etc. He is missing these critical things out. He keeps on telling the same notions and jokes for a decade now.
nobody cares about your flash in the pan memetech, youngblood. now pls go get a capital rich job in a city with a navigable waterway and make some kids
You might not like his jokes but the research in his books is solid. He’s giving the same preso (periodically updated) because it’s all still true. Carrier killer missiles? Umm... do you think there would be any repercussions for a country that tried that? Remember, the US took down an entire government for each of the twin towers. The US is prone to overreact. It's what we do! Attacking a US carrier would be a suicide mission for any country/group dumb enough to try it. If they succeeded…they would certainly regret it.
You're upset that he is focusing on broad fundamentals while you are praying for Deus Ex Machina? Wherever did your generation gain their reputation for fecklessness?
Have you heard of Supply and Demand right????? Supply = Production. Demand = Consumption. Without consumption you wont have have production. So yes Consumption is the source of wealth.
Supply and Demand - I do remember that from the multitude of economics classes I attended. I also remember the lecture about the fallacy that demand or consumption drives an economy. You can't consume anything until it is first produced. That's physics.
@@peteguard3571 of course you can't consume something that hasn't been created. But you won't produce something without there being a demand for it. Things are created because there is a demand for it. Its basic economic 101 Lets say you make screws for a living but there is zero demand for screws what happens? No one buys your screws because there is zero demand or lets say the market is over saturated with screws and little demand for screws it drives the price of screws down to the point where its unprofitable to make them because it will cost you more to produce those screws than you will get out by selling them like this it costs you $0.05 to make a screw but the value of that screw is $0.03 because there is little demand and over saturation in the market, So Demand drives production. To cut costs and make things more profitable helps drive innovation there by increasing innovation which increases demand which increases production. In a continuous cycle but the key that builds it all is the Demand aka Consumption.
He doesn't make that assertion. Producing more than you consume however is a key for world order but that equation has to be balanced by consumption to work.
If one researches recent talks about the EU by experts one will find what the experts consider what the EUs primary goal is . The goal is "peace" . This is why Basket cases like Greece and Italy in the Eurozone are tolerated , transfer payments to these countries are always ongoing. Greece might complain about the measures , but even radical anti EU/Merkel parties quickly realized play ....or be dirt , I mean bottom of the barrel dirt poor. But that if these countries drop out , subsequent regional dissent and unrest. And who is waiting in the wings??? the USA nope.... Putin .....just waiting to swoop in. Putin loves this shit. So EU is a business case yes , but its propping up for peace. But really it is a buy out, and It is no different then say Canada giving money to Quebec( Read: separatists) all out of proportion to what Quebec needs. No different then politicians making promises to certain areas of the countries they govern. Example | Trump promised dairy farmers in Wisconsin and Minnesota that US that he would crack Canada's dairy supply management to get more of their products into Canada. Canada is a tiny market it wont help US farmers much. BUT this has been done and he did it to insure "peace" ie: " votes" so he can retain power. Again No different then the EU propping up Italy or Greece. If you lose members you don't win the next war ie : Election. And in the US the sides are never been so polarized , and if even fake news can be believed I have never seen the US being so close to internal blows.
No the primary aim of the EU is ever closer political and economic union. It is a political project to create a united federal europe. Read Hugo Young's The Blessed Plot.
@khana ristobal That's a more long term prediction. He says that will happen after the global trade order breaks down, which hasn't happened yet. It might still happen.
You can mfg products anywhere. You can only sell them to people with money. China is screwed, which is why all the rich people in China are scrambling and doing everything they can to get their money out of China and into US dollars if they can.
What the US consumes from China will be replaced by product from booming Mexico and the rebuilding US manufacturing industry. The cost of living is inevitably going to go up - but not anything like it is for most of the rest of the world.
None of that will change our lands, our resources, our population demographics, our military etc.... Plus, when the shit hits the fan around the world, Americans will come together, and patriotism will rise.
That's a completely separate approach to the same problems. This is a geopolitical analysis. It doesn't claim to explain everything. However, as a lens, it produces a very clear and wide angle view. Most importantly, it predicts, from what I've seen, higher than 50%. Better than chance. The question is, how well do other predictive frameworks perform? And how much of it overlaps? This is statistics. Predictive power and explained variance. Calculate these and you can determine which frame deserves the most use. Sociology might be it. But it strikes me that geopolitics is the moneyball in baseball and sociology is the woo.
JHC.....This guy is The *Four Horsemen.* Watch until the end, question period. I hope he's wrong....but I can't find any fault in Peter's reasoning. I'm a life time lover of history, I just assumed that I would simply study it....I never expected/contemplated that I would be living it....Realtime, live and in color (Orange)!
Peter, or anyone, can you help me here. First very impressed. We need more thinkers. Thank you. It seems the underlying premise (or overarching foundation to your conclusions, if saying it two different ways helps) is that easy transport by rivers and access to oil (I see how the second source helps make for an alternative transport replacement to river floating) makes up the past and future well being of a country and its prospects (specifically the US). Was that too overgeneralizing to not lose you? It seems to be your primary premises for things went well and well go well. All that sounds so industrialization era. Have we not moved well beyond that. Do we not transport differently today? Roads, trains (especially in China) planes and who knows maybe under city tunnels, hyperloops and if we are lucky more eco-friendly fueled rockets that gets our stuff around the world in real space if not in tubes that manufacture frictionless space on earth. Ok, let's not reach so far into a speculative future. What about the exponential decline in cost per kW of solar power, new portable salt reactors or whatever our pace of innovation can reasonably suggest. Is not near zero cost of energy almost as likely as cheep floating being our primary impact factor to costs of transport? Follow the downward curve of costs (you seem great at extrapolating into the future - a future complement by the way) of general costs of renewables. Is it really all that much about where we get our oil or how much it costs and are rivers easy to flood stuff on? So this is not a challenge, you seem pretty thoughtful about all this so I'm interested, what about abundance world of Singularity University, impact on demographics of extended life-health span and longevity, increased productivity from global collaboration based on the 5 billion newcomers to the internet, or the efficiency of authenticated information through blockchain, the growing impact of AI on freeing up human attention to greater exploration and innovation? I guess the short of it is to me it seems like your taking buggy whip sales of 1880 to speculate the future demand on leather or how Britten built its empore on sailing ships and speculating the future worlds demand for sail material. Is really rivers and oil our driving even near-term geopolitics. I travel a lot globally including India's failing infrastructure that has forced them to jump to a commerce system on the internet superhighway or China trains that make our travel (stupid traffic and airport time added to flight time) look like we are falling way behind on the transport brings prosperity by rivers and oil look as though we are blind to information and analytics revolutionary forces. Able to help here.
