What's new

WSJ: China’s Fading Recovery Reveals Deeper Economic Struggles

A country can't stay a manufacture base forever, condition and progress will move you away from that because competition will grow (even tho most Chinese member here think otherwise) and the condition is going to make manufacturing industry unviable. Which is why most western countries have a fully function service industry.

The problem is, if the Chinese develop their service industry, then power would need to shift from central government to the individual owner, which is what Jack Ma rant on before he "Disappeared" but that means the government will lose regulatory power, and that's a big No-No for the Chinese. Until the Chinese realise this, they are going to stay in this state until one day the profit margin felt below and the demand shifted elsewhere, and when China had not developed an advnace service economy by then, then it would be like robbing the bank and left holding the bag.
That is why China initiated their Belt and Road initiative to use their surplus manufacturing capability as an FDI. So far, it has not produced very good results, but in future it may change. To become a service superpower like USA, china will have to be more transparent, which doesn't seem possible at least in the Eleven era, may happen once he succeeded by a less autocratic person!!
 
.
A country can't stay a manufacture base forever, condition and progress will move you away from that because competition will grow (even tho most Chinese member here think otherwise) and the condition is going to make manufacturing industry unviable. Which is why most western countries have a fully function service industry.

The problem is, if the Chinese develop their service industry, then power would need to shift from central government to the individual owner, which is what Jack Ma rant on before he "Disappeared" but that means the government will lose regulatory power, and that's a big No-No for the Chinese. Until the Chinese realise this, they are going to stay in this state until one day the profit margin felt below and the demand shifted elsewhere, and when China had not developed an advnace service economy by then, then it would be like robbing the bank and left holding the bag.
The Chinese? I tbought your mama waa Chinese! So what are you exactly? A hybrid Mongloid or something? That's the reason we shouldn't have mulattos in China.

Explain to me how developing the service economy equates shifting power to the people? China's service economy is actually pretty well developed.
 
.
That is why China initiated their Belt and Road initiative to use their surplus manufacturing capability as an FDI. So far, it has not produced very good results, but in future it may change. To become a service superpower like USA, china will have to be more transparent, which doesn't seem possible at least in the Eleven era, may happen once he succeeded by a less autocratic person!!
The scope of the issue here is the same reason why Yuan was not a significant player in currency basket.

The policy is working against this and there are no way to get around it because of the central power. You have to take power from the people who won't give you that in order to make a functioning service sector. What B&R did was issue loan, which is not exactly the best option for economy, especially when you have to write off a lot of bad debt.

The Chinese? I tbought your mama waa Chinese! So what are you exactly? A hybrid Mongloid or something? That's the reason we shouldn't have mulattos in China.

What's this have to do with anything?
Explain to me how developing the service economy equates shifting power to the people? China's service economy is actually pretty well developed.

You have to give individual power to company instead of government, things like lending power, who to lend and what rate you are lending out. Currency would need to be freely tradable, which mean the government cannot enforce fiscal policy to individual entity. And then you have decision making phase, you, not the government, nor central bank approval what you do. All those are balance of power transfer from the government to the individual company.

In most western economy, federal/central bank only implement Marco fiscal policy, such as controlling of interest rates, and controlling the flow of capital (like Foreign Investment Board), they don't take charge of every business decision like the Chinese central bank does to just about any company in China.
 
Last edited:
.
The Chinese model of growth through manufacturing and export works till it reaches middle income trap, after that if you want to keep growing, you have to open up the economy, withdraw all protectionist measures, free the currency from central bank's clutch, let people make wealth, move towards services and consumption economy, get rid of low end manufacturing, let businesses spread its wings around the world, increase direct tax collection and decrease indirect tax collection. There is another way to keep growing at 5%+, just keep depreciating the Yuan 5% every year. This growth isn't growth but stupidity that leads to middle income trap.
 
.
The Chinese? I tbought your mama waa Chinese! So what are you exactly? A hybrid Mongloid or something? That's the reason we shouldn't have mulattos in China.

