What's new

The Coming Debt Bust

Jacob Martin

FULL MEMBER
Joined
Oct 3, 2015
Messages
1,453
Reaction score
-8
Country
India
Location
Germany
The Economist

The coming debt bust

It is a question of when, not if, real trouble will hit in China

May 7th 2016 | From the print edition

CHINA was right to turn on the credit taps to prop up growth after the global financial crisis. It was wrong not to turn them off again. The country’s debt has increased just as quickly over the past two years as in the two years after the 2008 crunch. Its debt-to-GDP ratio has soared from 150% to nearly 260% over a decade, the kind of surge that is usually followed by a financial bust or an abrupt slowdown.

China will not be an exception to that rule. Problem loans have doubled in two years and, officially, are already 5.5% of banks’ total lending. The reality is grimmer. Roughly two-fifths of new debt is swallowed by interest on existing loans; in 2014, 16% of the 1,000 biggest Chinese firms owed more in interest than they earned before tax. China requires more and more credit to generate less and less growth: it now takes nearly four yuan of new borrowing to generate one yuan of additional GDP, up from just over one yuan of credit before the financial crisis. With the government’s connivance, debt levels can probably keep climbing for a while, perhaps even for a few more years. But not for ever.

When the debt cycle turns, both asset prices and the real economy will be in for a shock. That won’t be fun for anyone. It is true that China has been fastidious in capping its external liabilities (it is a net creditor). Its dangers are home-made. But the damage from a big Chinese credit blow-up would still be immense. China is the world’s second-biggest economy; its banking sector is the biggest, with assets equivalent to 40% of global GDP. Its stockmarkets, even after last year’s crash, are together worth $6 trillion, second only to America’s. And its bond market, at $7.5 trillion, is the world’s third-biggest and growing fast. A mere 2% devaluation of the yuan last summer sent global stockmarkets crashing; a bigger bust would do far worse. A mild economic slowdown caused trouble for commodity exporters around the world; a hard landing would be painful for all those who benefit from Chinese demand.

Advertisement


Brace, brace

Optimists have drawn comfort from two ideas. First, over three-plus decades of reform, China’s officials have consistently shown that once they identified problems, they had the will and skill to fix them. Second, control of the financial system—the state owns the major banks and most of their biggest debtors—gave them time to clean things up.

Both these sources of comfort are fading away. This is a government not so much guiding events as struggling to keep up with them. In the past year alone, China has spent nearly $200 billion to prop up the stockmarket; $65 billion of bank loans have gone bad; financial frauds have cost investors at least $20 billion; and $600 billion of capital has left the country. To help pump up growth, officials have inflated a property bubble. Debt is still expanding twice as fast as the economy.

At the same time, as our special report this week shows, the government’s grip on finance is slipping. Despite repeated efforts to restrain them, loosely regulated forms of lending are growing quickly: such “shadow assets” have increased by more than 30% annually over the past three years. In theory, shadow banks diversify sources of credit and spread risk away from the regular banks. In practice, the lines between the shadow and formal banking systems are badly blurred.

That creates two risks. The first is higher-than-expected losses for the banks. Hungry for profits in a slowing economy, plenty of Chinese banks have mis-categorised risky loans as investments to dodge scrutiny and lessen capital requirements. These shadow loans were worth roughly 16% of standard loans in mid-2015, up from just 4% in 2012. The second risk is liquidity. The banks have become ever more reliant on “wealth management products”, whereby they pay higher rates for what are, in effect, short-term deposits and put them into longer-term assets. For years China restricted bank loans to less than 75% of their deposit base, ensuring that they had plenty of cash in reserve. Now the real level is nearing 100%, a threshold where a sudden shortage in funding—the classic precursor to banking crises—is well within the realm of possibility. Midsized banks have been the most active in expanding; they are the place to look for sudden trouble.

