Avoiding Lost Decades: A Modern History (1979-2019)

[Electric Monk]

Avoiding Lost Decades: Teaser #1


BBC World Service - East Asian Rely Station (Hong Kong)

…repeat we are going off the air in twenty-two minutes on my mark…*mark. This is managing director Nigel Lane. The BBC regrets the inconvenience to our listening audience but the Chinese have told us they will be jamming our signal in just a short while.

Our top news story takes place here, in Hong Kong. Chinese troops have entered the city and with the withdrawal of the Joint Commonwealth-Japanese Fleet north to Taiwan Hong Kong is not prepared to put up resistance.

The Royal Hong Kong Police Force recommends that all citizens stay in their homes as much as possible until the present state of emergency is resolved.

It is 17 May, 2018 and the time is 1055 GMT, 1855 local time. The East Asian Rely Station is going off the air in twenty minutes on my mark…*mark. Repeat, it is…



BBC World Service - Far Eastern Rely Station (Singapore)

The five short pips followed by the long pip indicate that it is 1100 GMT . . . . . -

This is London. This is the BBC. Because of emergency conditions the Eastern Asia region is not, repeat is not, part of the BBC half hourly news update world programming.

This is a joint broadcast from the East Asian Rely Station in Hong Kong and the Far Eastern Rely Station in Singapore. Hong Kong is going off the air in fifteen minutes. All those currently tuned to Hong Kong will be losing signal, as well as FM & Satellite listeners in the Greater Hong Kong region. Shortwave listeners in Hong Kong may or may not be able to pick up Singapore—the BBC is unable to guarantee you service against Chinese jamming.

Pacific listeners may achieve better reception on Radio New Zealand International or Radio Australia.

We now go live to Jonathan Chapman, the BBC correspondent on board the Queen Victoria somewhere south-west of Taiwan.

…

We seem to have lost contact with the Joint Fleet.

This is the BBC. Our top news story tonight…

 

[Electric Monk]

In 1986 Japan entered the Bubble, the trailing end of a nearly three decade long economic expansion. The Bubble was marked by rapidly increasing stock and land prices. In 1990 the land value of Japan was roughly 50% more than the land value of the entire world, but 1990 is also when the Bubble ended.

The Lost Decade of the 1990s follows, subjecting Japan to more than a decade of low or negative economic growth.

The primary goal of this timeline is to avoid that Lost Decade, but also to avoid other lost decades. Europe spent the 1990s languishing, and America might well spend the next decade languishing (and has suffered from problems since the collapse of tech back at the end of the 90s).

In Japan Dodges The Bubble, the original version of this timeline, saving Japan from stagnating is all I wanted, but the butterfly effects from taking the world's second largest economy and radically overhauling it were quite large.

Therefore this timeline essentially covers an entirely different history of the planet from the late 1970s onwards.

My main thesis is that a reforming Japan in the 1980s can avoid the Bubble, keep sustained economic growth, and generate enough butterflies to give Europe a better decade in the '90s, America better '00s, and the world in general better off (though some regions may be much worse off). For example, a reformed Europe & America with no subsidies would provide incalculable benefit to African farmers and hence massively boost African economies and the standard of living on that continent.

The average person, in this alternate past & future, will be quite a bit better off.

 

[Nicomacheus]

Very interesting concept! All hail the march of global progress.

 

[OperationGreen]

Outstanding. I will be following this closely.

 

[CalBear]

...

The average person, in this alternate past & future, will be quite a bit better off.

I assume this state of affairs only survives is until the British nuke the PRC into the Stone Age after the loss of their fleet?

You don't get wars between nuclear powers that turn out well. This is especially true if the power that has the preponerance of deliverable weapons is suddenly losing.

The UK is the third most powerful nuclear state on the Planet, mainly thanks to it's SSBN's that are effectively undetectable (and will be into the foreseeable future) even by the most advanced ASW forces. A Seawolf or a Virginia might be able to track a Vanguard but the sonar crew would need to be having a VERY good day. One of to be new Russian Severodvinsk boats might have the same ability, but the quality of the sonar suite is still an open question. Nothing the PLAN has (or plans TO have) would have a prayer, especially if the RN surged all four boats.

Just a bit of feedback.

Best of luck with your timeline.

 

[DAv]

Certainly an ambitous project. I'll be keeping an eye on this one.

 

[Bishop]

It'll be very difficult to change Japan, they stagnated not just because of structural problems, but also because of some cultural aspects that slowed growth.