Don Ashlock Zeihan deals with existing facts on the ground to inform his predictions. The main things he looks at are geography and demography. People have to eat...the world's largest piece of high quality farmland is the middle of the US. You need to be able to transport food to start creating wealth...the US has the best naturally occurring navigable waterway system in the world. You need to be secure...the US is protected by oceans, mountains and deserts. You need energy...the US has shale. And you need enough young people to support your retired population...the US has their millennials. It's not just that the US has all these, it's that the food is plentiful, the transport is easy, the security is free, the energy is cheap, and the size of the US millennial population is unique. That puts the US in a singular position in the world for at least another 50 years. As long as another big game-changer doesn't happen. If I could ask Zeihan about one thing, it would probably be his thoughts about disruptive technology. He doesn't really deal with it, but having said that, disruptive tech is speculative. It's hard to point anything, even AI, and say That will happen in one year, in two years, in ten years, and here is what it will mean. He can only deal with the facts that exist right now, and right now, yes, water transport that is 12 times cheaper than road, even after you build the road, is very important. The reason other countries don't have China's high-speed rail is that it isn't economical. China loses money on every passenger.
@@srdxxx Excellent reply. I'm in multifamily in Phoenix, the fastest growing city in the fastest growing county in the USA. Multifamily is dependent on job growth, population growth, existing inventory and income growth, somewhat interest rates and of course purchase price. The whole road here I was bombarded with "what if's" by others in the industry, that are endless, and in the end are trivial in nature; self driving cars and parking to give an example; they will come, but slowly, just as electric cars are coming but slowly. Facts and primary principles thinking leadback to demographics. You should look into rental real estate, you would kick some ass.
People have said for years they don't want the US being the world's policeman. They're about to get their wish. What would happen in any major city where you wake up one day and there are no policemen. I'm sure it'll be fine.
Psydonym your smoking dope. First thing that happens without US guarantees is Russia marches on the Baltics, Ukraine, and probably Poland. Germany, Finland, and Sweden are forced to bow to their new masters. Of course China dominates South Korea, the Philippines, and Indonesia. Oh and Iran immediately invades west across Iraq into Syria and south into the Saudi oilfields. And that'll just be the start. If you think that is an improvement well there is a saying that applies: "you can't fix stupid."
He has some interesting points but there are MANY things wrong with his idea. One of the biggest would be that if north Korea can make nukes and ICBMs than almost anyone can do that. There are many countries that could build huge numbers of nukes overnight like Japan, germany, south Korea. Is the US and the developed world ok to live in a world where almost all the countries have at least 200 nukes on standby. How do u protect a super carrier group from a nuclear tipped torpedo? Etc etc etc...
I suppose you think America (and Russia and China) will just let another country get in a position to threaten their global standings....not likely. NK can hit Japan with a missile with severe consequences, they commit suicide if they TRY to send 1 to America. If India or Pakistan get a little too crazy they will be cut off by America, Russia and China. I'm not worried about new nukes I'm worried how China reacts when their economy collapses or when Putin dies or decides to step down.
...so then we just enter another Cold War, where the US once again out-develops & out-spends everyone else? Anyway, Germany for example has WAY bigger problems on their hands right now than "building huge numbers of nukes overnight"; like having the power to do so, since they're dependent on Russian oil, and now they're no longer getting any. Because of that pesky invasion of the Ukraine. And now the world lost one of its largest exporters, as Russia has been pretty much globally shunned. Launching nukes has never fixed a trade problem, especially when YOU are the one that has the problem with the trade.
Well I guess there is a Khan Noonien Singh on the horizon then, well well well, the does that mean I am going to be able to buy a Chrysler Cordoba with Corinthian leather Upholstery then! It's going to be good for the United States as usual but its going to be a dog eat dog world for the rest and they are going to be wearing milk bone underware.
Wrong in so many ways it's hard to list them all, first off the shale oil wells only last a few years, tops, STOP projecting the graph out like it's gonna be forever.
I like when an empire tells itself its invisible ,I bet you Britain did the same thing. From the future by the way (2020), how wrong this guy was .this is why predictions are meaningless.
Interesting but I suspect inaccurate/wrong. I'm Canadian and will admit to a certain amount of envy vis a vis the confidence of my American neighbors. That said the current political situation in the US simply can't be ignored and unless some big reforms are enacted quickly the gap between rich and poor in the US will continue to widen and decrease the chances of Zeihan's version of MAGA ever happening
No, you miss his point. Let's say you're right and the worst here happens and things spiral into an actual civil war/class war, resulting in the loss of, let's throw a number in the air, 15 million people. By Zeihan's analysis, by nature of its geography the US is rich enough and secure enough that we will still come out of it a superpower, sort of the way we came out of the last civil war stronger and richer. (The richer took a few years, I think, but not many.) In the wake of a civil war we would still have the largest piece of quality farmland in the world, still have the rivers for transport, still be flanked by two oceans, still have shale, and probably have a lot of children, which seems to happen after wars. I'm not sure what our society would look like, but that's not what he's dealing with. He's talking for the most part about unchanging structural advantages.
Easy answer........The gap between rich and poor will start to recede as the capital returns back to the US......(Global uncertainty always returns to the certainty) With US energy independence, certainty likely stabalizes the wealth distribution pattern. ....We're already seeing the results, as manufacturing and investment is returning back to US soil..... And this, along with a lowered Tax burden, has allowed President Trump a higher degree of reelection as a certainty. Our biggest challenge in America, is fighting off the Socialist/Greenie Progressives, who are attempting to stunt that natural stabilization......Their ideology if implemented, would drive the Capital flow back out of the country, and eventually cause a permanent situation of a lower represented middle class.....(California is the prime example of this ideology at play.)
Marc Tremblay is was going to respond, however you only need to read the response from Johnny Apple Seed. Pulling the USA off the world stage for the next 30 years or so will only make America that much stronger.
A good lecture, but it ignores the actual massive demographic changes in the USA, and only looks at the age of the population, which is missing an ENORMOUS factor. Any1 who doesnt know what I mean, please reference stefan molyneux's video on race and IQ.
Stefan is a philosopher not a scientist. But the cited work is absolutely done by scientists, and there are very few scientists who refute the differences between racial groups.
@@p51mustang24 as an exfan of steffans channel i have watched him since his channel came to youtube. Funny how his politics changed to an extreme from liberal to conservative, i wonder if it will change again when his audience switch sides. His studies that he cites are oftentimes coming from organisations who are known to be conservative interest groups. As a politically independent person who agrees with both sides on some issues i can tell you that steffan is a chameleon in these topics, because he profits off of them. Hes not a philosopher but hes is self proclaims often and he has made insinuations on what he think on minorities and how to handle us. There was a video of him explaining to a veteran why he should not try to be a hero if an public shooting where to happen and to "not bother to save the lives of minorities who want to take your guns". This is when i started to view him as a dangerous person and noticed how everything he explains to be the "truth" when he talks about terroist attacks and social issues. Not to discredit everything he claims there are some truths in his topics but he uses them as a crutch to pander the alt right. Which btw i also was part of that movement until the ethnonationalist took the movement and my skin color bacame a problem to them. Steffan has also deleted some videos that also proves my point to cover his tracks and explained that he has to for some bullshit reason. As a US citizen and also my family who has been in america since 1890 have started to question if we even should continue to serve this country considering that we have a long military history here as well. From the looks of yes as a MINORITY the game has always been survival and will continue to be that way, but with people like steffan pandering indirectly to the ethnonationalist hes mase his points on what he thinks of minorities like me and if he meets me he would make assumptions of me before he even gets to know me.
