General [M]ayhem

Go Back   General [M]ayhem > Real Time Sub-Forums > The Pit
Register Members List Mark Forums Read [M]erchandise Calendar

Reply
 
Thread Tools
ApathyEcstasy
yeah, different species of slanteye here
 
ApathyEcstasy's Avatar
 
Trading Places: China and the U.S.
http://www.time.com/time/business/ar...883278,00.html

But, the move in China seems to be relentlessly toward a free market economy. Because China has a rich treasury, it can afford to support a rotation to privatization without the immediate concern that its government will be troubled by huge deficits.

The U.S. faces both large deficits and the need to take de facto control of parts of the credit, financial, and industrial sectors. In effect, the amount of the nation's economic activity controlled by the government will rise to a level which would have been unimaginable even months ago.

Should China and the U.S. Swap Stimulus Packages?
http://www.time.com/time/business/ar...883277,00.html

In other words, Washington is providing lots of funding for "social safety net" programs — precisely the kind of programs that poor and unemployed Chinese really need and the government barely provides. Meanwhile, China is throwing money at infrastructure projects to a degree that the U.S. — with its creaky bridges, potholed roads, crumbling schools and obsolete airports — hasn't seen in decades.

China Won't Ride to World's Economic Rescue
http://www.time.com/time/world/artic...883527,00.html

As Zhou and Zhang talked numbers Thursday, they emphasized that China is doing all it can, but the rest of the world — and particularly the U.S. — needs to begin pulling its weight again. Asked what further steps China might take, Zhou replied, "What we are waiting for is, what will happen in the country where the crisis originated. If you can explain what that country will do, we can say what we will do."

Outside official circles in China that sentiment is stated more bluntly. "The U.S. is definitely a dragger. It's not a pusher. It's not a puller," says Chen Xingdong, a Beijing-based China economist for BNP Paribas Securities. "The U.S. is not doing the right thing. It's not acting."

China's Auto Bailout Takes a Different Route
http://www.time.com/time/world/artic...882172,00.html

Still, the recession could help Beijing push through changes to help the car industry grow more steadily in the long run. That, says Simpfendorfer, is one of the key differences between industry rescue efforts in the U.S. and China. "The Chinese auto sector is not as well entrenched as the interests in the auto sector in the U.S.," he says. "In the U.S. it's a century old [industry]; In China it's not even decades old but a decade old." China has "a greater tolerance to pain" that will allow the country "to push ahead with industrial restructuring that hurts but will ultimately produce a much healthier auto sector."

Last edited by ApathyEcstasy; 03-07-2009 at 08:29 PM..
Old 03-07-2009, 07:56 PM ApathyEcstasy is offline  
Reply With Quote
#76  

Advertisement [Remove Advertisement]

ApathyEcstasy
yeah, different species of slanteye here
 
ApathyEcstasy's Avatar
 
http://www.iht.com/articles/2009/03/.../compete16.php

The global economic downturn, and efforts to reverse it, will probably make China an even stronger economic competitor than it was before the crisis.


Apparently I'm supposed to put out an opinion or take a position or whatever in the pit? My position is that I agree.
__________________
7.9%, Chinese growth has screeched to a halt! People
are going to riot in the streets! The CCP is about to
fall!
8.1%, Chinese growth has over-heated! People are
going to riot in the streets! The CCP is about to fall!
Old 03-17-2009, 07:10 PM ApathyEcstasy is offline  
Reply With Quote
#77  

bingstudent
I am an idiot!
 
bingstudent's Avatar
 
Quote:
Originally Posted by ApathyEcstasy View Post
No one said they're not hurting from all that's going on...just that they're hurting way less than a lot of other places. And "not doin THAT great" is still leagues better than "an endless spiral into a black pit of fiscal catastrophe".

