It seems fine to me.
Ultimately having a firm floor is not a bad idea in a nation that still has significant wealth and income disparity.
Chinese Economics Thread
- Thread starter Norfolk
- Start date
It seems fine to me.
Ultimately having a firm floor is not a bad idea in a nation that still has significant wealth and income disparity.
For me it's certainly not fine if it's below the market clearing rate, what's even the point with that kind of minimum wage?
You have Shanghai and Beijing with 2420 RMB minimum wage and 2700 RMB minimum wage, this lvl is ridiculous for these world class cities because even the most crap jobs there pays at least 5000-6000 RMB., so market clearing rate it's 2x!. GDP per capita in these regions and cities are higher than in Poland, or comparable if you say Jiangsu, but minimum wage should be at least 2x the current amount to have even a closiness to the market clearing rate wage.
Poland is maybe not good example for it, cause the minimum wage skyrocketed in the recent years, and a lot of people got caught by the lvl so about 25% of workforce are working for this wage +-700zł. But right now in Poland you have 4300 zł minimum wage and that's 7700 RMB!, it will rise to 4666zł from next year. Shanghai, Beijing, Jiangsu, Zhejiang at similar lvl of per capita GDP should have at least minimum wage at market clearing rate to have some impact on the market and the most low paid jobs.
That low lvl, only makes anti-China articles/pundits in Western media or goverments go with dumb Michael Pettis overcapacity and not enough demand thesis further. The good ratio of China disposable income per capita to GDP per capita in China clearly proves that minimum wage has zero impact on the Chinese wages, which are much higher.
Minimum wage, just a bit higher than very poor so called "3rd" world countres, makes China unfortunately look bad, even though the reality on the ground is different, and it have no impact on real income.
My point, China minimum wage should be set on at least 5000-6000 RMB in first tier cities such as e.g. Shanghai, Beijing, Shenzhen etc. 4000 in lower, and 3000 RMB in the poorest regions of China to have any impact on wages (market clearing rate wage), so double the current lvl of minimum wage rates at least.
Last edited:
Having a minimum wage floor is still better than having no floor at all. If it has zero impact on the actual wages because in reality the market will pay more then... That's a good thing?
If the question is one of "looking bad" then I would argue that is not particularly relevant or even a priority for the Chinese government.
This all sounds like reputational frivolity.
Having government debt (central and local) reach as high as 56.1% of GDP (GDP of +US$18 trillion) doesn’t actually seem as bad as it was once thought. Even if such numbers were even higher, because most Western copiums are claiming that the CCP data is unreliable, BeijingDai still begs the big question: how much of this debt is “backed” by actual infrastructure assets that were created by issuing this debt?
I once read a very good book that highlighted the "Singapore Model". The book gave a good introduction to this model adopted by Singapore, stating that the debt issued is always to build assets that create value and generate returns for society and consequently for the country's economic growth and development. Singapore did not issue debt to finance current government spending; the debt issued was always tied to infrastructure investments.
Singapore has an even higher debt proportionally than the US, but no one talks about it and there is a reason:
Because the country is a net creditor with net debt. The Singapore government has a strong balance sheet with assets well above its liabilities. This is why international credit rating agencies such as Fitch, Moody's and Standard & Poors give Singapore the highest short-term and long-term credit ratings of AAA. This is not only due to the asset generated by the debt, but also to the large international reserves and the fact that it has one of the largest sovereign wealth funds in the world.
Public debt is used to invest in infrastructure such as ports, airports, highways and roads, and when completed, they are assets that have an intrinsic value. Therefore, Singapore does not borrow to use for current expenses but rather to build assets, all of its debt is tied to an asset of equal or greater value.
Gross debt - the value of the assets = low net debt, so they do not pay as much interest because there is a collateral asset.
I had a friend who visited Singapore a decade ago, he said that 82% of the population there lives in public housing where they rent or buy these apartments, where the government has built thousands of public residential apartment buildings.
Given the way China at the beginning of the reopening saw Singapore as a , China could have used this "Singapore Model" and adapted it to its continental conditions. It would be extremely difficult for China to fully replicate the "Singapore Model", but the way in which debt is issued to build tangible and real assets that will provide returns to society is one of the foundations for Chinese development, which explains why even if China's debt were higher, it is being built on real assets, therefore obtaining a lower net debt if calculating debt minus asset value.
So basically that's like comparing a person who has a mortgage of 56% of his annual salary, in the case of China, to a person who has credit card debit 130% of his annual salary, in the case of the US. Basically the former is in a good financial situation and the latter is dead broke.
some notes for September industrial production. Good news is that industrial robot continues to be up. another 23% growth YoY.
machine cutting tools (I assume CNC tooling is a large part of this) up a little more.
machine cutting tools (I assume CNC tooling is a large part of this) up a little more.
Whats the front two columns and the end two columns?
Industrial robot up 22.8% YoY is actually insane, considering last year China already installed more robots than everyone else combined and already operated the majority of robots on the planet.
形式主义
Far bigger problem. That poster's very suggestion embody the dangerous phenomenon.
and the income of person is inflated alot