Chinese Economics Thread

solarz

Brigadier
@solarz , I don't know if you took a look at his data but it put China's population in 2100 at between 600 million to 1.6 billion. I expect then that all the age group estimates also fluctuate similarly. That's extremely wide coverage and not really much to argue about even though there's still no guarantee that it will turn out "right". In general, I don't pay any mind to predictions of what's to come almost a century later because anything could happen in that span of time: war, plague, famine, global mass extinction (yes, some predict global mass extinction in 2100), life rejuvenating biotechnology (as some pointed out), colonization of other planets (or maybe underwater cities), etc...

Yes, I pretty much dismissed the whole year 2100 projection out of hand. However, even the 50-year projection is highly speculative.

@Klon I've given you examples, based on things that are actually happening, of how China's demographic trend will undergo some major changes in the future. If you insist on dismissing those initiatives, then that's your prerogative.

20 years ago, "experts" were saying China's only children would not be able to support their elderly parents without the help of siblings. Turns out it wasn't their parents that weren't getting support, but their grandparents, the generation that had 5 or 6 kids on average. Guess what happened? The baby boomers knew they were going to have to prepare for old age, so they focused their attention on that instead of caring for their own parents. The generation that, by expert opinion, should have had no problem getting support from their numerous kids, is now the ones suffering.
 

Klon

Junior Member
Registered Member
As responding line by line is a bit unproductive, here's everything in one comment.

1. I see the position of many is to dismiss projections as just guessing or on other grounds. Of course, I don't remember that happening for things like "top countries by GDP in 2050", but I guess it just depends on what the prediction is. Since the future is closed for discussion, let's take a look at what's already happened.

2. In my first post, I wrote that "China's population will get a lot older and smaller". Here's the
Please, Log in or Register to view URLs content!
for the following data.
2.a Median age of the total population (years): 1980 22, 1990 25, 2000 30, 2010 35, 2015 37.
2.b Population aged 60 and over: 1950 40 million, 1990 100 million, 2015 210 million. I think here it makes sense to look at the projections, as all these people have already been born and the only assumptions are about the death rate. 2030 350 million, peak around 2055 with between 420 and 530 million. Again, the lower numbers would reflect a shorter average lifespan and vice versa.
2.c Population aged 14 and under: 1950 190 million, peak in 1975 at 360 million, 2015 250 million.
2.d Population aged 24 and under: 1950 290 million, peak in 1990 at 590 million, 2015 430 million. So 590 million people were born between 1966 and 1990 and 430 million were born between 1991 and 2015.
2.e Population aged between 20 and 64: 1950 300 million, peak in 2015 at 930 million. As everyone who will be in this category in 2038 has been born, the projection is pretty clear until then: 820 to 830 million.

Just going by the past and present, China's population is getting a lot older. So far, the total population is
Please, Log in or Register to view URLs content!
, but it's through a massive increase in the numbers of older people. Take a look at the population pyramid.
Population%20by%20Age%20in%202017.png

You can see that looking from the top the pyramid first widens, reflecting a total fertility rate above replacement and meaning that each generation is larger than the one preceding it. Then, starting about 25 years ago, fertility drops below replacement and each bar is shorter than the matching one above (20 to 30 years before). It's also easy to see where the increase in the old population will be coming from, as the largest groups, currently between 40 and 55, will be over 60 in 2040.

3. "That is a pretty dubious model, as Chinese social dynamics are very different from those of Japan, both Koreas, or Vietnam." This was said about China's fertility rate following that of East Asia. But let's take a look at the fertility rate in a number of countries and see if any patterns emerge.
First, here's
Please, Log in or Register to view URLs content!
. It first went under 2.1 in 1992 and is currently (2015) 1.62.
Second,
Please, Log in or Register to view URLs content!
. Japan (under 2.1 in 1974, currently 1.46), South Korea (1983, 1.24), North Korea (1996, 1.92), Taiwan (1985, 1.22), Hong Kong (1980, 1.2), Singapore (1977, 1.24).
Third, large countries in
Please, Log in or Register to view URLs content!
.
Here's a
Please, Log in or Register to view URLs content!
for all countries with some additional statistics.