US economic recovery is underway already, China has still yet to see bottom. 22M people losing their jobs in 3 months isn't exactly "hurting way less." The 25 percent fall in exports is likely to get far worse before it improves at all, and even when global growth returns China surely won't be exporting at the torrid pace we saw from 2002 to 2008 again for decades. Now, rather than taking steps to stimulate domestic consumption (something the current generation of Chinese economic planners seem absolutely terrified of) the government continues to increase exports subsidies which is both futile and compounds the current oversupply problem. All this is aside the fact that China's banks are a ticking time bomb of toxic assets that are impossible to catalog because of the lack of transparency. The other shoe is still waiting to drop for China, hell ... the first shoe has barely hit the floor yet.
Old 03-17-2009, 09:11 PM bingstudent is offline  
Reply With Quote
#78  

ApathyEcstasy
yeah, different species of slanteye here
 
ApathyEcstasy's Avatar
 
I'm seeing a lot of words from an idiot without a whole lot of support from credible sources (let alone any at all). Also, recovery at the cost of 11.7 trillion in additional debt is called digging a deeper hole.

"Since the start of the year, investors have focused on the rise in Treasury sales as the Obama administration raises funds to pay for the $11.7 trillion bailout of the banking system, as estimated by Bloomberg calculations, and the $787 billion economic rescue package. The economy may contract 1.8 percent this year, after expanding 1.1 percent in 2008, according to a Bloomberg survey of 65 economists."


Although a lot of industries are showing signs of recovery, the banks are still in play, so still a huge variable. There's no real recovery until the banks are independently viable (without being essentially propped up by the government as they are now) since they're the source of capital for day-to-day business. For example, most major corporations take out loans to pay their employees, then pay it back over the next few weeks with their revenue stream. If the banks fail, you'll start seeing a huge shock wave throughout the economy, causing essentially the majority of the economy to collapse.

"As the global crisis has intensified, China's exports have been hit badly, affecting market-based investment and sentiment, notably in the manufacturing sector," the World Bank said.

But the World Bank's country director for China, David Dollar, said China still remained a relatively bright spot in an otherwise gloomy global economy.

"In many ways [it's] a fantastic performance and it's based on the fact that there's a lot of strength in China," Mr Dollar told the BBC.

"On balance, you've got decline in real estate and exports and then you've got growth in areas that the government can directly influence," he said, mentioning infrastructure and social programmes.
__________________
7.9%, Chinese growth has screeched to a halt! People
are going to riot in the streets! The CCP is about to
fall!
8.1%, Chinese growth has over-heated! People are
going to riot in the streets! The CCP is about to fall!

Last edited by ApathyEcstasy; 03-18-2009 at 04:54 AM..
Old 03-18-2009, 04:13 AM ApathyEcstasy is offline  
Reply With Quote
#79  

bingstudent
I am an idiot!
 
bingstudent's Avatar
 
Quote:
Originally Posted by ApathyEcstasy View Post
I'm seeing a lot of words from an idiot without a whole lot of support from credible sources (let alone any at all).

If you want to disagree with any of the numbers I cited then go right ahead. I don't really consider links necessary when reciting common knowledge like unemployment and export volume. But if you think any of my numbers are wrong then by all means correct them.
Old 03-18-2009, 11:18 AM bingstudent is offline  
Reply With Quote
#80  

joemama
Watch Toomer burn those cowboys. How bout them cowboys?
 
joemama's Avatar
 
Quote:
Originally Posted by ApathyEcstasy View Post
http://www.bbc.co.uk/blogs/thereport...per_china.html

BOOYA GLORY TO THE MOTHERLAND

"The Chinese economy remains - by the standards of the US or the UK - exceptionally strong.