@DreamOfSkye: There are no safe stock markets. All of them are overpriced. Russia might, with great emphasis on the word "might," survive because it has relatively large stocks of gold on hand relative to its population. I seriously doubt that the United States has any gold to speak of in its name. I strongly suspect that it has already been sold or leased out. Here's the dirty little secret about today's currencies -- all of them are purely unbacked fiats by their respective governments. They have no real backing. The only nations that have even a faint chance of having enough gold to sustain their populations are places like Russia that have small populations relative to the weight of precious metal it has stored.
@EricWahl: Things will get that bad and the thought of it keeps me awake at night. Despite my best efforts, I'm no ready for that day. All you are pointing out is that one must have one's priorities established. There are important lessons to be learned from what happened in Argentina during its episodes of hyperinflation.
@@ManuelGarcia-ww7gj This is 2019... the gold standard is long gone. What matters is legal security... not whether there's enough shiny yellow metal in some room.
@@ManuelGarcia-ww7gj Gold isn't that important anymore bud. They fazed it out of electronics, now its just a pretty metal that we normally put value in when shit hits the fan.
Idk it's a super interesting, logical talk, but also there's lots of interpretations of history and highly questionable assertions. Small example: Mexican-American US citizens are against illegal immigration because of competition (except he said it with all the hateful labels i.e. hispanics and illegals) - any evidence of this at all? Easily disputable: most migrants try to bring their extended families. Sounds like propaganda if you ask me. Or self-drank cool aid. Also, Peter thinks that the US is a "cultural" power? I think he (like most Unitestatians) confuses entertainment for culture. Also, usaisnotamerica.com
The US culture is ubiquitous. It’s not just entertainment, its the jeans you’re wearing and the device you’re using. It’s the like air you’re breathing. You don’t see it, but try living without it. The thing that angers people is that we’ve usurped their cultures. Not on purpose, but a natural by product of having better ideas.
strenght of american military,and weakness of chinease one - dont forget americans never won a war. i know for a fact that chinease navy is growing RLY FAST so is their air force.while americans have f35 (a multi bilion dollar flop),and zumwalt destroyer tha is too expensie to use
Russian invaded Ukraine which has resulted in the world shutting out Russia, one of the worlds leading food exporters - Trump administration launched a trade war with China - banks in Europe failing - Europe is entering an energy crisis because they're so dependent on Russian oil(so much for those pie in the sky German green energy dreams)
I laughed so hard when he brought up Xi
> "Xi will appoint an heir that looks just like him"
>Xi appoints himself as permenteant President
I would love to as him SO many questions!
Is clone
Ok Pete...You just need to have Q and A for a couple hours with an audience that has already seen your spiel. Now that would be fun.
Why?
@BASIL!!!!! The pumpin' Seagull bernie bro and proud
Just a note: Deutsche Bank stock has fallen by half since this presentation.
since 2007 it had a high just below 120, now 2024 it is just below 16. So it went up a little in the last 4 years, not much, but way down from the high.
It is critical to remember that the two most important pieces of information here are the demographics and the other is that China exports 50 % of its GDP while the United States only exports about 8 to 17% of its GDP. This is critical. It means the United States can weather any trade war while China cannot. Plus we control all of the seven seas, the arteries of most international trade. His and George Friedman 's insights tell us how things will go in the next 100 years or so.
Ianoodin who cares about race
what the trade figures mean is that the US is a parasite on the planet. Everything I buy is made in China and increasingly designed in China by Chinese people. I don't need the US. Nobody really does now.
Withnail1969 Why does the rest of the world use the parasities currency then huh
@@Bobelponge123 because that's the system the parasite set up after world war 2 to enable it to better parasitise.
Withnail1969 it’s literally currency you don’t have to use a parasite currency
I’ve seen about a dozen or so Zeihan lectures and this is definitely in the top 3
Most interesting lecture I have heard this year
@Charm Me Tonight He says exactly the same thing and makes the exactly same jokes in every lecture he does.
One of the most insightful prestentations I've ever seen. This guy is brilliant.
Outstanding summary of the world situation. Geography really is everything or, to place it in the vernacular, "location, location, location.
peter zeihan on at 3:00
Abdigani Sugal g
Thanks
Thank you
Wow that was an amazing lecture!
Just a pleasure to the ears, every piece of information in this lecture was of immense significance to the world we are expected to have. Glad I watched everything, this man is a genius!
It's not bad but after watching his lectures for years, I think he underestimates china. He thought they would hit massive issues years ago, they are still going far far stronger than anyone else and directly challenging america economically and still growing faster by far. I would be shocked if they aren't the number 1 economy with india and america the only 2 close in the future. I know he likes rivers and all, but I doubt it will make a difference in the modern world.
@@ssssaa2 The rivers are still cheaper than flying them or driving them, so unless you know of another way to transport goods. Also China is notorious for flooding the loan and credit market during a recession. This is suppose to put the major hurt off for later. They have done this for a long time and people keep expecting for the next recession to be the one that makes them pop but they still keep giving out more loans and credit.
And their growth comes from them catching up to current times. They are trying to slow down their growth as they know its not sustainable.
Right now Mexico and Canada are thanking their lucky stars.
Canada is going to fall apart and Mexico is ran by Warlords.
@Ianoodin Cartels are ran by warlords. Remember that the Chinese warlords' most profitable business was opium trade
congratulations zeihan. now i am sad. i live in brazil, and now i think i'm hopeless.
now i am considering moving somewhere else.
Don't! Clear Amazon and farm!!
@@metaphorpritam chup reh bengali
Sandese Aatehain lmaooo why the hate against bengalis lmao
@@Bobelponge123 i can't post 70+ years of history in a single comment.
He has said that he expects Argentina to thrive in this future, possibly worth exploring?
Good talk, but at 1:2:24, it's wrong. Downtown Toronto has a 20% UNoccupancy rate, not occupancy rate.
That’s what he meant
As of December 2018, Us-China trade war, Iran threatening to close the Persian Gulf, Ukraine vs Russia in Eastern Europe. Basically all his predicted zones of conflict. US also exports more than 11.7 thousand barrels of crude a day.
Alex Chen the guy is pretty much right on. It is a simple game of resources, location, demographics and military.
@@AJourneyOfYourSoul Its getting worse with Iran lol
What was frightening was how accurate he was on China, this was published April 2017, about Xi picking a 'twin'. Xi Jinping on March 2018 declared himself president for life.
Get ready guys and gals...and get your popcorn rwady
That is the best talk I have ever heard!
This is an extremely shady way to describe Lighthizer, and in the same presentation he now says the Japanese get it when he shows the slide of Abe with Trump. Yes, they get it now, security. It's not Lighthizer's fault they didn't get it in the 80s, and their economy was a threat to ours. Lighthizer is the USTR, not the we'll roll over for Japan TR. I like Peter, but he sounds like he's stuck up the USCOC's ass and a little upset that Trump pushed them to the side and hired his own killers that represent the US and not multinational interests. Lighthizer has done more than most people will ever know to protect the American economy from our competitors and from establishment groups like Stratfor and The USCOC, that Peter is connected to.
EU was never about economics but it was not wise to openly say that it was created to tie up Germany. So the cover story of economic cooperation was the official version.
Economic benefits realized in the recent history were a nice bonus.
Americans and Brits were never occupied so they do not understand how important it is for continental Europeans to keep EU alive no matter the cost,
No problem, Europeans almost never listen to Americans. Or other Europeans.
