Force-India
BANNED
- Joined
- Nov 5, 2014
- Messages
- 696
- Reaction score
- -2
- Country
- Location
And it will take 16 years to turn it into proffit
China Economy Forum
- Thread starter EagleEyes
- Start date
Beidou2020
SENIOR MEMBER
- Joined
- Dec 3, 2013
- Messages
- 7,857
- Reaction score
- -48
- Country
- Location
The insignificant little ant that is known as Britain can only laugh at superior countries like China because Britain is utterly irrelevant in the world.
Brits know they are irrelevant and can't do a damn thing to an important power like China.
Brits know they are irrelevant and can't do a damn thing to an important power like China.
William Hung
SENIOR MEMBER
- Joined
- Oct 3, 2013
- Messages
- 2,465
- Reaction score
- 16
Hehehehe it is this kind of comments that makes me return to PDF.
Don't be mad bro. You are too adorable.
Yes, I am defintely impartial and respectful and sensitive and polite and reconciliatory.
ahahahahahah.......that was hilarious my man.
But then again, those vietnamese merchants are just trying to make a living bros. afterall, its better than stealing. so dont burn their trading center/shops, else they might burn you instead.
What I said was true though. Look at the photos posted by EastSea, the center will mostly be used by small time merchants/smuggler who imports Chinese junks.
Just because the sweat shop factories and workers can earn some money from these junks, it doesnt mean that they should. Our world has very limited resources bro. They should be producing something else instead wasting both natural and human resources to make these cheap junks.
Just look at those garbage toys in @EastSea's post. Kids will play with them for maybe a few days then the poisoned toys will become junks and get thrown away. What a waste of resources making those garbage.
But don't worry bro, I will organise some green peace activists to terrorise these merchants and burn that disgustimg center down.
Long live Mother Earth!!!
AgentOrange
FULL MEMBER
- Joined
- Aug 25, 2014
- Messages
- 1,247
- Reaction score
- 4
- Country
- Location
Hehehehe it is this kind of comments that makes me return to PDF.
Don't be mad bro. You are too adorable.
Yes, I am defintely impartial and respectful and sensitive and polite and reconciliatory.
What I said was true though. Look at the photos posted by EastSea, the center will mostly be used by small time merchants/smuggler who imports Chinese junks.
Just because the sweat shop factories and workers can earn some money from these junks, it doesnt mean that they should. Our world has very limited resources bro. They should be producing something else instead wasting both natural and human resources to make these cheap junks.
Just look at those garbage toys in @EastSea's post. Kids will play with them for maybe a few days then the poisoned toys will become junks and get thrown away. What a waste of resources making those garbage.
But don't worry bro, I will organise some green peace activists to terrorise these merchants and burn that disgustimg center down.
Long live Mother Earth!!!
Your troll thread got shut down and you've lost all credibility.
William Hung
SENIOR MEMBER
- Joined
- Oct 3, 2013
- Messages
- 2,465
- Reaction score
- 16
This are fake toys illegally imported in to Vietnam by smugglers.
Tràn lan đồ chơi Trung Quốc độc hại | tại TP Vinh Nghệ An
Nice post brother.
Looking at these pictures really brings me happiness.
The local Viet govt is doing the right thing by destroying these poison garbage.
Your troll thread got shut down and you've lost all credibility.
My Joshua Wong tribute thread was causing a lot of CCP fanboys to suffer eclamptic seizures and killed a lot of brain cells. The mods did the right thing and quickly shut the thread down so that you won't be brain dead.
AgentOrange
FULL MEMBER
- Joined
- Aug 25, 2014
- Messages
- 1,247
- Reaction score
- 4
- Country
- Location
Nice post brother.
Looking at these pictures really brings me happiness.
The local Viet govt is doing the right thing by destroying these poison garbage.
My Joshua Wong tribute thread was causing a lot of CCP fanboys to suffer eclamptic seizures and killed a lot of brain cells. The mods did the right thing and quickly shut the thread down so that you won't be brain dead.
LOL, what happened was that you permanently cemented your troll status. If there was any merit to your thread, it wouldn't have been shut down at all.
And to think, you once styled yourself an intellectual and eloquent debater, trying to analyze the legal merits between rival claimants in the SCS while desperately trying to hide your Viet ethnicity in a pathetic bid to appear neutral. Now you're talking about "fanboys" and calling people "brain dead." How far you have fallen. I think you can wave bye bye to PDF think tank status. 
magic-007
FULL MEMBER
- Joined
- Oct 12, 2014
- Messages
- 355
- Reaction score
- 0
- Country
- Location
Buddy , I disagree with your a set of statement ,The fact is just so .As to hate,Some trolls' modus operandi ,Care less about what people say.