Pandamonium

The end to China’s debt build-up would not look exactly like past financial blow-ups. China’s shadow-banking system is big, but it has not spawned any products nearly as complex or international in reach as America’s bundles of subprime mortgages in 2008. Its relatively insulated financial system means that parallels with the 1997-98 Asian crisis, in which countries from Thailand to South Korea borrowed too much from abroad, are thin. Some worry that China will look like Japan in the 1990s, slowly grinding towards stagnation. But its financial system is more chaotic, with more pressure for capital outflows, than was Japan’s; a Chinese crisis is likely to be sharper and more sudden than Japan’s chronic malaise.

One thing is certain. The longer China delays a reckoning with its problems, the more severe the eventual consequences will be. For a start, it should plan for turmoil. Policy co-ordination was appalling during last year’s stockmarket crash; regulators must work out in advance who monitors what and prepare emergency responses. Rather than deploying both fiscal and monetary stimulus to keep growth above the official target of at least 6.5% this year (which is, in any event, unnecessarily fast), the government should save its firepower for a real calamity. The central bank should also put on ice its plans to internationalise the yuan; a premature opening of the capital account would lead only to big outflows and bigger trouble, when the financial system is already on shaky ground.

Most important, China must start to curb the relentless rise of debt. The assumption that the government of Xi Jinping will keep bailing out its banks, borrowers and depositors is pervasive—and not just in China itself. It must tolerate more defaults, close failed companies and let growth sag. This will be tough, but it is too late for China to avoid pain. The task now is to avert something far worse.
 
Of course, I do not expect the 50 cent crowd on PDF to acknowledge any of this. The size and scale of the coming debt-driven debacle in China has been obvious for years now. And so has been the fact that the longer the Chinese government keeps pump-priming the economy with more debt, the greater the chances that it will all end in disaster. A Japanese-style "lost decade" is, in fact, the best hope that China has in the medium term. Although the fact is that China's debt levels have long surpassed the one at which the Japanese economy entered its decades-long recessionary cycle in the early 90s.
 
It's not a matter of if but when. China is in a credit bubble. Every major economy has gone through one. The question is will China come through the pain stronger like most economies have in the past.
 
The Economist is a BRITISH magazine and one of the worlds most respected opinion makers.
The Economist is a JAPANESE magazine NOW and one of the WEST opinion makers. By the way,it never predict Chinese economy right in the past 30 years,NEVER,so you call it respected,er......
To the Indians, donot trust the west or surround by their stick. We never trust them,and that is why we develop better.
 
Last edited:
The Economist

The coming debt bust

It is a question of when, not if, real trouble will hit in China

May 7th 2016 | From the print edition

CHINA was right to turn on the credit taps to prop up growth after the global financial crisis. It was wrong not to turn them off again. The country’s debt has increased just as quickly over the past two years as in the two years after the 2008 crunch. Its debt-to-GDP ratio has soared from 150% to nearly 260% over a decade, the kind of surge that is usually followed by a financial bust or an abrupt slowdown.

China will not be an exception to that rule. Problem loans have doubled in two years and, officially, are already 5.5% of banks’ total lending. The reality is grimmer. Roughly two-fifths of new debt is swallowed by interest on existing loans; in 2014, 16% of the 1,000 biggest Chinese firms owed more in interest than they earned before tax. China requires more and more credit to generate less and less growth: it now takes nearly four yuan of new borrowing to generate one yuan of additional GDP, up from just over one yuan of credit before the financial crisis. With the government’s connivance, debt levels can probably keep climbing for a while, perhaps even for a few more years. But not for ever.

When the debt cycle turns, both asset prices and the real economy will be in for a shock. That won’t be fun for anyone. It is true that China has been fastidious in capping its external liabilities (it is a net creditor). Its dangers are home-made. But the damage from a big Chinese credit blow-up would still be immense. China is the world’s second-biggest economy; its banking sector is the biggest, with assets equivalent to 40% of global GDP. Its stockmarkets, even after last year’s crash, are together worth $6 trillion, second only to America’s. And its bond market, at $7.5 trillion, is the world’s third-biggest and growing fast. A mere 2% devaluation of the yuan last summer sent global stockmarkets crashing; a bigger bust would do far worse. A mild economic slowdown caused trouble for commodity exporters around the world; a hard landing would be painful for all those who benefit from Chinese demand.

