Chinese Economics Thread

[Sinnavuuty]

Please, Log in or Register to view URLs content!

Mystery Bond Buyer Clears China Developer’s Debt at 90% Discount​

• A little-known company is scooping up China Fortune Land bonds
• Canceling some bonds could help property firms cut debt load

Mysterious bond buyer pays off debt from Chinese developer with 90% discount. A little-known company is buying China Fortune Land securities. Canceling some bonds could help real estate companies reduce debt loads. The source of the money is shrouded in mystery. But a major Chinese real estate developer appears to be trying a new approach to resolving its debt: It's working with a buyer to buy bonds at deeply discounted prices and then canceling the bonds.

The actions of China Fortune Land Development Co., whose 2021 default marked the start of the country's housing crisis, are the latest twist in a debt disaster that has left more than $140 billion in real estate bonds in default and become a major obstacle for the second largest economy in the world.

OFF -

Please, Log in or Register to view URLs content!

 

[abenomics12345]

Ok, this was funny..

https://twitter.com/i/web/status/1815620675106963812

I've had personal interactions with Anne Stevenson-Yang - she's exactly as you would expect. Basically you'd go into meetings with her, and she's apparently fluent in Mandarin so she would translate for wypipo but then would be mis-translating things with a significantly negative tilt.

 

[abenomics12345]

I didn't like the comment because I didn't think no restrictions were placed on migrant workers in terms of social security contributions, I did it because there is no national overarching policy when it comes to hukou restrictions, it typically depends on the individual
provinces/municipalities to implement these systems. And I don't see this system continuing to exist since there's been a consistent erosion and a policy push towards removing or loosening these restrictions in the past few years.

E.g. Zhengzhou is a city with no hukou restrictions, and Zhejiang province has no restrictions with one exception (Hangzhou, which to be fair, is the largest and wealthiest city in Zhejiang province). Cities under 3 million in population also (ostensibly) have no restrictions.

"Last year, several cities also relaxed their stringent hukou policies, making them more lenient as directed by the National Development and Reform Commission. While the central city of Zhengzhou became the first big city to remove all hukou restrictions in 2022, Shanghai started offering the permit to fresh master’s degree graduates from the city’s universities."

Please, Log in or Register to view URLs content!

So what you said is true, but what matters more is the access to social services. Healthcare/retirement benefits etc.

The overall 'production' orientation of local governments basically pushes local governments in places like Zhengzhou to reduce all factor costs (land is given for free, tax breaks, turn a blind eye to labor underpayment). In fact, it is likely that local officials would allow/facilitate Foxconn (if not actively encourage Foxconn) to only contribute social security at the minimum amount (vs. the actual salary).

The spirit of my overarching point is still highly relevant, that migrant workers are getting shafted and the central government needs to put in excess cash into boosting their retirement/healthcare benefits (considering they are the people who functionally built China).

 

[chgough34]

Okay, reading this post again, it's extremely disappointing that you could produce such an analysis.

"China’s growth pattern mirroring Poland’s at the same level of per capita gdp" (A)
"China’s high growth spurt was not due to unique productivity gains but instead due to capital deepening and technical catch-up/absorption" (B)

First of all, (A) is not convincingly true. The Chinese graph is 20% of the length of the Polish graph, meaning that the similarity is statistically insignificant due to sample-size disparity.
Second of all, even if (A) were convincingly true, it does not imply (B). There could be a myriad of explanations to explain why China (an economy quite different to that of Poland, in terms of size, etc.) would have a similar graph to Poland, besides "Aha, China must be the next Poland and will clearly follow exactly the path of Poland".

Not really - China has exceptionally high levels of capital formation ant every level of development and the same level of growth as the CEEs which points to normal productivity levels, not anything particularly unique. If Chinas growth was primarily productivity driven - the falloff in growth shouldn’t have happened.

