D
Deleted member 24525
Guest
I am okay with being challenged on it so long as the ensuing discussion does not derail the thread, and if you view it as being very likely to do that then I'll stop.
Chinese Economics Thread
- Thread starter Norfolk
- Start date
My posts above aren't in moderator blue or red, so I am writing those as a normal member.
I wrote the last post in case you were using the term without knowing the subtext it implied. On the other hand, if you are well aware of the subtext and the meaning it conveys... Well I have nothing further to say at this stage as a normal posting member.
Why is China now allowing its real estate sector to decline like this? It's so that new capital, intelligence, and focus can shift to more productive sectors of high technology or industry during this critical time of global conflict with the Collective West. That's the entire explanation basically.
This also serves as a lesson to domestic investors and builders, to avoid much bigger problems in the future. They have 10 ways to rescue this sector (because they have a 10 times more efficient political system than the West and a far more planned economy and obedient society than them) - but they won’t, they are not like the West to give out helicopter money and create problems for future generations.
They can endure a minor pain now, instead of a bigger pain later, because they will be in power anyway, while Biden and his team know they are only in power for 4-8 years, and what happens after that, they don’t care.
And as real estate prices fall, new buyers will come for these properties, the law of supply and demand. And with this system, they have already urbanized 60% of the people, and there's still 40% left, I don't see why they won't urbanize them too.
Also, since they have a much higher homeownership rate than the USA, there is no chance of a banking crisis happening there (mass refusal of people to pay mortgages on properties leading to the collapse of banks).
By the way, most of these 'crises' in China have arisen precisely because of the economic collapse of the West (stagflation, EU 0.7% 'growth'), and by extension, the whole world economy suffers. For example, businesses cannot export as much as they planned and had in warehouses because the West is not growing that much anymore, so they had to sell to their citizens at reduced prices so that it all doesn’t 'go to waste' (deflation),
As well as overly optimistic real estate construction which they also thought was no problem to do, but as the West slowed down in growth, and with the Chinese economy being 40% export, there was also a reduction in buyers in the market.
But as the market now corrects itself, and prices drop, new real estate buyers will come, and some construction companies will fail (home prices fall in the short term, and real estate stocks drop too), but China will fulfill its goal of transferring new capital and human resources to more productive sectors and teaching a lesson to all market participants.
That's why I find it funny when CIA-controlled Western media (and 'influencers' like Zeihan) can only find this as some flaw in China (which is not actually a flaw, but very smart politics as I have already explained), and they do not see the 100 times worse economic problems in the West.
This also serves as a lesson to domestic investors and builders, to avoid much bigger problems in the future. They have 10 ways to rescue this sector (because they have a 10 times more efficient political system than the West and a far more planned economy and obedient society than them) - but they won’t, they are not like the West to give out helicopter money and create problems for future generations.
They can endure a minor pain now, instead of a bigger pain later, because they will be in power anyway, while Biden and his team know they are only in power for 4-8 years, and what happens after that, they don’t care.
And as real estate prices fall, new buyers will come for these properties, the law of supply and demand. And with this system, they have already urbanized 60% of the people, and there's still 40% left, I don't see why they won't urbanize them too.
Also, since they have a much higher homeownership rate than the USA, there is no chance of a banking crisis happening there (mass refusal of people to pay mortgages on properties leading to the collapse of banks).
By the way, most of these 'crises' in China have arisen precisely because of the economic collapse of the West (stagflation, EU 0.7% 'growth'), and by extension, the whole world economy suffers. For example, businesses cannot export as much as they planned and had in warehouses because the West is not growing that much anymore, so they had to sell to their citizens at reduced prices so that it all doesn’t 'go to waste' (deflation),
As well as overly optimistic real estate construction which they also thought was no problem to do, but as the West slowed down in growth, and with the Chinese economy being 40% export, there was also a reduction in buyers in the market.
But as the market now corrects itself, and prices drop, new real estate buyers will come, and some construction companies will fail (home prices fall in the short term, and real estate stocks drop too), but China will fulfill its goal of transferring new capital and human resources to more productive sectors and teaching a lesson to all market participants.