Al Bhatti
SENIOR MEMBER
- Joined
- Nov 16, 2009
- Messages
- 5,686
- Reaction score
- 6
- Country
- Location
China has come a long way.
Below was built in Karachi for China long time ago.
A 13,160 DWT Cargo Vessel Hetian was built for China National Machinery Import & Export Corporation, China, in 1978.
From my earlier post in Pakistan can offer '30% less' price on warships to Qatar
Below was built in Karachi for China long time ago.
A 13,160 DWT Cargo Vessel Hetian was built for China National Machinery Import & Export Corporation, China, in 1978.
From my earlier post in Pakistan can offer '30% less' price on warships to Qatar
Echo_419
ELITE MEMBER
- Joined
- Sep 12, 2012
- Messages
- 13,111
- Reaction score
- -4
- Country
- Location
In my personal opinion both nations don't need such long HSR corridors
Small one should be preferred like Delhi Amritsar,Islamabad Lahore
Long ones will eat to much money up & money can be better spent in the railways only
Srinivas
ELITE MEMBER
- Joined
- Sep 20, 2009
- Messages
- 12,455
- Reaction score
- -26
- Country
- Location
India already has France, Japan, Germany,China lined up for HSR projects.
India is going ahead with establishment of Railway universities to absorb the technology and start R&D .
Indian Railways to set up four universities in India over five years: Railway minister - The Times of India
India is going ahead with establishment of Railway universities to absorb the technology and start R&D .
Indian Railways to set up four universities in India over five years: Railway minister - The Times of India
l'ingénieur
FULL MEMBER
- Joined
- May 26, 2014
- Messages
- 510
- Reaction score
- 0
- Country
- Location
china needs to build highspeed cargo trains going directly from gwadar to china, no stops in between, if they want to maximize the use of gwadar port
dray
BANNED
- Joined
- Apr 8, 2013
- Messages
- 10,853
- Reaction score
- -1
- Country
- Location
Wasted investment; China's $6.8-trillion hole?
SHANGHAI
HAS CHINA really blown $6.8 trillion on worthless investments over the past five years? This is the startling claim made by two Chinese government researchers that has, understandably, caused quite a stir. If true, it would mean that fully 37% of Chinese investment since 2009 was wasted on building bridges to nowhere and homes with no one in them. There is, without question, plenty of worrying evidence that Chinese investment has become less efficient in recent years. But a closer look at how the researchers produced the $6.8 trillion figure badly damages their claim. Calling it a back-of-the-envelope estimate would be undeserved praise.
The $6.8 trillion calculation was made by Xu Ce of the National Development and Reform Commission, an economic planning agency, and Wang Yuan of the Academy of Macroeconomic Research, a think-tank under the commission. Their analysis was published last week as an opinion piece in the Shanghai Securities Journal, a government-run newspaper. In their article, they estimate that worthless investment totalled 7.9 trillion yuan in 2009; 5.4 trillion yuan in 2010; 4.7 trillion yuan in 2011; 10.6 trillion yuan in 2012; and 13.2 trillion yuan last year. That amounts to 41.8 trillion yuan over the past five years, or $6.8 trillion at the current exchange rate.
These are remarkably precise figures for wasted investment, something that, by its nature, is extremely hard to pin down. There are practical difficulties – for example, we know that some government investment funds have been skimmed off by corrupt officials, but it takes careful forensics to track the ill-gotten gains of one rotten official, let alone thousands of them. Even greater are the theoretical challenges. China has clearly built too many homes, too quickly, but if some of those that stand empty today are eventually bought then what once seemed a wasted investment could yet turn into a productive one.
So how exactly do Mr Xu and Ms Wang arrive at their numbers? Their method is to compare China’s capital efficiency in the 1980s and 1990s with the past decade; they treat any decline in efficiency as evidence of wasted investment. Although they don’t publish their calculations in full, their conclusions have the virtue of being very easy to replicate from official data. (Be warned that this is slightly wonky.)
Mr Xu and Ms Wang base their analysis entirely on the concept of incremental capital output ratio, or ICOR. ICOR is a measure of how much investment it takes to produce each additional unit of growth in an economy, with investment the numerator and additional GDP the denominator. The higher a country’s ICOR, the less efficient it is – that is, it takes more investment to produce a smaller amount of economic output. Mr Xu and Ms Wang begin by calculating that China’s average ICOR from 1979 to 1996 was 2.6. To do so they tot up each year’s ICOR and calculate a simple average. Here is a table of all of China's ICORs from 1979 to 1996, yielding the same average that they calculate:
Note: Some tables & charts could not be posted here because of formatting isues, please go to the link below to check those.
