Chinese Economics Thread

SampanViking

The Capitalist
Staff member
Super Moderator
VIP Professional
Registered Member
I notice an increasing amount of comments by readers in various financial articles, that pumping money into those crippled banks such as Citi Barclays and others, is a waste of money as it hasn't done anything beneficial to the man in the street or business, credit wise. Therefore they should let them fall, and start again.The notion that "to big to let go" is a fallacy.
Is that just being nieve, because letting them go would be like letting off financial nuclear bombs


Niave no, but your description is being rather too simplistic. The biggest complaint from many about the current Bail Out strategy is that it is effectively Privatising Profit; thus rewarding the architects of this mess, while Nationalising Dept to the detriment and liability of the Taxpayer. This is hardly an acceptable situation.

Banks are institutions like any other and if they simply rolled up the whole lot into Banks of National Recovery, they could protect both Depositer and Taxpayer while givign the boot to the Senior Executives that caused this mess. It is never going to be nice or painless, but the poor old taxpayer at least gets the profit as well as the toxic loans.

Furthermore, confidence can be restored by losing the aforementioned discredited Bankers and public money can be used to actually start lending again, which was the orginal purpose on the bailout and not to insure some grasping, incompetent idiots bonus scheme!!

Fugitive Visions writes
Ignore the pundits. After all, why should we care that China assumed $170 billion dollars of bad loans from Chinese banks in '99, or roughly 17% of the national GDP? State owned banking and enterprise must be better, Newsweek said so!

Why should we listen to the same pundits who have warned about loans to build additional manufacturing capacity in the middle of this decade? As long as I sleep well knowing that an army of government bureaucrats is there to protect China, I could care less. Long live the Chairman.

As China's GDP is now about the $4Trillion mark or there abouts, $170 Billion is obviously considerably less than 17%

Furthermore I think we have been more than tolerant of your unconstructive comments today. Mend you ways and your manners or there will be moderation consequences
 

Autumn Child

Junior Member
Well it looks like the first shots of the Obama administration has been fired when Geithner has made it quite plain about dealing with issues on Chinas currency.
The Democrats with supporting economists and business studies experts such as Peter Morici have been gunning for China a long time. With no lack of support in Congress and the Senate, things could get very tricky for the Chinese, as I think it would be more than just mild cajoling as practised by the Bush administration.
Any view on a likely scenario?

And what can the US do at this time? Start a trade war? who is going to lend US more money for the multiple bailouts and fiscal stimulus? which country still have money to lend out? Want to start inflation while your economy is in recession? its normal for new US president to be tough on china and later during his term soften the stance. Ultimately, logic wins. US and China is married economically now. A divorce would turn very ugly for both.
 

pla101prc

Senior Member
lol i saw that news too. maybe obama will treat China like any other president did, hardcore in the first two years, soft for the rest.
 

bladerunner

Banned Idiot
With the Banks paying very little in interest they could sell treasury bonds to the general public, to take up the slack made by China's absence in the market.I would be willing to buy a couple of ks worth if I could as Ive got a modest amount of US dollars not doing anything in particular. I hold them in a foreign currency account and I bought them when the Nz dollar was worth 73cents and some hedgeing/ forward at 62cents. sometime ago. Some of it was to cover a family member studying over there.. Our currencys tracking south and expected to get worse, its currently about 52c and there would be tens of millions of Americans and others also willing, if Obama with his oratory skills can persuede the people to go along with it.

I also think this time around we have a President that genuinely believes China is manipulating its currency, rather than just giving lip service to the subject to placate congress so I reckon he will be prepared to go for a ruling on it by the international body that decides these things and then leave the ball in China's court, with some expectations

I don't think China will get any support from the other major trading nations as they are also of the same opinion.
 

pla101prc

Senior Member
With the Banks paying very little in interest they could sell treasury bonds to the general public, to take up the slack made by China's absence in the market.I would be willing to buy a couple of ks worth if I could as Ive got a modest amount of US dollars not doing anything in particular. I hold them in a foreign currency account and I bought them when the Nz dollar was worth 73cents and some hedgeing/ forward at 62cents. sometime ago. Some of it was to cover a family member studying over there.. Our currencys tracking south and expected to get worse, its currently about 52c and there would be tens of millions of Americans and others also willing, if Obama with his oratory skills can persuede the people to go along with it.