That's why I find it funny when CIA-controlled Western media (and 'influencers' like Zeihan) can only find this as some flaw in China (which is not actually a flaw, but very smart politics as I have already explained), and they do not see the 100 times worse economic problems in the West.
Total Australian resources export in 2022-2023 is 459 billion and with a population of 25.69 million which mean each Australian share of resources export is $17,866.
Russia is richer in resources but it has greater population. Therefore, much of its resources is consumed in domestic and its resources is actually less than Australia in the total value. In addition, with a greater population, each Russian share of resources export is much less than each Australian.
You've explained this yourself already - GDP per capita - Australia has 25 million people, Russia has 146 million people. Russia would need to have a mining industry 6 times larger than the Australian one to reach parity there and there's simply not enough demand in the world to absorb such amounts of extracted resources. That's not even mentioning the fact that a lot of the resources Russia has are not easily accessible.
GDP is a cumulative measure for all the goods and services produced by the country, GDP per capita is that divided by the country's population. The produced goods and services can range from high-tech electronics to natural resources or even real estate, so having a high GDP per capita does not inherently mean that you are more technologically advanced - Gulf states, Brunei, etc. are the perfect examples of that.
Last edited:
Russia's GDP in PPP per capita is like half that of Australia. Not a fifth. You get those numbers if you use GDP in USD. Of course with Russia being heavily sanctioned by the West the value of its currency in USD is artificially depressed. The Ruble fell to like half its value against the USD in two years after 2014 Annexation of Crimea. Yet ask yourself, did Russia lose half its wealth in those two years?
Russia back in 2014 was still a major food importer. Now they are a major food exporter. They gained over a million new citizens with the annexation of Crimea. So how come we are supposed to expect that they lost like half their wealth in two years? GDP measured in USD is just plain BS.
Russia back in 2014 was still a major food importer. Now they are a major food exporter. They gained over a million new citizens with the annexation of Crimea. So how come we are supposed to expect that they lost like half their wealth in two years? GDP measured in USD is just plain BS.
Last edited:
Nato may have 20 times russian GDP, but most of that GDP is not geared for industrial warfare. Russia on the other hand, only has one viable modern industry, that is the arms industry. Soviet Union devoted 30% of its GDP in military spending which not only allowed Russia to have a huge stockpile of soviet era armaments, ships and planes. But also a fully independent armaments industry, that is capable of producing every kind of weaponry and in great scale. They also have a heavy industry also from the soviet times that produces basic materials like Steel, chemicals and also mines to get ores for those chemical. Russian economy is practically designed to fight a large scale industrial warfare against whole of Nato if required. That's why Russia is a great power, not because it has a lot of nukes.
Coming back to China, it also has a similar industrialization capable of fighting a big industrial war. But it only has one weakness, it still relies on imports of fuel and vulnerable to a naval blockade.
But guess who can solve this problem for China? Russia, with its vast natural resources which can shipped over land and breaking any naval blockade. So, by making Russia a great enemy, Nato has given China the biggest strategic Jackpot in the last few years.
D
Deleted member 24525
Guest
GDP is not measured in artillery shells, and neither is war production capability.
Look up how many F-35s have been made and compare that to the number of Su-57s. Look up Russian tank production capacity and compare that to the US, or compare how many modern destroyers Russia has to the US, I could go on.
If the US and Russia were to engage in open warfare on the steppe it would go horribly for the Russians. Ironically it is a very special technology that keeps them safe from this scenario.
Russia is a savant at shell production. It retained this capability out of necessity since after the Soviet collapse it was never able to rebuild an air force large or well-coordinated enough to be capable of competent SEAD operations, so it uses massed artillery as a crutch. If you want proof look at the airframe losses in the failed kyiv blitz. The US does not have this limitation and so it let its shell production whither since there was no realistic use case for the US military itself. Its continued relevance is entirely a reflection of Russia's nuclear deterrent combined with the fact that Ukraine is not a NATO member.