supercat
Colonel
Regarding the article from NYT yesterday, the saga continues.
Today Glenn chimes in.
One of Glenn's most important points:
Today Glenn chimes in.
One of Glenn's most important points:
Chinese Economics Thread
- Thread starter Norfolk
- Start date
Chinese vice premier, U.S. treasury secretary hold video call on economic issues
Source: XinhuaEditor: huaxia
2025-02-21 22:45:00
BEIJING, Feb. 21 (Xinhua) -- Chinese Vice Premier He Lifeng, who is also Chinese lead person for China-U.S. economic and trade affairs, held a video call Friday with U.S. Treasury Secretary Scott Bessent on bilateral important economic issues.
The two sides exchanged in-depth views on the implementation of consensus reached by the two heads of state during their phone talks, and on important issues between China and the United States in the economic field.
Both sides recognized the significance of bilateral economic and trade relations, and agreed to maintain communication on issues of respective concern.
The Chinese side also expressed serious concerns over recent U.S. additional tariffs and other restrictive measures against China.
Naturally, some folks will say this with a perfectly straight face while slapping export controls on everything China really wants to import.
Was Brad commissioned to write it or did he maybe send his article to nyt? Or somehing else?
.....
Last edited:
I think this guy puts it the most clearly. All the whining about imbalances and overcapacity is just a fig leaf over them being upset about losing.
And he specifically calls out Brad's NYT piece in this context.
And he specifically calls out Brad's NYT piece in this context.
For it to be a mistake China has to consider hurting the west to be a bad thing.
Hard to imagine someone actually being that dumb, but then again...
In this particular case it's a "mistake" because (as others pointed out on twitter) Brad Setser is an "ideas man" who specializes in balance of payments determinism. That's what he made his career in, that's what he writes about, that's the paradigm through which he understands the world. Chinese economic choices are therefore a mistake by definition whenever they fail to conform to his view of how economics is "supposed" to work within his perfect idealized model. In his mind there is a "right" way to do things, and everyone who fails to conform can only be mistaken. He often expounds at great length on how China, and Ireland, and Argentina, and Turkey, and Sri Lanka, are all making terrible mistakes. And they indeed are, so long as you accept his framework as valid. Personally, I suspect this is a bigger motivator than politics for him.
Thing is, he's not even wrong per se—not a hack or a grifter or whatever—he's just one of those academics who is too attached to his theories to account for messy reality.
Similar to Pettis? Bass?
that's how you know economics isn't a science, because for scientists, reality always wins. Einstein didn't say "nope measure the Michelson Morley experiment again, you probably just missed the aether". He figured out relativity. If science had the same philosophy of economics, we'd all still be using epicycles.