Chinese Economics Thread

[hkbc]

No, I mean actual savings rates not some bullshit ratio of household debt to GDP,

The Chinese save they don't spend on credit

You can go to

Please, Log in or Register to view URLs content!

yes real bona fide data from an actual intergovernmental agency and look at more charts you won't understand then twist them into some fantasy and waste everyone's time with more insane "analysis" just don't post your sh*t here!

 

[manqiangrexue]

Thank you for checking my calculation : )

I did not check your calculation; I did completely separate calculations. You "calculated" a number that means nothing. I calculated Chinese vs USA disposable income growth. What I did has nothing to do with what you did.

You are right, I made a mistake. Finally you had same useful comment : )

I'm always right. I told you to listen to Chinese people when it comes to math.

And thank you for validating all of my previous calculation : )

You just said, it was wrong, you made a mistake, and it made no sense. Now I validated your previous calculations? LOL Are you confused about the word, "validated," "previous" or just stupid? It's 1 of the 3... well... since the last one's a given it's one or more LOL

So, let check the numbers again :
Chinese consumer spending : 8.2%, USA 2.3%. (16 vs 17 )

8.2% and 2.3% of what? Growth? GDP? Makes no sense.

Now check the funding. With the original calculation it doesn't make sense to get here, but with the new numbers now makes : )

What is "funding?" That's not a statistic. It doesn't make sense as long as you do the "calculations." And if you already knew it didn't make sense, why did you post it before? Are you still posting shit that you know makes no sense? Everything thinks so.

China : consumer debt increased by 4.7% to GDP ----> 7% increase compared to the income
USA : consumer debt decreased by 0.5% ( 16 vs 17 july both )

Where are these numbers coming from? 4.7--->7 is not an equation. There are literally 2 numbers for China and 1 for the US. What the hell is this? Did you learn math in Poland?

The consumer spending is in the 40s %for China (38% if the consumer spending compared to the GNP, that is in yuan on the tradingeconomics ) , and 66% for the USA.

OK, this lone statement sounds about right although there is no argument formulating so there's no value to checking.

Means 100% of USA consumer spending coming from earning + they paying off debt, and 86% of the Chinese coming from debt .

Absolutely moronic interpretation with no math behind it. Math means equations, not a mess of numbers and you've only provided the latter.

Interesting, isn't it?

If you call mental vomit interesting, then it is...

Let's clarify: you thought that Chinese disposable income was stagnant. I showed you that it's growing, proving you wrong. Then, you moved the goalpost to say it's not outgrowing the US. So I showed you that is is in fact outgrowing the US by a large margin, proving you wrong again. You were proven wrong twice. Now, you moved the goalpost to outer space with nonsense metrics and a bunch of numbers pretending that it's math. You entire post makes no sense and has no point. You're wrong 2 times in 2 posts so the third time, you made sure it didn't make any sense, which is on a different plain of existence than being wrong, just like insane people can't be criminals. Good strategy for you.

Every time you post, I answer you point-to-point so you know I have an answer for why you're wrong for everything you say. Why don't you do that too? When you post, it's basically not a response to my post; just you starting another stupid idea after you realize your last one got killed. We know that. Just because you don't reply admitting you screwed up doesn't mean we think you might be right.

See the highlight from your post.
And if your read my posts from the last few dozens pages I argued about that the Chinese consumers has no word, and they has negligible share from the economy, and even that is based on credit.

And that was proven wrong with numbers. Also, define "negligible." This is an economic discussion; use numbers, not descriptive words to indicate an amount.

Are you aware of that Argentina has as many Noble prize laureates as China ? (Japan has five times more than China)

Are you aware that nobody considers Argentina or Japan a technological threat but the West fears only China? Technology dominates and makes money; prize awarded by committees are for ego. Where's Argentina's 5G? LOL Where's Japan's? They don't have any. They need to buy it while China sells it. That's the difference in technology you need to know.

