Could mass layoffs in China result in a violent crackdown on unrest by the CCP?

crobato · Dec 14, 2008

Mr T said:
They can get high growth - the problem is that they almost always suffer a bust subsequently at some point.

No they need high growth in order to make up increasing deficits and account unbalances.

Growth rates take inflation into account at least in the UK. And you are still missing the point. This person wasn't making a general comparison, he was saying that even China's low estimates of growth are "better" than the UK/US' had previously. That isn't true in the slightest because the countries are in entirely different situations.

GDP growth does not take account of inflation in numbers per se. That's how they are computed. And of course, China's low estimates of growth is better than the US/UK. What makes you think that 2% is always desirable? Its not. Certainly not for all the people entering retirement age and not for all the people entering the job stage. You keep talking about situations being different but fundamentally they're not.

It's no more a fact than that the CCP can spread the blame elsewhere.

Which is how? Find me an official statement that the CCP blamed the SAR on someone else, not various mumblings on the internet.

Of course there is. Look at how the government tried to move the blame for SARS to outside of China.

WRONG. Prove that with an official article or statement. I know what they said as opposed to what you think they said.

Actually, right - you did not say significant. You inserted that word in your comment previous to the one I'm quoting now.

I'm turning back and tell you whether its 1000, 10,000 or 100,000 or 100 million, the economic impact is still the same. You have people entering the job hunting stage relative to the size of the economy. It does not matter how big the numbers are, its the scale of the economy that matters. 8 people entering the job hunting stage for an economy with 100 people has the same impact as 8 million in a 100 million population.

You're trying to make it appear that the UK has a very different situation. That's BS in the highest sense of the word. Unemployed is unemployed, and economics are shared fundamentally everywhere else. You're just used to it because the UK has been in a declining pattern for quite some time.

Except that the "protests" frequently get violent. I'd say that the riots are a sign of social unrest, even if you want to argue over how severe it is.

Who told you that protests get frequently violent? There is a lot of protests out there in China and around the world---the majority of protests are indeed peaceful. But peaceful protests are not news worthy. The violence in protests is one that is eschewed by the media.

In China protests are often treated as crimes by the authorities.

Hell no. You really have not been following what protests in China is all about. You can protest all you want but when you start breaking stuff then it deservedly be called a crime.

crobato · Dec 14, 2008

That article must be a joke.

For 30 years, concentrating resources in the hands of the government through state ownership and taxes has served China well. But the private consumption needed to power self-sustained growth is lacking. For that, Chen argues, China must boost incomes and increase people's sense of financial security.

Yet that is practically what China has been doing---and doing it better---than anyone else in the planet. Maybe these journalists and economists that are out of touch should ask who is keeping California's real estate brokers busy these days.

Second, we know where the consumption economy has led. It is the consumption economy that is the failed model, not the manufacturing one.

Mr T · Dec 15, 2008

crobato said:
No they need high growth in order to make up increasing deficits and account unbalances.

No they don't, they need careful budgeting.

GDP growth does not take account of inflation in numbers per se. That's how they are computed.

Some countries may try to fiddle their growth figures, but if you see estimates from the World Bank etc they do take it into account.

What makes you think that 2% is always desirable? Its not.

I never said 2% is always desirable. I said that lower rates of growth that you generally get in developed economies are what's best. Otherwise why do you not get people constantly complaining its too low in Europe, North America, etc? Because you can't expect anything much better.

WRONG. Prove that with an official article or statement. I know what they said as opposed to what you think they said.

Actually, I know what I read. If you can prove they said it is all China's fault right from the start and that no outside countries were involved then that would be interesting - thanks.

You're just used to it because the UK has been in a declining pattern for quite some time.

Actually the other way around I've only been used to the UK getting better.

You can protest all you want but when you start breaking stuff then it deservedly be called a crime.

That is not correct. If you protest against the State you will be arrested even if you are acting peacefully.

crobato said:
Yet that is practically what China has been doing---and doing it better---than anyone else in the planet.

Well given China's incomes are still that of a developing nation it isn't that hard to boost them compared to developed countries. But they still have a long way to go.