 

[Heresy]

It was the graph itself from Noahpinion. Analysis was completely mine

Your analysis is worth less than toilet paper. Your reputation on this forum is pretty much public knowledge. Why the moderators haven't banned you is beyond comprehension.

It's bad enough that you're sole purpose seems to be carrying water for the American economy; but fundamentally, most of your analysis is just straight up wrong.

Not really - China has exceptionally high levels of capital formation ant every level of development and the same level of growth as the CEEs which points to normal productivity levels, not anything particularly unique. If Chinas growth was primarily productivity driven - the falloff in growth shouldn’t have happened.

Prove this. Define "particularly unique" in explicit terms. None of your Indian mealy-mouthed roundabout bullshit.

 

[Michaelsinodef]

So what you said is true, but what matters more is the access to social services. Healthcare/retirement benefits etc.

The overall 'production' orientation of local governments basically pushes local governments in places like Zhengzhou to reduce all factor costs (land is given for free, tax breaks, turn a blind eye to labor underpayment). In fact, it is likely that local officials would allow/facilitate Foxconn (if not actively encourage Foxconn) to only contribute social security at the minimum amount (vs. the actual salary).

The spirit of my overarching point is still highly relevant, that migrant workers are getting shafted and the central government needs to put in excess cash into boosting their retirement/healthcare benefits (considering they are the people who functionally built China).

The post you posted earlier litterally called for reforms and improvements for migrant workers though?

(yes, current and historically, migrant workers were basically getting shafted when it comes to retirement/social benefits).

 

[chgough34]

Prove this. Define "particularly unique" in explicit terms. None of your Indian mealy-mouthed roundabout bullshit.

China has a savings rate that is much higher than any other economy (

Please, Log in or Register to view URLs content!

) and the “savings=investment” identity. The chatter on “China so much infrastructure wow” is also going to be evidence of uniquely high levels of capital deepening.


Same levels of growth with more capital deepening means less of a productivity in growth.

 

[manqiangrexue]

China has a savings rate that is much higher than any other economy (

Please, Log in or Register to view URLs content!

) and the “savings=investment” identity. The chatter on “China so much infrastructure wow” is also going to be evidence of uniquely high levels of capital deepening.


Same levels of growth with more capital deepening means less of a productivity in growth.

I didn't see the definition of "particularly unique" but I saw exactly what people mean by "mealy-mouthed roundabout bullshit."

Just because there is undeniably a huge amount of capital deepening in China does not mean that other pillars such as innovation are not extremely high as well. Evidence of China's innovation is direct instead of poorly inferred; that China is moving faster than the US and the combined West in basically all science and tech with several fields in the lead, is direct evidence of innovation.

Also once again, maturing economies transitioning to high tech growth will always experience a reduction in growth percentage; that is the normal person version of your "mealy-mouthed roundabout bullshit."

 

[gelgoog]

You already see good examples of Chinese innovation in solar cells and battery technology. In power generation China leads the world in ultrasupercritical coal power plant technology deployment, and now also in 4th generation nuclear reactors like the HTR-PM.

As China catches up in more market segments it will also gain the incentive to develop increasingly more of its own advanced solutions.

 

[xlitter]

Let me ask you, if there were no limitations, why the F*** is it point #44 in the Decisions document released just now - that they will comprehensively remove limitations?

Are you arguing that rural residents aren't getting shafted? If you are, I have a bridge to sell you.

View attachment 132884

Read what I write before demonstrating your stupidity - the same message goes for you who liked his stupid post.

View attachment 132883

So you can only make assumptions based on a few words? Presumably all rural people are treated unfairly? Social security treats everyone equally. Don’t you know that the social security system targets everyone in the country? Because even people with a Beijing household registration are treated the same in Shanghai as those without a Shanghai household registration. This is the prerequisite for completely abolishing the restriction on household registration place. What do you mean by specifically highlighting rural areas? You don’t know that rural hukou is now far more useful than most urban hukou. Before calling others stupid, please get rid of your habit of taking quotes out of context.