|
A3th3r posted:This WAS true for the most part.. but you must remember that the Cold War ended with the fall of the Berlin Wall in the late 1980's. Oh yeah definitely, which is why the Chinese military today is different, and is geared to fight a war over Taiwan or SE sea than a people's war against an invading Soviet army.
|
#
?
Apr 9, 2015 23:45
|
|
|
|
| # ? May 12, 2024 14:52 |
|
|
Slaan posted:From what I can tell, this is already starting to happen. Thanks to the one-child policy, there are far more people 45+ than there are younger than 30. As those born before the policy was started are retiring right around now, it's going to be a huge cost sink on their kids. Their kids have to support their own families in high-cost cities like Shanghai, with relatively lovely wages, plus their parents now because there isn't a good safety net in China for the elderly. Whole apartment blocks will become nursing homes / assisted living with the state making sure there is employment for the youth as nurses, aides, etc. Of course they might be in trouble if they aren't already planning this out.
|
|
#
?
Apr 9, 2015 23:57
|
|
|
McDowell posted:Whole apartment blocks will become nursing homes / assisted living with the state making sure there is employment for the youth as nurses, aides, etc. Of course they might be in trouble if they aren't already planning this out. They aren't. The government is currently expecting children to care for their parents in the traditional Chinese fashion. They even passed a law to punish negligent children.
|
|
#
?
Apr 10, 2015 00:21
|
|
|
RocknRollaAyatollah posted:They aren't. The government is currently expecting children to care for their parents in the traditional Chinese fashion. They even passed a law to punish negligent children. 4 grand parents, 2 parents, 1 child.
|
|
#
?
Apr 10, 2015 00:42
|
|
|
RocknRollaAyatollah posted:They aren't. The government is currently expecting children to care for their parents in the traditional Chinese fashion. They even passed a law to punish negligent children. Cant see how this would negatively affect economic productivity. No siree bob.
|
|
#
?
Apr 10, 2015 02:20
|
|
|
Maybe a stock market implosion and wiping out everyone who was invested either directly in high interest "investments" or in banks neck deep in the same will spur a safety net program similarly to how the Great Depression led to SS? Most likely not though.
|
|
#
?
Apr 10, 2015 02:22
|
|
|
It's way easier to double down on authoritarian rule in order to keep power than it is to actually create a working social safety net, especially considering the sheer cost of providing it for 1.3 billion people. There's a reason anyone who is able to do so is moving as much of their wealth as possible out of China right now.
|
|
#
?
Apr 10, 2015 02:33
|
|
|
Shifty Pony posted:Maybe a stock market implosion and wiping out everyone who was invested either directly in high interest "investments" or in banks neck deep in the same will spur a safety net program similarly to how the Great Depression led to SS? Safety nets cost money, and China's still pretty poor on the world scale. Remember a huge chunk of China's population is still in subsistence farming territory, even if it's less than 50% and shrinking. A Japan-style economic implosion would only encourage them to kill off any welfare programs they have in a desperate attempt to jumpstart growth by continuing to shovel money into infrastructure investment. Again based on Japan, actually fixing demographic issues would probably be the very last thing they try as they pretty much just sit back and hope if they close their eyes and open them again the boom years will magically be back. China's probably just going to slide back into developing country territory. It might end up looking like a somewhat less dysfunctional Russia. Which isn't saying a whole lot, because Russia is mega ultra dysfunctional icantfindaname fucked around with this message at 02:41 on Apr 10, 2015 |
|
#
?
Apr 10, 2015 02:34
|
|
|
icantfindaname posted:It might end up looking like a somewhat less dysfunctional Russia. Which isn't saying a whole lot, because Russia is mega ultra dysfunctional A 1.4 billion population, dysfunctional Russia. I just hope it keeps it retains the whole "middle-kingdom" focus in that case.
|
|
#
?
Apr 10, 2015 04:27
|
|
|
Trammel posted:A 1.4 billion population, dysfunctional Russia. I just hope it keeps it retains the whole "middle-kingdom" focus in that case. They could try to invade Taiwan and fail spectacularly.
|
|
#
?
Apr 10, 2015 04:59
|
|
|
Trammel posted:A 1.4 billion population, dysfunctional Russia. I just hope it keeps it retains the whole "middle-kingdom" focus in that case. Probably? They don't really have anyone to invade besides maybe Vietnam? The Philippines? China spent the past 2000 years gobbling up all its neighbors, the Ukraine scenario has already happened if you're Tibet, Xinjiang or Mongolia. They probably won't start a war with Japan because Japan is strong enough to fight back. They're not really any threat to the USA
|
|
#
?
Apr 10, 2015 05:13
|
|
|
Serious post since y'all seem to need it: China is not Russia.
|
|
#
?
Apr 10, 2015 05:19
|
|
|
Yet. 
|
|
#
?
Apr 10, 2015 05:26
|
|
|
Arglebargle III posted:Serious post since y'all seem to need it: China is not Russia. More trees and rivers in Russia.
|
|
#
?
Apr 10, 2015 05:27
|
|
|
In Soviet Russia jokes still more amusing than In Maoist China jokes.
|
|
#
?
