|
My Imaginary GF posted:All of these, and: Did we already cover Canadian houses?
|
# ? Oct 13, 2014 15:30 |
|
|
# ? May 13, 2024 09:28 |
|
https://twitter.com/PDChina/status/522553279969234945/photo/1quote:4 people were burnt to death during a conflict btw real estate project builder & villagers in Kunming City hahaha holy poo poo if this is real
|
# ? Oct 16, 2014 05:18 |
|
4 people burnt to dead was dressed in fake police uniforms too. Crazy poo poo.
|
# ? Oct 16, 2014 05:43 |
|
Mange Mite posted:Did we already cover Canadian houses? -Canadian real estate -Buying luxury goods in Europe
|
# ? Oct 16, 2014 05:51 |
|
http://www.ft.com/intl/cms/s/0/02bf...l#axzz3GYoMNHmWquote:
|
# ? Oct 19, 2014 05:10 |
|
Hehe yeah there's no way the property market might burst.
|
# ? Oct 19, 2014 05:57 |
|
Arglebargle III posted:Hehe yeah there's no way the property market might burst. Has China told the rest of the world about the magic of only having one investment vehicle making that one vehicle immune to crashes? Seems that something like that would be helpful to know.
|
# ? Oct 20, 2014 00:50 |
|
I don't think there will be a price crash in China, the government is too willing to intervene in the economy and fudge numbers to let it happen. What will happen is a flatlining of GDP growth
|
# ? Oct 20, 2014 01:12 |
|
Hey you know that subsidy the PBOC offered to banks in order to get them lending? Something like 81 billion? Well no one took it because no one wants to lend. Given how dodgy GDP numbers are calculated in China, you can't even fathom how disastrous a flatline would look in real life.
|
# ? Oct 20, 2014 06:14 |
|
Cultural Imperial posted:Hey you know that subsidy the PBOC offered to banks in order to get them lending? Something like 81 billion? Well no one took it because no one wants to lend. Really? drat, China is hosed. I have fathomed how disasterous a flatline looks. It may result in a civil war in China; hell, I'd blame the economic slowdown for Hong Kong's problems. That's why I'm wondering the American exposure to Chinese subprime credit.
|
# ? Oct 20, 2014 06:17 |
|
They're going to change the CCP scorecard* to count debt levels in addition to GDP growth. Kind of closing the barn door after the horse has bolted but at least we'll have no more ridiculous projects like the Gansu government agency that wanted to level mountains and fill valleys to build more cities. GDP growth as a metric for party advancement has been a big driver of the huge loans taken out by local government to pay for infrastructure projects. It's an incredibly easy way to goose GDP numbers. With major officials rotated from place to place I'm sure there was an I'll-Be-Gone-You'll-Be-Gone mentality towards debt. If that sounds like a recipe for terrible policy, welcome to the last 10 years. *The semi-secret set of metrics by which the tenure of a communist party official is judged. These were first leaked in 2011 I believe. Arglebargle III fucked around with this message at 12:05 on Oct 21, 2014 |
# ? Oct 21, 2014 12:03 |
|
My Imaginary GF posted:Really? drat, China is hosed. Surely that's exaggeration. Are the top levels of CCP leadership that divided?