My point is that a large number of countries are in
Please, Log in or Register to view URLs content!
as China, with decades of sub-replacement fertility rates, and none (or very few) have been able to permanently reverse the trend and reach (and stay at) replacement levels. This includes places with a fully or majority Chinese population (Taiwan, Hong Kong, Macau, Singapore). All of this is why claims of China being special and able to increase its birth rates are, in my opinion, unpersuasive.

Summary
  • China's population has been growing older (median age) since the 1960's
  • China's total fertility rate has been well below replacement since 1992
  • Long term, a below replacement fertility rate leads to a declining population
  • So far, immigration to China has been negligible


Yes, I pretty much dismissed the whole year 2100 projection out of hand. However, even the 50-year projection is highly speculative.

@Klon I've given you examples, based on things that are actually happening, of how China's demographic trend will undergo some major changes in the future. If you insist on dismissing those initiatives, then that's your prerogative.
I think I addressed the arguments you presented and didn't dismiss anything out of hand. Obviously I do generally disagree with your points.
 

manqiangrexue

Brigadier
As responding line by line is a bit unproductive, here's everything in one comment.

1. I see the position of many is to dismiss projections as just guessing or on other grounds. Of course, I don't remember that happening for things like "top countries by GDP in 2050", but I guess it just depends on what the prediction is. Since the future is closed for discussion, let's take a look at what's already happened.

2. In my first post, I wrote that "China's population will get a lot older and smaller". Here's the
Please, Log in or Register to view URLs content!
for the following data.
2.a Median age of the total population (years): 1980 22, 1990 25, 2000 30, 2010 35, 2015 37.
2.b Population aged 60 and over: 1950 40 million, 1990 100 million, 2015 210 million. I think here it makes sense to look at the projections, as all these people have already been born and the only assumptions are about the death rate. 2030 350 million, peak around 2055 with between 420 and 530 million. Again, the lower numbers would reflect a shorter average lifespan and vice versa.
2.c Population aged 14 and under: 1950 190 million, peak in 1975 at 360 million, 2015 250 million.
2.d Population aged 24 and under: 1950 290 million, peak in 1990 at 590 million, 2015 430 million. So 590 million people were born between 1966 and 1990 and 430 million were born between 1991 and 2015.
2.e Population aged between 20 and 64: 1950 300 million, peak in 2015 at 930 million. As everyone who will be in this category in 2038 has been born, the projection is pretty clear until then: 820 to 830 million.

Just going by the past and present, China's population is getting a lot older. So far, the total population is
Please, Log in or Register to view URLs content!
, but it's through a massive increase in the numbers of older people. Take a look at the population pyramid.
Population%20by%20Age%20in%202017.png

You can see that looking from the top the pyramid first widens, reflecting a total fertility rate above replacement and meaning that each generation is larger than the one preceding it. Then, starting about 25 years ago, fertility drops below replacement and each bar is shorter than the matching one above (20 to 30 years before). It's also easy to see where the increase in the old population will be coming from, as the largest groups, currently between 40 and 55, will be over 60 in 2040.

3. "That is a pretty dubious model, as Chinese social dynamics are very different from those of Japan, both Koreas, or Vietnam." This was said about China's fertility rate following that of East Asia. But let's take a look at the fertility rate in a number of countries and see if any patterns emerge.
First, here's
Please, Log in or Register to view URLs content!
. It first went under 2.1 in 1992 and is currently (2015) 1.62.
Second,
Please, Log in or Register to view URLs content!
. Japan (under 2.1 in 1974, currently 1.46), South Korea (1983, 1.24), North Korea (1996, 1.92), Taiwan (1985, 1.22), Hong Kong (1980, 1.2), Singapore (1977, 1.24).
Third, large countries in
Please, Log in or Register to view URLs content!
.
Here's a
Please, Log in or Register to view URLs content!
for all countries with some additional statistics.

My point is that a large number of countries are in
Please, Log in or Register to view URLs content!
as China, with decades of sub-replacement fertility rates, and none (or very few) have been able to permanently reverse the trend and reach (and stay at) replacement levels. This includes places with a fully or majority Chinese population (Taiwan, Hong Kong, Macau, Singapore). All of this is why claims of China being special and able to increase its birth rates are, in my opinion, unpersuasive.

