This is true. But it is all relative. You can not possibly compare the "Chinese slums" to those of India, Africa and Brazil. It is world's apart in more ways than one.
Chinese Economics Thread
- Thread starter Norfolk
- Start date
This is true. But it is all relative. You can not possibly compare the "Chinese slums" to those of India, Africa and Brazil. It is world's apart in more ways than one.
AssassinsMace
Lieutenant General
I saw the guy that wrote this article on TV being interview. What a bunch of superficial spun nonsense? First of all did China say they were number one in order for it to be disputed? It's only on their side saying these things. It's a superficial title because if Americans are experiencing a sigh of relief from this news, why are they all worried over China and anxious about the future... still? Is this again the theme of logic where because China is not number one in whatever, China somehow is now the property of the US and the Chinese have to obey blindly aka be their slaves? Is that why they put so much into titles because if they're not number one, they think others will demand them to be their slaves? No wonder they're so paranoid living in a world of their own internal logic because they expect these things for themselves, others will demand it of them if the tables were turned?
All that stuff where the idea is the US naturally favored therefore the US is number one in whatever is because it's not natural. It was forced because they colonized the world. It's like how they want China to embrace democracy. In actuality they want Chinese to embrace Christianity before democracy. That's the undemocratic part they want force onto the Chinese before democracy because then the Chinese will always vote "naturally" for Christian values when voting in a democracy. Obama didn't have to worry about countries choosing to get loans from AIIB because naturally countries wanting to get loans for infrastructure want more restrictions and conditions placed on them according to this logic. If everything naturally favors the US, why all the worry over China?
Hendrik_2000
Lieutenant General
Interesting take on David Goldman interview with Le Figaro a conservative French newspaper. The French as former colonist as always still dream of white men superiority but time has change. They were under estimating China and Chinese for a long time suddenly they woke up in 21 the century and facing a Goliath name China. And they wonder what went wrong. David Goldman is no friend of China but he is realistic enough to see what went wrong. Now they want to contain China which is bound to fail
I guess 2 thing Greed and Hubris.
Greed because the wall street start employing those wunderbar MBA graduate in the 60's that think technology is the same as selling toothpaste Unilever or GE can be managed the same way , short term profit, efficiency, share holder value is the buzzword So they dismantle the high cost of manufacturing in the west and let the starving Chinese toil in the sweat shop of China and built everything for them while they enjoy high living standard supported by extensive welfare system from revenue taxing the most productive part of their society. Allowing union to run factory instead of management. They think China will happy to be slave labor as long as they were given crump. While at the same time dismantling their own industry and forcing innovative lab like RCA lab and bell lab to close due to merging. And there is no way China can catch up
But they are wrong instead China use the manufacturing to learn the trade secret of the west and train million of skill technician, engineer, worker, marketing and management. While at the same time collecting tax revenue and pocketing wages, built infrastructure and university, improving living standard allowing middle to send their kid to the west to study at western universities which again welcome them as they pay full tuition. Million were send probably the biggest knowledge transfer to China since Japan Meiji era. Deng was aske at one time isn't he afraid when the best and brightest immigrate His answer was NO because even if 10 % return China benefit . Well he get more than 10% now it is close to 90% return. Here is the excerpt
Now they want to contain China which is bound to fail
The logic of the development of an Asian internal market is similar to that of the European Community, and it is not surprising that the Asians are creating a giant free trade zone. Australia is in a nasty fight with China, but it now sells a higher proportion of its exports to China than ever before. It could not afford to stay out of the RCEP.
The American consumer for decades was the main source of demand in the world economy. Now the internal Asian market is far more important. South Korea, for example, exports twice as much to China as to the US. I am sure that the Japanese and South Koreans like the United States much better than they like China, but the economic logic behind an Asian free trade zone is overwhelming.
Underestimating China
I guess 2 thing Greed and Hubris.
