You cannot run a welfare state with an inverted population pyramid, that’s for sure. The biggest challenges China faces are all demographics related. If the government chooses to focus on pension over boosting fertility this will be a sign of trouble in my view.Boosting consumption seems like the right approach, though I find it funny given that this has long been a Western demand of China. But what other choice did they have? Here's consumer confidence:
View attachment 148050
Even getting back to 2015-16 levels would be an improvement. China's industrial sector has been beating all kinds of records but their consumers have been left behind.
Part of the issue is very high savings rates.
View attachment 148051
Moving from 33% of household savings rate to ~20% would do a lot. But a major issue is China's relatively weak pension system. People save that much because they cannot count on much state support in their old age. So if the govt wants to boost consumption, they must first tackle the reasons why Chinese people save that much (uncertainty and insecurity in old age). But Xi has long been skeptical of a "welfare state". So it will be interesting to see how they thread this needle.
China doesn't officially tax or directly use HK companies like Cheung Kong. Although they could use them for grey and black operations.How much damage will Li Ka shing's sale of ports cause to China? I see that Chinese media and some officials are criticizing this incident
Thank you for your answerChina doesn't officially tax or directly use HK companies like Cheung Kong. Although they could use them for grey and black operations.
I think the opposition from China is more about making bargaining chips against Trump. CK already has the money, while the stakes Blackrock have in infrastructure that will still be China (or rather HK/Li Ka Shing) operated can be held hostage against US.
Remember Blackrock isn't in the "in" group of US oligarchs, it is considered neutral or even personally hostile to Trump and Elon. So there are more dimensions here, as Blackrock might not necessarily recieve protection from USG if their assets are stripped under national security. Either way, I don't think it was smart for Blackrock to finalize the deal that has been going on for so long during the currently sensitive environment. Maybe if Kamala had been in power, the whole event would go under the table and it would have been a profitable longer term investment for Blackrock.
China's birth policy and elderly care services are being promoted simultaneously. In terms of elderly care, even if China does not enter an ultra-low birth rate now, the baby boom era around the 1960s will still produce a large number of elderly people. In terms of fertility, from the policies in various regions, the government is already aware of the severity of the situationYou cannot run a welfare state with an inverted population pyramid, that’s for sure. The biggest challenges China faces are all demographics related. If the government chooses to focus on pension over boosting fertility this will be a sign of trouble in my view.
Very much fearmongering as such an order would incur more penalty on US than on China, but the question is what end the media fearmongering is supposed to serve?Thank you for your answer
Chinese media believe that these ports will charge high service fees to Chinese ships in accordance with Trump's orders in the future
Hmm....looking at this, it seems the US economy is not all about a service/finance economy only like some claim.. Seems quite diverisfied to me actually. Plus there are many more than this foing well globally.May I point to this figure -
View attachment 147604
Hmm....looking at this, it seems the US economy is not all about a service/finance economy only like some claim.. Seems quite diverisfied to me actually. Plus there are many more than this foing well globally.