BTW, you say that the world will be better off, but from what I've read, the lives of 1.3 billion chinese people aren't that well off if they can't reunite peacefully with Hong Kong. You just gave a paltry hundred million lives a better economic life at the sacrifice of 1.3 billion people. I can't see how giving already well off people more money and people in desperate poverty a worst off life is a better world.

So I disagree strongly with the assessment of a better life for the average person.

 

[Arachnid]

I assume this state of affairs only survives is until the British nuke the PRC into the Stone Age after the loss of their fleet?

You don't get wars between nuclear powers that turn out well. This is especially true if the power that has the preponerance of deliverable weapons is suddenly losing.

The UK is the third most powerful nuclear state on the Planet, mainly thanks to it's SSBN's that are effectively undetectable (and will be into the foreseeable future) even by the most advanced ASW forces. A Seawolf or a Virginia might be able to track a Vanguard but the sonar crew would need to be having a VERY good day. One of to be new Russian Severodvinsk boats might have the same ability, but the quality of the sonar suite is still an open question. Nothing the PLAN has (or plans TO have) would have a prayer, especially if the RN surged all four boats.

Just a bit of feedback.

Best of luck with your timeline.

Actually this is 2018 and the Vanguard will have just retired and the Vanguard replacement will just be coming online (knowing British military procurement it will be 5 years late) and the RN will be scrambling to maintain the detterent patrol, thus no chance of all four being surged.

 

[stevep]

Actually this is 2018 and the Vanguard will have just retired and the Vanguard replacement will just be coming online (knowing British military procurement it will be 5 years late) and the RN will be scrambling to maintain the detterent patrol, thus no chance of all four being surged.

Aracnid

You seem to be presuming one result of the scenario is a significant improvement in British military procurement. Otherwise its more likely to be ~10 years late. On the other hand, given how used the forces are to crap mis-management the RN is probably able to keep at least a couple of the Vanguard's limping on so if the Chinese are stupid enough to destroy and Anglo-Japanese fleet things could get very, very nasty for them. Mind you Britain must to doing a hell of a lot better to be maintaining anything in the Pacific.

Steve

 

[stevep]

It'll be very difficult to change Japan, they stagnated not just because of structural problems, but also because of some cultural aspects that slowed growth.

BTW, you say that the world will be better off, but from what I've read, the lives of 1.3 billion chinese people aren't that well off if they can't reunite peacefully with Hong Kong. You just gave a paltry hundred million lives a better economic life at the sacrifice of 1.3 billion people. I can't see how giving already well off people more money and people in desperate poverty a worst off life is a better world.

So I disagree strongly with the assessment of a better life for the average person.

Bishop

Actually the scenario describes by EM was that there were significant improvements for a lot of people in many countries, not just Japan so it might still apply.

Also, other than that the Chinese government is playing the street thug, what do we know about what is the situation in China. While it sounds like China is having some sort of neo-Maoist fit it could be that it has also had dramatic economic success and the attack is prompted more by overconfidence in a flourishing economy rather than desperation of a brutal totalitarian state.

Steve

 

[Bishop]

Also, other than that the Chinese government is playing the street thug, what do we know about what is the situation in China. While it sounds like China is having some sort of neo-Maoist fit it could be that it has also had dramatic economic success and the attack is prompted more by overconfidence in a flourishing economy rather than desperation of a brutal totalitarian state.

If the Chinese government has resorted to vilence then they are most certainly deperate. Contrary to popular believe, the Chinese government actually doesn't go around invading people because they think they can. China actually wants to foster stability in other countries so they can engage these countries economicly so as to improve their economy.

If they are economicly successful, attacking Hong Kong will be out of the question as Hong Kong will undoubtedly very integrated to their economy, if they are economicly successful.

If what I mentioned above isn't true, then China certainly still has plenty of deperate poverty. At least much more than OTL.

Actually the scenario describes by EM was that there were significant improvements for a lot of people in many countries, not just Japan so it might still apply.

Sure significant improvements for a lot of people, but at the same time bad things for billions other people.

 

[stevep]

If the Chinese government has resorted to vilence then they are most certainly deperate. Contrary to popular believe, the Chinese government actually doesn't go around invading people because they think they can. China actually wants to foster stability in other countries so they can engage these countries economicly so as to improve their economy.