Summary
  • China's population has been growing older (median age) since the 1960's
  • China's total fertility rate has been well below replacement since 1992
  • Long term, a below replacement fertility rate leads to a declining population
  • So far, immigration to China has been negligible



I think I addressed the arguments you presented and didn't dismiss anything out of hand. Obviously I do generally disagree with your points.
The position most people hold is to dismiss century long predictions as there are too many variables in that given period of time (refer to my last post). The emphasis is on time, not on what the prediction is. You may not have seen it but I have posted before and I'll post again that I don't care at all for the 2050 top economies predictions; I'm not even a bit flattered by the prediction that China's nominal GDP will surpass that of the US in 2031. Everything depends on the hard work of the moment, nothing is close to certain. The Chinese must not be lulled into satisfaction by it.

Now, the data you posted is good; it says that currently, the trend today is an aging population, in China and for many (most) parts of the developed world. Given that, and that the predictions that you posted covered such a large range (600m-1.6b), I didn't dismiss anything either. But mostly, I don't downplay the ability of the Chinese government, with the forewarning that they have, to stabilize or otherwise mold the the events leading up to 2100. That the other populations that you listed could not do it doesn't worry me at all because firstly, China has accomplished many things that these nations could not, and secondly, in none of these populations does the government have as much control over its people as does China. Although the West likes to mock this as lack of freedom, in the end, there is nothing better at avoiding impending disaster than tight government controls.

We first saw China's fertility drop below 2 in 1992 though the one-child-policy was implemented in 1979. We can revisit the effects the 2015 two-child-policy in perhaps another decade or two. Still leaves plenty of time before 2100 LOL
 
now I read
China supports non-state firms to conduct debt-to-equity swaps
Xinhua| 2018-01-27 23:14:33
Please, Log in or Register to view URLs content!

China's top economic planner said Friday that it supported non-state firms to conduct debt-to-equity swaps, the country's latest move to reduce corporate leverage.

Private firms and foreign-funded firms will be supported to conduct such swaps in a market-oriented manner, said a document released by the National Development and Reform Commission (NDRC).

Debt-to-equity swaps allow creditors to exchange debt for equity stakes so that companies with long-term potential are not forced to default.

This method has been used by state-owned enterprises.

The NDRC also allowed banks to conduct swap programs by raising money through private equity funds.

Tax preferences and low-cost funding support will be provided for companies and banks involved in such programs, according to the document.

Debt-to-equity swaps are part of China's efforts to deleverage its corporate sector and rein in financial risks.
 

supercat

Major
China has 10% of the world's arable land. Yet She has to support more than 20% of the world's population. This fact alone makes the "more is better" meme regarding China's population questionable, without even mentioning China's water resource.

Back to economics, according to this article, Chinese economy grew 13% instead of 6.9% in 2017 once you factor in yuan appreciation and dollar depreciation.

China’s Irresistible Rise
Jan 30, 2018
Please, Log in or Register to view URLs content!


When China released its official economic data for 2017, many commentators quibbled about the data's reliability. But what they should have been talking about is China's undeniable importance to the global economy, which is becoming increasingly reliant on China's transition from industrial production to domestic consumption.

LONDON – China’s recently released GDP data for 2017 confirm it: the country’s dramatic rise, with the concomitant increase in its global economic relevance, is not slowing down.

To be sure, there has been fresh media chatter about the reliability of Chinese data, owing to reports that some provinces have been overestimating their economic performance in recent years. But for all we know, other provinces may have been doing the opposite. And in any case, the provinces that have
Please, Log in or Register to view URLs content!
to inflating their data are not large enough to have a significant impact on the national picture.

Moreover, two key points are often lost in the debate about China’s official statistics, which the country first starting releasing in the late 1990s. First, the debate is relevant only if China is increasing the degree to which it overestimates its data. Second, China’s published data should be considered in the context of its trading partners’ own figures, as well as those of major international companies that do business in China. As I have
Please, Log in or Register to view URLs content!
before, it is telling that China has overtaken both France and the United States to become Germany’s top trading partner.

As for the annualized 2017 data, most of the media focus has been on China’s reported real (inflation-adjusted) GDP growth, which, at 6.9%, represents the first acceleration in a couple of years and an improvement even on the government’s soft target rate of 6.5%. But the more important figure is China’s nominal GDP growth translated into US dollars. Owing partly to a strengthening renminbi, China’s total economic output grew to $12.7 trillion in 2017, representing a massive increase of 13% ($1.5 trillion) in just 12 months.