Advertisement


Brace, brace

Optimists have drawn comfort from two ideas. First, over three-plus decades of reform, China’s officials have consistently shown that once they identified problems, they had the will and skill to fix them. Second, control of the financial system—the state owns the major banks and most of their biggest debtors—gave them time to clean things up.

Both these sources of comfort are fading away. This is a government not so much guiding events as struggling to keep up with them. In the past year alone, China has spent nearly $200 billion to prop up the stockmarket; $65 billion of bank loans have gone bad; financial frauds have cost investors at least $20 billion; and $600 billion of capital has left the country. To help pump up growth, officials have inflated a property bubble. Debt is still expanding twice as fast as the economy.

At the same time, as our special report this week shows, the government’s grip on finance is slipping. Despite repeated efforts to restrain them, loosely regulated forms of lending are growing quickly: such “shadow assets” have increased by more than 30% annually over the past three years. In theory, shadow banks diversify sources of credit and spread risk away from the regular banks. In practice, the lines between the shadow and formal banking systems are badly blurred.

That creates two risks. The first is higher-than-expected losses for the banks. Hungry for profits in a slowing economy, plenty of Chinese banks have mis-categorised risky loans as investments to dodge scrutiny and lessen capital requirements. These shadow loans were worth roughly 16% of standard loans in mid-2015, up from just 4% in 2012. The second risk is liquidity. The banks have become ever more reliant on “wealth management products”, whereby they pay higher rates for what are, in effect, short-term deposits and put them into longer-term assets. For years China restricted bank loans to less than 75% of their deposit base, ensuring that they had plenty of cash in reserve. Now the real level is nearing 100%, a threshold where a sudden shortage in funding—the classic precursor to banking crises—is well within the realm of possibility. Midsized banks have been the most active in expanding; they are the place to look for sudden trouble.

Pandamonium

The end to China’s debt build-up would not look exactly like past financial blow-ups. China’s shadow-banking system is big, but it has not spawned any products nearly as complex or international in reach as America’s bundles of subprime mortgages in 2008. Its relatively insulated financial system means that parallels with the 1997-98 Asian crisis, in which countries from Thailand to South Korea borrowed too much from abroad, are thin. Some worry that China will look like Japan in the 1990s, slowly grinding towards stagnation. But its financial system is more chaotic, with more pressure for capital outflows, than was Japan’s; a Chinese crisis is likely to be sharper and more sudden than Japan’s chronic malaise.

One thing is certain. The longer China delays a reckoning with its problems, the more severe the eventual consequences will be. For a start, it should plan for turmoil. Policy co-ordination was appalling during last year’s stockmarket crash; regulators must work out in advance who monitors what and prepare emergency responses. Rather than deploying both fiscal and monetary stimulus to keep growth above the official target of at least 6.5% this year (which is, in any event, unnecessarily fast), the government should save its firepower for a real calamity. The central bank should also put on ice its plans to internationalise the yuan; a premature opening of the capital account would lead only to big outflows and bigger trouble, when the financial system is already on shaky ground.

Most important, China must start to curb the relentless rise of debt. The assumption that the government of Xi Jinping will keep bailing out its banks, borrowers and depositors is pervasive—and not just in China itself. It must tolerate more defaults, close failed companies and let growth sag. This will be tough, but it is too late for China to avoid pain. The task now is to avert something far worse.

The major problem for China is they lack currency and economic reform, the current economic system and currency management is heavily regulated by the State as SOE still dominant in China as well as Chinese tight grip of their own currency.