If they are economicly successful, attacking Hong Kong will be out of the question as Hong Kong will undoubtedly very integrated to their economy, if they are economicly successful.

If what I mentioned above isn't true, then China certainly still has plenty of deperate poverty. At least much more than OTL.



Sure significant improvements for a lot of people, but at the same time bad things for billions other people.

Bishop

I will agree that China is probably in a much worse way. Although I would hate to be certain of it without knowing more of the background. However it is a large slice of the world's population but by no means the majority. If most other areas are better off then by definition more people have benefited. I admit I would find it unlikely that only China is worse off but without knowing more about the scenario I couldn't say. Also rather surprised that with a flourishing world economy still centred heavily on Japan I would expect China to be doing very well because it would be such an obvious trading partner for Japan, as it was OTL. [Unless China was following a path similar to OTL and for some reason has only recently had things go badly wrong].

I am also dubious about being so certain only a China in distress would be that rash and aggressive. Its the most likely reason but not the only one.

Steve

 

[Bishop]

Bishop

I will agree that China is probably in a much worse way. Although I would hate to be certain of it without knowing more of the background. However it is a large slice of the world's population but by no means the majority. If most other areas are better off then by definition more people have benefited. I admit I would find it unlikely that only China is worse off but without knowing more about the scenario I couldn't say. Also rather surprised that with a flourishing world economy still centred heavily on Japan I would expect China to be doing very well because it would be such an obvious trading partner for Japan, as it was OTL. [Unless China was following a path similar to OTL and for some reason has only recently had things go badly wrong].

I am also dubious about being so certain only a China in distress would be that rash and aggressive. Its the most likely reason but not the only one.

Steve

You're forgetting that China has helped the world economy and overall, they have been good economicly in OTL.

I disagree there with the assessment that Japan is at the center of the economy in TTL, they really may have a large economy and they may somehow manage to sustain economic growth, but they don't have the same economic entrepreneurship culture to go into dynamic new industries. I suspect that America is still in the lead with their entrepreneurship. There seems to be more Japanese entrepreneurship nowadays, but it is still very little. It takes a long time for them to have a shift towards a more entrepreneurship culture. IMO, this culture is what makes America a very competitive country and this is something Japan needs to foster.

A shift towards this culture is difficult for Japan to achieve. Anywhere during the booming times will be difficult to push this since they'll probably see themsleves as having a good model without entrepreneurship.

 

[Electric Monk]

I assume this state of affairs only survives is until the British nuke the PRC into the Stone Age after the loss of their fleet?

You don't get wars between nuclear powers that turn out well. This is especially true if the power that has the preponerance of deliverable weapons is suddenly losing.

There's solid reasons on both sides for not going nuclear.

It'll be very difficult to change Japan, they stagnated not just because of structural problems, but also because of some cultural aspects that slowed growth.

Low consumer demand, low use of credit cards, and a focus on savings over investment. Yeah I know Japan has a lot of problems.

BTW, you say that the world will be better off, but from what I've read, the lives of 1.3 billion chinese people aren't that well off if they can't reunite peacefully with Hong Kong. You just gave a paltry hundred million lives a better economic life at the sacrifice of 1.3 billion people. I can't see how giving already well off people more money and people in desperate poverty a worst off life is a better world.

If the Chinese government has resorted to vilence then they are most certainly deperate. Contrary to popular believe, the Chinese government actually doesn't go around invading people because they think they can. China actually wants to foster stability in other countries so they can engage these countries economicly so as to improve their economy.

If they are economicly successful, attacking Hong Kong will be out of the question as Hong Kong will undoubtedly very integrated to their economy, if they are economicly successful.

The Chinese government is having problems—the Chinese people are a rather different story.

Notice that there's no attack on Hong Kong, the British deliberately didn't put up a fight on the ground and the Chinese wouldn't have pushed forward if they had.

A shift towards this [entrepreneurship] culture is difficult for Japan to achieve. Anywhere during the booming times will be difficult to push this since they'll probably see themsleves as having a good model without entrepreneurship.

You're forgetting that China has helped the world economy and overall, they have been good economicly in OTL.

The POD—which we'll get to soon—centres around economic reform begun for reasons that have nothing to do with the state of the economy (as it is, in the early 1980s, solid).

As for the Chinese lower prices at Walmart don't really compensate for the loss of middle class jobs. Free trade between advanced nations is a marginal net gain all around. Free trade between developed and undeveloped nations on the other hand is a major economic net gain—but not even remotely for everybody.

