That’s a long long long way ahead. Currently China’s GDP per capita is about one fifth of the USA, which is pretty similar to our own.

I’m just a bit sceptical of some of the alarmist economists who are not real businessmen (or women).

We have to build up the knowledge and the design, but not necessarily the production, which can immediately be done cheaper somewhere else once it’s mass market.
These policies are long term.

Even further ahead, China would eventually become more in with the pack in terms of living standards enabling older developed countries a chance to export back.

Exactly. From 2000 onwards was when China really started to boom and aggressively dominate international trade, undercutting western exporters and putting them out of business on a mass scale.

There can be no return to the competitiveness we had on export markets during the 1992-2000 period unless we cut our costs in half, which is completely unrealistic. Therefore that kind of recovery is not open to us this time.

The other problem is energy prices, especially oil but also gas and coal. All strong recoveries need cheap energy and we are not going to get that. That oil prices are atill above $90/brl even in such appalling global economic circumstances should be very very worrying.

In fact, from late 1992 through to about 2000 we had a good period of growth with exports rising faster than the growth in the economy as a whole.

Of course things may be different this time,
but if the government can convince people of the long term benefits of what they’re doing, they can win.

David Cameron will be hoping that it doesn’t come to that. This week’s report by the National Institute of Economic and Social Research suggests ‘robust growth’ will return in 2013 (albeit after a very poor 2012). There is still time, then, but the clock is ticking.

That is a statement of the obvious that we can pretty much all agree on.

The uncertainty though is what the public will consider to be an adequate recovery of the economy.

A large number of economists believe that the west has now entered a long era of ultra-low growth. The drivers of the long 1990s and 2000s boom – rising debt, consumerism, rising property prices, easy finance – have all collapsed and are not coming back. We do not have the cost base, competitiveness, skills or capacity to return to mass manufacturing outside of high-tech niches. Some economists even believe we have entered an era of no growth at all – see Richard Heindberg’s recent book “The End of Growth”.

It does seem possible that 0-1% per year growth may be the best we can achieve for some years. If so I wonder what the political impact will be.

I also agree about the challenge facing the Conservatives. If the Lib Dem malaise continues, I cannot see Labour polling just 29% again. Therefore, one would assume that Conservatives must break through the 40% barrier to win. The big question is how they can do this.

Labour will hoover up Lib Dem votes – the question is how many,
but the 2011 results show the Tories can just about balance that if they also pick up LD seats and limit the Labour advance in southern marginals.
To achieve outright victory, the Tories need to add on votes from those who were scared off in 2010.

On Miliband, I’m not yet clear whether the public think he’s unelectable circa leaders in the 1980s,
or just not very good,
in which case he could still make it to Downing Street if they think the Tories have actually made things worse (a view I don’t share myself).