Chinese Economics Thread

aquauant

Junior Member
Actually there is a partnership between a Chinese gaming company and foreign companies, like 50/50 or 60/40 depending on the agreement. Also the loans for these casinos came from Chinese banks therefore the banks earned a good returned on the interests as well. Finally it's not just Chinese people that are coming to Macao, but other Asian countries near by as well.

Could you give me proof of partnership of the major operators in Macau? From the Macau government office, I cannot get any information of that, except Sand China is operated by Sand and it is publicly owned. MGM is a partnershipe between MGM and HO, who is a Macau billionaire.

Majority of the gamblers are from mainland and Hong Kong. Macau tourist office has the figure. Please do check the fact out before you post. It is just simple courtesy. If you go to a macau casino, you can listen to the customers. They don't speak a lot of other languages except putonghua and cantonese.

Majority of profit are returned to foreign operators and shareholders. Even if it is 40%, it is a quite an outflow of money. You are from Texas. I guess I understand why you see no problem of it, especially the major operators are US. perhaps you don't understand our hatred of drugs and gambling. Both vices have in our history ruined our nation.

With your rationale, we may as well open an opium den here in China as long as we the Chinese gets 50% partnership. Foreigners like you are always looking at ways to undermine our nation. Sad.
 
Last edited:

kroko

Senior Member
Please, Log in or Register to view URLs content!


[q]The new trains between Shanghai and Harbin will stop in Suzhou, Wuxi, Changzhou, Nanjing, Xuzhou, Jinan, Tianjin, Shenyang and Changchun.[/q]

Remember, a rail net is not topological, and routing matters rather than just looking at the cities at the end points. The Harbin-Shanghai line and the Beijing-Shenyang line is not in conflict per se, as the former doesn't pass Beijing. As for whether it is a waste of resources, you can't really say without looking at the actual route, freight capacity, speed and what they were intended to serve.

If the problem is that the line doesnt pass beijing, then create a beijing-Tianjin line. Its a short distance. I dont think there is a need for a new beijing-shenyang high speed line.

Perhabs it is because of projects like this that chinese railways accumulated so much debt.
 

Equation

Lieutenant General
Could you give me proof of partnership of the major operators in Macau? From the Macau government office, I cannot get any information of that, except Sand China is operated by Sand and it is publicly owned. MGM is a partnershipe between MGM and HO, who is a Macau billionaire.

Majority of the gamblers are from mainland and Hong Kong. Macau tourist office has the figure. Please do check the fact out before you post. It is just simple courtesy. If you go to a macau casino, you can listen to the customers. They don't speak a lot of other languages except putonghua and cantonese.

Majority of profit are returned to foreign operators and shareholders. Even if it is 40%, it is a quite an outflow of money. You are from Texas. I guess I understand why you see no problem of it, especially the major operators are US. perhaps you don't understand our hatred of drugs and gambling. Both vices have in our history ruined our nation.

With your rationale, we may as well open an opium den here in China as long as we the Chinese gets 50% partnership. Foreigners like you are always looking at ways to undermine our nation. Sad.

What about the thousands of jobs that those Casinos (both foreign and Chinese owned) provided for the mainland? Las Vegas has been operating fine for decades and it can't even matched the money revenues that Macau makes in year. Also there are other Asians and foreigners had been travelling to Macau as well for vacationing and not just for gambling. Drugs, gambling, and prostitution goes almost hand in hand any where that has a casino. I believe as long as the government keeps the illegal drugs and prostitution in check than it's okay to gamble, that's the people's choice if they want to or not.
 

Preux

Junior Member
If the problem is that the line doesnt pass beijing, then create a beijing-Tianjin line. Its a short distance. I dont think there is a need for a new beijing-shenyang high speed line.

Perhabs it is because of projects like this that chinese railways accumulated so much debt.