Apr 10, 2015 05:30
|
|
|
Man, when Arglebargle thinks you're being too negative about China...
|
|
#
?
Apr 10, 2015 05:34
|
|
|
Admittedly, Russia has enough energy and water resources for itself. I think both countries are going to be very dysfunctional and corrupt but in different ways. China's danger is the middle income gap, its labor will be too expensive to compete with the lower rung of developing countries but its middle class won't be broad enough to support a traditional consumer economy. In this case, it will basically act like a poorer Japan with lowered growth, deflation fears and growing demographics crisis. That said, China will be a very large economy in nominal terms, and its military will continue to modernize. Ultimately, it won't dominate the world or disappear.
|
|
#
?
Apr 10, 2015 10:13
|
|
|
China would not become like Russia had become because the average Chinese person is aware of how market economics work and the long term benefits of stock ownership. Most Soviet citizens were ill prepared for market capitalism and democracy, which allowed the middle managers who were to come out on top.
|
|
#
?
Apr 10, 2015 12:39
|
|
|
RocknRollaAyatollah posted:China would not become like Russia had become because the average Chinese person is aware of how market economics work and the long term benefits of stock ownership. Most Soviet citizens were ill prepared for market capitalism and democracy, which allowed the middle managers who were to come out on top. Yeah, we will see about that. I think a lot of the "average people" are going to lose their shirts in the coming stock crash. Also, there are other issues of massive corruption and inequality in China that are immensely comparable to the type of poo poo that goes down in Russia, hell China may be the teacher rather than the student in that regard.
|
|
#
?
Apr 10, 2015 12:57
|
|
|
Jesus no China has a manufacturing-oriented export economy, the largest population in the world and gigantic modern infrastructure projects and Russia has an extraction-oriented export economy a relatively small and shrinking population (for its land area) and terrible infrastructure everywhere outside of the Moscow-St. Petersburg corridor. China handled the transition to market capitalism much more smoothly and China has a much larger nominal GDP. And a much more retarded military, somehow.
|
|
#
?
Apr 10, 2015 13:44
|
|
|
Fojar38 posted:It's way easier to double down on authoritarian rule in order to keep power than it is to actually create a working social safety net, especially considering the sheer cost of providing it for 1.3 billion people. There's a reason anyone who is able to do so is moving as much of their wealth as possible out of China right now. I had a question about that. Is there an attempt to crack down on this outflow? Is that possible in a country where a bribe can go pretty far? Will we see China start attempting to claw back overseas deposits and investments similarly to how the US has been chasing tax dodging?
|
|
#
?
Apr 10, 2015 14:07
|
|
|
Arglebargle III posted:Jesus no China has a manufacturing-oriented export economy, the largest population in the world and gigantic modern infrastructure projects and Russia has an extraction-oriented export economy a relatively small and shrinking population (for its land area) and terrible infrastructure everywhere outside of the Moscow-St. Petersburg corridor. China handled the transition to market capitalism much more smoothly and China has a much larger nominal GDP. I think the point is that China isn't necessary will literally become Russia but face a ton of problems comparable to Russia (but maybe not as bad as the 1990s). China has a bigger population and economy as you say, but its manufacturing-export economy is also heavily dependent on foreign demand, and if anything has maximized its returns. In addition, corruption is still endemic to China and has if anything fed the shadowing banking industry in a way comparable to the Russian black economy. Russia obviously has its dutch disease, but would probably be even worse shape if it didn't have access to energy. Also to be honest China's population is also an issue in itself coupled with the amount of environmental damage that has already happened, plenty of pollution happens in Russia but they have enough space to hide it in under the rug in a way China really can't.
|
|
#
?
Apr 10, 2015 14:50
|
|
|
How exactly is china analogous to russia beyond "they have a lot of problems with corruption"?
|
|
#
?
Apr 10, 2015 14:52
|
|
|
shrike82 posted:How exactly is china analogous to russia beyond "they have a lot of problems with corruption"? How about authoritarianism, general lack of public input, nationalism/growing militarism and high inequality? Or maybe barely existing social systems and aging demographics (although Russia's certainly is worse overall)? Oh and I guess issues with separatism/regionalism and overall a poor relationship with their neighbors?
|
|
#
?
Apr 10, 2015 14:59
|
|
|
Greece would fit your mix-and-match metrics more so than China.
|
|
#
?
Apr 10, 2015 15:05
|
|
|
shrike82 posted:Greece would fit your mix-and-match metrics more so than China. Eh not so much, Greece as dysfunctional is it is compared to the rest of the EU, is still a pretty different category. The Chinese were hoping growth itself would be enough to patch together all the problems of contemporary China but it doesn't like it is going to enough. China does have some nice skyscrapers and high-speed rail lines, it also gets 90% of its energy from coal and still has a very large population of peasants. Ardennes fucked around with this message at 15:29 on Apr 10, 2015 |
|
#
?