It is the consumption economy that is the failed model, not the manufacturing one.

So China is going to keep all those businesses going with much higher wages and competition from countries who charge less? Obviously not. Unless China suddenly gets a reputation for high-quality goods like Germany and Japan have it needs to move away from manufacturing.

Schumacher · Dec 15, 2008

Mr T said:
I don't think that a media report is bad because the owner doesn't have a research institute churning out data for it. If the media is to be accessible it must be affordable - otherwise there is no point to it.

That's why we see many western media these days sacrifice quality in order to be 'affordable' which is same as to say to sell more & their readers like you who rely on them become poorly informed.
Like the excuses you gave earlier of not easy/lack of funds etc & now a desire to sell more is only an excuse, doesn't change the fact that any work based on wishful thinking/pure speculation simply is not worth much to put it mildly.

Mr T · Dec 15, 2008

Schumacher said:
That's why we see many western media these days sacrifice quality in order to be 'affordable' which is same as to say to sell more & their readers like you who rely on them become poorly informed.

No need to turn this into a personal attack. I read the media widely and have access to everything you do. So if I am poorly informed you are too, because the media across the world is looking to cut costs.

If anything I would say that the broadsheet equivalent of the North American and European media is still better than anything you would find in China.

Like the excuses you gave earlier of not easy/lack of funds etc & now a desire to sell more is only an excuse, doesn't change the fact that any work based on wishful thinking/pure speculation simply is not worth much to put it mildly.

Again, I see no evidence that this work is based on wishful thinking/pure speculation. This isn't Joe Public commenting, they're professional journalists with an understanding of the country/circumstances they're commenting on, researching their articles by reading articles, talking to academics and so forth. Just because they don't research every piece of data they use themselves has little to do with the quality of the article. Indeed I wouldn't be surprised that if they did some people would accuse them of artificially creating data to support their articles and then demanding it be verified by yet another group of researchers. Who I supposed would have to be vetted themselves and so on.

You can claim cost is an excuse, but I think it's more a matter of realistic requirements.

Schumacher · Dec 15, 2008

Mr T said:
No need to turn this into a personal attack. I read the media widely and have access to everything you do. So if I am poorly informed you are too, because the media across the world is looking to cut costs.

Don't mean to be personal attack but for someone to dismiss the importance of good research the way you did, I can't see how you can be good at distinguishing good/bad info sources you read. And it shows in the level of your knowledge abt China.

Mr T said:
Again, I see no evidence that this work is based on wishful thinking/pure speculation. This isn't Joe Public commenting, they're professional journalists with an understanding of the country/circumstances they're commenting on, researching their articles by reading articles, talking to academics and so forth......
You can claim cost is an excuse, but I think it's more a matter of realistic requirements.

So after wasting so much time listing 'reasons' like too hard/lack of funds to justify the lack of research and how that doesn't make a piece of work 'bad', you now change tact again to say they may have indeed done research after all 'researching their articles by reading articles, talking to academics and so forth'.
So going back to the 8% growth thing, where's the research involved that show below 8% equals recession in China ?

BTW, the whole point is that when journalists go into speculating without much supporting data, they're not so 'professional' after all isn't it ?

Mr T · Dec 15, 2008

Schumacher said:
Don't mean to be personal attack but for someone to dismiss the importance of good research the way you did, I can't see how you can be good at distinguishing good/bad info sources you read.

I have never said that good research is not important, so you should not worry about my judgement in reading sources. I queried the need to independently verify every piece of data if one is merely quoting an official source and making that clear.

And it shows in the level of your knowledge abt China.

That is not a logical statement. I can know a lot about China yet not see certain types of research as being crucial. Similarly I can see research as being absolutely key yet know very little of any matter about China.

you now change tact again to say they may have indeed done research after all 'researching their articles by reading articles, talking to academics and so forth'.

I never said they didn't do research, I was explaining why they don't commission research in circumstances as we were talking about earlier on.

So going back to the 8% growth thing, where's the research involved that show below 8% equals recession in China ?

Who has been saying that sub-8% growth equals a recession in China? Not me. If someone does, however, you will need to ask them.