Perhaps you don't read very carefully. To assess whether the lines were economical and justifiable depends entirely on HOW they are routed, what they intend to serve, at what speed, cost of land acquired, etc and a host of other factors. This isn't a game of Civilization V, you can't just look at the end points and go 'yep, connected to the capital'. Beijing and Tianjin's centres are over 100 km apart and the train stations may be further apart. Considering that Beijing has a population larger than Taiwan and Tianjin has in the region of 12 million, you can't just fob it off with a branch line. How heavy would that branch line need to be? How often would the trains run? Would there be any room for yet another transportation trunk between the two cities? Power supply issues? Noise? Land costs? Then once you build that trunk (there already are plenty by the way, including a shiny-new 350 kph HSR line), you'll suddenly need to increase the Harbin-Shanghai line's capacity to make it service Beijing-Shanghai and Beijing-Harbin, too. Were the lines capable of handling that? If so would it increase costs? What is the demands of the Bohai Rim Economic zone? Is it justifiable to piggy bag that on a long range line? Then you need your trains to make longer stops in Tianjin because a 5 minute stop will make half the Beijing passengers miss their connection.

This isn't a game of 'connect the dots'. Railways are not lines on a map; they are not highways. You have no information on which to make a hasty judgement like that.
 

Equation

Lieutenant General
When the hypocrites gets caught, oh the irony.


neversleeps_071310-660x518.jpg



Please, Log in or Register to view URLs content!



The headline news is that the NSA has surreptitiously “burrowed its way into nearly all the security architecture” sold by the world’s largest computer networking companies, including everyone from U.S. mainstays Cisco and Juniper to Chinese giant Huawei. But beneath this bombshell of a story from Der Spiegel, you’ll find a rather healthy bit of irony.

After all, the United States government has spent years complaining that Chinese intelligence operations could find ways of poking holes in Huawei networking gear, urging both American businesses and foreign allies to sidestep the company’s hardware. The complaints grew so loud that, at one point, Huawei indicated it may abandon the U.S. networking market all together. And, yet, Der Speigel now tells us that U.S. intelligence operations have been poking holes in Huawei networking gear — not to mention hardware sold by countless other vendors in both the States and abroad.

“We read the media reports, and we’ve noted the references to Huawei and our peers,” says William Plummer, a Huawei vice president and the company’s point person in Washington, D.C. “As we have said, over and over again — and as now seems to be validated — threats to networks and data integrity can come from any and many sources.”

Plummer and Huawei have long complained that when the U.S. House Intelligence Committee released a report in October 2012 condemning the use of Huawei gear in telephone and data networks, it failed to provide any evidence that the Chinese government had compromised the company’s hardware. Adam Segal, a senior fellow for China Studies at the Center for Foreign Relations, makes the same point. And now we have evidence — Der Spiegel cites leaked NSA documents — that the U.S. government has compromised gear on a massive scale.

“Do I see the irony? Certainly the Chinese will,” Segal says, noting that the Chinese government and the Chinese press have complained of U.S hypocrisy ever since former government contractor Edward Snowden first started to reveal NSA surveillance practices last summer. “The Chinese government has been hammering home what they call the U.S.’s ulterior motives for criticizing China, and there’s been a steady drumbeat of stories in the Chinese press about backdoors in the products of U.S. companies. They’ve been going after Cisco in particular.”

To be sure, the exploits discussed by Der Spiegel are a little different from the sort of attacks Congress envisioned during its long campaign against Huawei and ZTE, another Chinese manufacturer. As Segal and others note, Congress mostly complained that the Chinese government could collaborate with people inside the two companies to plant backdoors in their gear, with lawmakers pointing out that Huawei’s CEO was once an officer in China’s People’s Liberation Army, or PLA, the military arm of the country’s Communist party. Der Spiegel, by contrast, says the NSA is exploiting hardware without help from anyone inside the Ciscos and the Huaweis, focusing instead on compromising network gear with clever hacks or intercepting the hardware as it’s shipped to customers.

“For the most part, the article discusses typical malware exploits used by hackers everywhere,” says JR Rivers, an engineer who has built networking hardware for Cisco as well as Google and now runs the networking startup Cumulus Networks. “It’s just pointing out that the NSA is engaged in the practice and has resources that are not available to most people.”

