Chinese Economics Thread

[Franklin]

From the BBC site:

Please, Log in or Register to view URLs content!

Now they are reducing coal consumption ( poor Australia ). When will they start reducing oil consumption? ( poor Saudi Arabia ).

This is made possible because of China's changing economic structure. China is moving away from mass low end production and is moving into higher end production and services. Those are far less demanding on energy use and the environment in general.

 

[PanAsian]

I'm not surprised in the least. China has 10x more smart people than Japan, so it will have 10x more world-class universities than Japan. Time is the only variable.

Save it Admin, China has 10x more people, ergo 10x more smart ones. Just math; I don't subscribe to racial or ethnic bullsh!t.

That's why until that comes to pass China is still a developing country.

 

[Jeff Head]

Guys, this is the Chinese Economic Thread.

It is not a thread to compare Japanese and Chinese Universities.

It is not a thread to branch further off still and dredge up articles about Potential Asian discrimination in US universities.

Saying that China has reached number one status in Asian Universities is fine...but we do not need to then go down the comparison lane...us vs. them, etc., etc.

DO NOT RESPOND TO THIS MODERATION

 

[SamuraiBlue]

I'm not surprised in the least. China has 10x more smart people than Japan, so it will have 10x more world-class universities than Japan. Time is the only variable.

Save it Admin, China has 10x more people, ergo 10x more smart ones. Just math; I don't subscribe to racial or ethnic bullsh!t.

Sorry but there is a large flaw in your logic which is 10 times the population doesn't mean they have equal opportunity nor training.

A simple analogy would be the World Soccer Cup, Japan's population larger than either Spain or Italy and yet Japan has never claimed the title, PRC has ten times the population compared to Japan and yet PRC hasn't been able to win the regional qualifying stage.
There are various reason for this but the simple learning is raw amount in population doesn't really equate to more talent.

 

[Blackstone]

Sorry but there is a large flaw in your logic which is 10 times the population doesn't mean they have equal opportunity nor training.

A simple analogy would be the World Soccer Cup, Japan's population larger than either Spain or Italy and yet Japan has never claimed the title, PRC has ten times the population compared to Japan and yet PRC hasn't been able to win the regional qualifying stage.
There are various reason for this but the simple learning is raw amount in population doesn't really equate to more talent.

That's why I listed time as the variable. China clearly has the will and the resource to institute world-class universities, and if we were to assume people in China are at least as intelligent as people in other parts of the world, including Japan, then my thesis is sound.

 

[Jeff Head]

Guys...last chance.

STOP comparing of Chinese and Japan. This is a Chinese Economic Thread. No need to compare numbers of smart people between Japan and China to discuss Chinese economics.

That is simply a zero sum game that lead ultimately to nationalistic arguments, high emotion, etc., etc.

We can discuss Chinese Economic conditions without it becoming a "Who has the most smart people and why," discussion.

That will not be tolerated.

DO NOT RESPOND TO THIS MODERATION

 

[Blackstone]

China plans to put up about 30% of the cash for Asia Infrastructure Investment Bank, and getting about 30% of the votes. Here in the Silicon Valley, we call that a fair deal for all stakeholders. However, Newsweek frames it as "China to wield veto over 57-member AIIB." The American people could be forgiven for having negative views of the bank, given the steady diet of crap they're fed by the lame stream media.

Please, Log in or Register to view URLs content!

China will retain a power of veto over its powerful new investment bank in a development likely to be viewed with suspicion by the US.

The Asian Infrastructure Investment Bank (AIIB), which has 57 founding members including key US allies such as the UK and Australia, will be based in Beijing and will focus on providing funding for infrastructure projects in developing Asian countries.

Beijing is providing almost $30bn (€26.7bn) of the bank's $100bn (€89bn) capital base, according to a report in the

Please, Log in or Register to view URLs content!

. This initial outlay gives China up to 30% of the voting share in decisions regarding structure, membership and capital increases.

