Chinese Economics Thread

solarz

Brigadier
This is something you won't see being quoted much.

Please, Log in or Register to view URLs content!

Honestly, it's not surprising once you think about it. In China, corporate interests must serve the Party's interests. In the US, politicians serve corporate interests.

After 8 years of Harper government, I'm not surprised to see Canada ranked at number 70 either.
 

AssassinsMace

Lieutenant General
Yep I just read that article, funny how some media was anger by China's probing of drug maker GSK for it's involvement in bribing local physicians in China into purchasing their drugs.

The media's denial was epic. Since the first report came out, GSK has been probed in Poland and Iraq for bribery.


Well it's no different from the earlier article where the European media was trying to spin Xi's corruption sweep in the ranks as a negative to the economy. Yeah because corrupt people like to spend money on expensive luxury goods from Europe. I bet if corruption were suddenly to end overnight, the first casualty would be luxury brands and would probably hit European economies in a significant negative way.
 
Last edited:

mzyw

Junior Member
Old news, reflecting second wave of reform in China

Please, Log in or Register to view URLs content!


China eased its grip on the telecommunications market on Friday by letting local carriers determine service charges rather than follow a government-set price range.

"The market should decide prices for all telecom services," said a joint statement from the Ministry of Industry and Information Technology and the National Development and Reform Commission.

"Carriers will be able to set charging, billing and price structure," it said. The regulators also abolished some regulations on telecom service charges.

"This sudden announcement marks full-marketization of China’s telecom industry," said Xiang Ligang, founder of telecom website CCTime.com.

Xiang has been a long-time supporter of reform in the sector, believing that by introducing more competition, the Big Three - China Mobile , China Telecom and China Unicom - will adapt to the rapidly changing mobile Internet era with customers likely to get better services at a lower price.

The Central Government began to ease controls last year when dozens of private companies secured approval to provide telecom services by leasing infrastructure built by State-owned carriers.

[email protected]
 

Equation

Lieutenant General
Excessive corporate influence in the country will be the downfall of the US, the most obvious example being how US corporations outsourced all sorts of know-how and jobs to China for several decades turning a hulking backwater into a giant all-around competitor.

True to a certain extent, but don't forget the add the cost of living and producing goods in America rises as well that causes the corporate manufacturing sector to outsource in order to satisfied the share holders. It's the shareholders demand on a return in their investment (without a single lost) that causes a chain event that's hard to turn back.
 
True to a certain extent, but don't forget the add the cost of living and producing goods in America rises as well that causes the corporate manufacturing sector to outsource in order to satisfied the share holders. It's the shareholders demand on a return in their investment (without a single lost) that causes a chain event that's hard to turn back.

Yeah, US and US corporate relations with China were and are a complex situation. A big part of it is the price to pay for the US to woo China and enlarge the Western trade block to psyche out the USSR to win the Cold War, and also buying time to tie up loose ends after winning the Cold War in Eastern Europe then in the Middle East (such as al Qaeda and Iraq) which were unintended consequences of earlier US actions to fight Soviet influence.
 

Franklin

Captain
With the news coming from the World Bank and now Moody's that China at the end of this year might overtake the US as the world's largest economy in PPP terms. Has help to create a lot of introspections amongst the media and commentators. This article compares China's rise today with those of America, the Soviet Union, Japan and Germany during the 19th and 20th century. And raises the question is China the fastest rising power in history ? China's performence on the one hand isn't that much different compared with those other countries in the same period of their rise but on the other hand China does exceptionally well in certain area's compared to those of the others.

Is China the Fastest-Rising Power in History?

Four graphs show how China stacks up against the powers of yesterday.

China is rising; but how far, and how fast? After the release of projections based on new World Bank data showing that China will soon overtake the United States as the world’s largest national economy, a debate has quickly ensued, with some China-watchers dismissing the new figures as an “accounting exercise” and others calling the revised data a “wake-up call.” But the hue and cry obscures a more fundamental question: whether the scale and speed of China’s ascendance is truly unique, or whether it resembles the emergence of earlier powers. China, it turns out, scores moderately on the first metric, and very highly on the second.

Although new powers have emerged for millennia — think Athens after the Greek victory over Persia in 479 B.C. and Rome in 264 B.C. at the start of its wars with Carthage — extensive data measuring the scale and speed of a nation’s rise only extend from the mid-nineteenth century to the present. During this period, five states have emerged as global powers:

The United States, circa 1870: Having recovered from a devastating civil war, it entered a period of rapid industrial growth and overseas expansion.
Germany, circa 1870: Otto von Bismarck defeated France and established a unified nation.

China, circa 1982: Its rise began after the ruling Communist Party completed its sixth five-year plan, a document the party still uses to help guide the economy, inaugurating a new era of economic reform and opening to foreign trade.