That said free trade is more widespread ITTL than OTL.

 

[CalBear]

Actually this is 2018 and the Vanguard will have just retired and the Vanguard replacement will just be coming online (knowing British military procurement it will be 5 years late) and the RN will be scrambling to maintain the detterent patrol, thus no chance of all four being surged.

Well the mention of the Queen Victoria seems to indicate that the money for the new full deck carriers was found (unless there's a HMS Queen Victoria that I missed), so maybe they scrapped together the bucks for a new set of boats too.

Even eleven years into the future, the Vanguard & her sisters will be a couple of generations ahead of the PLAN (Vengence will only be 17 years old). Four boats just makes it easier to plan. You could do it with just a single boat. Every D-5 can handle 12 MIRVs, although the RN currently holds the warhead loadout down to around three per bird (the US is limited to 8 MIRVs per Trident under START, but the UK is still free to go to 12). In theory that gives a single boat a max loadout of 192 warheads (or pretty close to the UK's entire inventory). In practice I would guess that you wouldn't see a single boat with much more than 100 warheads, so two boats would be ideal.

In the scenario posited, the ideal placement of the two boats would be well inside friendly waters, with plenty of ASW available but far enough from PRC waters that any PLAN boat would have a difficult time getting into range undetected. The waters off Hawaii would do wonderfully as would the area off Guam, both of which would afford coverage of virtually all of the PRC and are sanitized almost continuously even in peacetime. In a period of high tension the effort would go WAY up, simply to protect American interests.

If one wanted to go for a depressed trajectory shot (always nice if you are going for a counterforce strike) the waters off Japan would work well. They are not as secure as American waters, for reasons of distance from the PRC if no other, but the JSDF has a very good rep regarding ASW (and they are mentioned as a UK ally in the original post) and the region provides launch sites with about 8 minute flight time to the sole DF-31/31a missile field in the PRC

At the same time, the PRC is in a poor position to react. Her deterrent force is not really designed with the intention of striking at Europe and even thinking of taking a swipe at the U.S. is suicidal. If the counterforce option is utilized, that would also take the PLA's longest ranged weapons off the board.

The UK may not be the "Sun never Sets" empire of old, but she still is a serious force to be reckoned with.

 

[TheMann]

I'll be keeping an eye on this one with great interest, too, as I am an optimist.

 

[Wendell]

This seems like it could be quite interesting.

 

[SouthCarolinian]

Lots of discussion and conjecture from one post. I like it.

 

[Bishop]

The Chinese government is having problems—the Chinese people are a rather different story.

Notice that there's no attack on Hong Kong, the British deliberately didn't put up a fight on the ground and the Chinese wouldn't have pushed forward if they had.

I find it difficult to believe a China without Hong Kong would even need to attack if they were economicly successful, the reason Chine currently controls Hong Kong is because of the economy, Hong Kong depends heavily on China and for that to happen, China needs to be a better off country.

Read what I said to stevep, I said that China with a strong economy isn't a fool to attack other countries, they want a stable government, so they could gain economic benefits.

If they are economicly successful, they could easily control Hong Kong's business through pressure to do what they want and in Hong Kong, business is very powerful. The PRC is currently doing this in OTL.

I find it very doubtful these things could occur like you said with a wealthy China.

The POD—which we'll get to soon—centres around economic reform begun for reasons that have nothing to do with the state of the economy (as it is, in the early 1980s, solid).

I'd like to see how the Japanese manage to get a entrepreneur spirit in this TL, I believe you'll have one heck of a job to help them.

As for the Chinese lower prices at Walmart don't really compensate for the loss of middle class jobs. Free trade between advanced nations is a marginal net gain all around. Free trade between developed and undeveloped nations on the other hand is a major economic net gain—but not even remotely for everybody.

That said free trade is more widespread ITTL than OTL.

Actually, statistically, we as a whole benefit more.

Second, what's more important, the middle class guy that can easily get another job and the unemployment rate in America is still considered low or the chinese worker deperate for food?

So statistically we save more and even if we don't benefit more, there's chinese people who have food on their plates.

 

[Lord Insane]

I'd like to see how the Japanese manage to get a entrepreneur spirit in this TL, I believe you'll have one heck of a job to help them.

Have you checked the earlier version of this TL (Japan Dodges the Bubble), which was linked to earlier in this thread? It might answer some of your questions about that.