|
# ? Oct 21, 2014 12:13 |
|
Arglebargle III posted:They're going to change the CCP scorecard* to count debt levels in addition to GDP growth. Kind of closing the barn door after the horse has bolted but at least we'll have no more ridiculous projects like the Gansu government agency that wanted to level mountains and fill valleys to build more cities. GDP growth as a metric for party advancement has been a big driver of the huge loans taken out by local government to pay for infrastructure projects. It's an incredibly easy way to goose GDP numbers. With major officials rotated from place to place I'm sure there was an I'll-Be-Gone-You'll-Be-Gone mentality towards debt. If that sounds like a recipe for terrible policy, welcome to the last 10 years. Yeah with GDP numbers more than ever seeming to be "decided on" beforehand, there is still plenty of room for graft as long as the party line on statistics is kept as it has been. I do have to say I am surprised when I read something on Bloomberg accepting new GDP growth announcements without even the smallest gain of salt. Is it really a "tinfoil hat conspiracy" to suspect the numbers the CCP is publishing at this point? http://www.nytimes.com/2014/10/21/business/international/mixed-economic-signals-from-china.html?_r=0 quote:Mixed Economic Signals From China This article is a it better, the real surprising part is how different China reported exports to HK and NK's reported imports from China are. If anything since 2010 it is like they have existed in different worlds. Ardennes fucked around with this message at 16:27 on Oct 21, 2014 |
# ? Oct 21, 2014 14:46 |
|
I recently came back from a cheap tourist tour in China. I did not go to Beijing or Shanghai, but instead went to Kumming and Dai Lai. This maybe western economics thinking here, but what I saw (low population, shops everywhere few people buying, entire towers for sale). It really felt like something was going on. On the tour, I came up with the phrase "just for show", in which I applied to a lot of things in China. This fancy jeweled tissue box from this fancy 5 star hotel? A half used toilet paper roll was inside. This fancy bathroom? Terrible plumbing. When I talk to locals about this "just for show" motto, they get defensive and say that's how life works. FYGM. Instead of asking, "Why is China using massive amounts of money to fund condo projects that nobody wants to buy in a town nobody wants to live in?", they point out that the US owes China lots of money, and if China is in trouble, so is the US. It's like a country edition of Too Big to Fail. Any slight observations about the state of anything ends with some form of "Our government may not be the best, but it's not like Government never hid stuff, look at the radiation(employment) stats for Japan(America)!" My point in all this is I feel that China IS misleading everyone with their overall GDP numbers, and every quarter needs to be massaged further to hide that fact. After a few more years of doing so, the numbers they report vs the reality the numbers are suppose to represent would be so far apart that China would have no choice but to come clean, by which I mean the party will find scapegoats that they would say are directly responsible for the numbers, and remove them. They will then promise a more transparent way of GDP (and everything else) calculations. I have no idea what this means for the world as a whole though. Maybe some other super power country will save us all.
|
# ? Oct 21, 2014 18:11 |
|
Australia is most definitely hosed.
|
# ? Oct 21, 2014 18:19 |
|
DailyDumSum posted:I recently came back from a cheap tourist tour in China. I did not go to Beijing or Shanghai, but instead went to Kumming and Dai Lai. This maybe western economics thinking here, but what I saw (low population, shops everywhere few people buying, entire towers for sale). It really felt like something was going on. I wonder if the CCP can come clean at this point especially since every new statistic compounds the issue even further. I have a feeling we may be having to live in "fantasy land" at least at the media/political level since admitting something is seriously off the rails in China questions some of the basic principles of how the global economy is suppose to work. Also I don't know if there are scapegoats big enough to hide how bad things look like they have gotten in China. Obviously, they may try any way but there is going to be a lot of fallout. I mean China has been beating the growth drum for over 30 years at this point, where is their legitimacy when it turns out to be a fib since 2010-2011 or so? And yeah, Australia is pretty much screwed, maybe they can keep the housing bubble going for a while but I don't know how the Australian economy is going to bounce back between what is going to be an epic housing crash and an dried up export market. Brazil is already feeling it and that is one of the big reasons current presidential race is so close.
|
# ? Oct 21, 2014 18:49 |
|
Out of curiousity, how long can China publish rubbish numbers before it doesn't matter what they say? Obviously they have more leeway since they aren't transparent, but I cannot imagine that the US (or anyone else) would get away for long lying about their GDP. What is it about China that makes people say there won't be a crash until the government reports the crash?
|
# ? Oct 21, 2014 20:04 |
|
ocrumsprug posted:Out of curiousity, how long can China publish rubbish numbers before it doesn't matter what they say? Obviously they have more leeway since they aren't transparent, but I cannot imagine that the US (or anyone else) would get away for long lying about their GDP. One thing is that China is seen as a counter-balance to the US and the only real "chance" to replace the US as a the largest economy on earth. However, that reasoning also accepts what China (and the US ironically enough) has done to make that result happen. Also, I think there is a certain amount of faith in publish statistics simply because usually there is some accuracy to them, I have a feeling that period of history is ending.
|
# ? Oct 21, 2014 20:09 |
|
Ardennes posted:One thing is that China is seen as a counter-balance to the US and the only real "chance" to replace the US as a the largest economy on earth. However, that reasoning also accepts what China (and the US ironically enough) has done to make that result happen. This plays a significant part in it. There's a narrative that's been permeated everywhere since the 2008 Financial Crisis that developing economies will soon be the masters of the world and that America and the West are in decline. There are a ton of true believers in this, particularly in countries like Russia and China and I suspect that plays no small part in why they've both acted far more belligerent as of late.
