News on China's scientific and technological development.


AndrewS

Captain
Registered Member
I was thinking recently about all these statistics about how US life expectancy has gone down being used as a campaign issue in running for President of the US? And what are they blaming? It's because they say white males are under attack in society. Suicide rates have gone up like never before. They think they're being blamed for all societal problems. And white males haven't been doing the same to other men...? They portray other males as more likely to abuse and rape women. They're attacking other men's masculinity all the time. Take a look at what they say about Asian men. Yet we have to hear and feel sympathetic for what white men are going through...? It's not like they haven't stopped their assault on other men. Is their media or freer internet talking about that? They're the only ones that are victims of this. Hence why this fight with China over technology is so important. It's about control of the future. It's about control over their masculinity. Technology is going to determine who's on top because whoever controls technology is going to be making all the money. If they're not making the money, they won't be dominant in the world.
From the perspective of Chinese/US science and technology, we can see a big difference in university enrollment in STEM degrees.
These are the latest figures I could quickly find..

In 2015, 18% of US bachelor's degrees were STEM related. But the majority are Indians or Chinese.
In 2013, 40% of Chinese bachelor's degrees were STEM related

So we can see that STEM emphasis in China was twice as high.
As Chinese university enrollment levels increase, in the long-run, we could expect China to educate many more STEM degree-holders.

This has a large implication in terms of technology R&D personnel, and overall familiarity with technology amongst the workforce.

---

From a sociological perspective, STEM degrees are very male-dominated, whereas other courses tend to be female-dominated.
So we should also see a much higher proportion of higher-earning males in Chinese society versus US society.

---

From a societal perspective, this should mean Chinese society has larger numbers of eligible men in the future.

But in the USA, it is Indian and Chinese men who have STEM degrees.
So this is seen as a threat by many in the white male majority, thus their masculinity is denigrated in the media.
 

AndrewS

Captain
Registered Member
UPDATE 2-Senior U.S. Commerce official instrumental in pushing Huawei curbs to resign

WASHINGTON, March 2 (Reuters) - A senior U.S. Commerce Department official who helped lead the administration’s efforts to impose export restrictions on China’s Huawei Technologies Co is resigning, Secretary Wilbur Ross said on Monday.

Earl Comstock, who served for three years as director of Policy and Strategic Planning at the department, often clashed with other administration officials on a range of issues.

His resignation would be effective Friday, U.S. officials said.

Ross said in a statement he valued Comstock’s “wise counsel, his deep policy expertise, his innovative thinking and leadership,” and thanked him “for his service to the American people.” Comstock did not respond to a request for comment.

Comstock was a key person at the department on trade issues, notably the Commerce Department’s Section 232 investigations into the national security impacts of automotive, steel and aluminum imports, and the unsuccessful effort to add a citizenship question to the 2020 U.S. Census.

He was also a driving force behind an effort to put further restrictions on Huawei. Among these were possible rules changes aimed at curtailing foreign shipments of products with U.S. technology to the world’s No. 2 smartphone vendor after the company’s placement on a U.S. trade blacklist in May failed to cut off supplies.

Comstock helped overcome opposition from the Defense Department to a draft rule that would broaden U.S. authority over items with some U.S. content shipped from overseas, people briefed on the matter said.

The fate of those restrictions is uncertain. A meeting on the issue is expected to take place this month.

Last month, President Donald Trump expressed alarm that new curbs on sales to China could have blocked U.S. microchip sales as well as General Electric’s ability to continue supplying engines for a new Chinese passenger airplane.

Source
Please, Log in or Register to view URLs content!
This is good news for the long-term health of the US technology and aerospace industry.

For every product category, the Chinese market is already (or will be) far larger than the US market.

If US companies are prevented from accessing the Chinese market, then companies from Europe, China and elsewhere in Asia will step in.
Then those non-US companies will become formidable competitors, on the back of serving the larger Chinese market, combined with China's lower production and R&D costs.

---

It's obvious that that his pursuit of technology embargoes against Chinese companies is a huge strategic mistake.
Yet somehow he was the director of "Policy and Strategic Planning" at the Commerce Department?
 
Last edited:

Klon

Junior Member
Registered Member

AndrewS

Captain
Registered Member
In 2013, 40 percent of Chinese graduates finished a degree in STEM, over twice the share in American third level institutions.
Source:
Please, Log in or Register to view URLs content!

