Chinese Economics Thread

[pla101prc]

China now the world's largest exporter.

Please, Log in or Register to view URLs content!

China Overtakes Germany As Top Global Exporter


By Gary Bowerman, on 26-08-2009

Published in : The News, News August 2009

China exported goods worth USD521.7 bn in the first half of 2009, narrowly edging ahead of Germany, which exported goods worth USD521.6 bn, as the world's largest exporter, according to new data from the World Trade Organisation.

Germany has held the status as the world's leading exporter since 2003, and even though total Chinese exports have declined year on year for nine months, the WTO has predicted that China will pass Germany as the largest exporter in 2009.

Analaysts have noted that the full year export figure is hard to judge for both countries due to a number of crucial variables, such as the exchange rate as well as the rate of economic recovery, or otherwise, in certain regions.

The Organisation for Economic Cooperation and Development has predicted that the ratio of China's foreign trade to global trade will increase from the current 8.7 per cent to 10 per cent when the global economy recovers.

Last update : 26-08-2009

who was the leading exporter before 03, the US? looks like their industrial capability is depleting pretty fast.

i can just picture China becoming a huge trading monster like Japan once was, but to do that they need to manufacture better goods than just low-end products...

 

[EdT586]

Will China Disarm the World ?

A very interesting article on "China's Way of War" with her ultimate goal of disarming the world as an "economic" superpower !

Please, Log in or Register to view URLs content!

The article deals with economics. This is why I moved it to this thread.

bd popeye super moderator

 

[AssassinsMace]

China could be $1 trillion green tech market
By ELAINE KURTENBACH, AP Business Writer Elaine Kurtenbach, Ap Business Writer
Thu Sep 10, 4:46 am ET

SHANGHAI – China potentially could be a $500 billion to $1 trillion a year market for environmentally sustainable "green technologies," a group of businesses and experts said in a report Thursday that urges governments to ease the way for such initiatives.

The report by the China Greentech Initiative, a group of more than 80 leading technology companies, non-governmental organizations and policy advisers, pinpointed opportunities from 300 potential green technology options for China, spanning energy, water, buildings, transportation and industry.

But government support is key, said Richard Gledhill, global leader of Climate Change & Carbon Market Services in London for PricewaterhouseCoopers, a consultancy that helped head the research.

According to the U.S. International Energy Agency, holding climate change to just a 2 degrees Celsius increase over the next two decades will require $9 trillion in extra spending, he said.

"The private sector has a key role to play in delivering the required investment at the scale required to avoid dangerous climate change. But it will only do this if there is a clear, long-term policy framework to underpin prospects of a reasonable return," Gledhill said.

The project defined greentech as technologies, products and services that benefit users as much or more than conventional alternatives, while limiting the impact on the natural environment and promoting efficient and sustainable use of energy, water and other resources.

While such changes are needed worldwide, China's rapid growth and dizzyingly fast urbanization are contributing to a building boom that has created more than twice the floor space as in the U.S.

About 18 million people migrate from rural areas to the cities each year, so that by about 2050 China will have more than 200 cities with populations of more than 1 million people, the report said.

Such growth will require huge increases in use of energy, water and materials that will force China to adopt new, environmentally friendly technologies, it said.

Both Chinese and foreign companies will find new opportunities, though they still face challenges, particularly in overcoming barriers to transfer of technologies and preventing piracy of intellectual property such as patents.

"We need to find new business models to accelerate investment since so much of the technology is owned by universities rather than businesses," Gledhill told a recent conference in Shanghai on green technology.

 

[crobato]

Another economic milestone.

China's top 500 companies beat US rivals

Please, Log in or Register to view URLs content!

CHINA'S top 500 companies outperformed their US counterparts for the first time last year, a survey conducted by a business group has revealed, as the financial crisis wreaked havoc in the US.

Net profits at the nation's highest-performing firms totalled $US171 billion ($200.85 billion) in 2008, compared to $US99 billion ($116.28 billion) for the US firms, according to the survey by the China Enterprise Confederation (CEC).

The business group has compiled a list of China's top 500 companies, similar to the Fortune 500, since 2002.

The Chinese firms saw their profits fall by 13.2 per cent in 2008 compared to the previous year, according to the survey posted on the CEC's website - still a better performance than the Fortune 500's 85 per cent drop in profits.

The company that topped the list was state-owned giant Sinopec, the largest oil refiner in Asia, with revenue of 1.5 trillion yuan ($252.53 billion) in 2008, according to the survey, which was posted at the weekend.

Sinopec also made it to the top 10 of the Fortune Global 500, coming in at number nine.

China National Petroleum (CNPC), the nation's largest oil producer, came second with a turnover of 1.3 trillion yuan ($223.70 billion), and the State Grid Corporation of China followed with 1.1 trillion yuan ($189.18 billion) in revenue.

The Industrial and Commercial Bank of China, the country's biggest lender, ranked fourth on the list with a turnover of 490 billion yuan ($84.3 million).

The top 34 firms on the list are state-owned entities.

CEC vice-president Wang Jiming said the performance of China's top 500 in 2008 showed the financial crisis had less of an impact on the Asian nation's firms than on their US and global counterparts.

But he added it did not signal any substantial improvement in overall competitiveness.

"Chinese enterprises enjoy a good policy and domestic market environment," he was quoted as saying on the website.

"But compared to big global companies, they... still lag behind in resource allocation, innovation, international presence, business models and corporate culture."

