Chinese Economics Thread

[Franklin]

This is the new world order. The Americans and the Europeans are no longer able to compete with Chinese efficiency. And are now accusing China of overproduction, subsidising and dumping and are seeking ways to block Chinese imports into their markets. It won't work. Anything they block from China simply means the end users in America and Europe will have to pay more for these products and that will delay implementation of these new technologies which means they will fall further behind in these fields in the future. The solution is not to block China but to reform their own economies to make it more competitive on the world market.

But for the moment they are still too proud to admit that they have problems at home and are losing to China in terms of efficiency.

Please, Log in or Register to view URLs content!

 

[siegecrossbow]

This is the new world order. The Americans and the Europeans are no longer able to compete with Chinese efficiency. And are now accusing China of overproduction, subsidising and dumping and are seeking ways to block Chinese imports into their markets. It won't work. Anything they block from China simply means the end users in America and Europe will have to pay more for these products and that will delay implementation of these new technologies which means they will fall further behind in these fields in the future. The solution is not to block China but to reform their own economies to make it more competitive on the world market.

But for the moment they are still too proud to admit that they have problems at home and are losing to China in terms of efficiency.

Please, Log in or Register to view URLs content!

Isn’t that command economy? We all know what happened to the last major command economy that refused to adapt.

 

[FriedRiceNSpice]

Isn’t that command economy? We all know what happened to the last major command economy that refused to adapt.

Protection and support for domestic industries is a proven strategy in the playbook for industrial modernization and development. Whether or not it can be successfully implemented depends on an entire host of factors, and historically failure is more likely than success. But if US is serious about becoming competitive in industries currently China is dominant in, then it doesn't really have any other options available.

 

[henrik]

Protection and support for domestic industries is a proven strategy in the playbook for industrial modernization and development. Whether or not it can be successfully implemented depends on an entire host of factors, and historically failure is more likely than success. But if US is serious about becoming competitive in industries currently China is dominant in, then it doesn't really have any other options available.

That is why the yankees are now investing in Intel and tsmc chips factories.

 

[zgx09t]

Protection and support for domestic industries is a proven strategy in the playbook for industrial modernization and development. Whether or not it can be successfully implemented depends on an entire host of factors, and historically failure is more likely than success. But if US is serious about becoming competitive in industries currently China is dominant in, then it doesn't really have any other options available.

These protectionist tenors rhyme with Hamiltonian verses. It was the protectionism, with Hamilton's insight to make the newly independent colonies a strong single market, and a strong manufacturing base, through the guise of US postal service infrastructure building, that brought the US to its glory days on the hill. One of the first orders of the first sitting US Congress was to pass tariff laws, along the line of Hamilton's wishes. Arguably, US spent most years of its history in protectionism than in free trade, and in free trade only when it serves the US and in US favor. So US is going back to its roots. As long as China remains a single unified market, with strong advocate state leading the charge, promoting a huge manufacturing base, not dissimilar to US in its birth, China will be a really tough match for US to rival each passing year, let alone to beat.

 

[FriedRiceNSpice]

These protectionist tenors rhyme with Hamiltonian verses. It was the protectionism, with Hamilton's insight to make the newly independent colonies a strong single market, and a strong manufacturing base, through the guise of US postal service infrastructure building, that brought the US to its glory days on the hill. One of the first orders of the first sitting US Congress was to pass tariff laws, along the line of Hamilton's wishes. Arguably, US spent most years of its history in protectionism than in free trade, and in free trade only when it serves the US and in US favor.

This has been the recipe for every successful industrialization and development program ever since. Japan, South Korea, and more recently China, have all relied on this model to successfully industrialized and modernize their economies.

 

[Wrought]

These protectionist tenors rhyme with Hamiltonian verses. It was the protectionism, with Hamilton's insight to make the newly independent colonies a strong single market, and a strong manufacturing base, through the guise of US postal service infrastructure building, that brought the US to its glory days on the hill. One of the first orders of the first sitting US Congress was to pass tariff laws, along the line of Hamilton's wishes. Arguably, US spent most years of its history in protectionism than in free trade, and in free trade only when it serves the US and in US favor. So US is going back to its roots. As long as China remains a single unified market, with strong advocate state leading the charge, promoting a huge manufacturing base, not dissimilar to US in its birth, China will be a really tough match for US to rival each passing year, let alone to beat.

Hamilton was remarkably farsighted when it came to economic policy. A hundred years later, the legacy of his policies was instrumental in allowing American industry to challenge British dominance. At the time, Britain (the birthplace of the Industrial Revolution and consequently the greatest industrial nation) was the free trade champion in contrast to the heavily protectionist US.

Please, Log in or Register to view URLs content!

It is of course no coincidence, that the market leader is always the one demanding free trade so they can maintain dominance.

 

[FriedRiceNSpice]

As long as China remains a single unified market, with strong advocate state leading the charge, promoting a huge manufacturing base, not dissimilar to US in its birth, China will be a really tough match for US to rival each passing year, let alone to beat.

I think US policymakers are aware of that fact, hence the use of sanctions against China to buy as much time of possible in order to secure the markets of nations over which it has sufficient influence over via coercive diplomatic means.

 

[ansy1968]

I think US policymakers are aware of that fact, hence the use of sanctions against China to buy as much time of possible in order to secure the markets of nations over which it has sufficient influence over via coercive diplomatic means.

I see it in Defense and aerospace sector BUT on all other else they compete with each other. Hence a need to find an another China for the US to grow.

 

[Maikeru]

Still plenty of "China collapse" stories in the Western media but the serious money attitude seems to be changing:

Please, Log in or Register to view URLs content!

Cf: Fitch downgrade of China's long erm debt outlook to Negative (but retains A+ rating for now).