Interesting, isn't it?
So , Argentina had the scientific/technological background, but that was not sufficient to make possible to escape the middle income trap.
The consumer is the important.

If Argentina and Japan just wins prizes but does not translate the science to applicable use like China's doing, of course it will be worthless and that will be reflected in their poor GDP performance compared to China.

 

[Anlsvrthng]

No, I mean actual savings rates not some bullshit ratio of household debt to GDP,

The Chinese save they don't spend on credit

You can go to

Please, Log in or Register to view URLs content!

yes real bona fide data from an actual intergovernmental agency and look at more charts you won't understand then twist them into some fantasy and waste everyone's time with more insane "analysis" just don't post your sh*t here!


View attachment 50377

It is quite interesting.
The OECD doesn't contain any more data about the Chinese economy, so no consumer debt level and so on.

But the saving data doesn't add up with the increasing consumer debt level .
Or it can add up only if the wealthy saving, middle class going into debt.

Any other explanation? ( logical, not emotional )

 

[manqiangrexue]

It is quite interesting.
The OECD doesn't contain any more data about the Chinese economy, so no consumer debt level and so on.

But the saving data doesn't add up with the increasing consumer debt level .
Or it can add up only if the wealthy saving, middle class going into debt.

Any other explanation? ( logical, not emotional )

You don't understand the definition of "debt" and "saving." They are separate things. Debt is what you owe; you might owe it today or you might owe it 10-30 years later. Savings is what you have now. So you can have both debt and savings as long as you don't pre-pay your debts down the road with money you have immediately every time you get it. If I owe the bank $200K paid $20K per year for 10 years, I can still have savings of $100K (or $1 million, doesn't matter) because I don't have to pay what's due 5 years later with the money I have now. The reason you are trying to add these numbers and it "doesn't add up" is because you have the word, "debt" confused with the word, "net worth" which is what a person has after all debt is subtracted from all assets.

 

[Jura The idiot]

now I read
China's employment situation better than expected
Xinhua| 2018-12-14 13:09:08

Please, Log in or Register to view URLs content!

A senior official said Friday that China's employment situation was better than expected, with a lower unemployment rate and rising job creation in November.

The country's surveyed unemployment rate in urban areas stood at 4.8 percent in November, 0.1 percentage point lower than that in the previous month and November last year, Mao Shengyong, spokesperson of the National Bureau of Statistics, told a press conference.

The rate remained below the government's target of controlling the surveyed urban unemployment rate within 5.5 percent this year.

The number of newly-created jobs in urban areas reached 12.93 million for the January-November period, 130,000 more than the same period last year and surpassing the government's annual target of creating 11 million new urban jobs in 2018.

 

[hkbc]

It is quite interesting.
The OECD doesn't contain any more data about the Chinese economy, so no consumer debt level and so on.

But the saving data doesn't add up with the increasing consumer debt level .
Or it can add up only if the wealthy saving, middle class going into debt.

Any other explanation? ( logical, not emotional )

Let's use a real world example

In 2011 my wife decided she'd like a bigger house, so we found one, house prices were depressed from the banking crisis so I didn't want to liquidate an asset at the bottom of the market by selling the house we were in, I went to see my bank and arranged a mortgage as I have a good credit rating and was putting down a sizeable deposit they were tripping over themselves to give me the loan and I got it at a good rate.

The sad and ironic truth is if you have wealth banks are prepared to lend you lots more money, if you don't they will um and ah about it....

In 2012 it would have been recorded that my household DEBT levels had shot up 14 fold (basically I was borrowing 14 times the amount that I had outstanding on my old house)

In order to pay the deposit I also used a chunk of my SAVINGS so in 2012 it would have been recorded that my household savings took a battering

By just looking at those stats in 2012 I must have being in dire straits because in that year my DEBT shot through the roof and my SAVINGS took a hammering and my DEBT to INCOME ratio (closest analog to debt/gdp) would have gone from ~0.08x to ~ 2.9x.

