very worrying development for China. But it looks like tax revenue is stabilizing while land sale and non-tax revenue (are SOE revenues included here?) are dropping, a sign of the economy not doing too hot.
very worrying development for China. But it looks like tax revenue is stabilizing while land sale and non-tax revenue (are SOE revenues included here?) are dropping, a sign of the economy not doing too hot.
Pentagon propaganda, funded to about 3.7M
Where did you get those figures please?Pentagon propaganda, funded to about 3.7M
View attachment 148612
The United States and others are imitating China in large part because China succeeded in a way that was unexpected. Its success in electric vehicles and clean technology did not come from liberalizing economic policies but from state interventions in the market in the name of nationalist objectives. Whether or not the United States can compete with China on China’s playing field, it is important to recognize a fundamental truth: the United States is now operating largely in accordance with Beijing’s standards, with a new economic model characterized by protectionism, constraints on foreign investment, subsidies, and industrial policy—essentially nationalist state capitalism. In the war over who gets to define the rules of the road, the battle is over, at least for now. And China won.
I think the danger to this is that the US perceives China in a certain way and it may not truly appreciate the underlying factors to China's success, and it certainly is in no position to completely adopt the "China model".Results defeat ideology, always have and always will. As they say, imitation is the sincerest form of flattery.
"Nationalist objectives"? Why use "nationalist" adjectiv tho? Isnt it more pf national sec, towards for energy self reliance thing? Shouldnt really affect other countries much really. (Unlike the chip export ban policies or the fees for CN built ships?)Results defeat ideology, always have and always will. As they say, imitation is the sincerest form of flattery.
I think the danger to this is that the US perceives China in a certain way and it may not truly appreciate the underlying factors to China's success, and it certainly is in no position to completely adopt the "China model".
"protectionism, constraints on foreign investment" are categorically NOT a part of the China model, the US is learning the wrong lesson here if what the article says is true. ironically the US spent so much time slandering China that it has fallen for its own lies, and now they could be punished for it.
From the nation's earliest days, Congress has struggled with the fundamental issue of the national government's proper role in fostering economic development. 's "American System," devised in the burst of nationalism that followed the War of 1812, remains one of the most historically significant examples of a government-sponsored program to harmonize and balance the nation's agriculture, commerce, and industry. This "System" consisted of three mutually reinforcing parts: a tariff to protect and promote American industry; a national bank to foster commerce; and federal subsidies for roads, canals, and other "internal improvements" to develop profitable markets for agriculture. Funds for these subsidies would be obtained from tariffs and sales of public lands. Clay argued that a vigorously maintained system of sectional economic interdependence would eliminate the chance of renewed subservience to the free-trade, laissez-faire "British System."