Chinese Economics Thread

Blitzo

Lieutenant General
Staff member
Super Moderator
Registered Member
My sons good friend comes from China and he says its much easier here.
What do you intend studying?
Haha, in my own opinion I don't think any apology is on the menu, it is a forum as you've said, and people do say their own views - whatever that may be, and as long as it's within the set rules by whatever governing body of the site I think there's no problem.
I can hardly ask for an apology because a few of your arguments were effective! (though a bit controversial)

If I stay in NZ I'd probably want to go for a english/literature course (my best subject at school, ironicaly enough) cause I'm kind of good at it and it is quite interesting IMO. But if I went back to the PRC I'd probably have to do any course which comes under physics, chemistry or maybe accounting/business. I'd probably go to a Shanghai uni, as I have quite extensive relatives on my dad's side. Nothing's set in concrete yet of course, and I have yet to decide what subject's I will do next year so anything can change at this moment. :(

But that's enough about my personal life, I'll leave the more experienced members now to discuss about Chinese Economics now.
 

bladerunner

Banned Idiot
Yeah I suspect you're not Chinese because you talk about Chinese in a xenophobic way.
I dont wish to repeat myself so perhaps you may want to read blitzos posts on 745 and my reply on 748



And the charge of Chinese being responsible for the Rwandan massacre because the machetes were made in China is made in this book...

Please, Log in or Register to view URLs content!


They are showing their bias anybody with half a brain should be able to sort out the wheat from the chaff.
You also see this type of low quality reporting in the newspapers all the time
for example at the time of product scares from china.

Have you noticed that when a Western or Japanese company issues a recall they dont name the country only the company ............eg "Sony/ Ford issues recall for faulty battery". but if it was a Chinese company I can guarantee it would be " Chinese company issues recall" Its poor quality management control that allows that to happen, if you feel strongly about that, you should take that up in the western newspapers, rather than bitch about it here.

And look to yourself. If you can charge and perpetuate a lie that Asians intentionally introduced an invasive foreign species into the San Francisco bay even though after an official report said it was from ships'
I did no such thing, I merely introduced another another anti asian incidence to illustrate that San Fran doesnt have a monopoly on that



ballast tanks, you don't think someone of your mindset will sound the alarm bells and blame China for the death of untold numbers of birds because of windmill
DEspite what I going to say you have already made up your mind. However the answer is NO, and thats despite the fact I couldnt give a stuff about the birds




What is your view? You expect China to obey every activists that makes a charge as if they have the most honest intentions. Then you contradict yourself telling us not to follow the West. Your critical view of China then serves no purpose but China-bashing.

Once again NO Im not telling you, you must do this or that, Im merely expressing an opinion and inviting a response and not raming it down your throat.

AS we were inniatially discussing the Chinese economy, come up with a valid reply that counters the validity of my statement that "in my opinion sustainable growth is a better option than the exploitive 19th century one".rather than tired old one of hypocrysy. Im begining to think you havent got one or its pretty weak, Otherwise why resort to character attack?
 
Last edited:

AssassinsMace

Lieutenant General
That is one messy post.

Character attack? Like labeling people in here "China apologists?"

Shall we go back to where you didn't bother to explain when asked how can in two exact parallel cases you vilified the buyer in one case while villifying the supplier in another? Both happening to be China. China buying timber is a crime while Westerners knowingly buying organs that came from prisoners that were murdered for their organs is okay. And you don't think you have a bias against China?
 
Last edited:

bladerunner

Banned Idiot
That is one messy post.
I should stop trying to multi task

Character attack? Like labeling people in here "China apologists?"
A thoughtless one off usage on my part, possibly from exasperation

Shall we go back to where you didn't bother to explain when asked how can in two exact parallel cases you vilified the buyer in one case while villifying the supplier in another? Both happening to be China. China buying timber is a crime while Westerners knowingly buying organs that came from prisoners that were murdered for their organs is okay. And you don't think you have a bias against China?

Youve got me there, I can't really give a satisfactory one, and I really don't know enough about the claims and counter claims between say the state and the F.G.
While im not trying to make an apology for the participants in organ transplants, I really would hate to speculate what goes through a persons mind when told by his doctor that hes gonna die unless he gets a kidney. The thought of that could make the most noblest amongst us to make a strange decissions.
However with illegal logged timber, is that really life or death situation? WE have the governments of these countries trying to put a stop to the growth of naturally grown hardwood trees and direct people to purchase plantation grown ones. This blackmarket , which I think is circumventing sustainability is deplorable, is just plain greed. rather than life or death survival.
 

Engineer

Major
The only way?

Surely not, In the short term it might be the quickest and cheapest, but not the
only way.

If there are viable alternatives, they would have been adopted already. But clearly there isn't one, because if there is, you would have identified it already.
 

bladerunner

Banned Idiot
If there are viable alternatives, they would have been adopted already. But clearly there isn't one, because if there is, you would have identified it already.