Of course, no country’s ascent had a single, undisputed starting point. But cutoffs are necessary to gauge a rise or a fall, and the above inflection points are apt candidates. Here’s how China’s shares of global GDP, trade, and military spending compare to that of the other four powers, 30 years into their respective ascents

In sheer scale, China remains near the head of the pack on several measures, but it is not yet a clear frontrunner. After three decades of ascent, China’s economic footprint is comparable to that of the United States in 1900. China currently accounts for 14.6 percent of world output, while the U.S. share of global GDP in 1900 was 15.9 percent. At 14.3 percent, China’s share of global commerce is about a percentage point higher than the United States’ at the same stage of its rise. Militarily, China resembles Germany before it developed the powerful navy that new wealth afforded. Thirty years in, China’s share of global military spending — 9.2 percent — is just behind Germany’s share in 1900, at 10.5 percent. Of the comparison group, the Soviet Union’s rise differs most from China’s. The USSR prioritized military strength over economic prosperity, and the numbers show it. In 1975, the Soviet Union accounted for about a third of international military spending, but only 9.4 percent of global output, and a measly 3.9 percent of world trade, due to its isolation from the global economy.

Speed is where China stands out. In 30 years of ascent, starting from a low base, it has come farther, faster than any of the other rising powers in the comparison group. Here’s a look at its GDP growth, in historical context:

China has expanded its share of world GDP faster than any other rising state from 1870 to today. When then-leader Deng Xiaoping inaugurated a series of sweeping economic reforms in 1982, China accounted for a mere 2.2 percent of global output. 30 years later, in 2012, China produced 14.6 percent of the world’s GDP, a roughly seven-fold increase. Notably, other powers at the start of their rise began with a much more substantial share of world GDP: 6.5 percent for Germany in 1870, 7.1 percent for Japan in 1960, 8.9 percent for the United States in 1870, and 9.6 percent for the Soviet Union in 1950. Of those four, only the United States nearly doubled its share of global output during three decades of ascent. Although considered an industrial powerhouse at the time, Germany only managed to increase its share of world GDP by a few percentage points, while the Soviet Union’s 30-year share remained virtually unchanged through 1975.

The speed of China’s ascent as a trading power is even more impressive:

China’s share of global trade has exploded faster than any other rising power in the comparison group. In 30 years, China has expanded its share by a staggering multiple of more than 22. At the dawn of its reform period, China accounted for only 0.6 percent of world commerce; by comparison, the United States at year zero of its rise already conducted 9.3 percent of the world’s trade. Germany at the start of its ascent accounted for 10.7 percent of international commerce. Only the Soviet Union at the close of World War II had less of a presence in global trade than China at the outset of its rise.

A different picture emerges when examining the speed of China’s military ascent. In line with Deng Xiaoping’s belief that China should “hide [its] capacities” and “bide [its] time” — which meant, in part, getting rich first before building up its military — China’s share of world arms spending has advanced slower than its share of global GDP and trade:

China’s proportion of world military spending has expanded at an objectively rapid clip, even if it has not ballooned as fast as its economic footprint. During the 1990s, and then again during the 2000s, China nearly tripled its share of global military outlays. Pentagon data on China’s military spending paints a similar picture, and its 2013 white paper to the U.S. Congress notes China has the “fiscal strength and political will to support defense spending growth at comparable levels” in the future, although given that “China’s published military budget omits several major categories of expenditure” including foreign arms purchases, it’s hard to know for sure. The Defense Department estimated China’s total military-related expenditures for 2012 fell between $135 billion and $215 billion, though it cautioned that it didn’t know for sure. The next Pentagon white paper is scheduled to be released next week.

Mapped over time, China’s share of global military spending has charted an exponential growth path, unusual by historical standards. The Soviet share spiked after World War II, then plateaued at around one-third of global military spending. The U.S. share fluctuated around specific events — Germany’s return to peacetime footing after 1870 caused a temporary increase, while the Spanish-American War of 1898 produced a sharp peak leading into a rapid decline. Germany’s share of global military spending expanded and contracted over time, generally remaining between 10 and 15 percent of world spending on arms. Japan increased its share of global military spending throughout, but at a much slower pace than China.

China has risen faster than other powers, but not farther — yet. Prediction is a risky business. A decline in China’s working age population,widespread environmental degradation, endemic corruption, and risks associated with staggering income inequality — or some combination of those factors — could slow or derail the country’s rise. But if China can muddle through, conservative estimates put its share of global GDP at 28 percent by 2030. If this forecast is correct, China’s economic dominance will, on paper, equal that of the United States in 1951, a peak year in which the residual devastation wrought by World War II significantly boosted America’s share of global output.

Yet China will likely punch below its weight even if these forecasts prove accurate. It took the United States two world wars, a sea change in how the U.S. public viewed the world, and the creation of a new international order backed by a set of military alliances to fully translate its size into global dominance. China’s economy may become larger than the United States’ this year, but parity on paper will not quickly yield equal influence abroad.

Please, Log in or Register to view URLs content!
 
Last edited:

Doombreed

Junior Member
With the news coming from the World Bank and now Moody's that China at the end of this year might overtake the US as the world's largest economy in PPP terms. Has help to create a lot of introspections amongst the media and commentators. This article compares China's rise today with those of America, the Soviet Union, Japan and Germany during the 19th and 20th century. And raises the question is China the fastest rising power in history ? China's performence on the one hand isn't that much different compared with those other countries in the same period of their rise but on the other hand China does exceptionally well in certain area's compared to those of the others.

The Modern era accelerates the time frame of growth. But that's a two edge sword. A Chinese dynasty normally lasts 200-300 year. If China has done today in 30 years, what it used to take 100, does it mean the end will come that much sooner too?
 
Top