Very telling that their first comments are unsubtle gloating about China's recent woes and USA's simultaneous economic overperformance.Has he who who must not be named, and the person with many names and aliases been resurrected to grace us with yet another nuggets of wisdom about China's doomed economic prospects?
Well, keep an eye man, historically speaking inflationary periods and economic bubbles only really come down in economic recessions, that is why the FED is both the destroyer and savior of last resort, like a god. the worst would be the impossible trifecta HI, LG and HRYes and 5.5% is below 6%. China is growing below the pre-COVID trend
China's exports as a % of GDP is one of the lowest in the G20 and COVID caused an export boom in China. The trend in the US is that GDP is at levels implied by 2018-2019 growth. The trend in China is that GDP is at levels 7% below those implied by 2018-2019 growth.
High rates have been with the US economy for 1.5 years now and even with that, even residential single-family housing is growing as a sector. The US economy, for whatever reason (corporate/houshold borrowings at fixed rates (mortgages and corporate bonds) in 2020, increase in shares of , excess savings, a booming jobs market, etc) seems completely insensitive to interest rates and inflation is solved. The CPI uses as its housing/rents estimate, the average of all rents paid (instead of new rents) so it includes leases signed months ago. Now, new rents are declining and rents are 35% of the CPI. Inflation is over as a problem. Transitory supply issues resolved and rents went down because of rate hikes.
We are talking about when the high growth rate for developing countries that slow down when it reached high income status. Japan, South Korea, Hong Kong, Taiwan, and Singapore all have the similar growth curve. That is absurd for you to compare developed nations growth rate. For developed nations, their growth rate varies due to their economic performance.It's the best baseline there is of a unknowable other potential future.
GDP growth and GDPPC are negatively correlated but said correlation is neither strong or universal (see US outperformance of the EU and Japan with substantially higher per capita GDP). RE and COVID shocks were timed at the same time (perhaps intentionally to give political cover for the RE adjustments) but regardless, that you have *substantially* slower growth after COVID became a thing isn't deniable but the US did not have substantially lower growth (it had the same growth rate). Thus the MSM party about the growth rates
China's economy will enter recession when you stop making alts, sleepystudent.It's the best baseline there is of a unknowable other potential future.
GDP growth and GDPPC are negatively correlated but said correlation is neither strong or universal (see US outperformance of the EU and Japan with substantially higher per capita GDP). RE and COVID shocks were timed at the same time (perhaps intentionally to give political cover for the RE adjustments) but regardless, that you have *substantially* slower growth after COVID became a thing isn't deniable but the US did not have substantially lower growth (it had the same growth rate). Thus the MSM party about the growth rates
Ukraine could give up territory to Russia – NATO official (Stolenberg)
Kiev could end up relinquishing some of its former territory in exchange for NATO membership, Secretary General Jens Stoltenberg’s chief of staff, Stian Jenssen said at a debate on Tuesday. In his own statements on the issue, Stoltenberg has insisted that Kiev will set its own terms for “victory.”
“I think that a solution could be for Ukraine to give up territory, and get NATO membership in return,” Jenssen said at the debate, according to Norway’s VG newspaper. This discussion is already underway within NATO, he said, suggesting that it could be a “possible solution” to the conflict.
No NATO leaders have publicly endorsed the idea of Kiev giving up its claims to the territories of Donetsk, Lugansk, Kherson, or Zaporozhye, which were incorporated into the Russian Federation following referendums last September. Likewise, while Western officials have cast doubt on Ukraine’s ability to seize Crimea – an historical Russian territory which rejoined the Russian Federation in 2014, none have urged Kiev to abandon its claim to the peninsula.
Such an idea has apparently been floated behind the scenes, however. Swiss outlet Neue Zürcher Zeitung claimed in February, citing sources, that CIA Director William Burns had offered Russia a “land for peace” deal in which Moscow would keep “20% of Ukrainian territory.” The White House, the CIA, and the Kremlin all denied that such a proposal had been made.
Whether such a deal would be accepted by Kiev or Moscow remains doubtful. Russian President Vladimir Putin stated last year that securing the military neutrality of Ukraine was a key factor behind his decision to send troops into the country, and that having a NATO-aligned Ukraine on Russia’s borders would present an unacceptable security risk.
Ukrainian National Security and Defense Council chief Aleksey Danilov stated on Tuesday that Kiev will never negotiate with Putin’s government, that none of Ukraine’s Western backers are pushing for peace, and that “Russia must be destroyed like a modern-day Carthage."
Achieving this goal is proving extremely difficult for Kiev. Two months into its long-anticipated counteroffensive against Russian forces, the Ukrainian military has lost more than 43,000 men and nearly 5,000 pieces of heavy equipment, according to the latest figures from the Russian Defense Ministry.
“I think that a solution could be for Ukraine to give up territory, and get NATO membership in return,” Jenssen said at the debate, according to Norway’s VG newspaper. This discussion is already underway within NATO, he said, suggesting that it could be a “possible solution” to the conflict.
GDP growth in China is not unknowable. Most countries have less control over their economy, so GDP growth is discovered after it happened. In China, the government decides what GDP growth to achieve and then spends the required money and effort to achieve it. Many people here expected China to achieve 6% or more growth earlier this year, but this is as wrong as expecting 4% or less. The government will meet its targets. If growth is high, they deflate bubbles and introduce regulations, if growth is low, they provide stimulus. People should get used to thatIt's the best baseline there is of a unknowable other potential future.
GDP growth in the absence of COVID is unknowable.GDP growth in China is not unknowable.
You just described how fiscal and monetary policy work in all countries. China still doesn’t have “control” of GDP in the sense that because the NPC said it, GDP will grow at [X]% because the economy is 1.4 billion different agents making their own decisions. See China missing it’s GDP target in 2022 because of COVID lockdownsMost countries have less control over their economy, so GDP growth is discovered after it happened. In China, the government decides what GDP growth to achieve and then spends the required money and effort to achieve it. Many people here expected China to achieve 6% or more growth earlier this year, but this is as wrong as expecting 4% or less. The government will meet its targets. If growth is high, they deflate bubbles and introduce regulations, if growth is low, they provide stimulus. People should get used to that
That’s the whole point of it lol. It’s an effective ban on most direct investment even with the savings clause because companies are unlikely to give extremely detailed records over to investors, it increases the administrative burden on investors and creates a chill as to whether certain activities are legal or not (especially that since under IEEPA, the list of prohibited activities can be expanded at any minute). The point of the executive order is to prevent the formation of professional networks to help Chinese firms sell into the U.S. and to chill investment in China of all stripes and the executive order achieves this by it’s very existence, not the particular details of the existence (this is essentially the void for vagueness challenge).Rumour I heard was it will ban US investment into companies where the majority business is to do with things like quantum computing or AI, note the word majority. If true then this would be a make job program for accountents to see how creatively they can structure Chinese companies to stay under the limit.
"Why yes this potato farming business does have a minor branch doing quantum computing, purely for potato and potato related research you understand."