Please, Log in or Register to view URLs content!

This effectively means that China could veto prospective new members of the institution and will retain oversight regarding which projects to fund, according to the report.

However, Beijing has reportedly relinquished its veto power over day-to-day decisions, a decision which reportedly helped win over some founding members.

The US led a vocal campaign to try and dissuade its allies from joining the institution, but was largely unsuccessful as a slew of allies

Please, Log in or Register to view URLs content!

to become founding members of the bank before the 31 March deadline, with Japan being one of the few to abstain.

US National Security Council spokesman Patrick Ventrell said that Washington had concerns about whether the AIIB would meet the "high standards" of governance and environmental and social safeguards exemplified by the Washington-based World Bank.

Following the UK's decision to join the AIIB, the White House issued a pointed statement saying it expected the UK "will use its voice to push for adoption of high standards".

The AIIB has been viewed by some as a rival to the World Bank and the Tokyo-based Asian Development Bank (ADB). It was founded on the back of Chinese frustrations at a lack of influence in the World Bank and the International Monetary Fund (IMF). Despite reforms to World Bank voting in 2010 which gave China the third-largest share, it still has less than a third of the voting weight of the US, which dominates the institution.

However, the AIIB website insists that the institution will be multilateral, accepting bids from members and non-members, and will implement "strong policies" on accountability and procurement.

Hugo Brennan, Asia analyst at UK-based geopolitical risk consultancy Verisk Maplecroft, says that achieving foreign policy aims, such as increasing regional trade and boosting China's international standing, form a significant element of the motivations behind Beijing setting up the AIIB.

"Beijing isn't doing this out of the goodness of their hearts," says Brennan. "China is a trading nation. The economy is slowing and this is one way of finding new growth areas."

Brennan adds that the US has "backed itself into a corner" and now risks finding itself on the outside of a new player in the global financial architecture.

The AIIB, which will use English as its operating language, is due to become operational by the end of the year, according to Chinese media. Behind China and India, Russia has stumped up $6.5bn (€5.8bn) of capital for the project. The biggest western European investor is Germany, who have pledged $4.5bn (€4bn).

The institution aims to address Asia's gaping infrastructure gap. The World Bank estimates that some $8trn (€7.12trn) of investment is required between 2010 and 2020 to meet the need for energy, water and transportation projects in Asia.

Erica Downs, senior China analyst at US-based risk consultancy the Eurasia Group, says that the institution has already been a roaring success for Beijing.

"You could make the argument that it has enhanced China's soft power to a far greater degree than they could ever have imagined. The bank hasn't even started operating and they already have G7 countries involved. It's a massive coup for Beijing to have the Australians, the British, the French all involved," says Downs.

 

[delft]

Please, Log in or Register to view URLs content!

And no doubt efficiency improvements in China are important too.

 

[solarz]

China plans to put up about 30% of the cash for Asia Infrastructure Investment Bank, and getting about 30% of the votes. Here in the Silicon Valley, we call that a fair deal for all stakeholders. However, Newsweek frames it as "China to wield veto over 57-member AIIB." The American people could be forgiven for having negative views of the bank, given the steady diet of crap they're fed by the lame stream media.

Please, Log in or Register to view URLs content!

I don't get the argument. Why is 30% of the votes equal to a veto?

 

[AssassinsMace]

Fast track authority suffered a setback. The House Democrats didn't back the President. It's funny how the pro and con sides both falsely use China in their arguments. The con side uses China as if it's a part of TPP. The pro side uses China to say it'll write the rules if it doesn't pass. What rules? China won't be writing any rules that isn't agreed upon by others. The fact is they just don't want less rules. Arguing giving US control over writing those rules means they want more rules. Why is Obama concerned about AIIB? Because of the attractiveness of less rules as opposed to more rules Obama wants in order to have control who gets loans. The same reason why Obama leaves China out of TPP. Vietnam is worse than what China is accused per capita. It comes down to personal reasons not rule of law reasons.