(Sources: National Bureau of Statistics; The Economist)
These numbers are fine for what they are – estimates of the efficiency of Chinese investment – but it is at this point that the two researchers make several unreasonable leaps of logic. First, they use the 1979-96 ICOR average of 2.6 as their baseline estimate of what China’s ICOR ought to be were its investments all efficient. Next, they calculate the difference in China’s investment efficiency from 2009-13. For example, in 2009, the ICOR was 5, which is 48% less efficient than the baseline ICOR of 2.6. Therefore, they conclude, 48% of all Chinese investment in 2009 – 7.9 trillion yuan – was worthless. Similar calculations for each year up until 2013 yields the eye-popping result that 41.8 trillion yuan has been wasted.
There are two major, indeed fatal, flaws in this. First, why have they chosen 1979-96 as their baseline for ICOR efficiency in China? A quick glance at the tables above reveals that there was a big jump in ICOR (that is, a big decline in efficiency) from 1997-2000, followed by an improvement. The 1979-96 selection leads to a sharp downward bias in their baseline estimate. If we break the ICOR into decades, and break out the past five years separately, the results are very different, as this table shows.
Note: Some tables & charts could not be posted here because of formatting isues, please go to the link below to check those.
(Sources: National Bureau of Statistics; The Economist)
* stopping pre-stimulus
Using Mr Xu and Ms Wang’s method for calculating efficiency differences, we now can compare the ICOR of 4.2 over the past five years with 3.3, the average for both of the previous two decades. This is a much more relevant yardstick than the pre-1997 era. On this revised basis, China’s investments after the global financial were 21% less efficient than in the 1990-2008 period. Sticking to Mr Xu and Ms Wang’s approach, this would mean that 21% of all investment over the past five years – 22.6 trillion yuan ($3.7 trillion) – had been wasted. That is still a lot of money to burn through, but it is almost half their headline-grabbing estimate.
That leads to the second and even bigger flaw – namely, this is a lousy method for calculating wasted investment. ICOR serves as a rough guide to the efficiency of investment. It does not, however, show how much money was been wasted, only that it is generating smaller or bigger growth returns compared with previous years. For example, say that an investment of $1000 boosts GDP by $500 this year, but only by $400 next year. In this case, ICOR will have risen from 2 to 2.5. Using Mr Xu and Ms Wang’s framework, because investment is 20% less efficient in the second year than it was in the first year (ICOR of 2.5 vs 2), this is tantamount to 20% of investment, or $200, being worthless. But that is completely absurd. All we can conclude is that the return on investment has fallen, not that $200 has been wasted. Moreover, it is inevitable that in years when investment soars – which was, after all, the point of China’s stimulus package – investment returns will appear to suffer. The real question is whether those investments deliver returns over time, hence the point in looking at average ICORs over a longer period.
None of this is to give the Chinese economy a clean bill of health. As we have written, debt has increased too quickly, and declines in both productivity and investment efficiency are worrisome. But $6.8 trillion down the drain in just five years? This at least is one thing that will not keep us up at night.
Wasted investment: China's $6.8-trillion hole? | The Economist
SHANGHAI
HAS CHINA really blown $6.8 trillion on worthless investments over the past five years? This is the startling claim made by two Chinese government researchers that has, understandably, caused quite a stir. If true, it would mean that fully 37% of Chinese investment since 2009 was wasted on building bridges to nowhere and homes with no one in them. There is, without question, plenty of worrying evidence that Chinese investment has become less efficient in recent years. But a closer look at how the researchers produced the $6.8 trillion figure badly damages their claim. Calling it a back-of-the-envelope estimate would be undeserved praise.
The $6.8 trillion calculation was made by Xu Ce of the National Development and Reform Commission, an economic planning agency, and Wang Yuan of the Academy of Macroeconomic Research, a think-tank under the commission. Their analysis was published last week as an opinion piece in the Shanghai Securities Journal, a government-run newspaper. In their article, they estimate that worthless investment totalled 7.9 trillion yuan in 2009; 5.4 trillion yuan in 2010; 4.7 trillion yuan in 2011; 10.6 trillion yuan in 2012; and 13.2 trillion yuan last year. That amounts to 41.8 trillion yuan over the past five years, or $6.8 trillion at the current exchange rate.
These are remarkably precise figures for wasted investment, something that, by its nature, is extremely hard to pin down. There are practical difficulties – for example, we know that some government investment funds have been skimmed off by corrupt officials, but it takes careful forensics to track the ill-gotten gains of one rotten official, let alone thousands of them. Even greater are the theoretical challenges. China has clearly built too many homes, too quickly, but if some of those that stand empty today are eventually bought then what once seemed a wasted investment could yet turn into a productive one.
