Chinese Economics Thread

[solarz]

Unfortunately I left it too late to make additions to my post.
There are many women who run private business and are very wealthy in their own right.they could do what the Chinese women have done and list their enterprise on the stock market And also become overnight billionaires.I know of two women and a husband and wife team who could do that, but have public ally stated that they weren't interested.
I'm sure that is replicated in many Western countries, and if they were to do so, the disparity in billionaires could be rather marginal if any.

Uhh... so your explanation is that in other countries, women billionaires hide their wealth?

Well, since obviously non-Chinese male billionaires don't feel the need to hide their wealth, why do non-Chinese female billionaires, according to you, feel the need to do so?

 

[Janiz]

Uhh... so your explanation is that in other countries, women billionaires hide their wealth?

Yes, those lists contain only those people who want to be there. There are many billionaires who don't want their names published in such places. Just notice that most of those are new to the bussiness and they aren't usually coming from the wealthy families which accumulated their money for centuries (like Jewish bank families). Those are wealthy people for media - not wealthy people who rule the world. The wise children of those on the lists can withdraw those lists and work 'undercover' far away from media's loud attention.

 

[solarz]

Yes, those lists contain only those people who want to be there. There are many billionaires who don't want their names published in such places. Just notice that most of those are new to the bussiness and they aren't usually coming from the wealthy families which accumulated their money for centuries (like Jewish bank families). Those are wealthy people for media - not wealthy people who rule the world. The wise children of those on the lists can withdraw those lists and work 'undercover' far away from media's loud attention.

First, we're talking about self made billionaires, not those who have inherited their wealth.

Second, you still can't explain the disparity between the men and the women.

 

[B.I.B.]

First, we're talking about self made billionaires, not those who have inherited their wealth.

Second, you still can't explain the disparity between the men and the women.

Isn't the discussion about why China had more female billionaires than all of the West put together?

To recap you suggested it had something to do with the greater equality between the genders.

I disagreed by suggesting there was very little difference between China and the West when comparing the level of gender equality and offered up other reasons.

1/China had a more conducive enviroment for creations billionaires as it had a developing economy with less red tape.

2/Chinese woman were higher educated in more appropriate subjects than women in the West.to add to that,many would have made contacts,and obtained managerial experience while working in the SOEs

3/Chinesewomen found it hard to gain senior position and thus more likely to strike out on their own.Some had returned from the West with fancy Ivy League Mba's
"Forbes profiled one a couple of years back. She had a chinese name which I can't remember,however her surname was Hawken, and she became involved with property.

I also think you misunderstood the point I was making about privately owned companies.they are private because the owners did not need to make them public.the advantage of private companies is that they don't have to disclose financial information.the big advantage is that they don't have to make dividend payments to their shareholders,so they can focus on long term goals.they can choose to offer shares to Te public by way of a IPO and possibly become billionaires themselves.
Unlike China the NZ is very small and the amount of money handled on a daily basis would barely make pocket change in a Chinese scenario. so in a small market with limited investors interested in IPOs, why bother if one doesn't need the money as it is a very expensive and demanding process.
I think the same problem exists in quite a few smaller economies around the world.


As a reply you made about the total amount of Chinese numbers of billionaires not exceeding the West, I think someone posted a report from a Chinese publication "Hurun"claiming China had more billionaires than the USA.Because they started later it might be just a matter of time before they had the most in the world.

 

[Blitzo]

Isn't the discussion about why China had more female billionaires than all of the West put together?

To recap you suggested it had something to do with the greater equality between the genders.

I disagreed by suggesting there was very little difference between China and the West when comparing the level of gender equality and offered up other reasons.

"Equality of the genders" is a very vague and difficult to quantify phrase. Gender equality can after all be looked at from all sorts of domains, from social status/opportunity, to economic status/opportunity, to political status/opportunity, to military status/opportunity, so on and so forth. Some of these domains may even overlap.

In this case, the specific domain we are trying to examine the cause for, is China's greater number of self made female billionaires compared to other countries, when considering proportions of male vs female billionaires both within each country and between each country.
So specifically, we are looking at the basis of gender differences and/or equality which may have allowed women in China to achieve greater economic status or partake in more economic opportunity than in other countries.

In the rest of your post you then go on to describe a number of factors such as economic, educational, social, which may all have helped provide the circumstances for Chinese women to reach greater economic status/opportunity... and that itself is an attempt at explaining why there may be greater gender equality in this specific economic domain in China than in other countries. After all, things such as gender equality are very much dependent on the circumstances which may or may not enable certain degrees of equality to be reached.


The point I'm making is that it's actually very reasonable to use "gender equality" as a reason for trying to explain this difference, but one needs to be more specific about the domain of gender equality and what circumstances may or may not exist for the results to have occurred.
Furthermore, having good circumstances for gender equality in one domain (such as economic) may not always mean good circumstances for gender equality in another domain (such as politics).

In the case of this specific topic (self made female billionaires), I think it would be very sensible to argue that China may have better circumstances that allow more females to reach potentially higher rungs of economic status and opportunity compared to other nations, and that this could be described as greater gender equality in the economic domain.

 

[plawolf]

From a purely anecdotal standpoint, from my personal experience, gender equality is a very different animal in China compared to the west.

In my view, there is more social gender inequality in China compared to in the west, yet at the same time, professional gender inequality is far less deep rooted in China compared to the west.

That, in my view, is a big reason for the professional drive of Chinese women, and why they do so well in that regard - that the best and easiest way to escape the social gender inequality they suffer is to throw oneself more into the world of work, where women get treated fairer. Many women then use their professional accomplishments and status as a means to leverage better social treatment.

 

[Franklin]

This is actually good news. China is finally tackeling the overcapacity issue.

China expects to lay off 1.8 million workers in coal, steel sectors

China expects to lay off 1.8 million workers in the coal and steel sectors as part of its efforts to reduce industrial overcapacity, an official at the human resources and social security ministry said on Monday.

Yin Weimin, minister of human resources and social security, said capacity cuts will lead to some layoffs in 2016, but added that he was confident of keeping employment stable this year despite downward pressure on the economy.

No timeframe was given for the 1.8 million figure cited.

China aims to remove around 500 million tonnes of coal production capacity within the next three to five years and halt approvals of all new projects.

Please, Log in or Register to view URLs content!

 

[Ultra]

Looks like lean time ahead for the chinese.

 

[Equation]

Yeah if you would call 6-7% GDP growth "lean". Heck the EU or anybody would murder for that kind of "lean years"!

 

[Ultra]

Yeah if you would call 6-7% GDP growth "lean". Heck the EU or anybody would murder for that kind of "lean years"!

There is a big difference, G7 are developed countries who are already rich with comprehensive social security and pension system in place. China is a developing country with massive population and a large section of that population extremely poor. There is little to no safety net for these people who get laid off. If there is massive slow down that results in high unemployement, with no safety net in place, there is going to be riots and maybe even revolution. It is said that the communist party relies on GDP growth to sustain their power base and social stability.