Chinese Economics Thread

Bellum_Romanum

Bellum_Romanum

Brigadier
Registered Member
Great explanation from Dr. Andy Xie regarding the new Chinese export numbers, the information war against China's world leading tech in EV industry, including renewable energy sectors. The topic of discussion talks about the reason(s) why the U.S. is presumably even reluctant to let China allow it's RMB to appreciate in value hinting that's it's due to geopolitics (according to Dr.Xie's calculation China's economy is already 2x larger than that of the U.S. in ppp) and if China were to increase the value of its currency the nominal GDP will reflect that and that would further undermine the political narrative and most importantly the buying power of China since it's already the top trading partner of most countries over the U.S. providing an implausible scenario to the U.S. economic prestige.

Dr.Xie also posited that one of the main goal(s) of the U.S. with its two pronged approach with China are two fold: One, it's trying to push China to essentially go back to spending spree on its real estate sector to ensure that it'll never be able to recover from the eventual property bubble collapse hence the certainty of bringing down a calamitous turn on China's economy. Second, America keeps pushing a lot of negative news about China's supposed dire economic situation in order to weaken the confidence of its wealthy Chinese people (capital flight) leaving China vulnerable and uninvestable forcing wealthy Chinese people to leave and park their money in Singapore and then invest their money in the U.S. due to high inflation numbers.

 
Last edited:
FairAndUnbiased

FairAndUnbiased

Brigadier
Registered Member
Chevalier said:
The stupidest thing any nation outside of the Anglosphere can do is to take Atlanticist/IMF/World Bank advice on fiscal and monetary policy.

It's not simply a matter of soverignty, it's also a fact that the Atlanticist Elites are anti-human and Extinctionalists.
Click to expand...
Philippines were the richest Asian country in 1950 when literally everyone else was colonized or bombed to crap from WW2.

They had a copy of the US system almost down to the letter. A hard working population. Manila was the pearl of the orient, not Shanghai. They had US aid and military bases so they could concentrate on economy. They hired the top US economists.

Surely the Philippines are a superpower now. They're just as advanced as India, another superpower that copied the British system.
 
F

Franklin

Captain
Bellum_Romanum said:
Great explanation from Dr. Andy Xie regarding the new Chinese export numbers, the information war against China's world leading tech in EV industry, including renewable energy sectors. The topic of discussion talks about the reason(s) why the U.S. is presumably even reluctant to let China allow it's RMB to appreciate in value hinting that's it's due to geopolitics (according to Dr.Xie's calculation China's economy is already 2x larger than that of the U.S. in ppp) and if China were to increase the value of its currency the nominal GDP will reflect that and that would further undermine the political narrative and most importantly the buying power of China since it's already the top trading partner of most countries over the U.S. providing an implausible scenario to the U.S. economic prestige.

Dr.Xie also posited that one of the main goal(s) of the U.S. with its two pronged approach with China are two fold: One, it's trying to push China to essentially go back to spending spree on its real estate sector to ensure that it'll never be able to recover from the eventual property bubble collapse hence the certainty of bringing down a calamitous turn on China's economy. Second, America keeps pushing a lot of negative news about China's supposed dire economic situation in order to weaken the confidence of its wealthy Chinese people (capital flight) leaving China vulnerable and uninvestable forcing wealthy Chinese people to leave and park their money in Singapore and then invest their money in the U.S. due to high inflation numbers.

Click to expand...
The problem with propaganda is that if the propaganda is good enough to convince the masses then that same propaganda may end up convincing the propagandists themselves.
 
S

Serb

Junior Member
Registered Member
Yeah, the biggest problem is that the Western countries are already 'developed', so developing countries taking their advice, or seeking to emulate their current policies and systems is the stupidest thing ever. And so Western "experts' advice" (pressure) is both deceitful and harmful (on purpose). The biggest bullshit is focusing on services and consumptions instead of industry and investment. Most of the capital should go to the latter two fundamentally.

The only reason those Western countries are focusing on the first two now is that they already developed all of their innate human capital and productive limits, now getting diminishing returns on physical investments (E.g. roads, factories, technology) so they have to 'squeeze' what is left over to get that artificial 'growth'.

It is better said, that since their wealthy elites don't get the same investment prospects there, as before, due to competition, for example, for limited human capital, resulting in higher wages, unionization, more costs, and fewer profits, in various industries, they switched their capital for investment to less-productive services (including finance, passive investing) and lobbied for consumption-based economic models after taking control over their governments (and public perception and media) with generations of amassed concentrated wealth.

So, those countries are not really 'growing' themselves at this point, they are stagnating (real wages freeze or fall over years, no new productive value created in the economy), and only their elites continue to grow their wealth through various machinations internally, albeit at the cost of entire countries collapsing/falling back at later dates due to rising wealth inequality and losing competitive productive physical, tangible advantage to outside rivals.

The modern US is at this stage, for example, but fares way better than other contemporary or past similar empires due to the successful globalization of their currency, to this extent, for the first time in history. However, even that could be and is about to be lost thanks to them losing comprehensive physical, industrial, and tangible power in comparison to their biggest rival China, who could, therefore, burst that modern, global virtual scheme any time it chooses to now, and will get even better and better fighting chance as the time goes on.

Nevertheless, if a country has upward potential still, like most of the Global South, in terms of educational improvement for the existing population (more meritocracy, gross enrollment rates, especially tertiary levels, and STEM), total R&D, and infrastructure, potential, then it should go all in on manufacturing and investment. Investment and industry are the only ways that every entire in the history of the world managed to reach advanced standards of living and power. However, if we are talking about systems, then it is an autocratic system + a preferably somewhat directed economy. See colonial, mercantilist monarchies.

East Asian example is the best example you could theoretically follow on rising without having colonies or being surrounded by wealthy colonial empires of the past (entire Europe), descending from them (North America, Australia, NZ). China rose thanks to investment as seen from these two graphs, just match its GDP history with them and you will see what I mean. So, every time some Western CIA "economists" advise it to do more than now in terms of policies for spending, consumerism, more financilization - less real economy, less money in the state banks for strategic investing, less investment in total, etc, he is doing it out of sinister intentions (same as manufacturing, see "overcapacity" clown show).



1713264964849.png
1713267017092.png
 
Last edited:
Lethe

Lethe

Captain
The IMF has
Please, Log in or Register to view URLs content!
the April 2024 edition of its World Economic Outlook publication, which extends the horizon of its economic projections to 2029.

At current exchange rates, the IMF projects China's GDP in 2029 to be USD $24.8tn compared to USA's projected GDP of $35tn. That is to say, the projection is for China's GDP in 2029 to be 71% of USA's GDP, up from 65% in 2023.

This represents a downgrade from the previous October 2023 projection (72% in 2028), which was a significant downgrade from the April 2023 projection (85% in 2028) which in turn was a significant downgrade from the October 2022 projection (93% in 2027).

In PPP terms, the IMF projects China's GDP in 2029 to be $46.3tn or 132% of USA's projected GDP, up from 120% in 2023 but down from 134% in 2028 as projected in the October 2023 publication.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Top