It doesn't seem to have hindered Germany one iota. As for Europeans wanting the EU no matter what, I can think of several countries in the neighborhood that might disagree with you.
@Harry Lagom Let's see, the Hungarians, the Poles, the Czechs quickly come to mind. The Italians, Greek, and French aren't terribly happy, but sure everyone in Europe loves the EU project, especially the Russians, and then there are the British.
@@macvena 80% of Poles respond "yes" in a survey about staying in the EU in a hypothetical case of a referendum.
@Harry Lagom Actually, it's you who are wrong, and blind to the growing dissatisfaction. Egotistical fools are always overconfident, and that makes them careless. Time will tell though. I'd prefer to be wrong about Europe, but history says they never learn their lesson. They merely try a different tack at domination. So far, they have failed each time. History doesn't lie. At the current rate, most indigenous people of Europe will be found only in history books like the Romans.
So - If I get this right, I did hear that the .5 Trillion was going to infrastructure projects in the rust belt, then - its goes to follow - that any $$$ gained by us will go to Appalachian or Rust belt areas
Why is Zeihan the only one who talks about this so clearly and thoroughly? No one cares; not important enough!!??
In Europe countries public debt is a sum on national and local governments and all public institution debts. In US it's only federal one. What is US debt as sum of federal and states debts?
He isn't shitting on millennials. He's teasing them.
How does West South America -- particularly Chile and Peru -- play into these scenarios?
In the traditional sense of the word 3rd world, 3rd world meant any country that was not a major player of either side of the cold war (it is now used to refer to any poor countries in vernacular). I'm guessing that's what chile will be still.
Go to the Q&A at the end of the video. He shows a map concerning some of that.
Steven Thrasher , Zeihan only touts Argentina in S America.
YES!
It seems that many of the commenters are missing the point. The bottom line is that, in the long run, the USA can survive comfortably (after a painful adjustment period) completely independent of any interaction with the world should the world crash totally and fall into war and chaos. Any other factors are simply smaller details within the process, but the end would likely be the same.
It is an interesting thought that the USA might actually no longer have any need or interest to care about the rest of the world other than being strong enough to thwart any potential military action against the US ... and they just walk away.
PS:
This is a simple comment. This is not a strong political opinion, just a comment. I don't have notifications turned on so any arguments that one may wish to have will need to find another comment.
I have little or no interest in arguing over politics since none of us actually know what goes on behind closed doors of world leaders. We see what they allow us to see, not much more.
Peace!
FANTASTIC JOB.
Idk if SE Asia and India count as nations with "low security threats" or "good access to energy." That sort of presumes that China goes the Soviet route and just implodes when shit goes south (if it does). I don't see the CCP letting that happen. Most of the rest of the talk seems bang on though.
The video doesn't highlight japan as apart of that bubble because he assumes that Japan and China will go to war on that slide I think.
No date? When was this done?
GO PETER.
Does anyone know why the Netherlands and Denmark are still in the US interest after 2020 and the other EU countries except GB are not? He talks about this at 28:00
The Dutch and the Danish are the middleman in Europe. Because of theire location they can block trade (sea lanes) from happening, because all trade need to pass trough them.. So if you want to contain somone in Europe (German, France, UK, Russia, Sweden). Having them on your side is handy, they are small coutries so they will not start wars. And Denmark still controles Greenland, lot of rich minerals.
Just one point: The demographic reduction will cause economic problems in many countries but what about the countries that will account for the growth to a 10 billion world population by 2050. What will their economic evolution look like?
He claims in other videos that we will never reach 10 billion people. People will start starving around 8.5 billion. I am not sure if that is his prediction if brenton woods falls apart, of it doesn't.
@@meganh9460 A lot of that is just based on Russia imploding because of their demographics alone, being that they're one of the largest exporters of food in the world. And now they've been shut out from the rest of the world since committing to the takeover of Ukraine, so we don't even have to wait for the implosion for the food shortages in areas dependent on Russian exports to begin...
Good speech, but its a repeat. Why no new info?
It's the standard presentation he gives, based on the book. He's said that he gives this basic talk for the first half, then tailors the second half to the specific audience, like if he's talking to soy growers he'll talk about soy and agriculture, or if he's talking to a Texas/Mexican business association he'll talk more about cross border politics and economics, and so on. I think it's actually more like 70/30. So if you've seen his talk before, the more interesting part is the Q&A at the end.
You must be new to these kind of lectures. It's standard procedure. They all do this because these lectures are hard as hell to make. It's like making a new music album, or producing a blockbuster movie. LOOOOOTS of research, logistics, expertise, and man hours go into making them, thus, you can't expect them to recreate the presentation for every event.
Plus, he did present some new info. 38:49 is completely new as far as I can tell.
Relatively new yes. Always loved history, and kinda shunned politics most of my life. I have found, however, that geopolitics and historical trends are fascinating once one can step back from the main media front and look at it from different perspectives. Peter has a great way of presenting, and hopefully he will continue.
Oh man what a rough audience, lol. Holy hot damn, that CRINGE at 43:29 . Good grief, I felt that one from here. Still an excellent lecture, and I'm glad Peter can hold his composure like a pro.
But still it is very accurate.
Who is at the wrong side of the fence? This time it might be different! Every thing that goes up, eventually it has to come down
Too much positive thinking folks
I can guarantee you this is not how it’s gona happen
Positive thinking? Have you seen what he's talked about?
71samrath here we are 8 months later and he's been right so far.
Wow
"This is Chinese money trying to get the fuck out of dodge" Christ what an animal. I love it when academics just give it to you straight.
Well dam
1:02:24 "Toronto has a 20% occupancy rate" : complete nonsense. The VACANCY rate for apartments in Toronto was 1.1% in 2017 (lower in outlying cities of Ontario). The Federal government and the BC and Ontario provincial governments have brought in various taxes on foreign buyers and other mild controls, and as in New Zealand it is not clear that foreign capital has a controlling influence on prices, which are perhaps more the result of demand and many years of ridiculously low interest rates, together with booming economies in the biggest cities and very high immigration levels. Property taxes in Canada are payable whether a property is occupied or not, so it encourages property owners to rent out their apartments and houses if they don't live in them.
This talk is interesting, but if the other statistics are as unreliable, I wonder how secure are the speaker's conclusions. In any case, political and environmental concerns in the next few years will completely change the predictions. As an example, Canada cannot build any more pipelines due to indigenous and general public opposition to any expansion of fossil fuel extraction, and the bitumen/heavy oil from the oil sands of Alberta cannot get to market (i.e. tidewater, thence by tanker to China).
The thing that chills me is not all the info barf he throws into our faces, although very interesting, but the fact that he nonchalantly says war is inevitable. Not sure how long the US can stay aloof and isolated when this great war begins. Always thought being in America would be the worst place to be if another great war was upon us. But now I am thinking it might be the best place to be if you wanna survive, or at least have a chance at surviving. Places like Europe, Central Asia and the Middle East will get the worst of it. All those lives lost because the need of resources to sustain one self as a nation state. Maybe it is for the best, over population and all. Cruel thing to say.
That's the natural way.