When you add in the near-crippling indebtedness of businesses, banks and consumers in the UK and the US, well at that point China's financial strength looks almost awesome."
Taking pride in your "motherland" and heritage is all fine and good but....you constantly tout how China is becoming the greatest country on earth, yet you aren't willing to leave the US and live there yourself? Seems to me that if the US really were in decline and China was well on its way to becoming the new defacto world economic superpower you would want to be a part of that..
__________________
Rapid-fire double bass of the GenMay dru[M]mers collective

Syndrome of a Downs- drums/songwriter
._--_|\
/········\
\_.--Bumfuck Egypt
.......v
Old 03-18-2009, 12:33 PM joemama is offline  
Reply With Quote
#81  

ApathyEcstasy
yeah, different species of slanteye here
 
ApathyEcstasy's Avatar
 
Quote:
Originally Posted by joemama View Post
Taking pride in your "motherland" and heritage is all fine and good but....you constantly tout how China is becoming one of the most influential, yet you aren't willing to leave the US and live there yourself? Seems to me that if the US really were in decline and China was well on its way to becoming the new defacto world economic superpower you would want to be a part of that..

You just answered your own question in red. Corrections to your mistakes in lime. Important distinction in blue. There's a difference between decline and collapse. Decline doesn't negate the current realities of a significantly greater standard of living and far greater respect for human rights (even if there are contradictions at times). And I've already stated that I intend for any future progeny of mine to be taught so as to be fluent in spoken Mandarin and written Chinese so that they have the open option of moving around between the two different societies whether it be for business, pleasure, or emigration. Also, a 30-50 year transition is a long time period. It's not something that will really affect my life choices, but it will affect those a generation or two down the line.

edit: If I keep thinking, more would come to mind. The U.S. is much cleaner for one. And the spoken language is the one I grew up with. For all intents and purposes I consider this continent to be my home, but I can't help it if this country's leaders dig it into a deeper and deeper debt-hole against my wishes. The only reasonable choice is to have an alternative escape plan (not for myself, but for future generations) should this shit get too hairy.
__________________
7.9%, Chinese growth has screeched to a halt! People
are going to riot in the streets! The CCP is about to
fall!
8.1%, Chinese growth has over-heated! People are
going to riot in the streets! The CCP is about to fall!

Last edited by ApathyEcstasy; 03-18-2009 at 01:21 PM..
Old 03-18-2009, 01:04 PM ApathyEcstasy is offline  
Reply With Quote
#82  

ApathyEcstasy
yeah, different species of slanteye here
 
ApathyEcstasy's Avatar
 
Quote:
Originally Posted by bingstudent View Post
If you want to disagree with any of the numbers I cited then go right ahead. I don't really consider links necessary when reciting common knowledge like unemployment and export volume. But if you think any of my numbers are wrong then by all means correct them.

You're an idiot pretending not to know what I'm talking about. I'm not disputing your numbers. I'm disputing the conclusions you draw from those numbers.

A) That they're "afraid" of stimulating consumption? Trying to build up a modest social welfare system (up from scratch) is something that would help consumption as people would have less of a need to save every yuan they can. That is exactly what they're doing. Also it's easy to find in the news that they're subsidizing domestic consumption of appliances and automobiles.
B) That their banks are anywhere close to as messed up as western ones are? There are links in this thread that explain how this one is wrong.

As in America, real-estate values have fallen throughout China; but China’s bad-loan problem is nothing like America’s subprime-loan disaster. America’s banks have too little money. China’s have a lot, and the main reason they have not been lending is that until very recently the government was more worried about inflation than anything else. “Chinese banks are not only very liquid, they will lend when directed by the Party, which appoints all senior bankers,” Rothman wrote. They are being so directed now.


C) 22 million lost jobs is a lot, but China lost tens of millions of jobs in the 1990s when many S.O.E.s were shut down.

http://www.theatlantic.com/doc/20090...ese-innovation

Heaped on my desk are other sector-by-sector analyses suggesting that the rebound may come more quickly than the gross-demand figures indicate. “When can we expect to see signs of life in the mainland economy?” asked Andy Rothman, of CLSA Asia-Pacific Markets, in one such report, about the cement and steel industries. “Our answer is, March or April 2009,” when the first orders from the stimulus program will reach steel and cement companies.

