China-UK (Britain) Geopolitics and Economics: News & Discussions

[VCheng]

An American hotel doorsman earns 7 times higher pay than his/her Chinese counterpart.

Both stand in front of the hotel. Their job is the same.

The productivity is the same. You are seeing an illusion in the service sector GDP numbers.

As I said before, you may choose to ignore the facts. But, the facts remain true.

 

[Martian2]

As I said before, you may choose to ignore the facts. But, the facts remain true.

Give me a break. I've been giving you comparison after comparison (e.g. facts).

You've just been repeating your rote faith belief in incorrect service sector GDP numbers.
----------

Once you normalize the service sector GDP pay for American and Chinese service sector workers, it should be obvious that China's higher total energy consumption means a larger economy.

 

[VCheng]

Give me a break. I've been giving you comparison after comparison (e.g. facts).

You've just been repeating your rote faith belief in incorrect service sector GDP numbers.

You have voiced your opinion. I have provided the links to the data.

 

[Martian2]

You have voiced your opinion. I have provided the links to the data.

The data is wrong.

 

[cnleio]

U know ... there's a New Game !

 

[VCheng]

The data is wrong.

That is only your opinion, unless you can come up with data to support it. Any links please?

U know ... there's a New Game !

View attachment 265900

It is the same age old game of Empires and Thrones. New chapter? May be. Or not for a while yet. Who knows?

 

[Martian2]

In the past, only nominal GDP was used.

This problem was partially corrected when PPP was introduced. PPP makes sense only as a comparison between two closely-related countries in technology (e.g. China and the US).

PPP does not make any sense when you compare the US and India. India has a huge technological deficit and the productivity is not comparable.

Right now, the nominal GDP service sector measurements of China and the US are clearly wrong. This will be rectified in the future. Either China will move to a completely free-floating exchange rate or a service-sector GDP deflator will have to be introduced.

 

[BDforever]

The figures are from the World Bank, and considered reliable. You can ignore them if you like, but my point stands.

you will be personally ruled by chinese ....

 

[haviZsultan]

China is rising as the US declines. Britain can’t ignore this reality
Martin Jacques
China’s human rights are improving, and this relationship offers the UK opportunities that would otherwise be impossible

‘Since 2005 the financial crisis has rendered western growth rates close to zero and made the global economy ever more dependent on China. This is the new reality. To their great credit, Osborne and his party have seized the nettle.’ Photograph: Lauren Hurley/PA

Who would have guessed just three years ago that the David Camerongovernment would be the author of the boldest change in British foreign policy since the second world war? That is exactly what is now unfolding.

The process began this year when the British government announced it would join a Chinese initiative to help fund Asia’s enormous infrastructural needs. The UK became the first non-Asian country to join the Asian Infrastructure Investment Bank (AIIB), after which more than 30 other countries joined, including Germany and France.

The United States opposed the decision because it saw the AIIB as a threat to the International Monetary Fund and the World Bank. Britain has long been the US’s foreign policy shadow, so the decision to join the AIIB was the most significant act of independence since 1944, when John Maynard Keynes argued with America’s Dexter White at Bretton Woods over the new international financial order.

The underlying thinking behind the British decision has since become clear. This was no flash in the pan. The key mover is the chancellor, George Osborne. His approach is based on a recognition of the profound changes in the global economy caused by China’s rise. At the time of the last state visit to Britain by a Chinese president, that of Hu Jintao in 2005, the UK economy was still slightly larger than that of China: today China’s GDP, by the most conservative measure, is over three times greater. We are fast becoming a minnow by comparison.

Since 2005, the financial crisis has rendered western growth rates close to zero, left their economies debt-ridden, and made the global economy ever more dependent on China for growth and capital. This is the new reality that imbues the thinking of any government, right or left. To their great credit, Osborne and his party have seized the nettle.

The courageous decision to join the AIIB bestowed an advantage on the UK. From being a western laggard in its relationship with China, Britain moved to the front of the queue. Cameron’s claim that the UK could be “China’s best partner in the west” was not empty rhetoric, nor was the idea of a “golden decade” in Sino-British relations.

President Xi Jinping’s visit this week is likely to see many new commercial agreements between the two countries. Britain’s much-neglected infrastructure requires huge capital investment, money it does not have. The willingness of the Chinese to invest in HS2, a new programme of nuclear reactors and the so-called “northern powerhouse” offers opportunities that otherwise would be impossible. At the same time, the City of London is the largest offshore market for the renminbi, which could be crucial to its long-term future. Xi’s visit will greatly enhance the growing cooperation between China and the UK and give further shape to what might be described as Britain’s pivot to China.

President Xi Jinping and his wife Peng Liyuan arrive at London’s Heathrow airport. Photograph: Toby Melville/Reuters

Of course, there will be those who object on the grounds that the UK, in its embrace of China, is moving away from the US. However, the situation is rather more complex. China is rising; the US is declining. By 2030 it is projected that the Chinese economy will be twice the size of the US’s. Can Britain, or any country, ignore this? Most countries in the world in varying degrees are pivoting to China just as once, in America’s heyday, they pivoted to the US. This is about the force of gravity, not the ivory tower.

Take Australia, a very close and long-term American ally. China now accounts for over a quarter of its exports – far greater than America’s share. That, by default, means Australia has come to enjoy a much closer relationship with China: the Australians now talk of America as “our ally” and China as “our very good friend”

Those who want to ignore or deny these realities are living in a world that is growing smaller and less important by the day. Countries either change with the world or are rendered insignificant and marginal by those changes. The British government has recognised this and deserves support for doing so.

Of course there is understandable unease. China is a very different proposition from the US. Whereas historically we share much with the latter, that is not true of China, which comes from entirely different historical and cultural roots. As a result there is much room for disagreement and misperception. There is a powerful presumption in the west that China should be like us: it never has been and never will be. We must learn to accept this and try to understand China on its own terms rather than ours.

We are uncomfortable about China’s human rights record which, by our values, certainly leaves a great deal to be desired. But even here there is a bigger picture. China has taken 600 million people out of poverty, arguably the single biggest global contribution to human rights over the last three decades. Over the same period China has become a much freer society. The nation is a work in progress. Its human rights record is not a reason to reject a much closer relationship with it.

The new turn to China offers Britain the prospect of modernising our infrastructure in a way that otherwise would be inconceivable. It will create many new jobs. Above all it shows how Britain can prosper in the Asian-oriented and China-centric world rapidly unfolding before us.

All of asia, except for a few countries like Vietnam, Philipines, India and Japan is vouching for China and seeking an Asian power replacing a western power in each and every field. No more global hegemon and bully running the world. When America falls China and another country will take its place.

 

[Steve781]

The visit is being blown out of proportion. We're looking for some trade and investment not a best friend.

 

[BDforever]

We're looking for some trade and investment not a best friend.

money is fancy

 

[VCheng]

The visit is being blown out of proportion. We're looking for some trade and investment not a best friend.

And you will get it too. China will partner globally to increase its participation in trade for mutual benefits.

 

[Steve781]

money is fancy

Money is important but it's not the sole factor in determining relations. I'm pretty sure we won't be sharing intelligence with them any time soon for example.

 

[BDforever]

Money is important but it's not the sole factor in determining relations. I'm pretty sure we won't be sharing intelligence with them any time soon for example.

i think business is only concern of China as it is aiming super duper economic powerhouse

 

[Steve781]

i think business is only concern of China as it is aiming super duper economic powerhouse

What I'm saying is there's a difference between an economic relationship and a strategic relationship.