The nation's top companies also did well on the world stage, eclipsing Britain for the first time in terms of the number of firms in the Fortune Global 500, Mr Wang said.

According to the 2009 global list, 37 Chinese companies qualified - a jump of eight firms compared to the previous ranking. But only 26 British firms made it onto the list.

 

[Violet Oboe]

"But compared to big global companies, they... still lag behind in resource allocation, innovation, international presence, business models and corporate culture."

What specific business models and corporate culture does the guy refer to?? May be the highly successful model of skimming off your own company until only a hollow scam of deceptions remains and nonetheless losing your ill gotten gains by ´investing´ in good old Bernie Maddoff's ´secure offshore funds´?:rofl:

Many westernized Chinese do not realize that China actually does not lag behind the West since it is simply different and for exactly being different it also extraordinarily successful. Any unreflecting imitation of western style liberal capitalism will lead to a rapid unraveling of the ´Chinese model´ and consequently to instability and disaster for the nation.

Every Chinese student of economics should learn carefully the lesson about Japan's painful descent during the last two decades from a world leader to a second rate power. The entire process of introducing ´liberal reforms´ since the early 90's is an almost exclusive story of unmitigated failure by destroying Japan's competitiveness, ruining the states finances and exposing Japan's economic vulnerabilities for any competitors readily to exploit.

 

[RedMercury]

Perhaps the reason why some nations work so hard to push specific models and ideas onto others is that these models and ideas don't work.

 

[tphuang]

"But compared to big global companies, they... still lag behind in resource allocation, innovation, international presence, business models and corporate culture."

What specific business models and corporate culture does the guy refer to?? May be the highly successful model of skimming off your own company until only a hollow scam of deceptions remains and nonetheless losing your ill gotten gains by ´investing´ in good old Bernie Maddoff's ´secure offshore funds´?:rofl:

Many westernized Chinese do not realize that China actually does not lag behind the West since it is simply different and for exactly being different it also extraordinarily successful. Any unreflecting imitation of western style liberal capitalism will lead to a rapid unraveling of the ´Chinese model´ and consequently to instability and disaster for the nation.

Every Chinese student of economics should learn carefully the lesson about Japan's painful descent during the last two decades from a world leader to a second rate power. The entire process of introducing ´liberal reforms´ since the early 90's is an almost exclusive story of unmitigated failure by destroying Japan's competitiveness, ruining the states finances and exposing Japan's economic vulnerabilities for any competitors readily to exploit.

wow, what a revelation. Going to socialism reduces a country's competitiveness. Thanks for your lesson.

Seriously though, there are a lot of reasons for Japan's lost decade, having a one-party rule by LDP that tried to spend its way to stay in power is only part of it. The biggest reasons is probably not letting anything fail, bailing all the banks out, having a zero-percent interest rate and of course it didn't help their competitive advantage that they had to float their currency. Then again, that's not the main problem.

China has a lot to learn from the West in certain areas especially in quality control, business management and market branding. Of course, there are a lot of things it should ignore too, but that's how you succeed. Learn from other's mistakes and adopt their successful method. For example, six sigma, that's probably one of the most important lessons that Chinese companies have adopted.

 

[pla101prc]

China and the US actually have ostensibly similar kind of problems, in both cases their largest firms are large enough to influence or even dictate government policies. of course the respective cause of this phenomenon is quite different. but in both cases, i say its more than just an economic issue, its a political issue. especially for China, its much more complicated than just a "capitalism vs socialism" debate, if that's how some ppl want to look at it, then i'll just have to say that their brain function isnt sophisticated enough to capture the complexity of China's political environment.

 

[lcloo]

I don't believe there is a perfect model of economy or comapny based purely in capitalism or socialism. It is like food recipie, can you take the original hot spicy Thai Tom Yam? I love hot food yet I have to watered down on the chilly and spice.

Local culture, work attitude, education and many other factors can have certain impact. People in New York and Hong Kong can work like dog and capitalist models worked well. In China these will cause riots and protest, citing inhuman treatment (human rights?).

To be successful, it is not a question of being capitalist or socialist. It is acceptance by the mass, and making money so that your stake holders are happy, and recipient of your service and products are happy. And make everybody not only actually having a share of benifits but thinking that they have or will receive those benefits.

Economy is really all about producing and satisfying the needs of people. It is not the rigid model but the people that matters.

 

[Roger604]

wow, what a revelation. Going to socialism reduces a country's competitiveness. Thanks for your lesson.

Seriously though, there are a lot of reasons for Japan's lost decade, having a one-party rule by LDP that tried to spend its way to stay in power is only part of it. The biggest reasons is probably not letting anything fail, bailing all the banks out, having a zero-percent interest rate and of course it didn't help their competitive advantage that they had to float their currency. Then again, that's not the main problem.

China has a lot to learn from the West in certain areas especially in quality control, business management and market branding. Of course, there are a lot of things it should ignore too, but that's how you succeed. Learn from other's mistakes and adopt their successful method. For example, six sigma, that's probably one of the most important lessons that Chinese companies have adopted.

Well I think you're both right. There's no contradiction here. Japan's "relative" decline was caused by China's rise and by financial market tactics of the US.

It is true that China still has a lot to learn. As a whole, Chinese industry and economy is relatively rudimentary and unsophisticated compared to the West. At the same time, the gap is very quickly narrowing, and I expect in 10 years the best businesses in China will no longer have anything to learn from the West. They will need to innovate on their own.