I think more along the lines of proxy and cold wars. Russia has done OK in Georgia and Ukraine. China owns the China Sea and even the USA would find it difficult to remove Chinese presence in that area. Its a mistake to think along ww2 lines, although not unthinkable it is unlikely.
I find his attitude toward the inevitability of war to be pretty naive. Certainly some kind of cataclysm will happen that will precipitate war and some are more predictable/inevitable than others, but how foolish to assume that Russia is going to invade Europe and expand its borders because they have a massive demographic problem. This talk is, in the end, just another tunnel-vision superlative projection of the world while abdicating the factoring of huge unknowns e.g. deeper problems of morality and religion, internal cultural conflict, technological innovation, and the incredibly diverse consequences of social upheaval will certainly present.
For example, what happens if a white nationalist platforms emerge in Europe due to the economic disintegration that Zeihan cites? This is exactly what happened the last time in the 1920s and 30s when people reevaluated 'socialism' to embody the sharing of resources that corresponds with a racial denominator. What would then the implications be for the large white populations around the world that are quickly seeing themselves supplanted by large waves of immigration? I guess this hypothetical scenario is not mutually exclusive with the talk that Zeihan presents, but I think his 'steady state' model of the current world is a naive projection of our current vector, one that can quickly and violently veer from course with very slight input adjustments.
@@robertr.hasspacher7731 Regarding Russia - just look at history.
@@robertr.hasspacher7731 Hes not going into detail of each countries political issues. And yes war is very certain. The Chinese have had every opportunity to join the international community and partner with America in global leadership, why haven't they. They play by their own rules, and bide their time. Last year an economist in China wrote a paper about how glorious China was and how they have over taken the United States as the worlds number one economy..... He was then condemned by no less than 80 other economists. They do not like the attention. They want to rewrite the rules. They don't believe in a free press, you can look that up yourself they admit that. They don't believe in western values, aka individualism and prefer a more collectivist method. So the USA has two options, bow out and set up Regional powers and 'let' China have Asia. Or war.... It will be war.
The Z man enters at about 3:00 if yuou want to skip the talkling head
The guy is great but need a serious fashion advisor. 👍😃
Laszlo Kovacs 👍bingo! spot on!
reconcidering what he talked about, your comment About his stance on Fashion sheds some light on how we got that far down the slope. I sincerily hope Worlds Society has more IQ to offer.
Having that river system is lucky. You also have THREE Supervolacanos (Yellowstone, Long Valley and Valles Calderas)! Lucky you!
yes, we are going to tap into those and generate electricity for all of north america, which will help cool them down
if one of them does go, it will hurt america bad, but millions will starve around the world, so it not just america that gets hurt by it
As space cowbow said Lin Mai, but as usual Chinese only look 5 years ahead not 100 your economy crashes to the point of the middle ages and at LEAST half your population starves to death without the United States supporting China. If I were you, forget communism, and learn to pray for American success. For once look at your country's situation with LOGIC not nationalism. Nixon and Kissinger may have been assholes, but they understood that using China as leverage against the Soviet Union was only PART of their strategy. Keeping China from being a real threat while doing so at the same time was genius. If you don't want to believe me, read Kissinger's book about his interactions with Mao. He knew even then keeping China on an economic leash was the better way to contain China without a shot fired.
Ayy, we all have our pros & cons - that San Andreas fault could be a bitch too, lmao. Other than those lil things though, not too bad, not too bad at all!
wow how poignant this is , fast fwd a yr later...trade policy sending the global economy in a tailspin
Missed biggest group, Pro 2nd Amendment
Remote Viewer 1 constitutionalists
Does Peter completely forget to factor nuclear weapons into this equation? He doesn't even mention them once.
You are misunderstanding the lecture. If you want theories about who bombs who go to a conspiracy website. This is the future without large events that change it.
With due respect Megan H larllarfleton is not completely correct but neither are you. If the United States stays out of the wars, any nuclear exchanges stay localized or regional. Bad globally for sure but not an end of the world event. As horrible as that sounds, at least humanity has a future. Another issue that he has not addressed as far as I've seen is at least a possibility of civil war in the United States. But even that pulls us off the world stage for the next 30 years. Just as Peter has predicted. But look at the current issues with Iran. His statements on these problems are meant generally not specifically. But if you look at the world stage right now, he's been 100% correct. The USA military pull outs are accelerating now, as it should. I may be an arm chair general myself, but I'm not too worried, however I'm sure some idiot WILL find a way to screw it up lol. And as much as it pains me to say this, Trump seems to understand this issue better that his advisors. Think about this, if Trump does pull us out of these areas like he said he would, the world burns. But the hemisphere does not. Right or left if you look at the President's ACTIONS he kept his campaign promises better that just about every President we've had since Teddy Roosevelt. Just take away Twitter and he'd be seen as a great President. I'm gagging saying that by the way.
It's a pseudo weapon. Once they are used.. the world loses.
@@Narukosaki With respect I really don't think they will be used...on a strategic level. If I understand his reasoning right, with the USA NOT being involved, the nuclear exchanges stay localized. I'm not implying that these would have no effect on humanity as a whole, but not a world-ending event. Think about it this way, for whatever bluster Russia or China may throw our way, they have no chance to defeat the USA militarily. So in that case strategic release would be their ONLY option. But with the USA not involved, the exchanges SHOULD be limited. It's very much a gamble of course, but if we are not belligerents, they would have no real reason to launch. For an example Russia has complained for years about the USA not honoring the ABM treaty, but they have just announced they will abrogate the INF treaty. Why you may ask, the INF treaty deals ONLY with specifically with land based cruise and short range ballistic missiles. All of the missiles ranges listed in that treaty max out at 3000 miles. So that would support Peter's case that these moves are meant for Europe. Which is why NATO is pushing the USA to deploy more anti-ballistic systems.
@@meganh9460 Peter said " wars in the persian gulf and wars with Russia turn it into this" " the asians have their own war" hardly small events. Also 'conspiracy theory' does not mean wacky, far fetched nonsense. Many conspiracies actually manifest. By definition this man gave a conspiracy theory. World leaders conspire everyday
European have to become empires again ? ... Sounds good to me .🇬🇧
He said "vampires".
With whose army?
Arnold Tabor nah only France has the geography and alliances to be an empire
Actually, the Ford isn't much bigger than the Nimitz. But, they replaced the urinals with more reactor. It has about six times the power output.
America has all the Cards!!
And it doesn't even need to play
@Mike Sienicki not hardly !!!No friends only interest!!!! Sir Winston Churchill...
Chinese direct investment to the US fell to $4.8 billion in 2018, down from a high of $46 billion in 2016. What's the explanation for this? China doesn't seem to have collapsed yet.
The Chinese implemented laws to restrict assest leaving china and they imposed strict limits on being able to take money out of china.
Yup. 2016 was chinese capital flight
in his other videos, his adds that china will "hunker down"
How does he explain Switzerland's wealth.
a small, homogenized population with a highly skilled workforce
Those are effects, not causes. What caused it to have a homogenized and highly skilled population? Zeihan says that flat land is necessary for a place to be wealthy.
@@3506Dodge No, he says that good farmland plus good transport is necessary to produce wealth. Switzerland sells security to those that produce wealth.
@@srdxxx Security? Switzerland is neutral. It barely provides it's own security.