Explain to me how developing the service economy equates shifting power to the people? China's service economy is actually pretty well developed.

He's retarded and is simply looking for a way to pretend why the US somehow has a bigger economy despite making, consuming and doing things at a far smaller scale than China.

China has a HUGE service economy. China's ecommerce, gaming, fast fashion and short video/advertizement (think Douyin/Tiktok) is much bigger than the US. Just because that service sector is not as big as China's manufacturing sector does not mean it is small. Chinese apps and services are massive in China and some like Tiktok, SHEIN and Temu are massive in the global stage.

The biggest issue with services, unlike core manufactured components, is they are usually non-essential. Easy to develop, easy to live without and easy to ban. China does nicely without Google and Facebook. US don't really need Tik Tok.

Look at India, Chinese apps are all banned by the Indian government and yet China still have a massive trade surplus with them from components like APIs for the generics to cellphone parts for their brand new Iphone assembly lines.

The US's national "produce" is 70% from these services from p0rn to ponzi scheme "financial instruments." Will not work for China. China should continue to mass produce trains, planes and automobiles -- ships and spacecraft.

When the world begins strip-mining the ocean floor and the moon, you think Chatgrp is going beat the Chinese companies who are actually building things?
 
.
He's retarded and is simply looking for a way to pretend why the US somehow has a bigger economy despite making, consuming and doing things at a far smaller scale than China.

China has a HUGE service economy. China's ecommerce, gaming, fast fashion and short video/advertizement (think Douyin/Tiktok) is much bigger than the US. Just because that service sector is not as big as China's manufacturing sector does not mean it is small.

The biggest issue with services, unlike core manufactured components, is they are usually non-essential. Easy to develop, easy to live without and easy to ban. China does nicely without Google and Facebook. US don't really need Tik Tok.

Look at India, Chinese apps are all banned by the Indian government and yet China still have a massive trade surplus with them from components like APIs for the generics to cellphone parts for their brand new Iphone assembly lines.

The US's national "produce" is 70% from these services from p0rn to ponzi scheme "financial instruments." Will not work for China. China should continue to mass produce trains, planes and automobiles -- ships and spacecraft.

When the world begins strip-mining the ocean floor and the moon, you think Chatgrp is going beat the Chinese companies who are actually building things?
everything in china is undervalued because of xi's damage to chinese branding

chinese people some of the hardest working i've ever seen, sad they have to sacrifice half their value so xi can continue to do terrorism
 
.

China’s Fading Recovery Reveals Deeper Economic Struggles

Ballooning debt, tepid consumption and worsening relations with the West to weigh on growth, economists say

im-790194


China’s era of rapid growth is over. Its recovery from zero-Covid is stalling. And now the country is facing deep, structural problems in its economy.

The outlook was better just a few months ago, after Beijing lifted its draconian zero-Covid controls, setting off a flurry of spending as people ate out and splurged on travel.

But as the sugar high of the reopening wears off, underlying problems in China’s economy that have been building for years are reasserting themselves.

The property boom and government overinvestment that fueled growth for more than a decade have ended. Enormous debts are crippling households and local governments. Some families, worried about the future, are hoarding cash.

View attachment 932308

Chinese leader Xi Jinping’s crackdowns on private enterprise have discouraged risk-taking, while deteriorating relations with the West—exemplified by a new campaign against international due diligence and consulting firms—are stifling foreign investment.

Economists say these worsening structural problems are hobbling China’s chances of extending the growth miracle that transformed it into a rival to the U.S. for global power and influence.

Instead of expanding at 6% to 8% a year as was common in the past, China may soon be heading toward growth of only 2% or 3%, some economists say. An aging population and shrinking workforce compound its difficulties.

China could drive less global growth this year and beyond than many business leaders expected, making China less important for some foreign companies, and less likely to significantly surpass the U.S. as the world’s biggest economy.

