3/20/2026 at 7:18:27 PM
If one removed the country names and just looked at where investment (focus, planning, and money) was, we would see two greatly different pictures.One country is disincentivizing or even blocking renewable energy production, rolling back climate protection measures, trying to revitalize the coal industry, slashing investment in scientific research of all kinds, demonizing higher education, and spending vast and rapidly increasing amounts of public funds to create direct, physical conflicts.
Another country is increasing their renewable energy generation capabilities dramatically each year, encouraging EV adoption, investing very heavily in scientific research, and also investing in military (although without initiating direct physical conflicts).
One of these two countries is riding on momentum, but the drag from waste and mismanagement of resources is increasingly slowing it. The other country is building momentum while reducing drag.
The difference in these approaches will be obvious in a decade, and in two decades one of the two countries will be just another chapter in a book about the rise and fall of empires.
by michaelteter
3/20/2026 at 7:33:22 PM
> in two decadesWhile I agree with your overall point, I'm reminded of "the market can stay irrational longer than you can stay solvent" here. The US is a huge economy with a massive military infrastructure. I don't think it's fading to fallen empire status that quickly.
by smallerfish
3/20/2026 at 7:36:10 PM
When the only question is how precipitous the empire's fall will be, it's not looking good, regardless.by mptest
3/20/2026 at 7:38:22 PM
That is always the only question.by ambicapter
3/20/2026 at 8:07:32 PM
>The US is a huge economy with a massive military infrastructure.Yeah, because famously neither Rome nor Spain nor England had massive military infrastructures for their times.
by dessimus
3/20/2026 at 7:41:33 PM
Europe is wisely waking up and starting to loosen its military dependence on the US. Hopefully they are/will do the same when it comes to medical research since the US has been taken over by anti-vaxxers.I’m saying this as a non European. I’m an American who is making plans to split my time between the US and Costa Rica (here now) and maybe Panama and would love to see them become close to Europe politically.
by raw_anon_1111
3/20/2026 at 7:37:31 PM
It is fading though, we are only arguing about the magnitude of its velocity and acceleration at this point.by seanmcdirmid
3/20/2026 at 7:50:47 PM
Is it though? Dollar is appreciating in times of turmoil? And what’s the alternative - the all talk Europeans?by nxm
3/20/2026 at 8:07:15 PM
Presumably China given OPs comments.It’s going to be a multi-polar world. The US will continue to be among the top powers for decades to come. We’re simply exiting an unusual period where China isn’t leading/among the leading pack of countries.
The rate of US relative decline will be set by our policy decisions and cohesion. As we are apparently electing malicious narcissists with dementia to our highest office, a more precipitous decline seems reasonable
by danny_codes
3/20/2026 at 8:05:07 PM
Alternative to what?by garbagewoman
3/20/2026 at 8:27:38 PM
I prefer talk to bombs. In that way Europe has more in common with China- wars ar just too messy and expensive.by expedition32
3/20/2026 at 8:03:26 PM
Hopefully. With that said, when a country makes too many poor decisions, independently or relative to other countries, it'll eventually bite them in the butt.by omgwtfbyobbq
3/20/2026 at 7:57:57 PM
Most people probably said the same thing about the Soviet Union in the 1980sby nullocator
3/20/2026 at 8:00:35 PM
'How did you go bankrupt?''Two ways. Gradually, then suddenly.'
by HPsquared
3/20/2026 at 7:45:41 PM
US has fossil energy and its actually on the front lines in innovation including green energy, so it will probably be fine. IMHO the main risk would be whatever hapen to the Japanese mobile phone industry happening to US. That is, US will probably end up developing lots of very cool US specific tech that people will talk about how impressive it is but no one will be interested in actually buying it because everyone else will have moved on.by mrtksn
3/20/2026 at 7:39:12 PM
I'd say it's a closer race and the end is not a foregone conclusion yet. That one country currently exhibiting some very troubling tendencies also has more robust self-healing mechanisms in the form of democracy. It has gone off course in the past too but then found its way back. That said, those self-healing mechanisms are under attack as well so there is at least some suspense in the long term outcomeby ripvanwinkle
3/20/2026 at 7:56:25 PM
I'd love to share your optimism and trust in that country-that-shall-not-be-named's self-healing mechanisms, but its system is already centuries old and based on a sort of "gentleman's agreement" that each of the powers in the state will respect the others. To make things worse, since WW2, the executive has amassed more and more power which a sufficiently unscrupulous president can use to start an authoritarian takeover. Currently, the only hope I see is that enough people are fond enough of their democracy (even if only because that's what they grew up with) to stand up for it when push comes to shove...by rob74
3/20/2026 at 9:23:36 PM
A major problem facing that nation is that not many people are particularly interested in maintaining a democracy. They just want to see the “other team” lose.by bigfatkitten
3/20/2026 at 8:22:17 PM
And even more galling is the why. One country is turning its back on renewables because it's "woke". Just the dumbest people in charge.by deeg
3/20/2026 at 8:06:01 PM
> If one removed the country names and just looked at where investment (focus, planning, and money) was, we would see two greatly different pictures.> ...
> The difference in these approaches will be obvious in a decade, and in two decades one of the two countries will be just another chapter in a book about the rise and fall of empires.
The interesting question is: why. I'd say the US ultimately will be judged to be another victim of the "shock doctrine" (in its case, the China Shock). In other words (at least in a democracy): letting the economists and libertarians run wild with the economy will create a backlash that will ultimately weaken it.
The supposedly smart people in charge needed to pay less attention to their pet theories, and way more attention to the common people. They didn't, and this is the result.
by palmotea
3/20/2026 at 9:11:39 PM
China is one of the top producers of CO2? They also keep building new coal plants faster than anyoneEnergy doesn't appear immaculately from the heavens. You need to spend a lot of conventional fossil fuel to be able to make renewables
by karel-3d
3/20/2026 at 9:27:54 PM
"Energy doesn't appear immaculately from the heavens."It actually does. There is a big fusion reactor up there that gives us a lot of direct energy, if you don't live near the poles it is enough for everything.
by tuna74