Greed because the wall street start employing those wunderbar MBA graduate in the 60's that think technology is the same as selling toothpaste Unilever or GE can be managed the same way , short term profit, efficiency, share holder value is the buzzword So they dismantle the high cost of manufacturing in the west and let the starving Chinese toil in the sweat shop of China and built everything for them while they enjoy high living standard supported by extensive welfare system from revenue taxing the most productive part of their society. Allowing union to run factory instead of management. They think China will happy to be slave labor as long as they were given crump. While at the same time dismantling their own industry and forcing innovative lab like RCA lab and bell lab to close due to merging. And there is no way China can catch up
But they are wrong instead China use the manufacturing to learn the trade secret of the west and train million of skill technician, engineer, worker, marketing and management. While at the same time collecting tax revenue and pocketing wages, built infrastructure and university, improving living standard allowing middle to send their kid to the west to study at western universities which again welcome them as they pay full tuition. Million were send probably the biggest knowledge transfer to China since Japan Meiji era. Deng was aske at one time isn't he afraid when the best and brightest immigrate His answer was NO because even if 10 % return China benefit . Well he get more than 10% now it is close to 90% return. Here is the excerpt
Now they want to contain China which is bound to fail
The logic of the development of an Asian internal market is similar to that of the European Community, and it is not surprising that the Asians are creating a giant free trade zone. Australia is in a nasty fight with China, but it now sells a higher proportion of its exports to China than ever before. It could not afford to stay out of the RCEP.
The American consumer for decades was the main source of demand in the world economy. Now the internal Asian market is far more important. South Korea, for example, exports twice as much to China as to the US. I am sure that the Japanese and South Koreans like the United States much better than they like China, but the economic logic behind an Asian free trade zone is overwhelming.
Underestimating China
Last edited:
By Xue Li Source: Global Times Published: 2020/11/8 20:18:40
The western alliance system of international relations or the Chinese world view.
These two are going head to head against one another.
What a time to be alive!
Guys, China isn't trying to replace ALL iron ore import from OZ. It's clearly not possible. But there's no need to replace it completely to hurt OZ iron ore industry, thus hurt OZ government for its stupidity.
All it needs to do is ensure further increases come from alternative source, with a reduction from OZ big enough to hurt them. Don't forget, in a capitalist economy, even a percentage or two drop is sufficient to cause chaos in the market place, with mutiplying knocked on effect to other parts of the economy.
I did already mention this with my Simandou comment.
If Simandou starts running at 100 million tonnes per year, then that can directly replace imports from Australia.
If we have iron ore prices somewhere between $50-$100 per tonne, that is $5-$10 Billion in direct revenue, before multiplier effects.
Then it would only be fair for government spending cuts to hit the military, since this has been caused by the National Security cold warrior types.
Plus I suspect China has now reached peak steel output, primarily because the pace of urbanisation has peaked.
So in the medium term, I expect Chinese steel production to steadily decline after next year.
Last edited:
Technically, a 'slum' is an unplanned area within a municipality. As such, it may not have roads, electricity, water supply, fire/police departments, public schools/hospitals, and etc... The unplanned (and untaxed) nature distinguishes a 'slum' from a very poor city district. China has a zillion very poor/run-down residential areas but no slums due to its strict residential registration ('hukou') system.
Slums are notoriously difficult to eradicate once they are firmly entrenched. Slums don't start to disappear until a country has reached 'high-income' (typically measured by GNI per-capita) level. Given that less than a handful non-city-state countries have managed to escape from the 'middle-income trap' since W.W.2 (e.g. South Korea, Taiwan, and Poland), slums will remain a fact of life in poorer countries for decades to come. You just have to ask yourself what is the prognosis for these low and middle-income countries to break out of the pack. Some countries have been trapped for decades already (think Argentina, Brazil, and Mexico).
China has been an 'upper middle-income' country since 2015 and is on the verge of becoming a 'high-income' country (end of 2021?). This is what China 2025 was all about. Where to seek comparative advantage and increase the productivity level so China can reach OECD level of development. China need these productivity gains to compensate for its aging (and soon, smaller) population.
Yes. I agree with much what you have written. But I was writing in reply to @vincent I think your post is more appropriate if it's in reply to Vincent.
Sorry if I miss read your reply. I was under the impression that (And it maybe a post from another member), someone thought China should replace entire iron ore imports from OZ with Brazil's. Which prompted the discussion of it being impossible to replace entirely the supply from OZ.
So my point was there's no need to replace COMPLETELY altogether. Just enough to hurt.