I have a lot more reports from a lot more sectors, but all lead toward the same conclusion: China’s economy may suffer more than most others, but it also has more tools and resources in reserve than most others.
__________________
7.9%, Chinese growth has screeched to a halt! People
are going to riot in the streets! The CCP is about to
fall!
8.1%, Chinese growth has over-heated! People are
going to riot in the streets! The CCP is about to fall!

Last edited by ApathyEcstasy; 03-18-2009 at 02:08 PM..
Old 03-18-2009, 01:26 PM ApathyEcstasy is offline  
Reply With Quote
#83  

bingstudent
I am an idiot!
 
bingstudent's Avatar
 
Quote:
Originally Posted by ApathyEcstasy View Post
A) That they're "afraid" of stimulating consumption? Trying to build up a modest social welfare system (up from scratch) is something that would help consumption as people would have less of a need to save every yuan they can. That is exactly what they're doing. Also it's easy to find in the news that they're subsidizing domestic consumption of appliances and automobiles.

Encouraging rural Chinese to buy the shitty Chinese-made appliances that the EU and US don't want anymore isn't exactly the same thing as creating a consumer society.

And here's proof of my argument, that the CCP is still too heavily focused on export reliant growth at the expense of domestic consumption:

Quote:
That’s not all. Today’s Xinhua helpfully lists China’s stimulus package for ten different sectors announced between January 14 and today. These consist of machinery, textile industries, shipbuilding, autos, steel industries, electronics and information industry, light industry, petrochemical sector, nonferrous metals and logistics.

Nearly all of these products are in global oversupply, so the full focus must be on boosting consumption, right? Wrong. A quick run-down of the related article shows that some of the measures are certainly pro-consumption:

* provide subsidies for home appliances for rural buyers
* boost demand for petrochemical products
* lower the purchase tax on cars
* provide one-off allowances to farmers to upgrade their three-wheeled vehicles and low-speed trucks
* improve the credit system for car purchase loans

But too many of them are actually likely to decrease Chinese contribution to global consumption (i.e. increase its negative contribution) by acting more to boost production than consumption:

* promote company restructuring and offer subsidized loans to support technical innovations within the nonferrous metals sector
* adjust export rebate rates of nonferrous products
* lift processing trade restrictions on some labor-intensive, technology-intensive, energy-efficient, and environment-friendly products
* provide more credit access for firms in the petrochemical sector
* boost innovation in information technologies (whatever that means)
* increase financial input for the country's electronics and information industry
* give tax rebates for electronics and information product exports
* encourage large auto companies, as well as major auto-part makers, to expand through mergers and acquisitions so as to optimize resources and improve their competitiveness on the international market (does this mean prevent bankruptcies?)
* increase credit support for ship builders
* suspend construction of new docks and the expansion of slipways (which doesn’t increase production but, I think, might slow investment-based consumption)
* increase export rebates for textile producers
* help auto manufacturers raise their share of the auto market in China from 34% to 40%
* create a special textile-industry fund for structural adjustment and technological upgrading

The problem, as I see it, is while an awful lot of experts here are busy explaining why the US must be careful about how quickly it reduces its contribution to global demand, which the US absolutely must do as part of its adjustment process, they seem to miss the point that China must increase its contribution to net demand, but it is actually reducing it. It may be confusing to many if I claim that subsidizing credit to steel producers or auto manufacturers is the 2009 equivalent of Smoot-Hawley – after all isn’t Smoot Hawley all about tariffs? – but the point is the reason Smoot-Hawley was such a disaster is because it involved an attempt by the largest trade surplus country in the world to increase its trade surplus in spite of collapsing world demand, and the 2009 equivalent must necessarily be Chinese or German moves that have the same effect.
http://www.rgemonitor.com/us-monitor...ppen_in_the_us

Quote:
Originally Posted by ApathyEcstasy View Post
B) That their banks are anywhere close to as messed up as western ones are? There are links in this thread that explain how this one is wrong.