However, because I now have 2 houses and only need to live in one I rented the old house out, this yielded an INCOME so in essence I borrowed money to buy an ASSET and although I SPENT my SAVINGS and added lots of visible DEBT that money was actually yielding a RETURN.

The rental YIELD was about 5.5% and the mortgage rate 2.2% with the loan value roughly the market price of the old house at the time the rental INCOME more than covered the mortgage repayments so despite incurring lots more DEBT and reducing my SAVINGS my INCOME actually went up.

Now if I had sold the old house to buy the new one in 2012 my DEBT levels would have reduced to nothing therefore just looking at that measure in 2012 things must be really looking up for me because I am DEBT free!

Its 2018 house prices have recovered the rental YIELD is now only about 4.3% because although the rent had gone up its rising slower than house prices

By just comparing YIELD numbers in 2012 and 2018 I must be worse off because 4.3% is less than 5.5% but not really in absolute terms the rent had gone up faster the costs to service the mortgage so I actually have even more INCOME and because of the rise in house prices my NET WORTH has shot up.

These are the fallacies of cherry picking numbers and meaningless comparison, you can correlate random events to build a case but it won't actually have any foundational truth.

Cherry picking irrelevant stats conflating and combining random, unrelated and meaningless numbers to produce a "conclusion" posited as "fact" which under the most superficial inspection can be found to be utter falsehoods are the hallmarks of all your posts, its not even a case of subjectivity or opinion.

To most people the fact that a society has growing incomes and consumption would be a positive indicator; that a society which has a high savings rate would consume through credit only if it was fiscally, advantageous. However, in your delusion those are the indicators of a decaying society on the brink of implosion. Despite repeated counter examples actual facts, independent statistical analysis you demand proof and cling onto your delusions that's just psychosis

 

[Jura The idiot]

now noticed the tweet

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!

China's fiscal revenue rose 6.5 percent year-on-year to 17.23 trillion yuan (about $2.5 trillion) in the first 11 months of 2018, official data showed

 

[Anlsvrthng]

Let's use a real world example

In 2011 my wife decided she'd like a bigger house, so we found one, house prices were depressed from the banking crisis so I didn't want to liquidate an asset at the bottom of the market by selling the house we were in, I went to see my bank and arranged a mortgage as I have a good credit rating and was putting down a sizeable deposit they were tripping over themselves to give me the loan and I got it at a good rate.
.....
These are the fallacies of cherry picking numbers and meaningless comparison, you can correlate random events to build a case but it won't actually have any foundational truth.

Cherry picking irrelevant stats conflating and combining random, unrelated and meaningless numbers to produce a "conclusion" posited as "fact" which under the most superficial inspection can be found to be utter falsehoods are the hallmarks of all your posts, its not even a case of subjectivity or opinion.

To most people the fact that a society has growing incomes and consumption would be a positive indicator; that a society which has a high savings rate would consume through credit only if it was fiscally, advantageous. However, in your delusion those are the indicators of a decaying society on the brink of implosion. Despite repeated counter examples actual facts, independent statistical analysis you demand proof and cling onto your delusions that's just psychosis

It is simple :
-China reached roughly 30% of the GDP PPP per capita of the USA .
-The consumer debt level increase dramatically in the past few years
-the consumer share from economy stagnate

No, recent events:
-car sales peaked in 2017
-phone/pork ect sales slowing as well.

My hypothesis is that it showing a general slowdown in the Chinese economics activity. Actually it show the failure to re-balance the economy from investment to consumption.

The trade surplus growing, showing that the economy failed to generate enough demand.
You can call these as "random data",but it will be easy to see if these are uncorrelated values - see what happens in 2019 in China. : P

To most people the fact that a society has growing incomes and consumption would be a positive indicator; that a society which has a high savings rate would consume through credit only if it was fiscally, advantageous. However, in your delusion those are the indicators of a decaying society on the brink of implosion. Despite repeated counter examples actual facts, independent statistical analysis you demand proof and cling onto your delusions that's just psychosis

No growing income - the data showing the same level of income growth as the debt growing.