“The disappointing recovery today really suggests that some of the structural drags are already in play,” said Frederic Neumann,
chief Asia economist at HSBC.

China’s economy expanded at an annual rate of 4.5% in the first quarter, boosted by the end of Covid-era restrictions.

Yet more recent signals suggest the revival is ebbing. Retail sales rose just 0.5% in April compared with March. A bundle of data on factory output, exports and investment came in much weaker than economists were expecting.

More than a fifth of Chinese youths aged 16 to 24 were unemployed in April. E-commerce giants Alibaba and JD.com reported lackluster first-quarter earnings. Hong Kong’s Hang Seng Index, dominated by Chinese companies, is down 5.2% year to date, and the yuan has weakened against the U.S. dollar.

Most economists don’t expect China’s problems to lead to recession, or derail the government’s growth target of around 5% this year, which is widely seen as easily achievable given how weak the economy was last year.

View attachment 932306

A boom in electric-vehicle production allowed China to surpass Japan as the world’s largest exporter of vehicles in the first quarter. Beijing’s industrial policies and China’s manufacturing prowess mean it is still finding ways to succeed in some major industries.
“We still have confidence in the long-term growth story of China,” said Phillip Wool,

head of research at Rayliant Global Advisors, an asset manager with $17 billion under management. He said the country’s transition to one that relies more on domestic consumption instead of exports will help keep it on track.

Still, many economists are growing more worried about China’s future.

The big hope for this year was that Chinese consumers would dramatically step up spending, as the main drivers of China’s past growth—investment and exports—languish.

But while people are spending somewhat more after almost three years of tough Covid-19 controls, China isn’t experiencing the kind of surge other economies enjoyed when they emerged from the pandemic.

Consumer confidence is low. More important, some economists say, is that Beijing hasn’t been able to meaningfully change Chinese consumers’ long-running propensity to save rather than spend—a response to a threadbare social safety net that means families must sock away more for medical bills and other emergencies.

Chinese household consumption accounts for around 38% of annual gross domestic product, according to United Nations data, compared with 68% in the U.S.

“Consumer-led growth has always been a bit of an aspirational target” for China, said Louise Loo, China lead economist in Singapore at Oxford Economics, a consulting firm. Now, it may be even harder to achieve, she said, given how cautious Chinese consumers are coming out of the pandemic.

View attachment 932307

Although Beijing is trying to make it easier to borrow this year, lending data indicate households prefer to pay down debt than take on new loans.
In March, Zi Lu dipped into her dowry and paid off the remaining 1.2 million yuan, equivalent to about $170,000, on her mortgage for an apartment she bought in Shanghai two years ago. Working for an e-commerce retailer, she said sales have been underwhelming this year. Lu said she is anxious and wants to reduce her debt burden.

“I’m scared of getting laid off out of the blue,” she said.

Also looming over the economy is its massive debt pile.

Between 2012 and 2022, China’s debt grew by $37 trillion, while the U.S. added nearly $25 trillion. By June 2022, debt in China reached about $52 trillion, dwarfing outstanding debt in all other emerging markets combined, according to calculations by Nicholas Borst, director of China research at Seafarer Capital Partners.

As of last September, total debt as a share of GDP hit 295% in China, compared with 257% in the U.S., data from the Bank for International Settlements shows.

Viewing the debt buildup as a threat to financial stability, Xi has made deleveraging a centerpiece of his economic policy since 2016, weighing on growth.

To help deflate the country’s housing bubble, regulators imposed strict borrowing limits for property developers from late 2020. Property development investment fell 5.8% in the first quarter of this year despite policy efforts to stem the pace of the slide.


@beijingwalker

@Hamartia Antidote @F-22Raptor Chinese economic ponzi scheme
Rednecks are just jealous. Insh'Allah, may Allah help China become the world's largest economy in NOMINAL GDP.

@beijingwalker

@ChineseTiger1986

@chinasun
 
. . .
Middle income trap my arse :D

China is almost high-income now and will blow past that "trap" in a few years:
IMG_9002.jpeg
 
.
The scope of the issue here is the same reason why Yuan was not a significant player in currency basket.