I also think this time around we have a President that genuinely believes China is manipulating its currency, rather than just giving lip service to the subject to placate congress so I reckon he will be prepared to go for a ruling on it by the international body that decides these things and then leave the ball in China's court, with some expectations

I don't think China will get any support from the other major trading nations as they are also of the same opinion.

you seem to be implying that the major economic powers will pressure the Chinese gov to stop "manipulating" the Yuan. how far will that go though? the US only managed to force the Yuan up by a small bit when its economy was relatively healthy, how much pressure can the whitehouse really apply?
 

antimatter

Banned Idiot
Get ready for economic battle with Obama's administration!

Well with Paulson out, the new treasury secretary fires the first shot!

By Lori Montgomery and Anthony Faiola
Washington Post Staff Writers
Friday, January 23, 2009; Page A08

As Timothy F. Geithner moved closer yesterday to confirmation as the next Treasury secretary, he signaled a confrontational shift in the U.S. economic relationship with China, bluntly stating that the new administration thinks Beijing is "manipulating" its currency and will act "aggressively" using "all the diplomatic avenues" to change China's currency practices.

Get ready to rumble.

Here's few pointers
*) Acquire more oversea firms and produce products oversea
*) Time to sell US treasuries
*)If US begin to levy heavy tax, then lower the Yuan. No need to raise the Yuan further.
*)Time to restrict US products into China


Please, Log in or Register to view URLs content!
 

Hendrik_2000

Lieutenant General
I also think this time around we have a President that genuinely believes China is manipulating its currency, rather than just giving lip service to the subject to placate congress so I reckon he will be prepared to go for a ruling on it by the international body that decides these things and then leave the ball in China's court, with some expectations

I don't think China will get any support from the other major trading nations as they are also of the same opinion.

Bladerunner are you the same bladerunner who was banned from CDF I believe we have cross swords before. Before you get caught up in China hate frenzy just read this article below

Please, Log in or Register to view URLs content!


US's road to recovery runs through Beijing
By Francesco Sisci and David P Goldman

English author G K Chesterton rhymed about "the night we went to Bannockburn by way of Brighton Pier", and it may seem no less whimsical to argue that the United States' road to recovery, as well as Barack Obama's path to presidential greatness, run through China.

In the rush to prop up America's financial institutions, foreign economic policy seems remote from Washington's agenda. America wants to revive the mortgage market and consumer spending. The effort is doomed to failure. For a quarter of a century the American consumer has been the locomotive of the world economy, and now the locomotive has derailed and taken



the rest of the world economy with it.

Recovery requires a great change in direction of capital flows. For the past decade, poor people in the developing world have financed the consumption of rich people in America. America has borrowed nearly $1 trillion a year, mostly from the developing world, and used these funds to import consumer goods and buy homes at low interest rates. The result is a solvency crisis of the American household, which shows up as a solvency crisis for financial institutions. If we reckon the retirement needs of households as a liability, the household sector is as good as bankrupt.

No recovery is possible unless American households can save, and they cannot save in an economic contraction when incomes spiral downwards. To save, Americans must sell goods and services to someone else, and a glance at the globe makes clear who that must be: nearly half the world's population, and most of the world's capacity for economic growth, is concentrated in China and the Pacific Littoral.

China's economic problem is the inverse of America's: China has achieved fast rates of growth at the expense of huge disparities between the prosperous coast and the backward interior, as well as excessive dependence on foreign markets. China's policy response to the economic crisis is far more radical than Washington's. Rather than attempting to patch up the situation and restore the status quo ante, China plans to spend nearly a fifth of its gross domestic product on an internal stimulus focused on infrastructure in its interior. Severe execution risk attends the Chinese proposal, and markets remain to be convinced.