Although I feel protecting the environment is important ,I realise economic growth must come first and unfortunately if faced with the choice of adopting a "slash and burn approach" or die, concerns for the environment seem to fly out the window.
As far as China is concerned perhaps better enforcement of the policies it is prepared to carry out. It appears that regional governments ignore edicts from central, at leisure and it's just the same old same old. I read that some of the reasons for the thousands of disturbances in the rural areas aren't just about money, but the degradation of the environment around them.

Much is made of Chinas accumulation of financial resources, and despite its impressive ventures into green technology eg solar power etc, perhaps more money can be devoted to making eco friendly choices at industry level. because I can envisage a period where the West would start to place levies on Chinese products on the grounds that China isn't pulling its weight in emissions control. Having said this, I fully go along with China not undertaking any formal undertaking in the level of emissions So why not pre-empt this by implementing more green technology thus creating new industries and jobs for the up skilled who had been involved in low tech manufacturing?

Finally and getting back to the environment Vechiles whose views I respect , suggested that we really have no way of forecasting what's going to happen in the distant future. we can't even predict the following weeks weather with any degree of certainty. However true that may be, Scientists are now claiming that the worse case scenarious made by the U.N. two years ago are now being realised
Please, Log in or Register to view URLs content!
. ,so the affects of not heading the warning signs is coming back to bite us on the bum , Therefore a doable growth model, one that is not based on maximum profits should be investigated.
 
Last edited:

ABC78

Junior Member
Hey guys I saw this program on C-span2 and I found to informitive. Even though this is from 06 I think the issues disgusted are still relivant. Hope you like it.

Please, Log in or Register to view URLs content!
 

flyzies

Junior Member
Please, Log in or Register to view URLs content!


China Import Surge Casts Obama Tariff as Phony War (Update1)
Share | Email | Print | A A A

By Bloomberg News

Sept. 17 (Bloomberg) -- Chinese consumers who buy $608 billion of goods from overseas are diminishing the prospects of a trade war with the U.S.

China’s imports, up 68 percent in five years, now amount to almost one-third of gross domestic product, according to World Bank data. The nation’s demand for foreign products is a boon for American companies, which exported $351 billion to China in the past five years.

U.S. President Barack Obama’s 35 percent tariff on tires from China spurred a Chinese investigation into prices of U.S. poultry and car products. Dangers of further escalation may be mitigated by the increasing benefit China provides the world economy. Poised to surpass Japan as No. 2 in GDP, its purchasing power is a lure to firms seeking new customers.

“As China depends more on domestic demand, its rise won’t be seen by the rest of the world to be as big a threat as some view it now,” said Shen Minggao, a former consultant to the World Bank who is chief economist in Hong Kong for the Greater China region at Citigroup Inc., the third-largest U.S. bank.

Tyson Foods Inc., the world’s biggest meat producer, entered China in 2001. Last year, the Asian nation accounted for 10 percent of the Springdale, Arkansas-based company’s $1.4 billion in beef sales and 12 percent of its $1.6 billion chicken sales.

Prevent Escalation

Meat consumption per person is about 20 pounds a year in China, compared with 89 pounds in the U.S., Tyson estimates. That helps explain why Tyson joined Hormel Foods Corp. and 32 other agriculture companies and industry associations this month to push the Obama administration to refrain from engaging in a trade battle with China.

“The size of China’s economy and the extent to which the nation is entwined with other major economies may prevent an escalation” of conflicts, said Lu Ting, an economist at Bank of America-Merrill Lynch in Hong Kong.

China accounted for a third of global expansion last year, according to International Monetary Fund data using purchasing- power-parity calculations to adjust for exchange-rate differences. Its growth this decade has averaged 10.2 percent, and it will overtake Japan next year with GDP of $5.3 trillion, surpassing its Asian neighbor’s $4.72 trillion, the IMF projects.

‘Dynamic’ Growth

Increasing consumer demand in China for foreign goods and services has been spurred by 4 trillion yuan ($586 billion) in stimulus spending. The import surge is helping reshape the region, with China passing the U.S. as Japan’s biggest export customer this year and also becoming the No. 1 export market for South Korea.

China is “providing a much more dynamic source of pan- regional growth, and ultimately of global growth” than Japan ever did, said Stephen Roach, chairman of Morgan Stanley Asia, based in Hong Kong. “China’s pretty open to both exports and imports.”

While some Chinese imports are components used in products that are later shipped to consumers abroad, that share is dropping. Government figures show it fell to about 33 percent last year from 39 percent in 2007. Analysts said the nation is likely to become a bigger final destination for global goods and services.

China’s advancing economy benefits from having the world’s largest population: At 1.33 billion, it is more than 10 times that of Japan. Chinese GDP per person was $3,300 in 2008, equal to Japan’s 1973 total, according to estimates by economists at Nomura International Ltd.

‘Early Stage’

“It just shows you that China is still at a very early stage of development,” said Robert Subbaraman, chief economist for non-Japan Asia at Nomura in Hong Kong, who worked at the Australian central bank.

Tyson -- along with Austin, Minnesota-based Hormel, the second-largest U.S. turkey processor -- and 32 other agriculture companies and industry associations pressed the Obama administration in a Sept. 3 letter to refrain from tariffs on Chinese tire imports, concerned that China would retaliate against U.S. products.

