Miscellaneous News

[tokenanalyst]

The point was that if you assumed pre-COVID trends in the US and China and looked at where US GDP and China's GDP were today, the US GDP grew along its pre-COVID trend to 2023 even with higher inflation & interest rates but China's GDP is 7% lower than its pre-COVID trend with lower inflation and lower real interest rates and lower growth rates compared to the pre-COVID trendline even after the lockdowns. This points to the suggestion that COVID induced permanent scarring (hysteresis) in China's economy but not the United States

China was growing 6% in 2018-2019. They growing closer in hasher environment than most of the world because they depend more on exports, but is the same trend in the US and worldwide The "recovery" is being tamper by the world economic environment.

At the end I would recommend keeping an eye on inflation because if it comes back, is over. High interest rates, high inflation and low growth. Is over.

 

[daifo]

"Muh Free press" and
US cops/law enforcement really don't give a care for how they treat old people (98 yr old lady died from stress of the raid)

Please, Log in or Register to view URLs content!

 

[Sardaukar20]

In case this hasn't been shared before:

Please, Log in or Register to view URLs content!

A Sikh guy who runs or works at a store in the US dishes out justice to a looter, the Indian way.

I won't be surprised if the US police arrests the Sikh guy instead of the looter. Such is the justice system there. Looting is fine. But whooping someone's ass with a Lathi? I'm not so sure that American law is cool with that.

 

[KYli]

That's the entire point. If even during a recovery from a massive lockdown (where you'd expect growth to be unsustainably high for a few quarters), you have a growth rate that's lower than normal pre-COVID times, then what that shows is that COVID massively scarred the economy and sent it on a permanently lower growth trajectory

Under China's 13th FYP, the GDP growth rate was expected to be average 6.5% but due to pandemic in 2020 the actual GDP growth average is 5.8%. Without 2020, the growth rate is 6.6% which just barely above the growth target.

Under China's 14th FYP, the Chinese government doesn't have a guidance of growth but the expectation is between 5% to 5.5%. China would focus on quality of growth as the government is trying to rein in bubble in property sector. So using per-pandemic growth rate for calculation is just inaccurate.

More importantly, I just don't understand why you expect China's GDP growth to continue to grow at the same pace. As all major developing countries have experienced, GDP growth rate tends to decelerate after reaching certain threshold. China's GDP per capita at $12,840 is approaching high income economy which the world bank sets at $13,845. Therefore, it is more realistic to use 5% to 5.5% average for 2021-2025 to calculate if China met its target or not. Beside, it is the property sector that is the biggest drag to the economy. COVID actually isn't that big a factor.

 

[jblas13]

China was growing 6% in 2018-2019. They growing closer in hasher environment than most of the world because they depend more on exports, but is the same trend in the US and worldwide The "recovery" is being tamper by the world economic environment.

Yes and 5.5% is below 6%. China is growing below the pre-COVID trend
China's exports as a % of GDP is one of the lowest in the G20 and COVID caused an export boom in China. The trend in the US is that GDP is at levels implied by 2018-2019 growth. The trend in China is that GDP is at levels 7% below those implied by 2018-2019 growth.

At the end I would recommend keeping an eye on inflation because if it comes back, is over. High interest rates, high inflation and low growth. Is over.

High rates have been with the US economy for 1.5 years now and even with that, even residential single-family housing is growing as a sector. The US economy, for whatever reason (corporate/houshold borrowings at fixed rates (mortgages and corporate bonds) in 2020, increase in shares of , excess savings, a booming jobs market, etc) seems completely insensitive to interest rates and inflation is solved. The CPI uses as its housing/rents estimate, the average of all rents paid (instead of new rents) so it includes leases signed months ago. Now, new rents are declining and rents are 35% of the CPI. Inflation is over as a problem. Transitory supply issues resolved and rents went down because of rate hikes.

Please, Log in or Register to view URLs content!

https://twitter.com/i/web/status/1689685117353041941

 

[Bellum_Romanum]

Under China's 13th FYP, the GDP growth rate was expected to be average 6.5% but due to pandemic in 2020 the actual GDP growth average is 5.8%. Without 2020, the growth rate is 6.6% which just barely above the growth target.

Under China's 14th FYP, the Chinese government doesn't have a guidance of growth but the expectation is between 5% to 5.5%. China would focus on quality of growth as the government is trying to rein in bubble in property sector. So using per-pandemic growth rate for calculation is just inaccurate.

More importantly, I just don't understand why you expect China's GDP growth to continue to grow at the same pace. As all major developing countries have experienced, GDP growth rate tends to decelerate after reaching certain threshold. China's GDP per capita at $12,840 is approaching high income economy which the world bank sets at $13,845. Therefore, it is more realistic to use 5% to 5.5% average for 2021-2025 to calculate if China met its target or not. Beside, it is the property sector that is the biggest drag to the economy. COVID actually isn't that big a factor.

Has he who who must not be named, and the person with many names and aliases been resurrected to grace us with yet another nuggets of wisdom about China's doomed economic prospects?

 

[jblas13]

So using per-pandemic growth rate for calculation is just inaccurate.

It's the best baseline there is of a unknowable other potential future.

More importantly, I just don't understand why you expect China's GDP growth to continue to grow at the same pace. As all major developing countries have experienced, GDP growth rate tends to decelerate after reaching certain threshold. China's GDP per capita at $12,840 is approaching high income economy which the world bank sets at $13,845. Therefore, it is more realistic to use 5% to 5.5% average for 2021-2025 to calculate if China met its target or not. Beside, it is the property sector that is the biggest drag to the economy. COVID actually isn't that big a factor.