And every link in this thread concerning the Chinese banking system also readily admits that the complete lack of transparency and normalized accounting rules make it impossible to determine just how hosed Chinese banks really are. Let's see someone mark Chinese bank balance sheets to market, then we can discuss whether western banks really are in worse shape than their Chinese counterparts.

Quote:
Originally Posted by ApathyEcstasy View Post
C) 22 million lost jobs is a lot, but China lost tens of millions of jobs in the 1990s when many S.O.E.s were shut down.

You do realize that there's a substantial difference between shedding tens of millions of jobs over the course of a decade and over the course of four months, right? I'm not really of the opinion that all this new unemployment is going to collapse CCP control, but many intelligent people are and it's clearly a contingency that must be considered.

Quote:
Originally Posted by ApathyEcstasy View Post
http://www.theatlantic.com/doc/200904/chinese-innovation

This article supports my argument:

Quote:
If that were to happen again, would it be because of “Buy American” provisions or other forms of American “protectionism” editorial pages so often warn against? That’s the wrong thing to worry about, according to this logic. The real counterpart to Smoot-Hawley would be Chinese protectionism—or rather, any effort by China to defend its huge trade surpluses, as the U.S. once did. China’s government is unlikely to rely on outright Smoot-Hawley–style tariffs. Instead it could increase subsidies to exporters; it could try to push the RMB’s value back down, after three years of letting the currency rise; it could encourage manufacturers to restrain wages; it could impose indirect barriers to imports, as with its recent pressure on China’s airlines to cancel outstanding orders for Boeing and Airbus airplanes. By early this year, China’s government was in fact doing every one of these things. As a result its global trade surplus, instead of shrinking as expected when the world economy deteriorated, grew dramatically. Exports fell, but imports fell much more: in January, exports declined by 17 percent and imports by more than twice as much—by 43 percent. This is an economic problem for other countries. But it could be an even more serious political provocation, if China is seen as forcing its share of unemployment problems onto everyone else. And thus, to bring this scenario to a close, the best China can expect from today’s shocks might be unemployment rates higher than America’s in the ’30s. The worst would be for China to start a trade war that makes things even harder for itself.

Last edited by bingstudent; 03-18-2009 at 02:59 PM..
Old 03-18-2009, 02:43 PM bingstudent is offline  
Reply With Quote
#84  

ApathyEcstasy
yeah, different species of slanteye here
 
ApathyEcstasy's Avatar
 
Quote:
Originally Posted by bingstudent View Post
Encouraging rural Chinese to buy the shitty Chinese-made appliances that the EU and US don't want anymore

Don't want? Or can't afford... Because plenty of Americans and Europeans were sure as hell buying those shitty Chinese-made appliances at record levels before this financial disaster happened.

Quote:
Originally Posted by bingstudent View Post
isn't exactly the same thing as creating a consumer society.

Promoting consumerism =/= driving things towards a consumer society? Please explain that logic for me.

Quote:
Originally Posted by bingstudent View Post
And here's proof of my argument, that the CCP is still too heavily focused on export reliant growth at the expense of domestic consumption:



http://www.rgemonitor.com/us-monitor...ppen_in_the_us

Again, you're going to have to explain to me how promoting exports is mutually exclusive from promoting domestic consumption, because it's not. There's nothing to stop a country from promoting both at the same time. In fact, Japan consumes a shitload while exporting a shitload as well. Germany is another example of a developed nation that consumes a good amount while still being heavy in exports.

Quote:
Originally Posted by bingstudent View Post
And every link in this thread concerning the Chinese banking system also readily admits that the complete lack of transparency and normalized accounting rules make it impossible to determine just how hosed Chinese banks really are. Let's see someone mark Chinese bank balance sheets to market, then we can discuss whether western banks really are in worse shape than their Chinese counterparts.