The debt level also contributed to the uneven development of Chinese Economy in different part of China, you can see some part are highly developed and with a very high living standard, and most part of China is underdeveloped and have a lower living standard. That would means an average Chinese if they want to live in Tier 1 city like Shanghai or Beijing, and if they came from Tier 2 or 3 city (like from Western China such as Shanxi and Gansu) they cannot do anything but borrow money.

The debt problem is going to get worse without economic reform and currency reform, the Chinese had already done a devalue of their currency, not surprise if they are going to need another one in the future.

The only hope is that China either reform or break down before they have been able to admit into international economy bodies. Such as Currency basket and MPR.
 
Just FYI, India will still be poor and a complete mess, either way.

That's not true actually. Once the wastage of investment that China has indulged in burns Western investors, the only major market left to tap will be India. So China's loss may bring us pain in the short term, but in the medium term is definitely advantageous.

There is also the security dimension to be considered. A booming China is an aggressive China. A decade of slow/negative growth in China will be good for security in this part of Asia. China has territorial disputes with almost all neighbors and better sense may prevail when it finds itself in a weaker position.

Look, I would love to say that there can be peaceful coexistence with a totalitarian dictatorship. But facts suggest otherwise. No one wants to see the people of China hurt, but everyone (except the Party faithful and the 50 cent crowd) want to see the so-called Communist Party go under.

It's not a matter of if but when. China is in a credit bubble. Every major economy has gone through one. The question is will China come through the pain stronger like most economies have in the past.

That China may come out of it stronger is a definite possibility. No one doubts the strength and resilience of the Chinese people. But its not going to happen on the watch of the Party, which has fed the economy with the narcotic of free credit for too long. Even now, instead of tightening, they are infusing even greater amount of debt into the system.

I don't expect any miracles as long as the so-called Communist Party stays in power.

The major problem for China is they lack currency and economic reform, the current economic system and currency management is heavily regulated by the State as SOE still dominant in China as well as Chinese tight grip of their own currency.

The debt level also contributed to the uneven development of Chinese Economy in different part of China, you can see some part are highly developed and with a very high living standard, and most part of China is underdeveloped and have a lower living standard. That would means an average Chinese if they want to live in Tier 1 city like Shanghai or Beijing, and if they came from Tier 2 or 3 city (like from Western China such as Shanxi and Gansu) they cannot do anything but borrow money.

The debt problem is going to get worse without economic reform and currency reform, the Chinese had already done a devalue of their currency, not surprise if they are going to need another one in the future.

The only hope is that China either reform or break down before they have been able to admit into international economy bodies. Such as Currency basket and MPR.

Thanks for the incisive comment. Change in a country like China can only come from within. It is trues that unlike most market economies, China can keep pump-priming debt for much longer. But eventually, the supply will outstrip the demand bubble that has been artificially created.

The longer the debt binge, the greater will be the pain of bankruptcies and recession.

Of all the people you'd expect. It'd surely be an Indian to start this thread hoping for China's economy would crash since India couldn't catch up.
Its like, let's hope for the hare to break it's legs, so the tortoise would catch up.
:rofl: Indians! *Smh*

In the medium term catching up will not be an issue. Let us, for a moment, keep aside that fact that Chinese growth figures are fudged. Even the genuine growth in production that has taken place post 2007 has been in manufacturing and asset classes that are purely driven by debt. The moment the debt supply stops, these figures will go into negative.

Catching up from a lower baseline with a growth of 7% may take time if China was actually growing at 6%. When the great Party cannot fudge numbers any longer, the actual figures for China will be negative and catching up with a contracting economy is not that tough.

You should know that - how long did it take for China to catch up with Japan after 1992?

We never trust them,and that is why we develop better.

That is, in fact, the crux of this thread. Did you develop better? Once the reckless debt binge stops, do you think you will be in a position to sound pompous and all-knowing?