The policy is working against this and there are no way to get around it because of the central power. You have to take power from the people who won't give you that in order to make a functioning service sector. What B&R did was issue loan, which is not exactly the best option for economy, especially when you have to write off a lot of bad debt.



What's this have to do with anything?


You have to give individual power to company instead of government, things like lending power, who to lend and what rate you are lending out. Currency would need to be freely tradable, which mean the government cannot enforce fiscal policy to individual entity. And then you have decision making phase, you, not the government, nor central bank approval what you do. All those are balance of power transfer from the government to the individual company.

In most western economy, federal/central bank only implement Marco fiscal policy, such as controlling of interest rates, and controlling the flow of capital (like Foreign Investment Board), they don't take charge of every business decision like the Chinese central bank does to just about any company in China.

Services encompasses much more than financial services aka paper pushing, understand? The US is only viable because of their paper pushing and printing industry.

You friggin seriously think China micromanages each and every company like a Soviet planner? China is a state led capatalist society, the government shows the direction, companies have their own ways to reach their destination. You do know 4 banks in US just collapsed right?

Middle income trap my arse :D

China is almost high-income now and will blow past that "trap" in a few years:
View attachment 932628
It's th3 exchange rat3, if we increase the Yuan just by 20%,suddenly most Chinese are high income.
 
.
Services encompasses much more than financial services aka paper pushing, understand? The US is only viable because of their paper pushing and printing industry.
I did not say "Financial" service only, the term I used is "fiscal policy", fiscal policy affect every bit of operation on all company, because every company have their fiscal policy, tech company has it, bank has it, and even my textile company has it, so I am not just talking about fiancial sector, I may have used banking as an example because that is the easiest to understand, if you wanted, I can talk to you about fiscal policy to just about any business, and US only ever have 4 quantitative easing since 1921.


But I doubt what you know about that and no, the Fed didn't just print money.

And China dictate the term on fiscal policy in a way via both anti-trust law and currency control to dictate fiscal policy of basically every company, Jack Ma was not pissed because China don't have a viable system for his ant finance to work, he is pissed because of the anti-trust system that work against him, not saying he need to be monopolised the tech and e-commerce market, but the unhealthy interference to Alibaba is basically the reason why it wasn't in any "Corporate List" like Fortune 500, S&P 100 or so and so anymore.

You friggin seriously think China micromanages each and every company like a Soviet planner? China is a state led capatalist society, the government shows the direction, companies have their own ways to reach their destination. You do know 4 banks in US just collapsed right?


Again, China dictate the market by adjusting both macro and micro fiscal policy, that's a combination of capital control, anti-trust, interest rate, and even state directive to dictate what the local business can and cannot do, of course the government wouldn't have a "list" of what you can do for you to follow, but by manipulating those parameter, you literally control the entire market as to what the government want you to do.

Say for example, if China want to focus on AI research, they don't just dump money in institution like University to do the bidding like many western countries, they move the anti-trust parameter into allowing more competition on Tech companies that do AI research and limit the right that those who didn't or release funding option for some tech company and not all, it may be fine if your capital market is free float, it's not in China tho, that would push tech companies, regardless of what they were gearing up to to move to AI research, now this is just an example how China can manipulate their policy to affect company, I am not saying this is actually done.

On the other hand. what has the bank collapse have to do with Federal/Central bank policy? In fact, I would argue, those bank collapse is because the lack of government interference, which is a good thing for the market. I mean, those are commercial bank or boutique bank, which like any other company, can go under if they were mismanaged. Unlike the blue chip banks, which have more relationship with federal banking system. As Biden put it

The president said the management of Silicon Valley Bank and Signature Bank, a second institution that was included in the plan, would be fired. "If the bank is taken over by FDIC, the people running the bank should not work there anymore," he said.

