I think another axis is an underlying cultural difference: balance of collectivism vs individualism. China can say “there will be a factory here” because it’s overall good to have one, even if a few noses are out of joint. In California it’s decades of fights to get a train. The trick to competing is to find the right balance for the next decades. China used to be all-central-planning, which was sluggish and not agile. Now it’s guided by central planning (great for overall alignment) over many years rather than jerky 4 year stints, combined with massively distributed efforts to generate high levels of competition and agility. What is the optimal balance for your country or state?

Isn't robot density per 10,000 workers the standard metric used by the International Federation of Robotics?

https://x.com/orikron/status/1859657159338025418?t=9J4ASQP_M...

> however the west still has the upper-hand in terms of robot to population density ratio.

Considering that latest data shows that China industrial robot density is only lower than SG and SK (surpassing Japan and German recently), then the west doesn't have the upper hand anymore.

> China's strategy is innovation, science and productivity. We on the west seem to like consumption before everything else and IMHO we are doing it wrong.

What is this even supposed to mean? You can't have productivity without consumption - who are you producing things for? Well, consumers - duh.

China is the beneficiary of having relatively low marginal costs, but it's worth noting that's been changing and production has been moving out of China and into other cheaper regions - i.e. Vietnam.

Depends if the Chinese need a market to export to.

The main issue with china is a reliance on exports and a declining population...

All work and productivity is ultimately an enabler of consumption.