He would do everyone a greater favour if he just shut up entirely.
Chinese Economics Thread
- Thread starter Norfolk
- Start date
I just become curious to position China current state compared to the Eastern European countries.
I choose 1990 vs 2017 , and Germany as baseline, using the GDP PPP numbers from tradingeconomics.com.
Chosen countries Poland and Hungary .
Hungary 1990: 15000 USD/person, 2017: 27000 usd/person
Poland : 1990 : 10000 usd/person, 2017 : 27000 usd/person.
Germany 1990:27000 USD/ person, 2017 : 45200 usd/person.
China 1990:1500 USD preson, 2017:15000 USD/person.
So, by percentage Poland was on the 32% of Germany economical performance in 1990, Hungary was at 48%. Both of them improved themselves to 60% to 2017.
China now on the economical development level where Poland was in 1990, at 33% of the German economical performance.
It has few interesting implications:
1. it was possible to make 5% GDP growth in Hungary for a decade.
2. Both country had more than 10 % higher consumption than China in 1990 , without healthcare
3. I made a mistake, the seemingly wasted highway investment has higher return (Destroying less value) in Hungary / Poland than in China.
And generally, just because you have one experience, and you are Chinese doesn't means that China is not constrained by the same rules as every other country in history /around the world.
The thing that you feels by reading this text called as "".
PiSigma
"the engineer"
Hungary and Poland are what China considers as a small province or a small city by population.
The only similarities are they have similar GDP.... with a 30 year gap. Which means the numbers mean nothing.
Thanks for bringing up cognitive bias, your posts are excellent examples of it.
You can use Russia as well, showing similar numbers.
And yes, China is 30 years behind the Eastern European countries.
Currently she is on the same level like Brazil . By numbers.
<sarcasm>
But of course if there is a country with 1.3 billion residents and with a single central government to set the way then the management will be way easier than for a 10 million country before the investment and export led growth boom ( I talk about Hungary in 1990 ) </sarcasm>
I can not see how China can repeat the Hungarian growth .
PiSigma
"the engineer"
You clearly did not understand what I said. $15000 in 1990 is more like $30000 now, not just from growth, but inflation. So the fact Poland and Hungary are $27000 means there haven't been real growth.
So yes China is a lot poorer now than eastern Europe of 1990. But it means there are room for growth.
He clearly hasn't been to China. Maybe hasn't seen pics of today's Shanghai or Shenzhen
Sorry, it is not the development level of Hungry in 1990, but Poland at that point of time.
And not compered to the GDP numbers, but compare Poland in 1990 to Germany at the same year, and compare China in 2017 to Germany to the same year. ( 33% of the German GDP in both year based on GDP PPP )
So, based on this China is on the same development level ( compared to Germany ) than Poland was in 1990.
With absolutist rubbish road infrastructure, no high speed trains , no export lead growth and so on.
China is a big country.
Even a small, 10 million country has extreme level of differences between the capital / rest of the country.
So, Sanghai etc doesn't show the average or typical China, and frankly I don't think that anyone has any clue how China really looks like on average.Simply it too big to make a good assessment or sampling by a single person.
By the numbers on average it is more similar to Brazil than to Japan.
And it actually goes back to the point 1 , if it is so difficult to manage a small country, how easy is to manage a country 130 times bigger, and having four magnitudes more complicated relationship system ?
PiSigma
"the engineer"
Development levels can not be measured in dollars. Gdp/capita is only used to measure a relative level of wealth compared to USA based on the exchange rate at the time.
I'm done answering basic economic questions to people that clearly know nothing.
kwaigonegin
Colonel
PPP is not linear so your opinion are not predictively sound. Economic development and growth is not codependence on PPP. As in your examples, Hungary doubled their PPP in 30 yrs but China was 10X. To say China is 30 years behind is naive. Using linear thinking, one can also say China's economic performance is 5X better than Hungary's from 1990 to 2017.. again meaningless
Perhaps a better statement is China's PPP is equvailent to Hungary's in 1990 but that statement while true in and itself is also meaningless. like saying the sky is blue.
You also have to consider size, politics and population sizes. There is a world of difference between say shanghai and remote western china. hungary or poland's gap is not as distinct or obvious due to smaller size.