It is much more likely that you will feel cheated about what the Party has done to the people, once the spate of bankruptcies begins in earnest.

what we need to do it or not, when to do it, how to do it, we Chinese make all the decisions by ourselves!


take your fcuking poison somewhere else !



we can set up another IMF if we want, same as AIIB to WB!!!


:china::china::china:

If you are so confident of your position, you wouldn't have to curse me.

First save money for the capital flight that is draining hundreds of billions from the foreign reserve every month, and then harbour delusions of grandeur about World Bank/IMF.

The Economist is a JAPANESE magazine NOW and one of the WEST opinion makers. By the way,it never predict Chinese economy right in the past 30 years,NEVER,so you call it respected,er......

http://www.cnbc.com/2016/04/26/china-debt-a-risk-but-authorities-are-handling-it-moodys.html

http://www.livemint.com/Opinion/XpZVxjMQ6CGOCQLdowkzdM/Chinas-record-debt.html

https://next.ft.com/content/acd3f2fc-084a-11e6-876d-b823056b209b

http://www.forbes.com/sites/douglasbulloch/2016/04/26/why-chinas-debt-matters/#5b5522a7f88c

http://www.theaustralian.com.au/bus...s/news-story/f76870e7fc84ee97e99d5bee0a4078d6

http://www.marketwatch.com/story/chinas-debt-problem-is-bigger-than-you-think-2016-05-06

http://www.scmp.com/business/market...bt-ratio-least-nine-times-official-number-and

http://www.theepochtimes.com/n3/2059563-why-chinas-debt-crisis-will-differ-from-japans/

http://www.bloomberg.com/news/artic...-says-we-all-have-to-worry-about-china-s-debt

http://seekingalpha.com/article/3975363-chinese-debt-bomb-keeps-ticking

American, British, Australian, Indian, even SCPM (Hong Kong), all say the same thing. Take your pick.
 
The Economist is a JAPANESE magazine NOW and one of the WEST opinion makers. By the way,it never predict Chinese economy right in the past 30 years,NEVER,so you call it respected,er......
To the Indians, donot trust the west or surround by their stick. We never trust them,and that is why we develop better.
I can't believe the number of nut jobs that liked your post!

The Economist group is owned by Cadbury, Rothschild, Schroder and Agnelli. If you have inside knowledge that says it is owned by the Japanese please go and change their blurb on Wikipedia.

Please back up your statement that " Economist is never right."

Criticism of China is not a war cry. Most people who live in democratic countries criticize their governments continuously. You are just unused to it coming from a one party state.
 
If you think that people in China do not criticise the government, then you have never been to China. :P
Dude, that was not aimed at people like you or jhungary. It was meant for the shell like ears of those tw1ts who start screaming blue murder at the slightest criticism. Yes, I do know that there are many reasonable people in China, I have met many such.
 
I can't believe the number of nut jobs that liked your post!

The Economist group is owned by Cadbury, Rothschild, Schroder and Agnelli. If you have inside knowledge that says it is owned by the Japanese please go and change their blurb on Wikipedia.

Please back up your statement that " Economist is never right."

Criticism of China is not a war cry. Most people who live in democratic countries criticize their governments continuously. You are just unused to it coming from a one party state.

You need to know this, in Chinese, there is a term called "自欺欺人" which translate to "To deceive oneself as well as other" You cannot deceive other until you can lie to yourself everything is going to be okay.

They don't care what happened in the real world where we live in, as long as they can spin the way they want in the internet, all is A-OK.

Dude, that was not aimed at people like you or jhungary. It was meant for the shell like ears of those tw1ts who start screaming blue murder at the slightest criticism. Yes, I do know that there are many reasonable people in China, I have met many such.

lol, you did not offend me any bit, I am a realist, I don't really care nor wanted to tow the line for anybody, if I see something that's out of place, I will speak up.

I hate these people as much as you do, so yeah, you need to remember, for every one of them, there is one like me.
 