“For some, the Chinese market is the difference between profitability and possible bankruptcy,” the groups wrote to U.S. Trade Representative Ronald Kirk.

Gary Mickelson, a Tyson spokesman, declined to comment on why his company joined the effort. Julie Craven, a spokeswoman for Hormel, didn’t respond to requests for comment.

U.S. Factory Jobs

Obama said Sept. 11 he will boost by 35 percent the 4 percent tariff on $1.8 billion of imported Chinese car and light-duty truck tires. He acted on a petition from the United Steelworkers union that said surging imports are cutting factory jobs. The duties start Sept. 26 and last for three years, dropping 5 percentage points a year, according to a White House statement.

U.S. stocks showed little sign of investor concern, with the Standard & Poor’s 500 Index rising 2.5 percent since the announcement. American government bond yields are also little changed; China is the biggest holder of Treasury securities, with $800.5 billion. Benchmark 10-year notes closed to yield 3.47 percent yesterday, compared with an average 3.43 percent the past month.

Obama played down the danger of escalating tensions with China, arguing that trade rules must be enforced to build support among lawmakers and the American public.

Bilateral Ties

“We’re not going to see a trade war,” Obama said in a Sept. 14 interview at the White House. “We have rules on the books” and “we’ve got to establish credibility and enforcement of the rules precisely because I want to further expand trade,” he said when asked what he will tell China’s President Hu Jintao at the Group of 20 meeting next week in Pittsburgh.

While China’s Ministry of Commerce said it “strongly opposes” Obama’s decision and announced probes of chicken and auto products from the U.S., it also sought to underscore the importance of bilateral economic ties.

“We don’t want to see individual trade-remedy cases hurt the trade and economic relationship between China and the U.S.,” Yao Jian, a ministry spokesman, told reporters Sept. 15 in Beijing.

There may still be a risk that tensions will become more heated because China lacks the political and military ties Japan has with the U.S., said Nicholas Lardy, a senior fellow at the Peterson Institute for International Economics in Washington.

“The potential for trade friction, and any other kind of friction, is much higher with China than Japan,” Lardy said. “We don’t have a security relationship with China and we’re not likely to have one.”

Steel Pipes

U.S. Steel Corp. filed yesterday a petition with the U.S. International Trade Commission seeking dumping and anti-subsidy duties of as much as 90 percent on $400 million of Chinese-made steel pipes used in chemical, petrochemical, refineries and related operations, according to Roger Schagrin, a lawyer for the U.S. producers. The U.S. imposed tariffs this month on a different type of steel pipe from China in a separate case.

A Chinese Ministry of Commerce official, asked about the U.S. Steel filing, said that giving in to protectionism will only provoke more such actions. He spoke on condition of anonymity.

Obama and Hu are scheduled to meet at the summit of leaders from the world’s largest developed and emerging nations Sept. 24-25. The G-20 at its November and April gatherings committed to “reject protectionism” and promote global trade.

Rising Rank

China’s ascendance comes after it already surpassed Germany and the U.K. in global GDP rankings earlier this decade. IMF projections indicate its economy will climb to $8.5 trillion in 2014, about half the size of the $16.9 trillion estimate for the U.S.

Premier Wen Jiabao said last week tax cuts on property and car purchases, subsidies for low-income households and a three- year 850 billion yuan plan to improve health-care coverage were aimed at boosting income and spurring domestic demand.

Wen’s government is targeting 8 percent GDP expansion this year, after the growth rate averaged 9.9 percent during the past three decades. In Japan, the central bank estimates that potential growth has fallen to about 1 percent, roughly half the pace achieved during a six-year expansion through 2007.

“The big development this year is that China has become a market in and of itself, not just a production base,” said Jian-min Jin, a senior fellow at Fujitsu Research Institute in Tokyo who previously helped craft technology policy at China’s Department of Science and Technology. “China’s attitude towards its own market has changed. The government is actively trying to build a domestic market.”
 

Mcsweeney

Junior Member
Paul McCartney boycotting the Beijing Olympics was mentioned. I also remember that Steven Spielberg was hired to direct the opening ceremonies, but he pulled out because he somehow blamed China for the genocide in Darfur. I thought that was pretty damn ridiculous.

Funny thing is though, it was for the better. Why did they need him anyway? When he pulled out, he was replaced by the movie director Zhang Yimou, and he put on the best opening ceremony of all time.
 

pla101prc

Senior Member
Paul McCartney boycotting the Beijing Olympics was mentioned. I also remember that Steven Spielberg was hired to direct the opening ceremonies, but he pulled out because he somehow blamed China for the genocide in Darfur. I thought that was pretty damn ridiculous.

Funny thing is though, it was for the better. Why did they need him anyway? When he pulled out, he was replaced by the movie director Zhang Yimou, and he put on the best opening ceremony of all time.

Zhang was always the director, steve was some advisor thingy. but yea the point is since the ceremony was a huge success, it made him look like a real idiot
 
Top