You're the only one I've ever known that would propose that there is even a remote possibility that western banks might be in better shape than Chinese ones. If Chinese banks were being propped up by the government like western banks are, it would be reflected through a far larger annual budget deficit. This is the first year in a really long time that there has been any deficit in the budget. So...just because analysts aren't being granted access to all the details doesn't mean that they can't infer from a lot of other available data.

Quote:
Originally Posted by bingstudent View Post
You do realize that there's a substantial difference between shedding tens of millions of jobs over the course of a decade and over the course of four months, right? I'm not really of the opinion that all this new unemployment is going to collapse CCP control, but many intelligent people are and it's clearly a contingency that must be considered.

It's not like the CCP is flailing around oblivious to the fact that there are many visible threats to the nation with this current global crisis. The big point is that they're handling the crisis better than most other nations are. Without having to dig themselves into an enormous 20 trillion dollar hole.

Quote:
Originally Posted by bingstudent View Post
This article supports my argument:

It supports mine too.

That this crisis provides a lot of opportunities for Chinese companies to become major (if not dominant) players in industries that were not too long ago, dominated by western companies. That as time passes, China's leverage over the U.S. will only grow. That this is China's equivalent of the U.S.'s 1930s (the U.S. came out of it stronger than ever, and the point is that there are many good reasons why China will too).

Funny enough that you still haven't addressed how the U.S. is supposed to be doing better than China in your opinion when the debt is expanding at an ever greater rate. The existing 10 trillion dollar debt + an additional 11.7 trillion over the course of the recovery attempt is not a hole that you can dig yourself out of without defaulting. Essentially cutting off an arm and a leg. Well, I suppose it could be possible to pay it all back if you think it's at all politically feasible for any president to cut the annual budget to 1/3 of what it is now while pumping the rest of that 2/3 of the money into repayments. You've been completely ignoring the elephant in the room. Would be nice to see if you can demonstrate any sincerity at all by speaking more on that.
__________________
7.9%, Chinese growth has screeched to a halt! People
are going to riot in the streets! The CCP is about to
fall!
8.1%, Chinese growth has over-heated! People are
going to riot in the streets! The CCP is about to fall!

Last edited by ApathyEcstasy; 03-18-2009 at 06:21 PM..
Old 03-18-2009, 06:08 PM ApathyEcstasy is offline  
Reply With Quote
#85  

bingstudent
I am an idiot!
 
bingstudent's Avatar
 
Quote:
Originally Posted by ApathyEcstasy View Post
Don't want? Or can't afford... Because plenty of Americans and Europeans were sure as hell buying those shitty Chinese-made appliances at record levels before this financial disaster happened.

Don't want. There's a fundamental shift underway in Western economies, particularly the US's, towards much higher levels of personal savings. Americans and Europeans never were able to afford a huge portion of their imports, that's why they drove themselves to such levels of debt to acquire them. There's a conscious change happening in the behavior of American consumers right now.

Quote:
Originally Posted by ApathyEcstasy View Post
Promoting consumerism =/= driving things towards a consumer society? Please explain that logic for me.

There's a very big difference between subsidizing the purchase of overstocked home appliances and making the types of structural changes that are needed for the emergence of a consumer society. Yes, China is making progress in some areas like land reform and social services but is still decades behind when it comes to personal insurance, retirement entitlements and consumer credit availability. China's central planners have been successful pragmatists so far but there is clearly apprehension towards taking the leap. That's why their response to the current slowdown is so export-reliant as demonstrated by the Pettis article I quoted from above.

Quote:
Originally Posted by ApathyEcstasy View Post
Again, you're ging to have to explain to me how promoting exports is mutually exclusive from promoting domestic consumption, because it's not.