So how exactly do Mr Xu and Ms Wang arrive at their numbers? Their method is to compare China’s capital efficiency in the 1980s and 1990s with the past decade; they treat any decline in efficiency as evidence of wasted investment. Although they don’t publish their calculations in full, their conclusions have the virtue of being very easy to replicate from official data. (Be warned that this is slightly wonky.)
Mr Xu and Ms Wang base their analysis entirely on the concept of incremental capital output ratio, or ICOR. ICOR is a measure of how much investment it takes to produce each additional unit of growth in an economy, with investment the numerator and additional GDP the denominator. The higher a country’s ICOR, the less efficient it is – that is, it takes more investment to produce a smaller amount of economic output. Mr Xu and Ms Wang begin by calculating that China’s average ICOR from 1979 to 1996 was 2.6. To do so they tot up each year’s ICOR and calculate a simple average. Here is a table of all of China's ICORs from 1979 to 1996, yielding the same average that they calculate:
Note: Some tables & charts could not be posted here because of formatting isues, please go to the link below to check those.
(Sources: National Bureau of Statistics; The Economist)
These numbers are fine for what they are – estimates of the efficiency of Chinese investment – but it is at this point that the two researchers make several unreasonable leaps of logic. First, they use the 1979-96 ICOR average of 2.6 as their baseline estimate of what China’s ICOR ought to be were its investments all efficient. Next, they calculate the difference in China’s investment efficiency from 2009-13. For example, in 2009, the ICOR was 5, which is 48% less efficient than the baseline ICOR of 2.6. Therefore, they conclude, 48% of all Chinese investment in 2009 – 7.9 trillion yuan – was worthless. Similar calculations for each year up until 2013 yields the eye-popping result that 41.8 trillion yuan has been wasted.
There are two major, indeed fatal, flaws in this. First, why have they chosen 1979-96 as their baseline for ICOR efficiency in China? A quick glance at the tables above reveals that there was a big jump in ICOR (that is, a big decline in efficiency) from 1997-2000, followed by an improvement. The 1979-96 selection leads to a sharp downward bias in their baseline estimate. If we break the ICOR into decades, and break out the past five years separately, the results are very different, as this table shows.
Note: Some tables & charts could not be posted here because of formatting isues, please go to the link below to check those.
(Sources: National Bureau of Statistics; The Economist)
* stopping pre-stimulus
Using Mr Xu and Ms Wang’s method for calculating efficiency differences, we now can compare the ICOR of 4.2 over the past five years with 3.3, the average for both of the previous two decades. This is a much more relevant yardstick than the pre-1997 era. On this revised basis, China’s investments after the global financial were 21% less efficient than in the 1990-2008 period. Sticking to Mr Xu and Ms Wang’s approach, this would mean that 21% of all investment over the past five years – 22.6 trillion yuan ($3.7 trillion) – had been wasted. That is still a lot of money to burn through, but it is almost half their headline-grabbing estimate.
That leads to the second and even bigger flaw – namely, this is a lousy method for calculating wasted investment. ICOR serves as a rough guide to the efficiency of investment. It does not, however, show how much money was been wasted, only that it is generating smaller or bigger growth returns compared with previous years. For example, say that an investment of $1000 boosts GDP by $500 this year, but only by $400 next year. In this case, ICOR will have risen from 2 to 2.5. Using Mr Xu and Ms Wang’s framework, because investment is 20% less efficient in the second year than it was in the first year (ICOR of 2.5 vs 2), this is tantamount to 20% of investment, or $200, being worthless. But that is completely absurd. All we can conclude is that the return on investment has fallen, not that $200 has been wasted. Moreover, it is inevitable that in years when investment soars – which was, after all, the point of China’s stimulus package – investment returns will appear to suffer. The real question is whether those investments deliver returns over time, hence the point in looking at average ICORs over a longer period.
None of this is to give the Chinese economy a clean bill of health. As we have written, debt has increased too quickly, and declines in both productivity and investment efficiency are worrisome. But $6.8 trillion down the drain in just five years? This at least is one thing that will not keep us up at night.
Wasted investment: China's $6.8-trillion hole? | The Economist
Backstabbing viets, let them rot. Let American take advvantage of them. They will be China's or US vassal state.
A box of tissue paper is worth more than 24,000 vnd. If vnd wasn't so dirty i would use it to wipe my ***.
EastSea
BANNED
- Joined
- Oct 24, 2011
- Messages
- 3,787
- Reaction score
- -1
- Country
- Location
china said in cold war ." US is paper tiger" but china has been backstabbing Soviet Russian 1969 and Viets 1972/79. your dream was that to be vassal state to US.
Similar threads