@@3506Dodge Only secure countries can enforce neutrality. Switzerland can't project power, but between its mountains and its armed citizens, Switzerland is plenty secure.
No word about Eurasia's biggest project - The New Silk Road/ Obor.
Extremly onesided...
Magdalena Wójtowiczowa Yeah overland trade cannot put a dent in the reliance on sea trade so it is mostly a nonissue in the big picture.
Even if the Iranian pipeline/silk road did make a dent in energy needs and provide a market for their finished goods, it still does nothing for their foreign agriculture dependence, debt bubble, and demographically driven end to competitive labor.
Opowieści tego typa to takie 'bajki dla pokrzepienia serc' dla amerykanów.
OBOR/BRI is a branding endeavor. THey are taking all spending over two decades and calling it Silk Road. They started the endeavor and do not have the capital to see it done. Chinese spending on OBOR/BRI last year, was only slightly more than Thai FDI to the rest of ASEAN. The reason they had this hype, is because to actually do it they need global capital; which means US, Japanese and EU. Especially since the loans and debt repayment is denominated in USD. Foreign Reserves in China are flat, not growing. Foreign Reserves are the Assets, a portion of them, that sit on the Asset side of the Chinese Central Banks Balance Sheet (PBOC). Supposed spending is higher than all of China's Reserves. China needs reserves to buy Soybeans, Oil, Copper, Iron, everything it imports. Can't do OBOR in RMB, because they have a closed financial system. No one can get the RMB, through exports, because China trades in USD, and tries to export as much as it can, or source as much as it can internally. There is no trade in RMB, no-one can pay the loans for OBOR. Have to use USD, have to use New York r EuroDollar London, global capital really not that excited. Central Asia is largely unpopulated. Seaborne transportation is cheap. Land expensive. OBOR/BRI, nothing but PR.
they don't have the money to waste, OBOR spending was only 14 billion last year. OBOR relies on foreign capital, not Chinese to execute, and global institutions to rectify over-indebtedness, Pakistan and IMF, not AIIB requiring Pakistani debt, but profligate spending, requiring IMF to rectify, amazing.
He is a really good lecturer, ...but please, somebody tell this generation X guy about artificial intelligence, carrier killer missiles, blockchain, robots, etc. He is missing these critical things out. He keeps on telling the same notions and jokes for a decade now.
nobody cares about your flash in the pan memetech, youngblood. now pls go get a capital rich job in a city with a navigable waterway and make some kids
You might not like his jokes but the research in his books is solid. He’s giving the same preso (periodically updated) because it’s all still true. Carrier killer missiles? Umm... do you think there would be any repercussions for a country that tried that? Remember, the US took down an entire government for each of the twin towers. The US is prone to overreact. It's what we do! Attacking a US carrier would be a suicide mission for any country/group dumb enough to try it. If they succeeded…they would certainly regret it.
BLOCKCHAIN LUL
You're upset that he is focusing on broad fundamentals while you are praying for Deus Ex Machina? Wherever did your generation gain their reputation for fecklessness?
How old are you?
Consumption is not a source of wealth. It is production. That's how people can consume
Have you heard of Supply and Demand right?????
Supply = Production.
Demand = Consumption.
Without consumption you wont
have have production. So yes Consumption is the source of wealth.
Supply and Demand - I do remember that from the multitude of economics classes I attended. I also remember the lecture about the fallacy that demand or consumption drives an economy. You can't consume anything until it is first produced. That's physics.
@@peteguard3571 of course you can't consume something that hasn't been created. But you won't produce something without there being a demand for it.
Things are created because there is a demand for it.
Its basic economic 101
Lets say you make screws for a living but there is zero demand for screws what happens? No one buys your screws because there is zero demand or lets say the market is over saturated with screws and little demand for screws it drives the price of screws down to the point where its unprofitable to make them because it will cost you more to produce those screws than you will get out by selling them like this it costs you $0.05 to make a screw but the value of that screw is $0.03 because there is little demand and over saturation in the market, So Demand drives production. To cut costs and make things more profitable helps drive innovation there by increasing innovation which increases demand which increases production. In a continuous cycle but the key that builds it all is the Demand aka Consumption.
He doesn't make that assertion. Producing more than you consume however is a key for world order but that equation has to be balanced by consumption to work.
Inconvenient facts left out.
Which?
Would like to know which ones?
He kinda looks like Steven Crowder with a moustache.
I can see it, and you know, he also kinda talks like Crowder does too. Similar flow.
smart
If one researches recent talks about the EU by experts one will find what the experts consider what the EUs primary goal is . The goal is "peace" . This is why Basket cases like Greece and Italy in the Eurozone are tolerated , transfer payments to these countries are always ongoing. Greece might complain about the measures , but even radical anti EU/Merkel parties quickly realized play ....or be dirt , I mean bottom of the barrel dirt poor. But that if these countries drop out , subsequent regional dissent and unrest. And who is waiting in the wings??? the USA nope.... Putin .....just waiting to swoop in. Putin loves this shit. So EU is a business case yes , but its propping up for peace. But really it is a buy out, and It is no different then say Canada giving money to Quebec( Read: separatists) all out of proportion to what Quebec needs. No different then politicians making promises to certain areas of the countries they govern. Example | Trump promised dairy farmers in Wisconsin and Minnesota that US that he would crack Canada's dairy supply management to get more of their products into Canada. Canada is a tiny market it wont help US farmers much. BUT this has been done and he did it to insure "peace" ie: " votes" so he can retain power. Again No different then the EU propping up Italy or Greece. If you lose members you don't win the next war ie : Election. And in the US the sides are never been so polarized , and if even fake news can be believed I have never seen the US being so close to internal blows.
No the primary aim of the EU is ever closer political and economic union. It is a political project to create a united federal europe. Read Hugo Young's The Blessed Plot.
....he makes interesting points but comes off as a bit too confident....glib smartasses are often proved wrong with the passage of time....
George Benwell I mean as far as being wrong goes he guess the Xi take over in China.
He's been saying this for a while. What's he been wrong about so far?
...but..... that's what makes him so entertaining to listen to.
@khana ristobal That's a more long term prediction. He says that will happen after the global trade order breaks down, which hasn't happened yet. It might still happen.
… this aged ironically well …
China offers world connectivity and 1st world products. US offers it market . . . Until our National Debt eats up spending.
Dude our national debt is NOTHING compared to Europe
Or China's for that matter
You can mfg products anywhere. You can only sell them to people with money. China is screwed, which is why all the rich people in China are scrambling and doing everything they can to get their money out of China and into US dollars if they can.
China offers .... connectivity... for whom. Isn't their country behind a firewall.
What the US consumes from China will be replaced by product from booming Mexico and the rebuilding US manufacturing industry. The cost of living is inevitably going to go up - but not anything like it is for most of the rest of the world.
So what you are saying is....the US will rule the world.
How does our societal breakdown and destruction of social bonds factor into all this?
ask a sociologist
None of that will change our lands, our resources, our population demographics, our military etc.... Plus, when the shit hits the fan around the world, Americans will come together, and patriotism will rise.
That's a completely separate approach to the same problems. This is a geopolitical analysis. It doesn't claim to explain everything. However, as a lens, it produces a very clear and wide angle view. Most importantly, it predicts, from what I've seen, higher than 50%. Better than chance.