Read the the article I quoted from above please, it's comparative whereas nothing you've posted even answers the argument being made about the glaring weakness of China's domestic consumption engine. Here's a refresher:

Quote:
But too many of them are actually likely to decrease Chinese contribution to global consumption (i.e. increase its negative contribution) by acting more to boost production than consumption ... China must increase its contribution to net demand, but it is actually reducing it.
So you see, it's not a matter of being mutually exclusive, but it is a matter of balance. China's response to the global slowdown so far has, on balance, contributed to the global oversupply problem rather than help alleviate it.

Quote:
Originally Posted by ApathyEcstasy View Post
You're the only one I've ever known that would propose that there is even a remote possibility that western banks might be in better shape than Chinese ones. If Chinese banks were being propped up by the government like western banks are, it would be reflected through a far larger annual budget deficit. This is the first year in a really long time that there has been any deficit in the budget. So...just because analysts aren't being granted access to all the details doesn't mean that they can't infer from a lot of other available data.

It's already been explained above how Chinese banks relied on SPEs to hide loans to literally hundreds of thousands of now defunct SOEs and the lack of transparency makes it impossible to determine the scope of the damage. The very fact that you claim I'm the only person that has ever raised this issue indicates to everyone that you don't read nearly as much as you think you do about the Chinese economy.

Quote:
Originally Posted by ApathyEcstasy View Post
It's not like the CCP is flailing around oblivious to the fact that there are many visible threats to the nation with this current global crisis. The big point is that they're handling the crisis better than most other nations are. Without having to dig themselves into an enormous 20 trillion dollar hole.

They're handling the crisis better than most other nations are ... but instituting massive increases in protectionism in the form of export subsidies? I think your comparison of China to the US in the 30s is more apt than you realize, but not because of the potential for recovery, rather because China is replicating the effects of tragic missteps like Smoot-Hawley.

And in regards to the China social / political collapse argument - like I said before, I don't think it's particularly likely that we'll see the CCP lose governance, but as China's growth continues to slow the CCP will lose a great amount of flexibility in dealing with the pressing unemployment problem.

Quote:
Originally Posted by ApathyEcstasy View Post
That this crisis provides a lot of opportunities for Chinese companies to become major (if not dominant) players in industries that were not too long ago, dominated by western companies. That as time passes, China's leverage over the U.S. will only grow. That this is China's equivalent of the U.S.'s 1930s (the U.S. came out of it stronger than ever, and the point is that there are many good reasons why China will too).

The US emerged stronger than ever because WW2 forced a massive re-mobilization of the US economy. I hope a similarly beneficial event is not on the horizon for China, and I doubt many people predict that one currently is.

Quote:
Originally Posted by ApathyEcstasy View Post
Funny enough that you still haven't addressed how the U.S. is supposed to be doing better than China in your opinion when the debt is expanding at an ever greater rate. The existing 10 trillion dollar debt + an additional 11.7 trillion over the course of the recovery attempt is not a hole that you can dig yourself out of without defaulting. Essentially cutting off an arm and a leg. Well, I suppose it could be possible to pay it all back if you think it's at all politically feasible for any president to cut the annual budget to 1/3 of what it is now while pumping the rest of that 2/3 of the money into repayments. You've been completely ignoring the elephant in the room. Would be nice to see if you can demonstrate any sincerity at all by speaking more on that.

1) The magnitude of current crisis in the US economy was obviously exaggerated by the media for ratings and US politicians for political gain.

2) Yes, the US has a large structural debt to deal with, however, with the growing US debt in mind the global consensus still remains that the US economy will remain the most reliable. There's also the risk that US politicians do something right for once and alleviate the debt crisis with effective budgeting. You're an idiot for thinking the US needs to somehow eliminate the entire debt, it just needs to keep the debt to GDP ratio reasonable enough for the globe to remain confident in US solvency.

3) The US's coming entitlement crisis is tiny compared to what China will experience in over the next two decades as it's aged population reaches record size and the workforce shrinks. Demographic trends look good for the US and awful for China.
Old 03-27-2009, 10:54 PM bingstudent is offline  
Reply With Quote
#86  

ApathyEcstasy
yeah, different species of slanteye here
 
ApathyEcstasy's Avatar
 
I'm really satisfied with most of your answers. Only really a few things to point out.

