Chinese Economics Thread

[Hendrik_2000]

Ok guy let's move on . Regardless of the nay sayer China keep improving the livelihood of her people. Now the "Have not" provinces are closing the gap against Beijing and Shanghai
China's have not provinces are closing the gap with Shanghai and other richer regions

Please, Log in or Register to view URLs content!

,

Please, Log in or Register to view URLs content!

,

Please, Log in or Register to view URLs content!

,

Please, Log in or Register to view URLs content!

,

Please, Log in or Register to view URLs content!

,

Please, Log in or Register to view URLs content!

Please, Log in or Register to view URLs content!

the favorable news is that Chinese regions are converging (link is external). The chart below shows those regions that had relatively low per capita GDP in 2009 have grown significantly faster in the subsequent years than the more developed (mostly coastal) provinces.

Please, Log in or Register to view URLs content!

Please, Log in or Register to view URLs content!

Below is updated provincial per capita information. The chart above is based on 2009 currency.

Please, Log in or Register to view URLs content!

On a nominal exchange rate basis and IMF projection
2016 $8866 [About the level of Turkey, 71st of 189 countries, about 15% of US per capita level]
2017 $9482
2018 $10219
2019 $11127
2020 $11457
2021 $12543 [Past Turkey and Mexico, Nearing Lebanon and Hungary about 18.6% of US per capita level]

Please, Log in or Register to view URLs content!

2016 $15095 [About 26% of US per capita level, 85th in the world]
2017 $16172
2018 $17405
2019 $18752
2020 $20190
2021 $21733 [about 32% of US level, 79th in the world] Overall China economy would 132% of the US economy on PPP basis







SOURCES - Peterson Institute for International Economics (PIIE), IMF, China national statistics
Author:

Please, Log in or Register to view URLs content!

on

Please, Log in or Register to view URLs content!

 

[Brumby]

The exchange started from here actually,https://www.sinodefenceforum.com/chinese-economics-thread.t3715/page-567#post-401012

I am responding to your specific issue so as to bring closure to a topic of conversation and not be accused of selective avoidance. Personally I would not have responded in a like manner that you took issue with. I had on many occasions mentioned I dislike economics because economic statistics and data as an instrument is highly subjective to interpretation and comes with it various caveats that are not intuitively obvious. In other words, one can present a set of economic data and frame the narrative that favours one interpretation over another but the preferred narrative may not necessarily be true because it may be difficult to disprove due to various reasons. For example, in that situation you highlighted the contention was whether the Europeans were pulling back investments in China as alluded and someone pulled some statistics that showed foreign investments were still increasing which were counter to that narrative. The problem though is that those statistics do not differentiate between European and other foreign investments and so without knowing the mix we can't decisively conclude. More importantly, there is failure to recognise that in the real world, investment decisions have long lead and lag time before its impact its obvious due to the nature of investment decision cycles. The reason I am actually making the effort to go through this is to highlight economic discussions are never straight forward and very often inconclusive. It is the main reason I normally stay out of it as very often discussions are not very productive.

On another note, MSCI had decided to defer Chinese stocks into the index.

Please, Log in or Register to view URLs content!

"Chinese authorities have been trying to attract capital in, but restricting outflows, and this (repatriation limit) is capital restriction out. That does deter a lot of foreign investors," Qiu said, noting that "if the global environment remains benign and the currency depreciation remains gradual, they could actually consider relaxing it."

MSCI said it would retain the China A shares inclusion proposal as part of the 2017 review and did not rule out a potential off-cycle announcement "should further significant positive developments occur ahead of June 2017."

"International institutional investors clearly indicated that they would like to see further improvements in the accessibility of the China A shares market before its inclusion in the MSCI Emerging Markets Index," Remy Briand, managing director and global head of research at MSCI, said in the release. "In keeping with its standard practice, MSCI will monitor the implementation of the recently announced policy changes and will seek feedback from market participants."

The release also said investors needed more time to assess the effectiveness of the Qualified Foreign Institutional Investor program (QFII) investment quota allocation, capital mobility policy changes and the effectiveness of the new trading suspension policies.

In financial markets, premium is placed on certainty of policies, unhindered movement of funds, governance and transparencies. These are areas that China need to work on.

 

[broadsword]

I am responding to your specific issue so as to bring closure to a topic of conversation and not be accused of selective avoidance. Personally I would not have responded in a like manner that you took issue with. I had on many occasions mentioned I dislike economics because economic statistics and data as an instrument is highly subjective to interpretation and comes with it various caveats that are not intuitively obvious. In other words, one can present a set of economic data and frame the narrative that favours one interpretation over another but the preferred narrative may not necessarily be true because it may be difficult to disprove due to various reasons. For example, in that situation you highlighted the contention was whether the Europeans were pulling back investments in China as alluded and someone pulled some statistics that showed foreign investments were still increasing which were counter to that narrative. The problem though is that those statistics do not differentiate between European and other foreign investments and so without knowing the mix we can't decisively conclude. More importantly, there is failure to recognise that in the real world, investment decisions have long lead and lag time before its impact its obvious due to the nature of investment decision cycles. The reason I am actually making the effort to go through this is to highlight economic discussions are never straight forward and very often inconclusive. It is the main reason I normally stay out of it as very often discussions are not very productive.

So someone post a current positive report on China. A second person would post another report to offset that report, often off tangent to the original poster's report, with sarcastic remarks to boot. And so the bickering starts. The cycle has been repeated many times. As I wrote before, it is good sometimes for someone to play the Devil's advocate, but his intention is clear to us; may not be to you and you do not find it a problem because that seems to be your way too, but it is not.