China can reduce the execution risk of its great economic shift towards home consumption, and America can solve its savings problem, through a grand partnership. This partnership need not be exclusive to America and China, but it must be founded on America and China, two of the world's largest economies. India and the other Asian economies should be encouraged to join this partnership. A great deal has been written about prospective conflict between China and the United States, but very little explanation is offered as to what issues might arise between China and the United States. China and America have far more to gain from cooperation than from conflict.

America's objection to Chinese foreign policy center on China's pursuit of commercial interest with countries (Iran, Sudan) whose behavior America considers unacceptable. America stands to gain an ally in questions of rogue-state behavior, terrorism, nuclear proliferation and other matters of national interest, in return for helping China achieve its legitimate goals.

The goals of the partnership should be to:

Support China's internal development by re-orienting export flows towards China and other emerging economies from the United States and other industrial countries.

Transfer technologies and other expertise to the emerging economies.

Make the emerging economies partners in the recovery of American asset prices.

Fear and risk-aversion rather than trust and optimism conditioned the two-way capital flow between emerging markets and the United States during the past 10 years. After the 1997 Asia financial crisis, and the 1998 Russian bankruptcy, investors in emerging markets lent their savings to the American government or its quasi-governmental agencies to diversify their portfolios into safe assets, while Westerners invested in local emerging market currencies for higher returns.

As one of the authors reported recently at this site (See Who will finance America’s deficit? David P Goldman, Asia Times Online, November 13, 2008), global financing of the US government deficit drew on leverage in emerging markets. De-leveraging of the world financial system sharply curtails the availability of overseas financing for the Treasury deficit.

America's economy model is broken. The tape cannot be run in reverse: America can't rescue an economy based on rising consumer debt and zero savings. America must become a technology exporter. Throwing more money into consumer stimulus, bailouts for the automobile sector, and so forth will fail miserably. America should recognize that the deformation of its economy is the inverse of the deformation of the Chinese economy (as well as other emerging economies), and that their common problem has a common cure.

The trouble in the world economy has been that a rich Chinese won't lend money to a poor Chinese, unless the poor Chinese first moves to America. China bought American mortgages, including poor-quality assets dressed up as high-quality assets, because China does not have the financial, legal and administrative capacity as well as the trust to write sufficient mortgage business at home. China's efforts to spend a fifth of its GDP on infrastructure face enormous problems of governance. In the United States, voters most approve most public spending at the local level, and the federal system provides checks and balances against abuse of public funds. Emerging economies must rely on the probity of a small number of officials with enormous power, a far less effective check against corruption.

China can use America's help in shifting its economy towards the internal market. Ironically, American officials have been trying to persuade China to import the American financial model for years, and the collapse of the American model has made the prospect less attractive. But it is a very good moment for China to bring in American banks, and start up a consumer lending market. The failures of the American consumer market do not wipe out a century of banking experience in evaluating and securitizing consumer loans. To help import the American model, China should be given the opportunity to purchase major American institutions in return. Citicorp, for example, could be bought today for about $50 billion or Capital One for $13 billion.

America remains the most technologically advanced economy in the world. China needs American high technology. In many instances, America restricts the sale of technology to China due to security concerns.

The United States should offer China a general reduction in restrictions on imports of American technology and acquisition of American companies, in return for a treaty linking Chinese and American security interests. The treaty would include:

A system of royalties for technology transfers and guarantees against pirating.

Freedom for Chinese companies to acquire American companies, including financial institutions.

Agreement on a common stance towards rogue states, nuclear arms proliferation, terrorism and other issues of mutual concern, covering such issues as Pakistan, Sudan, Iran and other areas of past diplomatic conflict.

An agreement on strategic arms deployment in Asia.

A roadmap for China's democratization.

Environmental and energy-efficiency goals.

Stabilization of China’s yuan against the dollar to support free capital flows between the US and China.

There are close to 2 billion people in China and the countries in its immediate periphery, and a further 1.1 billion people in India. Half the world's population lives in emerging Asia, and its productivity could triple in a generation. Out of the present crisis, the world might enjoy one of the longest and fastest economic booms in history - or it might remain in an economic mire for a decade. The incoming American administration might be remembered as one of the worst, or one of the best, in American history.

David P Goldman was global head of fixed-income research for Banc of America Securities and global head of credit strategy at Credit Suisse.
 