|
# ? Oct 21, 2014 20:13 |
|
Ardennes posted:One thing is that China is seen as a counter-balance to the US and the only real "chance" to replace the US as a the largest economy on earth. However, that reasoning also accepts what China (and the US ironically enough) has done to make that result happen. I just try and fail to imagine a situation where some developer in the US was building cities that no one was living in, or someone (a lot of someones) purchasing investment properties in Detroit, and then taking GDP growth numbers seriously. In China, both of those things seem to be taken as proof that everything is great and thanks for asking.
|
# ? Oct 21, 2014 20:16 |
|
ocrumsprug posted:I just try and fail to imagine a situation where some developer in the US was building cities that no one was living in, or someone (a lot of someones) purchasing investment properties in Detroit, and then taking GDP growth numbers seriously. Ultimately, it is because the US is more transparent but also....it already happened until 2008 or so. I saw a lot of houses in California that didn't make a whole lot of sense. The US didn't fake statistics (well...expect unemployment) but ultimately we relied on a very similar bubble economy, but its collapse was more visible. Granted, it is at this point that, it becomes unclear where the global economy has anywhere to go because the "West" and the "East" are on the edge of failure at the moment.
|
# ? Oct 21, 2014 20:22 |
|
ocrumsprug posted:Out of curiousity, how long can China publish rubbish numbers before it doesn't matter what they say? Obviously they have more leeway since they aren't transparent, but I cannot imagine that the US (or anyone else) would get away for long lying about their GDP. The fact that a lot of very powerful people not just in China but all over the world might lose money if there is an intimation of instability there.
|
# ? Oct 21, 2014 20:24 |
|
ocrumsprug posted:Out of curiousity, how long can China publish rubbish numbers before it doesn't matter what they say? Obviously they have more leeway since they aren't transparent, but I cannot imagine that the US (or anyone else) would get away for long lying about their GDP. You can just look at the raw material import numbers, you don't have to look at China's number. Figuring out new ways to use China's over supply labor force IMO is more important than real estate "bubble". Chinese still has no other way to put their saving money except saving accounts with very low interest and real estate.
|
# ? Oct 21, 2014 22:53 |
|
And ponzi schemes.
|
# ? Oct 21, 2014 23:02 |
|
Cultural Imperial posted:And ponzi schemes. Sometimes with the same bank, even. Am I correct in my assumption that China's holding of foreign debt is denominated in dollars?
|
# ? Oct 21, 2014 23:04 |
|
whatever7 posted:You can just look at the raw material import numbers, you don't have to look at China's number. Isn't one of the most popular methods of getting currency out of the country, other than a suitcase or taped to your body, by making large foreign raw material purchases from a supplier you happen to own and then forgetting to deliver the materials? Everyday Chinese having only one option to invest their money, so it is safe, really is an interesting argument. China should share their knowledge of that with the rest of the world, as we would like it if our markets would stop exploding every so often.
|
# ? Oct 21, 2014 23:49 |
|
ocrumsprug posted:Isn't one of the most popular methods of getting currency out of the country, other than a suitcase or taped to your body, by making large foreign raw material purchases from a supplier you happen to own and then forgetting to deliver the materials? Also at the high stakes baccarat tables in Macau. One of those "We should do something about this" things that keeps getting tossed around in the CCP but the top heads and major influential military members have a vested interest in being able to move massive sums of money out of mainland China.
|
# ? Oct 22, 2014 00:13 |
|
Fojar38 posted:This plays a significant part in it. There's a narrative that's been permeated everywhere since the 2008 Financial Crisis that developing economies will soon be the masters of the world and that America and the West are in decline. There are a ton of true believers in this, particularly in countries like Russia and China and I suspect that plays no small part in why they've both acted far more belligerent as of late. America is in "decline" relative to earlier but that's because there's nowhere to go but down after the post WW2 situation. The key point though is that some believe the narrative is "[BRICS country] will take the US's position" when in reality it will be "[BRICS country] will be comparable with the US in 20XX but will not have a very large share of the pie".