Apr 10, 2015 15:13
|
|
|
You can group more than half of the countries in the world in the authoritarian definition. China and Russia practice very different brands of authoritarian government. Chinese oversea diaspora is more comparable to Jews. Chinese inside China gets their own archetype. They are not comparable to the Russians.
|
|
#
?
Apr 10, 2015 15:47
|
|
|
lol at the implication that Chinese retail investors are sophisticated, financially savvy market actors.
|
|
#
?
Apr 10, 2015 15:54
|
|
|
Cultural Imperial posted:lol at the implication that Chinese retail investors are sophisticated, financially savvy market actors. I'd say they're on par with 1920s American mass investors, which puts them decently far ahead of 90s Russian "investors" even if they're still going to get owned.
|
|
#
?
Apr 10, 2015 16:50
|
|
|
Fairly good profile for President Xi Jinping in the New Yorker that explains his personal and political philosophy.
|
|
#
?
Apr 10, 2015 17:24
|
|
|
Shifty Pony posted:I had a question about that. Is there an attempt to crack down on this outflow? Is that possible in a country where a bribe can go pretty far? Will we see China start attempting to claw back overseas deposits and investments similarly to how the US has been chasing tax dodging? It's technically illegal in China to move your wealth overseas/individually invest in foreign assets (as far as I'm aware.) One of the reasons the Shanghai and Hong Kong markets are about to blow up is because most investors have no choice but to invest in either property/housing (which is declining) or in the Chinese stock market. If you're rich enough you can grease the right palms and exploit a loophole where you're supposedly just paying a large import fee but in actuality moving most of your wealth and assets offshore, but obviously this is only an option to the kleptocracy. Xi's much vaunted anti-corruption campaign is supposedly starting to target people who do so but it's running into the same problems the rest of his supposed anti-corruption campaign is which is that it's drastically undermining "the way things work" in China and causing a not insignificant amount of damage to the Chinese economic structure which as it turns out was heavily fueled by corruption. And this is if you give Xi the benefit of the doubt and assume he legitimately wants to get rid of corruption and not just get rid of his political enemies.
|
|
#
?
Apr 10, 2015 18:21
|
|
|
shrike82 posted:How exactly is china analogous to russia beyond "they have a lot of problems with corruption"? Because they're an authoritarian, quasi-rogue state stuck in the middle income trap but with enough power and influence to make their neighbors' lives a headache Maybe the average Chinese person lives better than the average Russian (this isn't even true right now, but I'll give you the benefit of the doubt for the future), but that's about the only difference from a geopolitical perspective. China's export economy has already hit the limit of its expansion as China competes now with the entire developing world and first world demand is only so great. An economy dependent on exports is a liability, not a strength. To be honest having oil might actually be preferable for the Chinese government, because you can buy fancy military equipment disproportionate to what your normal economy could produce icantfindaname fucked around with this message at 18:59 on Apr 10, 2015 |
|
#
?
Apr 10, 2015 18:30
|
|
|
It's really striking how you can predict how bullish/bearish someone will be based on whether or not they've actually been to China. People whose job it is to sit in London and look at spreadsheets are always the ones who are predicting China to become the world's dominant economic power whereas people who have actually been to China almost universally say that poo poo is hosed and it's a ticking time bomb.
|
|
#
?
Apr 10, 2015 18:37
|
|
|
I've been to China and it's not going to be the next superpower but it's not doomed either.
|
|
#
?
Apr 10, 2015 18:53
|
|
|
I don't think it's doomed, but I'm not sanguine about the CCP's chances to keep their stranglehold.
|
|
#
?
Apr 10, 2015 19:14
|
|
|
Zeroisanumber posted:Fairly good profile for President Xi Jinping in the New Yorker that explains his personal and political philosophy. Also, that was a very good read. The fact that none of his major targets in the anticorruption drive have been Princelings is pretty telling.
|
|
#
?
Apr 10, 2015 19:18
|
|
|
TheBalor posted:Also, that was a very good read. The fact that none of his major targets in the anticorruption drive have been Princelings is pretty telling. Bo is princeling.
|
|
#
?
Apr 10, 2015 19:21
|
|
|
TheBalor posted:I don't think it's doomed, but I'm not sanguine about the CCP's chances to keep their stranglehold. Nah the CCP is fine. It's everything else about China whose prospects aren't so hot, mostly because of the CCP being fine
|
|
#
?
Apr 10, 2015 19:26
|
|
|
whatever7 posted:Bo is princeling. Bo was a princeling who edged too close to being a warlord.
|
|
#
?
Apr 10, 2015 19:59
|
|
|
|
| # ? May 12, 2024 14:52 |
|
|
Fojar38 posted:It's really striking how you can predict how bullish/bearish someone will be based on whether or not they've actually been to China. People whose job it is to sit in London and look at spreadsheets are always the ones who are predicting China to become the world's dominant economic power whereas people who have actually been to China almost universally say that poo poo is hosed and it's a ticking time bomb. Speaking of which. We Traveled Across China and Returned Terrified for the Economy quote:
http://www.bloomberg.com/news/articles/2015-04-09/we-travelled-across-china-and-returned-terrified-for-the-economy
|
|
#
?
Apr 11, 2015 01:36
|
|