Decoupling isn't phoney – The global trading system is starting to rearrange

Re:Decoupling isn't phoney – The global trading system is st... by nvm0n2 on Wednesday August 30, 2023 @12:51PM (#37324992)

Wouldn't that be extremely bad, given that 2021 was a year with many lockdowns and COVID related disruption especially in China? Surely 2023 should have experienced a rebound?

[ Parent | on HN ]

Re:Decoupling isn't phoney – The global trading system is st... by sudosysgen on Wednesday August 30, 2023 @01:06PM (#37325283)

The average Chinese was locked down for less than the average American, and while the lockdowns were far more severe, they weren't much worse for the economy.

2021 was a great year for Chinese exports especially due to COVID. It's one of the countries that suffered the least economic damage, and it's exports actually grew immensely compared to previous years.

[ Parent | on HN ]

Re:Decoupling isn't phoney – The global trading system is st... by dirtyid on Wednesday August 30, 2023 @02:02PM (#37326265)

No it would be stupid good.

PRC export value went from 2.5T in 2019 to 3.4T in 2021, to 3.6T in 2022. It increased more during 3-4 years of covid than previous 10 years combined (1.4T in 2009). Primarily because 0covid left most of PRC undisrupted, most of the time, which setup PRC to export to most of world, especially global south. Currently everyone's exports down due to global slow down, but PRC exports down from stupid high peak. It's more surprising how much of exports PRC is holding onto due to artificial conditions caused by covid. Reverting back to 2021 (3.4T) would be a 5 steps forward 1 step back situation vs, reverting back to 2020 (2.6T) which would be status quo.

[ Parent | on HN ]

Re:Decoupling isn't phoney – The global trading system is st... by nvm0n2 on Wednesday August 30, 2023 @04:33PM (#37328651)

You are right, thank you for the detailed answer.

[ Parent | on HN ]