Dude, that was not aimed at people like you or jhungary. It was meant for the shell like ears of those tw1ts who start screaming blue murder at the slightest criticism. Yes, I do know that there are many reasonable people in China, I have met many such.

Well I wouldn't say it's reasonable or not.

But government corruption has always been the number 1 complaint in China. (And for good reason, if you've seen any news coming out of China).

And people do get angry about it:

Chinese Citizens Stormed Government Offices Near Shanghai And Forced The Mayor To Strip - Business Insider

Anyway, it's human nature to criticize one's own leaders, you can't change that without changing species.

(And the OP's comments were very obviously designed to inflame anger. :P)
 
It's not a matter of if but when. China is in a credit bubble. Every major economy has gone through one. The question is will China come through the pain stronger like most economies have in the past.

Yes, people can name all the countries that failed, but they only need to name the one China is the most similar to, relatively. The USA.

American companies can be successful without ever leaving America, Japan on the other hand, cannot. China's current top companies in the tech and entertainment industries are all China based, none of them are international in the truest sense of the word.

This is a huge advantage, soon the bar would be raised so high that just in America is not going to be enough to be successful, like in Japan, yet it will be for China.

The debts, the structural problems, these things come and go, but you know what, these are all side shows, it is the real hard power that matters in the end.

If you want further evidence, just watch John Oliver. America's got problems, but it's still trucking fools, why?

That's not true actually. Once the wastage of investment that China has indulged in burns Western investors, the only major market left to tap will be India. So China's loss may bring us pain in the short term, but in the medium term is definitely advantageous.

There is also the security dimension to be considered. A booming China is an aggressive China. A decade of slow/negative growth in China will be good for security in this part of Asia. China has territorial disputes with almost all neighbors and better sense may prevail when it finds itself in a weaker position.

Look, I would love to say that there can be peaceful coexistence with a totalitarian dictatorship. But facts suggest otherwise. No one wants to see the people of China hurt, but everyone (except the Party faithful and the 50 cent crowd) want to see the so-called Communist Party go under.

Whether the party goes under is irrelevant, due to recent events I can see how you would see the party that way, in reality the party doesn't matter to me you and the light post.

China's actions internationally, are Chinese interests, they will remain Chinese interests whether it be the communist party or the martian party. If Modi drops dead tomorrow, would India and Pakistan be best friends? Hell no. In terms of international relations, expect further push against India, CCP or not. As Pakistan is infinitely more important to us than India. Just like Japan is to the US.


As to your first point, China is the biggest investor now, you think Western capital remains the only capital? Even after Japan's crash, it still was a huge investor, and the same will be more true for China. India has been the prefered choice in many since the begining as China was in the communist bloc. Yet here we are in 2016.

If your government really reforms and takes some hits, then yea, investments will come even from China.

BTW, aggressive? All powerful nations act this way, it only looks different because one waves the flag of freedom that gave no freedom, the other doesn't wave a flag and really didn't do anything that actually impacted any country. Or to put it more bluntly, if you can name a country since 2007's sea row that we did even 1/1000th of the damage to their country than their own government and people, I like to hear it.

That China may come out of it stronger is a definite possibility. No one doubts the strength and resilience of the Chinese people. But its not going to happen on the watch of the Party, which has fed the economy with the narcotic of free credit for too long. Even now, instead of tightening, they are infusing even greater amount of debt into the system.

I don't expect any miracles as long as the so-called Communist Party stays in power.



Thanks for the incisive comment. Change in a country like China can only come from within. It is trues that unlike most market economies, China can keep pump-priming debt for much longer. But eventually, the supply will outstrip the demand bubble that has been artificially created.

The longer the debt binge, the greater will be the pain of bankruptcies and recession.

The government of Xi, of Hu, of Jiang, of Deng, of Mao are all different, far more different than any Indian government change or any government change. So your characterization of change can only happen without the party can only really be true if there is absolutely nothing China can do.

For the policies, good or bad, are so different each administration, it may as well be a different country.