My point simple : to step beyond the middle income trap a country has to start to redistribute the wealth from the few to the many.

I can't see any sign of this in China.

High savings rate simply a way to control the way of development. Take the money from the households, and make roads/ports ect.
IF the country is backward and/or devastated any improvement will makes, and the idiots at the helm can not make bad decision.

But as the country growing after a while even president genius will looks like an idiot.

But as soon as the country running out of options of copy/paste the decision making needs to be delegated down.

Like in your case, what is more effective, if YOU make decision about buying/renting , or a government office ?

Check the story of the Provident UK reorganisation few years ago, and it will show the limits of central commands / economy organisation.


Interesting, China deposit interest is 0.35%.
Inflation 2.2%.
So, there is a 1.85% transfer of wealth fro depositors to borrowers.

It is big improvement, in 2005 it was around 4%.

The mortgage rate is around 5%.

Means if a household saved 20% of income for 5 years then after the sixth years they transfer 1.85% of they income to the borrowers.

 

[manqiangrexue]

It is simple :
-China reached roughly 30% of the GDP PPP per capita of the USA .
-The consumer debt level increase dramatically in the past few years
-the consumer share from economy stagnate

No, recent events:
-car sales peaked in 2017
-phone/pork ect sales slowing as well.

My hypothesis is that it showing a general slowdown in the Chinese economics activity. Actually it show the failure to re-balance the economy from investment to consumption.

The trade surplus growing, showing that the economy failed to generate enough demand.
You can call these as "random data",but it will be easy to see if these are uncorrelated values - see what happens in 2019 in China. : P

No growing income - the data showing the same level of income growth as the debt growing.


My point simple : to step beyond the middle income trap a country has to start to redistribute the wealth from the few to the many.

I can't see any sign of this in China.

High savings rate simply a way to control the way of development. Take the money from the households, and make roads/ports ect.
IF the country is backward and/or devastated any improvement will makes, and the idiots at the helm can not make bad decision.

But as the country growing after a while even president genius will looks like an idiot.

But as soon as the country running out of options of copy/paste the decision making needs to be delegated down.

Like in your case, what is more effective, if YOU make decision about buying/renting , or a government office ?

Check the story of the Provident UK reorganisation few years ago, and it will show the limits of central commands / economy organisation.


Interesting, China deposit interest is 0.35%.
Inflation 2.2%.
So, there is a 1.85% transfer of wealth fro depositors to borrowers.

It is big improvement, in 2005 it was around 4%.

The mortgage rate is around 5%.

Means if a household saved 20% of income for 5 years then after the sixth years they transfer 1.85% of they income to the borrowers.

Why are you still talking? This post is a summation of all the ideas that you presented that have been debunked and defeated. You are literally always wrong but you don't care; you either pretend that you were right the next time you mention a topic or you just move onto another stupid idea trying to move past the last embarrassment quickly but equally quickly into the next. The last post, we just found out that you've been "calculating" debt without even knowing what debt is; you thought it was net worth. How embarrassing is that? And you're still talking? LOL Do you feel anything or does this happen to you so often you're numb? What are we going to find out next? Maybe you don't know what GDP means? LOL

Every stupid, incorrect point you brought up in this post was already previously answered and you had nothing that made sense to say in response. Cars, pork, transfer of wealth, all of your ideas/understanding were wrong and now this post is the summary of them. You want a detailed reply? Just reread all my posts in this thread.

 

[Jura The idiot]

now noticed the tweet

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!

China has achieved another year of bumper

Please, Log in or Register to view URLs content!

in 2018 with grain output standing at 657.89 million tonnes, the National Bureau of Statistics said Saturday