But in the end, the two types of attack have the same result: Networking gear controlled by government spies. And over the last six months, Snowden’s revelations have indicated that the NSA is not only hacking into networks but also collaborating with large American companies in its hunt for data.

Jim Lewis, a director and senior fellow with the Center for Strategic and International Studies, adds that the Chinese view state-sponsored espionage a little differently than the U.S. does. Both countries believe in espionage for national security purposes, but the Chinese argue that such spying might include the theft of commercial secrets.

“The Chinese will tell you that stealing technology and business secrets is a way of building their economy, and that this is important for national security,” says Lewis, who has helped oversee meetings between the U.S. and the Chinese, including officers in the PLA. “I’ve been in the room when they’ve said that. The last time was when a PLA colonel said: ‘In the U.S., military espionage is heroic and economic espionage is a crime. In China, the line is not that clear.’”

But here in the United States, we now know, the NSA may blur other lines in the name of national security. Segal says that although he, as an American, believes the U.S. government is on stronger ethical ground than the Chinese, other nations are beginning to question its motives.

“The U.S has to convince other countries that our type of intelligence gathering is different,” he says. “I don’t think that the Brazils and the Indias and the Indonesias and the South Africas are convinced. That’s a big problem for us.”

The thing to realize, as the revelations of NSA snooping continue to pour out, is that everyone deserves scrutiny — the U.S government and its allies, as well as the Chinese and others you may be more likely to view with skepticism. “All big countries,” Lewis says, “are going to try and do this.”
 

AssassinsMace

Lieutenant General
It's not hard to deduce this was what was happening. Several years ago the US was alarmed at something that had to do with if I remember correctly was an undersea internet cable or something like a global hub point involving China. It was said China could hack into it and have access to a large portion of the global internet traffic. Snowden confirmed that the NSA was doing such things themselves. So if you read or hear anything being accused of China over cyber espionage, it's telling that's a blue print of what the NSA is doing. I posted the story about 60 Minutes PR piece for the NSA a couple weeks back. In it they said China was planning to destroy everyone's computers with a bios attack essentially turning every computer into a brick. Like I mentioned before... this is what the NSA is doing. They've developed this plan to destroy people's computers. The story mentioned that China was mining for personal data like your shopping or internet interests which would be used to send a malware infested email so that it would be opened and then the malware could be introduced into your computer and destroy it. Snowden early on said the NSA was mining data from average Chinese citizens not just the government or military.

Now you know why in part Obama has been hesitant to discuss with allies over any agreement of not spying on allies. That basically declares it's all right to spy on "enemies" meaning the US can spy on China but China can spy all they want right back. An agreement would also include definitions of such spying which include economic espionage. Why would you spy on allies unless you're paranoid or it does have a lot to do with economic espionage that Obama says the US is not engaged in. In turn it will spell out what China can do because of not being an ally.
 
Last edited:

kroko

Senior Member
An explanation of the recente cash crunchs in china:

Please, Log in or Register to view URLs content!


In five years, debt grew from 125% to 215% of GDP. Whoa. I wonder if it would gave been better for china´s economy to grown at 5% since 2008. More sustainable, instead of growing by debt.
 

AssassinsMace

Lieutenant General
I recently read an article claiming China was going bust because they can't make enough HSR to keep up with demand. What happened to the "no one was riding the too expensive for the average Chinese citizen HSR in China" to where China was going to go bust?
 

Engineer

Major
So if you read or hear anything being accused of China over cyber espionage, it's telling that's a blue print of what the NSA is doing.

It's basically psychological projection at work. A country could not have been paranoid about hacking from China if that country isn't hacking others. The situation also applies to everything else that China is being accused of. Human rights violations? The accuser happens to be violating human rights at home. Currency manipulation? The accuser happens to be running the money-printing machine non-stop. China's military threatening others? That's because the accuser is threatening others with its military. China being a threat to freedom of navigation? That's because the accuser considers blockade as a valid strategy. The list goes on.
 
Top