Last edited:

bladerunner

Banned Idiot
Bladerunner are you the same bladerunner who was banned from CDF I believe we have cross swords before. Before you get caught up in China hate frenzy just read this article below

Please, Log in or Register to view URLs content!
Unfortunately I don't remember crossing swords with you on CDF which was a site I hardly visited.
I had a habit of not signing off when called away and other people in the household had trolled through the website, thought it would be amusing to make some remarks in my absence. I can't even remember what it was about.However when I became aware of them I did not find them particularly offensive nor was an apology required, At the time , I could have been annoyed by his actions, rather then the added remarks because I felt it was a situation where members were being a bit precious.

Anyway I am not anti Chinese and neither have I ever been involved in such a manner, however that being said I am not of the impression that this site was a China cheer leading site, open to members who are prepared to overlook Chinas faults, despite its achievements, but a site where people can learn and discuss things about China without prejudice.

That being said I am a frequent visitor of atimes and have come across this article before, but remember its only a subjective opinion written by someone of the profession that has caused all this mess. but someone more understanding of economics and finances, then myself could possibly come up with a well rationalized opposing view.

Futhermore this is an economics thread, raising the issue of Chinas policy as regards the Yuans valuation is a matter of world concern and a legitimate topic, considering USAs threatened course of action. It is not China bashing despite the allegation of some members, who are quick to play the "China is the injured party card" YOu gota get over it and move on otherwise you will never progress properly.
 
Last edited:

bladerunner

Banned Idiot
BY the way my statement about other countries concurring with the US position on Chinas currency is a fact, its just that theyre a standing back and let the US lead the way on the matter. eg> Japan and the EU have also passed remarks on Chinas currency position over time.
 

flyzies

Junior Member
Even though China will feel the effects of the world slowdown, much of the doom and gloom talk is more from wishful thinkers. Wasn't a couple years ago when China was overheating, they said China had to slow down to 7%? Now the economy supposedly drops 3% from the year before and now China is collapsing? Or what about those that claim that China always lies about growth? Early in China's economic reform they said China was exaggerating the figures higher because that's what commies do. Then when China is overheating, they said the commies are hiding higher figures than the official 13%. Why the contradiction? Because being anti-China you can only think of the worst. Just like they say China will plunge into turmoil and chaos as a result of the global slowdown. Where do they come up with this? Because they think all of China's economy is 100% dependent on exports to the West regardless of what happens domestically. So if Chinese exports drop 50%, then the Chinese economy collapses 50%. Also Westerners have this mentality that if it's bad for them, it has to be worse for everyone else. The more inferior they view you, it's just makes it more worse for you. Which is why they believe China will plunge into chaos and disorder. A Western country could never take a 50% drop in its economy without complete disorder and lawlessness raging from its citizens. So in China that's what they predict. But then a Western system of government could never take care of 1.3 billion people. China has managed pretty well since reforms. Before this global crisis they believed a free political and economic system checks and balances correcting itself. This financial crisis is the result. Now they're in just plain denial of their situation where they can only feel good from reporting bad news from China. I read some news saying that this crisis will be good for the US in the end because it will force outsourced American jobs back to the US. Maybe but in the end the high-demanding pay of the American worker cannot compete with cheap labor overseas so Americans will never be able to sell their products to a developing world who cannot afford them. So who wins? The foreign company that can produce and sell more cheaply than the out of reach cost American brand. What they gleefully enjoy about bad news from China is actually worst news for them. If China is not making money from the West, China no longer has to be careful about Western interests. China can sell arms to who ever they wish without fearing any economic reprecussions because there will be none. Seriously, there's a silver lining for China in this global slowdown. Beijing's actions as a result of this slowdown shows they're shifting to strengthen and concentrate on the domestic economy. Meaning in the end China will be more independent than ever.

Well said. It's hardly surprising to find some doom-and-gloom economists say "China will now devalue the Yuan to save their exports" or something along those line...when all the evidence points to the Yuan being stabilised, keeping with China's economic policy. It's astonishing how some people just dont believe what's coming out of China...even tho we can all see it's plainly the truth.
 
Top