What happens when the mod steps in?

The thread seized. See my post https://www.sinodefenceforum.com/chinese-economics-thread.t3715/page-573#post-401416.

I don't want to see that happen. Otherwise, in response to Hendrik's post before yours, he or the other one might post to say China is still a long way off from even South Korea or Taiwan's standard. As if we do not know of such factoid. He did something similar before: When China reported it succeeded in developing a critical electronic component, he wrote that other countries had already succeeded. If it was you or Bltizo who responded, the impression would have been different. You have to factor the relevant variables to understand the resulting after taste. I do not want to go into those as they are too sensitive.

So I am thankful to the mod for asking Samuraiblue to stay away from this thread in fairness to the majority.

 

[Brumby]

So someone post a current positive report on China. A second person would post another report to offset that report, often off tangent to the original poster's report, with sarcastic remarks to boot. And so the bickering starts. The cycle has been repeated many times. As I wrote before, it is good sometimes for someone to play the Devil's advocate, but his intention is clear to us; may not be to you and you do not find it a problem because that seems to be your way too, but it is not.

What happens when the mod steps in?

Philosophically and factually I disagree with the notion that posting a contrary view is necessarily the source leading to a thread being shut down. The rules are against country bashing and nationalist chest thumping and so such actions should not be present. The problem being framed is that negative post is country bashing but such standard opens up the prospective argument that positive post are merely nationalistic chest thumping and hence should rightly be subject to the same restriction. Popeye I believe has the view that politics should not be allowed and discussions only confined to military matters because politics tend to attract tension between opposing interest group. The source of the problem in my view is not the presence of positive or negative post but generally the lack of maturity of forum members in accommodating such matters. Invariably discussions deviate off topic because rebuttals cannot be sustained based on substance and at worst degenerate to personal attacks as a choice of last resort. When matters eventually get out of control, moderators have to step in to temporarily close the thread. The issue in my view is poor form in attempting to shift responsibility where the main problem is lack of maturity in behaviour and capacity to handle complex discussions.

 

[broadsword]

Philosophically and factually I disagree with the notion that posting a contrary view is necessarily the source leading to a thread being shut down. The rules are against country bashing and nationalist chest thumping and so such actions should not be present. The problem being framed is that negative post is country bashing but such standard opens up the prospective argument that positive post are merely nationalistic chest thumping and hence should rightly be subject to the same restriction.

Is the other party not also being nationalistic and antagonistic?

The source of the problem in my view is not the presence of positive or negative post but generally the lack of maturity of forum members in accommodating such matters. Invariably discussions deviate off topic because rebuttals cannot be sustained based on substance and at worst degenerate to personal attacks as a choice of last resort. When matters eventually get out of control, moderators have to step in to temporarily close the thread. The issue in my view is poor form in attempting to shift responsibility where the main problem is lack of maturity in behaviour and capacity to handle complex discussions.

This is not a photography or cooking forum. By the letter of the law, he has not broken any rule; by the spirit, he has been a bull in a china shop. When matters get out of hand, you need effectual and decisive solution.

 

[Brumby]

Is the other party not also being nationalistic and antagonistic?



This is not a photography or cooking forum. By the letter of the law, he has not broken any rule; by the spirit, he has been a bull in a china shop. When matters get out of hand, you need effectual and decisive solution.

I don't think being nationalistic is a problem but whether SB had been overtly antagonistic is a question of degree, motive and intend and is highly subjective. It should be noted that it is not merely SB's actions but also the corresponding actions of other posters toward SB. In any case, a moderating call had been made and we should let the matter rest and move on.

 

[broadsword]

I don't think being nationalistic is a problem but whether SB had been overtly antagonistic is a question of degree, motive and intend and is highly subjective. It should be noted that it is not merely SB's actions but also the corresponding actions of other posters toward SB.

As I had said before, different stroke for different folks. We are different. You can see several members had stepped in to take on him.

In any case, a moderating call had been made and we should let the matter rest and move on.

Let us focus on the real issues.

 

[irischloe]

Ok guy let's move on . Regardless of the nay sayer China keep improving the livelihood of her people. Now the "Have not" provinces are closing the gap against Beijing and Shanghai.....

It is pretty astonishing Inner Mongolia could sit at rank 6, even richer than Guangdong!!
and it looks like the southwest part of China is the poorest region (including Sichuan ,Yunnan and Guizhou), wonder any big development plan to improve livelihood there?

 

[solarz]

It is pretty astonishing Inner Mongolia could sit at rank 6, even richer than Guangdong!!
and it looks like the southwest part of China is the poorest region (including Sichuan ,Yunnan and Guizhou), wonder any big development plan to improve livelihood there?

Inner Mongolia is home to all the coal tycoons. There is a massive coal mining industry there.

 

[Qi_1528]

@Brumby. Personally, I think SamuraiBlue was skirting the edge of what is acceptable under the rules. He has clearly been pushing a political agenda, regardless of what the facts and reality say, as happens with most ideologically driven people. He may have been doing it implicitly rather than explicitly, but I don't think that should get him out of trouble. He also comes off as a bit of a troll. For those who don't know Western internet speak, a troll is someone who deliberately seeks to annoy or upset people for kicks.

I've voiced contrarian viewpoints on this forum myself, and have yet to get into any major trouble, and I think partly because I try to make it clear I am interested in getting as close to the truth as possible.

Post about provincial GDP growth rates

These numbers are excellent to see, but I am concerned about where the GDP growth in poorer provinces is coming from. Last time I checked, income inequality in China is still growing from a level which is already economically destabilising. I'd be interested to see the trend of inequality levels for individual provinces if anyone knows where I can find this data.