I was referring specifically to the quoted part.

The NSF has STEM at over a
Please, Log in or Register to view URLs content!
of American bachelor's degrees and Asians at one
Please, Log in or Register to view URLs content!
of the recipients of those.
In your first link from the NSF, I don't see anything about one-third of US bachelor's degrees being STEM-related. Can you point it out.

In your second link, read the note below next to the graph.

Racial/ethnic groups include U.S. citizens and permanent residents only; they do not include foreign nationals with temporary visas.
 

Klon

Junior Member
Registered Member
In your first link from the NSF, I don't see anything about one-third of US bachelor's degrees being STEM-related. Can you point it out.
"At the same time, U.S. S&E bachelor’s degrees, which comprise one-third of U.S. bachelor’s degrees awarded, increased from 400,000 in 2000 to 650,000 in 2015. "
Different
Please, Log in or Register to view URLs content!
from the same source:
"U.S. output of bachelor’s degrees has increased by more than one-half over the past 2 decades. S&E degrees have consistently accounted for over one-third of the total."
"S&E fields account for a larger proportion of all bachelor’s degrees in China than in the United States. In 2014, these fields accounted for 48% of all bachelor’s degrees in China, compared with 39% of all bachelor’s degrees in the United States."

In your second link, read the note below next to the graph.
I did read that. Does that mean that in your original post you were including international students? Either way, the claim remains unsourced.
 

AndrewS

Captain
Registered Member
"At the same time, U.S. S&E bachelor’s degrees, which comprise one-third of U.S. bachelor’s degrees awarded, increased from 400,000 in 2000 to 650,000 in 2015. "
Different
Please, Log in or Register to view URLs content!
from the same source:
"U.S. output of bachelor’s degrees has increased by more than one-half over the past 2 decades. S&E degrees have consistently accounted for over one-third of the total."
"S&E fields account for a larger proportion of all bachelor’s degrees in China than in the United States. In 2014, these fields accounted for 48% of all bachelor’s degrees in China, compared with 39% of all bachelor’s degrees in the United States."
Well, both sources say the same thing. Which is that the Chinese undergraduate education system prioritises STEM degrees more.
I also suspect there has been a change in definition for STEM/S&E?
Apparently the NSF definition of S&E now includes psychology and social sciences. Link below.

Please, Log in or Register to view URLs content!

And if I look at my local university, University College London, it should still be fairly representative of a US university.

I see 4650 undergraduate students studying courses with psychology, anthropology or social science in the name, out of 42110 total undergraduates. There are probably more subjects in there that the NSF would count.
So it still comes to a minimum of 11% of the undergraduate population which could explain most of the jump from 18% to 33% S&E in the US definitions?

I did read that. Does that mean that in your original post you were including international students? Either way, the claim remains unsourced.
Yes, international students do get included. Most want to stay and work afterwards.
So yes, you got me there, the claim should be that "Asians are highly over-represented" rather than "Indians and China are a majority" in higher-earning S&E bachelor's degrees.
But this doesn't impact the rest of the analysis.
 

Klon

Junior Member
Registered Member
Well, both sources say the same thing. Which is that the Chinese undergraduate education system prioritises STEM degrees more.
I also suspect there has been a change in definition for STEM/S&E?
Apparently the NSF definition of S&E now includes psychology and social sciences. Link below.

Please, Log in or Register to view URLs content!

And if I look at my local university, University College London, it should still be fairly representative of a US university.

I see 4650 undergraduate students studying courses with psychology, anthropology or social science in the name, out of 42110 total undergraduates. There are probably more subjects in there that the NSF would count.
So it still comes to a minimum of 11% of the undergraduate population which could explain most of the jump from 18% to 33% S&E in the US definitions?
I agree, definitions probably have something to do with it. The NSF also excludes health sciences, which should be quite major in the US.

Yes, international students do get included. Most want to stay and work afterwards.
So yes, you got me there, the claim should be that "Asians are highly over-represented" rather than "Indians and China are a majority" in higher-earning S&E bachelor's degrees.
But this doesn't impact the rest of the analysis.
Even including international students it's not close to a majority, which I guess we agree on now.
Please, Log in or Register to view URLs content!
has jobs, not degrees, but it's illustrative.
Also, it does impact the analysis, inasmuch as a majority and 13 percent are very different.
 

Top