Economist Fact-Checks Zeihan's China Collapse Story

Visit guard.io/moneymacro to get your free browser scan and a 7-day trial of premium features.

I read a great comment about Zeihan. "He's successfully predicted 20 of the last 3 global crises." Cracked me up.

This sort of credible challenge is deeply appreciated. Peter is still human and can make mistakes. I appreciate even more that you delivered this critique with the utmost of respect. You’re an excellent example of professionalism in this regard. Thank you.

Not just with China, but elsewhere, Zeihan does an excellent job identifying problems but consistently underestimates the ability of people to adjust and muddle through problems without falling apart. He is generally too pessimistic, but the problems he mentions are valid.

That’s exactly what I suspected, I always enjoy listening to him. I just turn his predictions down a few notches.

I've watched a lot of Zeihan vids and value his analysis, but I'm often surprised at the somewhat extreme nature of his conclusions because they seem not to allow for the possibility of any intervention. I just don't think the world works that way. Thanks for your presentation.

I think your peer reviews and fact check videos of these popular youtubers are really important. Especially as they serve a big audience that might not be as critical. This may cause even more less critical information spreading the globe. So well done Joeri. You make youtube a better place

Very good video. The problem I have found with Mr. Zeihan is that he more often than not 1) Comes to a conclusion, and then 2) Finds facts to support his conclusion.

I really enjoyed how this video presented the keypoints raised by Mr. Zeihan. I agree with some of the counter arguments, one thing wasn't addressed about the housing market in China, oversupply. They have double the amount of housing units to house double their population. The more of something you have the cheaper it becomes. How will the Chinese deal with this inflationary bubble which will collapse and likely take two thirds of the property value with it. Fundamentally, I do not see a way out without a serious and painful market correction. This is one thing in a democracy, something completely different in a dictatorship.

As a geography teacher I've been keeping tabs on Zeihan for many years and, in my view, he has always attracted people's attention through sensational claims. To me, he is a very knowledgeable sophist. In many of his talks with military personnel he make these claims about how America's greatest rivals aren't really a threat and that countries like China could be easily contained. In his lectures to American soy farmers he always claims that they shouldn't worry about Brazillian competition because of Brazil's bad infrastructure and narrow export corridors.However, year after year, Brazil has produced more soy beans, exported more and more, and has now finalized its largest railway in decades, that cuts the nation from north to south. To me, he will always overlook other nations success, particulary those that have some sort of beef with the US, may it be peaceful competition or geopolitcal rival. I'm a great admirer of the US society and, as a Brazillian, always find ways to learn more about our flaws by observing America's example, but Zeihan only seems to apreciate the success of his country and some of America's friends.

I appreciate your thoughtful criticism of Zeihan's predictions and assessments of China. I must mention the Lancet study was published before China admitted to miscounting its population in 2023. The impact was over 100 million. Given the propensity for China to report data with an overly optimistic lens, we are likely to see more corrected census reports. Not to criticize the Lancet, but if they are using faulty data from China, then their conclusions will be inaccurate.

Regarding piracy, do you find it at all ironic that, since the Houthi's have begun attacking shipping, the only safe shipping through the region are those flagged either under China or Russia?

Peter Zeihan is like that postman Cliff Calvin in Cheers TV series. He knows everything a little bit. And he can string some big words together and appears to be coherent.

This is not a rampant debunking. It positions an strong alternative argument in a respectful way. Enjoyed it. Kudos.

I have traveled and worked in China for about forty years, and have followed its astonishing economic progress with a great deal of interest. You are correct: Zeihan correctly points out problems that now face China, but draws hyperbolic negative conclusions.

Your first point misunderstands the consumption. People in late 20's to early 30's are taking on lots of debt for housing when they start family formation. That's why that demographic is so important for growth. That economic demand shows shows up immediately without the corresponding income.

Zeihan's alarmist assessment is designed to bring attention to his channel, to some extent. But I'm surprised you failed to mention the rapid Chinese advancement in AI/robotics that could offset the "demographic time bomb" and labor shortages. Also would have been worth noting that Chinese people and the PBOC are buying gold at record levels, as an economic hedge against the housing market collapse.

Great video, as a military officer I appreciate Zeihans perspective but yes, definitely important to understand that his perspective is one opinion and not an absolute truth on which to entirely base decisions.

Thank you for this detailed insight. Sometimes when listening to Peter I have this nagging feeling that he is caught up in his own confirmation bias. I appreciate your rational and thorough analysis.

I think the point that Zeihan makes on the Chinese navy is that whilst they have more vessel’s, those vessels have got a very small range and would be able to provide support over longer distances e.g Middle East or Argentina. Also the shipping lanes they have to go past on both routes head through the territory of US allied nations so could easily be disrupted. Good video over all and quite eye opening on the first point but I do think you have underplayed his arguments on 2 and 3