solarz
Brigadier
Re: In 1840, CHina has the highest GDP in the world but.....
Let's do a bit of math here. The average monthly salary of a professional in a 2nd to 3rd tier city is 3k to 5k. That means the average household income is 6k-10k monthly, or 8x12 = 96k yearly, on average. That means a house of about 300k is 3 times their yearly salary. That is a pretty reachable goal. Consider that in toronto, the average condo is 350 - 400k, and the average yearly salary is 50-70k, multiplied by 2 for dual-income households (much less frequent than in China), and the proportion is about the same: 3 to 1. That's not even counting the fact that many companies give their employees housing benefits to offset the costs of buying a house, something that simply doesn't exist here in Toronto.
Why is Chinese real-estate over priced again?
Oh, so what are you suggesting? That the Chinese government should just *give* those homeless and laborers free houses? FYI, China isn't the only nation on earth with homelessness and poverty issues. Why is there an expectation for China to provide housing for everyone? And not just a place to live, but a place that you own!
The fact that the government is even providing houses at 80k for lower-income families is pretty damn amazing in itself!
And what's your point? Being able to field massive manpower *is* a sign of being a superpower, even up to WW2. So what cossack cavalry uses swords? So what if Russia's main focus was in Europe? No nation willingly cedes territory unless they had no other choice. Finally, yes, we all know that the Qing became weak 200 years later. Again I ask, what's your point?
That makes his credentials even more suspicious.
Considering that antimatter only posted the summary, and nothing that leads to this guys "actual views", I can only respond to what is there. If you think that's "misinterpreting" his views, blame the summary guy.
Your analysis of China's real estate is really weird. If there weren't enough buyers for the houses, then the housing prices wouldn't have gone up. It's a simple equation of supply vs demand. Even if a lot of those buyers were investors, they: a) still rent the place out to those who do need to live, but can't afford to buy, and b) still means that there are enough "rich" people to buy the houses.
The stock market bubbles aren't created by outside forces, they're created by Chinese speculators who want to make a quick buck by hyping up some stock.
Finally, I don't know about the stock market, but the property prices seem pretty in line with the economy. Housing prices fell in late 2008, early 2009, as the financial crisis first hit, but rebounded in mid 2009 as China's recovery was faster and better than anyone expected.
Let's do a bit of math here. The average monthly salary of a professional in a 2nd to 3rd tier city is 3k to 5k. That means the average household income is 6k-10k monthly, or 8x12 = 96k yearly, on average. That means a house of about 300k is 3 times their yearly salary. That is a pretty reachable goal. Consider that in toronto, the average condo is 350 - 400k, and the average yearly salary is 50-70k, multiplied by 2 for dual-income households (much less frequent than in China), and the proportion is about the same: 3 to 1. That's not even counting the fact that many companies give their employees housing benefits to offset the costs of buying a house, something that simply doesn't exist here in Toronto.
Why is Chinese real-estate over priced again?
Oh, so what are you suggesting? That the Chinese government should just *give* those homeless and laborers free houses? FYI, China isn't the only nation on earth with homelessness and poverty issues. Why is there an expectation for China to provide housing for everyone? And not just a place to live, but a place that you own!
The fact that the government is even providing houses at 80k for lower-income families is pretty damn amazing in itself!
And what's your point? Being able to field massive manpower *is* a sign of being a superpower, even up to WW2. So what cossack cavalry uses swords? So what if Russia's main focus was in Europe? No nation willingly cedes territory unless they had no other choice. Finally, yes, we all know that the Qing became weak 200 years later. Again I ask, what's your point?
Engineer said:
That makes his credentials even more suspicious.
Engineer said:
Considering that antimatter only posted the summary, and nothing that leads to this guys "actual views", I can only respond to what is there. If you think that's "misinterpreting" his views, blame the summary guy.
Your analysis of China's real estate is really weird. If there weren't enough buyers for the houses, then the housing prices wouldn't have gone up. It's a simple equation of supply vs demand. Even if a lot of those buyers were investors, they: a) still rent the place out to those who do need to live, but can't afford to buy, and b) still means that there are enough "rich" people to buy the houses.
The stock market bubbles aren't created by outside forces, they're created by Chinese speculators who want to make a quick buck by hyping up some stock.
Finally, I don't know about the stock market, but the property prices seem pretty in line with the economy. Housing prices fell in late 2008, early 2009, as the financial crisis first hit, but rebounded in mid 2009 as China's recovery was faster and better than anyone expected.