In the medium term catching up will not be an issue. Let us, for a moment, keep aside that fact that Chinese growth figures are fudged. Even the genuine growth in production that has taken place post 2007 has been in manufacturing and asset classes that are purely driven by debt. The moment the debt supply stops, these figures will go into negative.

Catching up from a lower baseline with a growth of 7% may take time if China was actually growing at 6%. When the great Party cannot fudge numbers any longer, the actual figures for China will be negative and catching up with a contracting economy is not that tough.

You should know that - how long did it take for China to catch up with Japan after 1992?

You can say fudged all you want, and it probably is, but that's not the point is it. GDP numbers by itself is just a number, it doesn't mean any more than tree numbers, or cat numbers. What it represent is prestige and since every international organization recognizes, I say goal achieved.

If all your argument is based on what numbers you think may be, then just say it's 5 dollars and caught up already.

If you are going to bring Japan into this, I have to point out, China has a 10-1 advantage in population, a billion to 1 in resources, is India looking to expand its population 10 times tomorrow and take over South America?

If you are so confident of your position, you wouldn't have to curse me.

First save money for the capital flight that is draining hundreds of billions from the foreign reserve every month, and then harbour delusions of grandeur about World Bank/IMF.

No need for delusions, we already surpassed IMF in lending. Besides regarding IMF/world bank, you are getting screwed at the same time we are. Unless your position is as long as we get screwed, you're happy, then there really isn't much you want to say about IMF.


Lastly, you can point to articles we can point to infrastructure. At the end of the day, words are just words, we can always write more, but let see someone build what we have built, and don't even pretend like our infrastructure is not needed, even Americans are wanting infrastructure, it's just they are not doing much at the moment.

Dude, that was not aimed at people like you or jhungary. It was meant for the shell like ears of those tw1ts who start screaming blue murder at the slightest criticism. Yes, I do know that there are many reasonable people in China, I have met many such.

By attacking the party you are attacking China, I don't see it that way, but even Modi haters are being attacked in India and you guys are suppose to be a democracy.

People complain about the government all the time, everywhere. Be it America or China.

Why do you think international students coming home are much more patriotic? Especially concerning Taiwan and HK? I'm sure you are not the biggest fan of rape threads, why?

See it for what it is. Most people talking about CCP are not really talking about the CCP are they, SCS, military, international trade, and more are all CHINESE interests, not CCP interests.

Well I wouldn't say it's reasonable or not.

But government corruption has always been the number 1 complaint in China. (And for good reason, if you've seen any news coming out of China).

And people do get angry about it:

Chinese Citizens Stormed Government Offices Near Shanghai And Forced The Mayor To Strip - Business Insider

Anyway, it's human nature to criticize one's own leaders, you can't change that without changing species.

(And the OP's comments were very obviously designed to inflame anger. :P)

People very rarely like to admit, that they either want what we have or wants to keep what they have. It's about the CCP as much as going on a date is about the food.

That's why I like Trump and Abe, at least they are up front about their hate.
 
China is always the spotlight, attract people's attention, idiot's, talent's, I am happy to enjoy these.

Hope that the talent give more advise on China economy and other.

I can't believe the number of nut jobs that liked your post!

The Economist group is owned by Cadbury, Rothschild, Schroder and Agnelli. If you have inside knowledge that says it is owned by the Japanese please go and change their blurb on Wikipedia.

Please back up your statement that " Economist is never right."

Criticism of China is not a war cry. Most people who live in democratic countries criticize their governments continuously. You are just unused to it coming from a one party state.
Hehe, you are living in your world, you don't know China, if you know Chinese, and browsing Chinese website, you will know.

And, I tell you, if just know criticising, talk too much, just like you leader and politician, less action, the leader can't change anything, all these are useless, in my opinion, you indian are just used to talking and talking without result.
 
Last edited:

Pakistan Affairs Latest Posts

Back
Top Bottom