The question is, how well do other predictive frameworks perform? And how much of it overlaps? This is statistics. Predictive power and explained variance. Calculate these and you can determine which frame deserves the most use. Sociology might be it. But it strikes me that geopolitics is the moneyball in baseball and sociology is the woo.
This is geopolitics not sociology.
JHC.....This guy is The
*Four Horsemen.*
Watch until the end, question period.
I hope he's wrong....but I can't find any fault in Peter's reasoning.
I'm a life time lover of history, I just assumed that I would simply study it....I never expected/contemplated that I would be living it....Realtime, live and in color (Orange)!
Peter, or anyone, can you help me here. First very impressed. We need more thinkers. Thank you. It seems the underlying premise (or overarching foundation to your conclusions, if saying it two different ways helps) is that easy transport by rivers and access to oil (I see how the second source helps make for an alternative transport replacement to river floating) makes up the past and future well being of a country and its prospects (specifically the US). Was that too overgeneralizing to not lose you? It seems to be your primary premises for things went well and well go well. All that sounds so industrialization era. Have we not moved well beyond that. Do we not transport differently today? Roads, trains (especially in China) planes and who knows maybe under city tunnels, hyperloops and if we are lucky more eco-friendly fueled rockets that gets our stuff around the world in real space if not in tubes that manufacture frictionless space on earth. Ok, let's not reach so far into a speculative future. What about the exponential decline in cost per kW of solar power, new portable salt reactors or whatever our pace of innovation can reasonably suggest. Is not near zero cost of energy almost as likely as cheep floating being our primary impact factor to costs of transport? Follow the downward curve of costs (you seem great at extrapolating into the future - a future complement by the way) of general costs of renewables. Is it really all that much about where we get our oil or how much it costs and are rivers easy to flood stuff on? So this is not a challenge, you seem pretty thoughtful about all this so I'm interested, what about abundance world of Singularity University, impact on demographics of extended life-health span and longevity, increased productivity from global collaboration based on the 5 billion newcomers to the internet, or the efficiency of authenticated information through blockchain, the growing impact of AI on freeing up human attention to greater exploration and innovation? I guess the short of it is to me it seems like your taking buggy whip sales of 1880 to speculate the future demand on leather or how Britten built its empore on sailing ships and speculating the future worlds demand for sail material. Is really rivers and oil our driving even near-term geopolitics. I travel a lot globally including India's failing infrastructure that has forced them to jump to a commerce system on the internet superhighway or China trains that make our travel (stupid traffic and airport time added to flight time) look like we are falling way behind on the transport brings prosperity by rivers and oil look as though we are blind to information and analytics revolutionary forces. Able to help here.
Don Ashlock Zeihan deals with existing facts on the ground to inform his predictions. The main things he looks at are geography and demography. People have to eat...the world's largest piece of high quality farmland is the middle of the US. You need to be able to transport food to start creating wealth...the US has the best naturally occurring navigable waterway system in the world. You need to be secure...the US is protected by oceans, mountains and deserts. You need energy...the US has shale. And you need enough young people to support your retired population...the US has their millennials. It's not just that the US has all these, it's that the food is plentiful, the transport is easy, the security is free, the energy is cheap, and the size of the US millennial population is unique. That puts the US in a singular position in the world for at least another 50 years. As long as another big game-changer doesn't happen.
If I could ask Zeihan about one thing, it would probably be his thoughts about disruptive technology. He doesn't really deal with it, but having said that, disruptive tech is speculative. It's hard to point anything, even AI, and say That will happen in one year, in two years, in ten years, and here is what it will mean. He can only deal with the facts that exist right now, and right now, yes, water transport that is 12 times cheaper than road, even after you build the road, is very important. The reason other countries don't have China's high-speed rail is that it isn't economical. China loses money on every passenger.
@@srdxxx
Excellent reply. I'm in multifamily in Phoenix, the fastest growing city in the fastest growing county in the USA. Multifamily is dependent on job growth, population growth, existing inventory and income growth, somewhat interest rates and of course purchase price. The whole road here I was bombarded with "what if's" by others in the industry, that are endless, and in the end are trivial in nature; self driving cars and parking to give an example; they will come, but slowly, just as electric cars are coming but slowly. Facts and primary principles thinking leadback to demographics. You should look into rental real estate, you would kick some ass.
Watch out for a Blue Ocean event in the early 2020s. Nature bats last.
September
and then came the Joe Biden...
if you dont have somebody causing war, you dont have to defend yourself... if usa is out there might be more peace than with usa...
People have said for years they don't want the US being the world's policeman. They're about to get their wish. What would happen in any major city where you wake up one day and there are no policemen. I'm sure it'll be fine.
srd xxx sure it will be better when the police isn't committing the crime and has a veto to make it legal :)
You think there would be no war if we where out of those areas? Delusional
Psydonym your smoking dope. First thing that happens without US guarantees is Russia marches on the Baltics, Ukraine, and probably Poland. Germany, Finland, and Sweden are forced to bow to their new masters. Of course China dominates South Korea, the Philippines, and Indonesia. Oh and Iran immediately invades west across Iraq into Syria and south into the Saudi oilfields. And that'll just be the start. If you think that is an improvement well there is a saying that applies: "you can't fix stupid."
what an absurd statement
He has some interesting points but there are MANY things wrong with his idea. One of the biggest would be that if north Korea can make nukes and ICBMs than almost anyone can do that. There are many countries that could build huge numbers of nukes overnight like Japan, germany, south Korea. Is the US and the developed world ok to live in a world where almost all the countries have at least 200 nukes on standby. How do u protect a super carrier group from a nuclear tipped torpedo?
Etc etc etc...
Would you like me to explain how stupid you sound?
@@matthawkins123 yes please
I suppose you think America (and Russia and China) will just let another country get in a position to threaten their global standings....not likely. NK can hit Japan with a missile with severe consequences, they commit suicide if they TRY to send 1 to America. If India or Pakistan get a little too crazy they will be cut off by America, Russia and China. I'm not worried about new nukes I'm worried how China reacts when their economy collapses or when Putin dies or decides to step down.
...so then we just enter another Cold War, where the US once again out-develops & out-spends everyone else?
Anyway, Germany for example has WAY bigger problems on their hands right now than "building huge numbers of nukes overnight"; like having the power to do so, since they're dependent on Russian oil, and now they're no longer getting any. Because of that pesky invasion of the Ukraine. And now the world lost one of its largest exporters, as Russia has been pretty much globally shunned. Launching nukes has never fixed a trade problem, especially when YOU are the one that has the problem with the trade.
So basically Donald Trump doesn't know his own strength 😳
GO TRUMP.
Well I guess there is a Khan Noonien Singh on the horizon then, well well well, the does that mean I am going to be able to buy a Chrysler Cordoba with Corinthian leather Upholstery then! It's going to be good for the United States as usual but its going to be a dog eat dog world for the rest and they are going to be wearing milk bone underware.
LONG LIVE DONALD TRUMP.
Wrong in so many ways it's hard to list them all, first off the shale oil wells only last a few years, tops, STOP projecting the graph out like it's gonna be forever.