BTW, the whole point is that when journalists go into speculating without much supporting data, they're not so 'professional' after all isn't it ?

Sometimes journalists will openly indicate they are speculating or hypothesising. For the rest of the time how would you know if they were speculating? They don't produce a bibliography of their research, that's what academics who takes weeks or months to produce their work do.

Mr T · Dec 15, 2008

Not every headline from the foreign media is bad.

Please, Log in or Register to view URLs content!

The president of the World Bank, Robert Zoellick, is praising China for so far taking the right steps in helping stabilize its own economy amidst the global financial crisis. However, he warns that there are many tough economic problems that will need to be addressed in the year ahead.

crobato · Dec 15, 2008

Mr T said:
No they don't, they need careful budgeting.

Wrong. Ever watched what David Walker, US Comptroller, said? Simply, the amount needed for entitlements to support an aging population is going to overwhelm the wage earners. You can't budget your way out of a 55 trillion deficit. Only rabid economic growth can.

Some countries may try to fiddle their growth figures, but if you see estimates from the World Bank etc they do take it into account.

Wrong again. GDP figures do not adjust to inflation. That's the way they're computed. Economic growth per se is measured on a year to year GDP basis.

I never said 2% is always desirable. I said that lower rates of growth that you generally get in developed economies are what's best. Otherwise why do you not get people constantly complaining its too low in Europe, North America, etc? Because you can't expect anything much better.

Wrong again. Wrong, wrong wrong. Where the hell are you learning your economics?

People are complaining that its too low in Europe (high unemployment) and in the NA where you got deficit after deficit. 2% is far from sufficient for developed countries facing their entitlement and deficit challenges.

Actually, I know what I read. If you can prove they said it is all China's fault right from the start and that no outside countries were involved then that would be interesting - thanks.

Wrong. You claimed that it is China that is officially putting the blame on SARS to someone else. Its easy to prove this if they truly said it.

Don't toss the question back. Transparent tactic. It's obvious you can't show it.

Actually the other way around I've only been used to the UK getting better.

The UK isn't getting any better. The impact affects the UK (worst industrial base in the EU) than in any other part of Europe.

That is not correct. If you protest against the State you will be arrested even if you are acting peacefully.

Wrong again. You get arrested only if you cross the line if you speak out promoting armed violence and sedition against the government, and if you act disorderly.

Well given China's incomes are still that of a developing nation it isn't that hard to boost them compared to developed countries. But they still have a long way to go.

Wrong again. Many developing nations don't have the growth rates China has.

So China is going to keep all those businesses going with much higher wages and competition from countries who charge less? Obviously not. Unless China suddenly gets a reputation for high-quality goods like Germany and Japan have it needs to move away from manufacturing.

Wrong again. You let the free markets speak, and China should make what they can sell. If the markets say, we don't want that many toys, you let the toy manufacturers fail, and leave only the successful ones. You let the jobs and capital flow to more basic and recession proof businesses. If you're stuck with making high value, high cost goods, then it is your economy that is flawed and inflexible because you cannot adjust to changing demands. It is the economies that has to create demand artificially (phased obsolescence) and power that demand through fixed cheap credit is what got us into this trouble in the first place.

dlhh · Dec 15, 2008

So China is going to keep all those businesses going with much higher wages and competition from countries who charge less? Obviously not. Unless China suddenly gets a reputation for high-quality goods like Germany and Japan have it needs to move away from manufacturing.

Thats the most ridiculous statement I ever read. Manufacturing provides the most jobs for the citizens of developing countries. A consumption economy only takes place when the country is developed and rich. Show me a poor country with high rates of consumption. You can't have a service based economy when the majority of your citizens are still farmers.

You should do more research before writing such ill founded statments.

Could mass layoffs in China result in a violent crackdown on unrest by the CCP?

crobato

Colonel

crobato

Colonel

Mr T

Senior Member

Schumacher

Senior Member

Mr T

Senior Member

Schumacher

Senior Member

Mr T

Senior Member

Mr T

Senior Member

crobato

Colonel

dlhh

New Member