Clearly, those who have warned that China is following in Japan’s footsteps and heading for a long-term deflationary cycle have been far off the mark. To my mind, such simplistic comparisons are never particularly useful. Not only has China averted the risk of deflation; it has done so with an appreciating currency.

When my former Goldman Sachs colleagues and I first started tracking the rise of the BRIC economies (Brazil, Russia, India, and China) in the early 2000s, we figured that it would take until the end of 2015 just for China to catch up to Japan. Yet 2018 has barely started, and already China’s economy is two-and-a-half times larger than Japan’s, five times larger than India’s, six times larger than Brazil’s, and eight times larger than Russia’s. It is also larger than the entire eurozone.

China’s staggering $1.5 trillion expansion in 2017 means that, in nominal terms, it essentially created a new economy the size of South Korea, twice the size of Switzerland, and three times the size of Sweden. The latest data suggest that China could catch up to the US, in nominal terms, sometime around 2027, if not before. Within a decade after that, the BRIC countries collectively could catch up to the G7 economies.

Of course, such an achievement would be driven largely by China. Still, taken together, the remaining BRICs are larger than Japan. And now that Brazil and Russia have put their recent recessions behind them, the BRICs will likely make a large contribution to nominal global GDP in 2018.

One final consideration for the global growth outlook is the Chinese consumer. Many commentators still discuss China as if it were solely an industrial power. But consumption in China has crept up nearly to 40% of GDP. Since 2010, Chinese consumers have added around $2.9 trillion to the world economy. That is bigger than the United Kingdom’s entire economy. British trade negotiators should take note: after Brexit, the Chinese market will be more important to the UK economy than ever.

Yet, in addition to its annualized data, China also recently reported its December data, which revealed monthly reported-retail-sales growth of a slightly disappointing 9.4% year on year. One hopes that this is a reflection not of a consumption slowdown, but rather of Chinese policymakers tightening financial conditions in the second half of 2017.

Needless to say, as China becomes increasingly important to the global economy, its upside and downside risks will continue to have far-reaching implications for the rest of the world. And, indeed, a consumption slowdown would be bad not just for China, but also for the rest of the world economy, which is now depending on China’s shift from industrial production to domestic consumption.

Please, Log in or Register to view URLs content!
 

manqiangrexue

Brigadier
When Americans want to boycott China, they can't because they find that everything they love to buy and everything that is reasonably-priced is made in China. When I want to boycott Muji, I also can't, but because of the opposite problem: I never saw fit to buy a damn thing there anyway since it's just a massively overpriced Japanese Walmart. I guess technically, I've been boycotting it all my life LOL

Please, Log in or Register to view URLs content!

China orders Muji to destroy catalog over 'problem map'
Updated: Jan 31, 2018 04:55 AM EST

BEIJING (AP) - The foreign ministry on Wednesday told foreign companies to "respect China's sovereignty" after Japanese retailer Muji was ordered to destroy a catalog that Beijing complained mislabeled Taiwan and omits disputed islands.

Muji joined a string of companies including hotel keeper Marriott and fashion brand Zara that Beijing has criticized this year for commercial materials that fail to reflect its territorial claims.

The government of President Xi Jinping has been increasingly assertive about its claims to self-ruled Taiwan and disputed areas of the South China Sea and East China Sea.

The national surveying administration complained a map of locations of Muji stores in a furniture catalog distributed in the southwestern city of Chongqing failed to show the Diaoyu Islands. The agency said the "problem map" contained "serious errors" in regard to Taiwan but gave no details.

"All foreign companies in China should respect China's sovereignty and territorial integrity," said a foreign ministry spokeswoman, Hua Chunying. "I believe it is a universal principle agreed upon by all countries."

The uninhabited Diaoyu islands in the East China Sea also are claimed by Japan, which calls them the Senkakus.

In Tokyo, Japan's chief Cabinet secretary said his government has officially complained to Beijing about the order to Muji.

"There is no territorial dispute to be settled over the Senkaku Islands. We can by no means accept the measure based on China's unilateral claims," Yoshihide Suga said at a news conference, according to Kyodo News.

Earlier, Marriott was ordered to close its mainland Chinese website for one week after the company listed Taiwan and Hong Kong as countries on a survey sent to customers.

Zara, Delta Air Lines and medical device maker Medtronic issued apologies after being criticized by Chinese internet regulators for calling Taiwan a country on their websites.
 
Top