GDP growth and GDPPC are negatively correlated but said correlation is neither strong or universal (see US outperformance of the EU and Japan with substantially higher per capita GDP). RE and COVID shocks were timed at the same time (perhaps intentionally to give political cover for the RE adjustments) but regardless, that you have *substantially* slower growth after COVID became a thing isn't deniable but the US did not have substantially lower growth (it had the same growth rate). Thus the MSM party about the growth rates

 

[daifo]

In case this hasn't been shared before:

Please, Log in or Register to view URLs content!

A Sikh guy who runs or works at a store in the US dishes out justice to a looter, the Indian way.

I won't be surprised if the US police arrests the Sikh guy instead of the looter. Such is the justice system there. Looting is fine. But whooping someone's ass with a Lathi? I'm not so sure that American law is cool with that.

this is old news, the Police did briefly contemplated looking into assault charges but they drop that idea since it would be more embarassment for california

 

[Sardaukar20]

Please, Log in or Register to view URLs content!

India has for long pitched for reforms at the UNSC, which last saw reforms in 1963 when four non-permanent members were added to the council, and has been calling for a more equitable and representative structure. India and Brazil are both considered front-runners for a permanent seat. “India’s likely demand that new BRICS members must support UNSC reforms, will advance India’s claim for a permanent seat on the body, although not as directly as Brazil wants it to,” the source said.

India's condition for new members to join BRICS: "Support my bid to become the 6th permanent member in the UNSC with Veto power. Make me a Superpowah in the UN!". Like a gangster asking for support from a new member for his bid to become the next Underboss.

I think aspiring BRICS countries should just say yes to India, join the BRICS, and then forget all about it after. If anything, China could still Veto India's ascension into the UNSC permanent seat, citing India as an unprofessional warmongering idiot threat. What is India gonna do then? Kick out the new members of BRICS? Its gonna need votes from the other founding members too, especially China and Russia. What is India gonna do then? Sulk? Sabotage? Or leave BRICS? Good luck!

 

[supersnoop]

I think the lesson is these kind of big time diplomatic discussion over territory changing hands MUST be backed with credible threat of violence, else no one is going to give up anything no matter how much of a smooth talker your negotiator is.

According to Shilao, during the 1997 Hong Kong handover the Hong Kong Garrison was subject to intense EW from

Please, Log in or Register to view URLs content!

. Even though this was all agreed upon many years before and everything went according to the agreed protocol the Brits are still going to be an asshole about it. So you can imagine if you don't have credible threat of violence and think you can just nicely talk them into giving up Falkland Island you have another thing coming.

Please, Log in or Register to view URLs content!

The exact quote:

in no more than one or two years time the Chinese government would formally announce their decision to recover Hong Kong.

Not necessarily violence. I think the bigger implication was whether the British were willing to risk losing everything (businesses, etc.) by maintaining a sovereignty claim.

TBH, China didn't had Thatcher at gunpoint.

If the UK refuses to return Hong Kong back to China, then the PLA will just march their troops and tanks across the Shenzhen River and right onto the streets of Kowloon. And what can the UK even do about it?

Sure, the UK did drew up plans to nuke China in case Beijing orders the PLA to crash into Hong Kong in the 1950s and the early-1960s.

But when Thatcher visited Beijing in September 1982 - China was estimated to have 200+ nuclear warheads, and had just introduced the DF-5 ICBM, which puts all of the British Isles within range of a Chinese nuclear attack. Besides, Hong Kong is much, much farther away from the UK than the Falklands/Malvinas are - There is zero hope for the UK to relieve their garrisons in Hong Kong if Beijing decides to reunite Hong Kong forcefully, then and there.

Plus, the early-1980s was the honeymoon period between China and the US-led West, and the US-led West needs China's support to stand against the USSR. It was definitely not in London's interests to force China back into the WTO camp.

To sum it up - It was Thatcher (and the UK in general) that didn't have a choice in the first place.

As you can see in the link above (and there are others like it for those that have a distaste for CNN), UK never had any illusions about keeping HK and actually the Falklands war did have an indirect impact on he negotiations.

What's more interesting is that Zhou Enlai always had a lot of foresight into how he could use HK to the PRC's advantage. First, they never invaded HK in the immediate aftermath of the war. Then when the British had considered giving HK more political freedom in the 50's, Premier Zhou could foresee how this could be used as a lever to be used against the PRC and strongly advised against it. When the leftist riots gripped the city in the 60's, he actually moved against them. He also guaranteed water and food delivery to HK even when PRC was poor. This guy had a 50 year plan, amazing...

CNN said this on the point of democracy:
“very unfriendly act,” premier Zhou Enlai reportedly told British officials in 1958. Another Chinese official in 1960 threatened potential invasion if the UK attempted to introduce greater democracy to the colony.

The full background is actually this (

Please, Log in or Register to view URLs content!

):

A self-governing Hong Kong would, in their opinion, open its doors to Chiang Kai-shek and the Americans,' according to British Embassy documents concerning the meeting.
'China wished the present colonial status of Hong Kong to continue with no change whatsoever . . . the enormous American Consulate-General in Hong Kong was merely a base for subversive activities in China and this would become worse if Hong Kong was self-governing.