|
# ? Oct 22, 2014 00:20 |
|
The US isn't actually in decline, though. Growth in the US has been significantly better than Europe and Japan for a long time now, and looks like it might even be better than China in the future, depending on how badly China implodes. There's a very plausible scenario where the rest of the world basically goes down in flames and the US keeps trucking along, and that, at least with China, is seeming more likely every day
|
# ? Oct 22, 2014 00:44 |
|
computer parts posted:America is in "decline" relative to earlier but that's because there's nowhere to go but down after the post WW2 situation. The key point though is that some believe the narrative is "[BRICS country] will take the US's position" when in reality it will be "[BRICS country] will be comparable with the US in 20XX but will not have a very large share of the pie". Even that is questionable since the middle-income trap has already claimed several of the vaunted BRICS economies and seems poised to capture China as well.
|
# ? Oct 22, 2014 00:44 |
|
icantfindaname posted:The US isn't actually in decline, though. Growth in the US has been significantly better than Europe and Japan for a long time now, and looks like it might even be better than China in the future, depending on how badly China implodes. There's a very plausible scenario where the rest of the world basically goes down in flames and the US keeps trucking along, and that, at least with China, is seeming more likely every day Even if China starts growing at a far slower path it will still have exceeded the US as the largest economy in the world, or will do so eventually if you use nominal measure of GDP. So even if we just assume the power of the PRC and the US remains relatively constant, it's still very significant. None of the major geopolitical rivals to the US in the 20th century: Germany, Japan and the USSR, has came even close to match the amount of economic resources the US possessed. All 3 had economies a fraction of the size of the US. In other words, China will be far more powerful a rival than even the Soviet Union was if Cold War 2.0 ever breaks out. quote:Even that is questionable since the middle-income trap has already claimed several of the vaunted BRICS economies and seems poised to capture China as well. Typo fucked around with this message at 01:59 on Oct 22, 2014 |
# ? Oct 22, 2014 01:54 |
|
quote:Even if China starts growing at a far slower path it will still have exceeded the US as the largest economy in the world, or will do so eventually if you use nominal measure of GDP. This assumes a permanently stagnant US economy which is not the case. quote:None of the major geopolitical rivals to the US in the 20th century: Germany, Japan and the USSR, has came even close to match the amount of economic resources the US possessed. The USSR did, it just turns out that central planning is a really inefficient way to run an economy. quote:Yeah, it's really problematic, and the solution to it is political change in the PRC. And the result of that might very well be a 50/50 between wonderful and disastrous. Avoiding the middle-income trap by adopting western style democracy is the way that Japan and South Korea managed to avoid it, and if China does so it may be able to avoid it as well, though I will point out that under such circumstances a US-China rivalry probably wouldn't exist anymore.
|
# ? Oct 22, 2014 04:33 |
|
That's right, all democracies are friends.
|
# ? Oct 22, 2014 04:39 |
|
Fall Sick and Die posted:That's right, all democracies are friends. They tend to be more inclined to tolerate one another's competition.
|
# ? Oct 22, 2014 04:42 |
|
Fall Sick and Die posted:That's right, all democracies are friends. Pretty much, yes. They don't invade each other and, at least recently, don't put up massive trade barriers
|
# ? Oct 22, 2014 04:46 |
|
icantfindaname posted:Pretty much, yes. They don't invade each other and, at least recently, don't put up massive trade barriers Your definition of democracy seems to be "agrees with the West".
|
# ? Oct 22, 2014 04:48 |
|
Fojar38 posted:The USSR did, it just turns out that central planning is a really inefficient way to run an economy. And China doesn't have central planning anymore and have not since like 80s-90s
|
# ? Oct 22, 2014 04:50 |
|
Fojar38 posted:The USSR did, it just turns out that central planning is a really inefficient way to run an economy. By 1989, the USSR's GDP was about half that of the US, $2,659 B versus $5,233B. If anything it was impressive the Soviet Union lasted so long against an alliance of countries that was so much more economically powerful then them, but it also explains a lot of the choices they made and the shortcuts they took. GDP per capita in 1989 was around $9,000 versus $21,000 in the US, in comparison the USSR has GDP per capita similar to Venezuela. Ardennes fucked around with this message at 04:59 on Oct 22, 2014 |
# ? Oct 22, 2014 04:51 |
|
computer parts posted:Your definition of democracy seems to be "agrees with the West". Do you have any examples of democracies that don't agree with the "West", or have consistently pursued a policy of military aggression towards it?
|
# ? Oct 22, 2014 04:52 |
|
|
# ? May 13, 2024 09:28 |
|
icantfindaname posted:Do you have any examples of democracies that don't agree with the "West", or have consistently pursued a policy of military aggression towards it? Argentina re: The Falklands.
|
# ? Oct 22, 2014 04:53 |