Even if it runs out we can switch to methane
I like when an empire tells itself its invisible ,I bet you Britain did the same thing. From the future by the way (2020), how wrong this guy was .this is why predictions are meaningless.
how about now ?
Interesting but I suspect inaccurate/wrong. I'm Canadian and will admit to a certain amount of envy vis a vis the confidence of my American neighbors. That said the current political situation in the US simply can't be ignored and unless some big reforms are enacted quickly the gap between rich and poor in the US will continue to widen and decrease the chances of Zeihan's version of MAGA ever happening
No, you miss his point. Let's say you're right and the worst here happens and things spiral into an actual civil war/class war, resulting in the loss of, let's throw a number in the air, 15 million people. By Zeihan's analysis, by nature of its geography the US is rich enough and secure enough that we will still come out of it a superpower, sort of the way we came out of the last civil war stronger and richer. (The richer took a few years, I think, but not many.) In the wake of a civil war we would still have the largest piece of quality farmland in the world, still have the rivers for transport, still be flanked by two oceans, still have shale, and probably have a lot of children, which seems to happen after wars. I'm not sure what our society would look like, but that's not what he's dealing with. He's talking for the most part about unchanging structural advantages.
Easy answer........The gap between rich and poor will start to recede as the capital returns back to the US......(Global uncertainty always returns to the certainty)
With US energy independence, certainty likely stabalizes the wealth distribution pattern. ....We're already seeing the results, as manufacturing and investment is returning back to US soil..... And this, along with a lowered Tax burden, has allowed President Trump a higher degree of reelection as a certainty.
Our biggest challenge in America, is fighting off the Socialist/Greenie Progressives, who are attempting to stunt that natural stabilization......Their ideology if implemented, would drive the Capital flow back out of the country, and eventually cause a permanent situation of a lower represented middle class.....(California is the prime example of this ideology at play.)
Marc Tremblay is was going to respond, however you only need to read the response from Johnny Apple Seed. Pulling the USA off the world stage for the next 30 years or so will only make America that much stronger.
.
A good lecture, but it ignores the actual massive demographic changes in the USA, and only looks at the age of the population, which is missing an ENORMOUS factor.
Any1 who doesnt know what I mean, please reference stefan molyneux's video on race and IQ.
The pseudo scientist steffan? yeah he seems like a voice of reason.
Stefan is a philosopher not a scientist. But the cited work is absolutely done by scientists, and there are very few scientists who refute the differences between racial groups.
Also, I notice that your name is "mexiball nation" with a mexican flag in the profile pic. Seems you may be biased for obvious reasons.
@@p51mustang24 as an exfan of steffans channel i have watched him since his channel came to youtube. Funny how his politics changed to an extreme from liberal to conservative, i wonder if it will change again when his audience switch sides. His studies that he cites are oftentimes coming from organisations who are known to be conservative interest groups. As a politically independent person who agrees with both sides on some issues i can tell you that steffan is a chameleon in these topics, because he profits off of them. Hes not a philosopher but hes is self proclaims often and he has made insinuations on what he think on minorities and how to handle us. There was a video of him explaining to a veteran why he should not try to be a hero if an public shooting where to happen and to "not bother to save the lives of minorities who want to take your guns". This is when i started to view him as a dangerous person and noticed how everything he explains to be the "truth" when he talks about terroist attacks and social issues. Not to discredit everything he claims there are some truths in his topics but he uses them as a crutch to pander the alt right. Which btw i also was part of that movement until the ethnonationalist took the movement and my skin color bacame a problem to them. Steffan has also deleted some videos that also proves my point to cover his tracks and explained that he has to for some bullshit reason. As a US citizen and also my family who has been in america since 1890 have started to question if we even should continue to serve this country considering that we have a long military history here as well. From the looks of yes as a MINORITY the game has always been survival and will continue to be that way, but with people like steffan pandering indirectly to the ethnonationalist hes mase his points on what he thinks of minorities like me and if he meets me he would make assumptions of me before he even gets to know me.
I don't follow his channel much, but his presentation on the topic I mentioned is good.
The US dollar hard? Bwa-ha-ha-ha! The US stock market is a safe zone? By what standard. Please don't make me laugh. It HURTS!
@DreamOfSkye: There are no safe stock markets. All of them are overpriced. Russia might, with great emphasis on the word "might," survive because it has relatively large stocks of gold on hand relative to its population. I seriously doubt that the United States has any gold to speak of in its name. I strongly suspect that it has already been sold or leased out.
Here's the dirty little secret about today's currencies -- all of them are purely unbacked fiats by their respective governments. They have no real backing. The only nations that have even a faint chance of having enough gold to sustain their populations are places like Russia that have small populations relative to the weight of precious metal it has stored.
@@ManuelGarcia-ww7gj that's not a secret. And if things got that bad, nobody will care about gold. They will care about food and water.
@EricWahl: Things will get that bad and the thought of it keeps me awake at night. Despite my best efforts, I'm no ready for that day. All you are pointing out is that one must have one's priorities established. There are important lessons to be learned from what happened in Argentina during its episodes of hyperinflation.
@@ManuelGarcia-ww7gj This is 2019... the gold standard is long gone. What matters is legal security... not whether there's enough shiny yellow metal in some room.
@@ManuelGarcia-ww7gj Gold isn't that important anymore bud. They fazed it out of electronics, now its just a pretty metal that we normally put value in when shit hits the fan.
Arrogant and presumptuous talk.
Idk it's a super interesting, logical talk, but also there's lots of interpretations of history and highly questionable assertions.
Small example: Mexican-American US citizens are against illegal immigration because of competition (except he said it with all the hateful labels i.e. hispanics and illegals) - any evidence of this at all? Easily disputable: most migrants try to bring their extended families.
Sounds like propaganda if you ask me. Or self-drank cool aid. Also, Peter thinks that the US is a "cultural" power? I think he (like most Unitestatians) confuses entertainment for culture. Also, usaisnotamerica.com
The US culture is ubiquitous. It’s not just entertainment, its the jeans you’re wearing and the device you’re using. It’s the like air you’re breathing. You don’t see it, but try living without it. The thing that angers people is that we’ve usurped their cultures. Not on purpose, but a natural by product of having better ideas.
hes naivness of american strenght and weakness of al other is almoust cute
What's he naive about?
strenght of american military,and weakness of chinease one - dont forget americans never won a war.
i know for a fact that chinease navy is growing RLY FAST so is their air force.while americans have f35 (a multi bilion dollar flop),and zumwalt destroyer tha is too expensie to use
The Americans won WWII, The Civil War, Korean War.....
buahahahha thats a good one
Yes, it was very good for the U.S. to win these wars.
I like how almost everything this guy predicted didn't happen or was the opposite. This guy's a joke.
Russian invaded Ukraine which has resulted in the world shutting out Russia, one of the worlds leading food exporters - Trump administration launched a trade war with China - banks in Europe failing - Europe is entering an energy crisis because they're so dependent on Russian oil(so much for those pie in the sky German green energy dreams)
same lecture for years, boring
I post it mainly for the questions after which are interesting
Can't change reality, mate.
Geography and demographics don't change that quickly.
boredom and knowledge hunger; I have to switch fields to find sth new (but politics&society are always nr1)
This guy is a real con artist!