I never believed that the U.S. needed to completely eliminate the debt. There's just no reason to test her luck by trying to push the debt to the absolute possible limit unless it were absolutely necessary. It would also look really good if the U.S. eliminated the debt just to prove that she can (something that is seriously in question these days).

I'd also argue that it wouldn't take anything remotely close to a world war for China to re-mobilize her entire economy. If you don't recall, China did just that not more than 20 years ago.

I wasn't saying that you're the only person to raise the financial transparency issue. I was saying that you're the only person I've known to argue that China's banks are weaker in this current financial crisis than western ones. I've seen plenty of people argue that China's banks were weaker, but these arguments all took place before most people had any idea that this current crisis with western banks would even happen.
__________________
7.9%, Chinese growth has screeched to a halt! People
are going to riot in the streets! The CCP is about to
fall!
8.1%, Chinese growth has over-heated! People are
going to riot in the streets! The CCP is about to fall!

Last edited by ApathyEcstasy; 03-29-2009 at 03:04 AM..
Old 03-29-2009, 02:54 AM ApathyEcstasy is offline  
Reply With Quote
#87  

ApathyEcstasy
yeah, different species of slanteye here
 
ApathyEcstasy's Avatar
 
China GDP Growth May Quicken to 10% by Year End

http://www.bloomberg.com/apps/news?p...Vaw&refer=home

The Purchasing Manager’s Index rose to a seasonally adjusted 52.4 in March from 49 in February, the Federation of Logistics and Purchasing said yesterday, bringing forward its publication from tomorrow.

Urban fixed-asset investment jumped 26.5 percent in the first two months from a year earlier, while vehicles sales climbed 25 percent in February. China’s economy may expand by 7.5 percent between April and June and growth may accelerate in the following months, Sun said.

Ha Jiming, chief economist at China International Capital Corp. in Hong Kong, yesterday raised his forecast for China’s growth this year to as much as 8 percent from a previous estimate of 7.3 percent. He cited strong loan growth and the recovery in indicators such as power output, new project investment and car sales.
__________________
7.9%, Chinese growth has screeched to a halt! People
are going to riot in the streets! The CCP is about to
fall!
8.1%, Chinese growth has over-heated! People are
going to riot in the streets! The CCP is about to fall!
Old 04-04-2009, 02:28 AM ApathyEcstasy is offline  
Reply With Quote
#88  

Escaped Gorilla Genitals
Jim Morrison
Hey, Jim <3 ules, You didn't deserve this because you can't guess numbers but anyways BREAK ON TH
 
Escaped Gorilla Genitals's Avatar
 
Quote:
Originally Posted by joemama View Post
Taking pride in your "motherland" and heritage is all fine and good but....
Actually it's pretty childish and a major cause of a lot of problems.
Old 04-04-2009, 11:22 AM Escaped Gorilla Genitals is offline  
Reply With Quote
#89  

ApathyEcstasy
yeah, different species of slanteye here
 
ApathyEcstasy's Avatar
 
Quote:
Originally Posted by Jim Morrison View Post
Actually it's pretty childish and a major cause of a lot of problems.

No different than American patriotism. The only thing different is I'm rooting for the challenger, not the reigning champion.
__________________
7.9%, Chinese growth has screeched to a halt! People
are going to riot in the streets! The CCP is about to
fall!
8.1%, Chinese growth has over-heated! People are
going to riot in the streets! The CCP is about to fall!

Last edited by ApathyEcstasy; 04-04-2009 at 05:57 PM..
Old 04-04-2009, 05:11 PM ApathyEcstasy is offline  
Reply With Quote
#90  

Reply


Thread Tools

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off

Forum Jump



All times are GMT -7. The time now is 04:09 AM.



Powered by vBulletin® Version 3.8.7
Copyright ©2000 - 2018, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.