Biden called for a "full accounting" of what led to the shutdown of Silicon Valley Bank and "why those responsible can be held accountable."


If I am a loan officer, and you come to me for a business loan, and you have a stupid business plan and a irresponsible fiscal policy, would you expect me to loan you the money? This is the same thing, these companies are seriously mismanaged, they SHOULD BE GONE UNDER. It's not like the Federal bank instruct SVB to buy a bunch of T-Bill and hold it or invest in cryptocurrency, that is just bad fiscal policy, and they collapse becuase of their stupid fiscal policy, I would argue this is a good thing, or do you think the government should prop them up even with their stupid fiscal policy simply because they don't want to look bad because these institution collapse??
 
.
I did not say "Financial" service only, the term I used is "fiscal policy", fiscal policy affect every bit of operation on all company, because every company have their fiscal policy, tech company has it, bank has it, and even my textile company has it, so I am not just talking about fiancial sector, I may have used banking as an example because that is the easiest to understand, if you wanted, I can talk to you about fiscal policy to just about any business, and US only ever have 4 quantitative easing since 1921.

Hey genius do you understand what is the meaning of 'FISCAL POLICY'? Companies don't have a fiscal policy, they have a BUDGET. Damn I am talking to an idiot.

fiscal policy​

noun


: the financial policy of a government particularly as regards the budget and the method and timing of borrowings and especially in relation to central-bank credit policy




But I doubt what you know about that and no, the Fed didn't just print money.

And China dictate the term on fiscal policy in a way via both anti-trust law and currency control to dictate fiscal policy of basically every company, Jack Ma was not pissed because China don't have a viable system for his ant finance to work, he is pissed because of the anti-trust system that work against him, not saying he need to be monopolised the tech and e-commerce market, but the unhealthy interference to Alibaba is basically the reason why it wasn't in any "Corporate List" like Fortune 500, S&P 100 or so and so anymore.


Anti trust laws have nothing to do with FISCAL POLICY dumbshit. One is to reduce monopolies Shit what the fck are you even ranting about?


Again, China dictate the market by adjusting both macro and micro fiscal policy, that's a combination of capital control, anti-trust, interest rate, and even state directive to dictate what the local business can and cannot do, of course the government wouldn't have a "list" of what you can do for you to follow, but by manipulating those parameter, you literally control the entire market as to what the government want you to do.
All governemnts adjust their fiscal policies based on inflation and other market indicators, the question is how much and how little. So the CHIPS ACT and fcking tarriffs by Trump is not micromanaging the economy? Dude, you need to start to wake up and smell the coffee.

Say for example, if China want to focus on AI research, they don't just dump money in institution like University to do the bidding like many western countries, they move the anti-trust parameter into allowing more competition on Tech companies that do AI research and limit the right that those who didn't or release funding option for some tech company and not all, it may be fine if your capital market is free float, it's not in China tho, that would push tech companies, regardless of what they were gearing up to to move to AI research, now this is just an example how China can manipulate their policy to affect company, I am not saying this is actually done.

On the other hand. what has the bank collapse have to do with Federal/Central bank policy? In fact, I would argue, those bank collapse is because the lack of government interference, which is a good thing for the market. I mean, those are commercial bank or boutique bank, which like any other company, can go under if they were mismanaged. Unlike the blue chip banks, which have more relationship with federal banking system. As Biden put it
China has got a fund to fund multiple companies accorss multiple technologies, no difference from your National Labs program. Bad or good? I am seeing results and not complaining.



If I am a loan officer, and you come to me for a business loan, and you have a stupid business plan and a irresponsible fiscal policy, would you expect me to loan you the money? This is the same thing, these companies are seriously mismanaged, they SHOULD BE GONE UNDER. It's not like the Federal bank instruct SVB to buy a bunch of T-Bill and hold it or invest in cryptocurrency, that is just bad fiscal policy, and they collapse becuase of their stupid fiscal policy, I would argue this is a good thing, or do you think the government should prop them up even with their stupid fiscal policy simply because they don't want to look bad because these institution collapse??
4 banks went under and it is only due to private mismanagement and not because of an economic mismanagement? LOLOL. You are one woke cheerleader.
 
Last edited:
.
Anti trust laws have nothing to do with FISCAL POLICY dumbshit. One is to reduce monopolies Shit what the fck are you even ranting about?
Dude, did I just explain to you how China could use anti-trust law to implement fiscal policy?

Say for example, if China want to focus on AI research, they don't just dump money in institution like University to do the bidding like many western countries, they move the anti-trust parameter into allowing more competition on Tech companies that do AI research and limit the right that those who didn't or release funding option for some tech company and not all, it may be fine if your capital market is free float, it's not in China tho, that would push tech companies, regardless of what they were gearing up to to move to AI research, now this is just an example how China can manipulate their policy to affect company, I am not saying this is actually done.


All governemnts adjust their fiscal policies based on inflation and other market indicators, the question is how much and how little. So the CHIPS ACT and fcking tarriffs by Trump is not micromanaging the economy? Dude, you need to start to wake up and smell the coffee.

Are you for real? how's tariff goes with "inflatiuon" and "market indicator"?

Also, CHIPS act, was enacted by Biden in 2022, not by Trump, and it was designed to boost investment, not currency management.

maybe learn the word "microeconomy" before you talk, or are you going to give me a dictionary indication and say A equal to B?

China has got a fund to fund multiple companies accorss multiple technologies, no difference from your National Labs program. Bad or good? I am seeing results and not complaining.
National Lab program are both public and private venture, they aren't the same.

4 banks went under and it is only due to private mismanagement and not because of an economic mismanagement? LOLOL. You are one woke cheerleader.

LOL? If it was economic management, then why just 4, why not more than 20? There are 4844 banking iinstitution in the US,


There are currently 4,844 insured commercial banks, according to the Federal Deposit Insurance Corporation (FDIC).

This figure is current as of the end of 2021. The FDIC reports a new insured bank count every year, and next year’s number is almost certain to be different.


if it is about economic mismangement, would it be more than 4 bank that gone bust? Or you are saying economic policy only affect a small portion of banking in the US??

Dude, next time you should do some research or not complaint to the mod before you insult people, it makes you look stupid, not smart.
 
Last edited:
.
Dude, did I just explain to you how China could use anti-trust law to implement fiscal policy?
Fiscal policy is budget based numbnuts. Do you even understand what you arw crapping about. Just because you rant a lot, doesn't make it logical. Dude, how many times have I caught you bullshiting.


Are you for real? how's tariff goes with "inflatiuon" and "market indicator"?

Also, CHIPS act, was enacted by Biden in 2022, not by Trump, and it was designed to boost investment, not currency management.
Tarriffs increase the cost of goods and is inflationary in essense. This is very basic, you don't know this? And do I have to explain to you market indicators? Lolol


maybe learn the word "microeconomy" before you talk, or are you going to give me a dictionary indication and say A equal to B?


National Lab program are both public and private venture, they aren't the same.
Maybe you should learn the basics first before talking. From LNG to 'article' lololol.

Why aren't the national labs the same? China funds our own national labs and some private companies also fund research at these labs.

LOL? If it was economic management, then why just 4, why not more than 20? There are 4844 banking iinstitution in the US,

4 banks collapsing in a short period isn't serious enough huh.



if it is about economic mismangement, would it be more than 4 bank that gone bust? Or you are saying economic policy only affect a small portion of banking in the US??
I am saying money printing, lax regulations and economic mismanagement creat3d this timebomb. You wanna raise your pom poms now to cheer for America? Lol


Dude, next time you should do some research or not complaint to the mod before you insult people, it makes you look stupid, not smart.
Yah and how many times have I proven your idiocy? Lol. LNG, Article, Oil pricing. Lolol
 
.

Pakistan Affairs Latest Posts

Back
Top Bottom