|
"We have the equivalent of $25,000,000,000 USD (25 BILLION United States dollars) in our reserves that cannot be moved without your help. We will send you the $25,000,000,000 USD and when you send it back to us you can keep 20% (1,250,000,000) as transaction fee. I am absolutely positive that this arrangement will be of mutual benefit to both of us and I think that it is of utmost importance that you reach me through my personal email address stating your telephone and fax numbers and I would give you a telephone call to discuss the matter further and if we reach an acceptable arrangement, then we can proceed further."
|
# ? Mar 26, 2016 02:19 |
|
|
# ? May 27, 2024 02:58 |
|
StandardVC10 posted:IIRC it's a An-24 clone but with Pratt and Whitney Canada engines and new avionics or something like that.
|
# ? Mar 26, 2016 13:31 |
|
Krispy Kareem posted:Maybe I'm missing something, but it didn't seem to be that bad. Some language issues, some cultural issues, some food issues. They were sent on an expenses-paid vacation so they wouldn't see the slow part* of production. *The part where all the tiny children come in and work for 16 hours a day handmaking their poo poo.
|
# ? Mar 28, 2016 21:39 |
|
So I was perusing the CIA World Factbook today and saw that there was a note next to China's official exchange rate GDP saying "because China's exchange rate is determined by fiat, rather than by market forces, the official exchange rate measure of GDP is not an accurate measure of China's output; GDP at the official exchange rate substantially understates the actual level of China's output vis-a-vis the rest of the world; in China's situation, GDP at purchasing power parity provides the best measure for comparing output across countries" This runs in contradiction to everything that I have heard about exchange rate vs PPP calculations for GDP. I always thought that PPP was only useful for measuring the domestic purchasing power of a given country and wasn't particularly useful for cross-country comparisons, particularly countries with massive differences in population and income. That said I hadn't considered that the nature of the Chinese currency being controlled by the government might influence its exchange rate GDP, although if the government controls the exchange rate how useful is an exchange rate measure at all? Wouldn't that mean that it would be whatever the CCP wanted it to be at any given moment? I don't understand economics very well and have been trying to wrap my head around all these measures of economic output for a few days now, and the only conclusion I have been able to arrive at is that every economist has a different opinion about everything. What's the deal with this CIA note? Does it mean that China's "real" economy is it's PPP economy? Or does this mean that literally nobody knows how large or small the Chinese economy is with any meaningful precision?
|
# ? Apr 11, 2016 21:10 |
|
Fojar38 posted:So I was perusing the CIA World Factbook today and saw that there was a note next to China's official exchange rate GDP saying Exactly what it means. And it's part of the issue, China has been both artificially inflating it's GDP growth while devaluing it's currency, but the market is calling it on it and it's gonna hurt.
|
# ? Apr 11, 2016 21:46 |
|
So to make sure I understand it correctly, China has been inflating its real GDP growth rate, which means that China's economy should be smaller than what's reported, but on the other hand, it keeps its currency artificially low, which means that that China's economy should be larger than what's reported as implied by that CIA factbook note? Is that note there because due to having a fixed currency, the Chinese government can make their exchange rate gdp whatever they want simply by devaluing or appreciating the currency however they want, thereby making the designation meaningless?
|
# ? Apr 11, 2016 22:07 |
|
Fojar38 posted:So to make sure I understand it correctly, China has been inflating its real GDP growth rate, which means that China's economy should be smaller than what's reported, but on the other hand, it keeps its currency artificially low, which means that that China's economy should be larger than what's reported as implied by that CIA factbook note? I'm not sure why China's currency manipulation would cause China's economy to be larger than whats reported. I think there are several issues which are clear when it comes to China: 1. China has an economy 2. China has a currency 3. No why But seriously, deflation is a regressive tax which redistributes wealth from debtors to creditors while inflation is a progressive tax which redistributes wealth from creditors to debtors. China's economy would grow if communist officials were to engage in a form of taxation as reliable as inflation. The problem with China is regulation, as regulations are just excuses for bribes, and the only way to fix this is to have a two-party system.
|
# ? Apr 11, 2016 23:00 |
|
Fojar38 posted:So I was perusing the CIA World Factbook today and saw that there was a note next to China's official exchange rate GDP saying I'm not an economist but I know the currency undervaluing is not nearly as bad as is often made out, certainly it's much less pronounced than with Japan in the high postwar years of the 60s and 70s. China has actually taken substantial steps to float their currency in recent years. And on top of that I suspect the effect of exchange rates on GDP is a lot smaller than that note makes it out as. I would lean towards the note being there to avoid hurt Chinese feelings. It's probably a measurable effect but not very significant. Normal GDP is still the proper measurement for cross-country comparison And also the last thing you said is also true icantfindaname fucked around with this message at 23:29 on Apr 11, 2016 |
# ? Apr 11, 2016 23:26 |
|
icantfindaname posted:
The Chinese economy is precisely as large and as small as whatever does not hurt the feelings of the Chinese peoples and their 56 flavors of minorities.
|
# ? Apr 12, 2016 00:13 |
|
My Imaginary GF posted:The Chinese economy is precisely as large and as small as whatever does not hurt the feelings of the Chinese peoples and their 56 flavors of minorities. Lol if you think anyone in the Chinese government gives a single poo poo about minorities beyond how to get rid of them
|
# ? Apr 12, 2016 00:17 |
|
Fojar38 posted:Or does this mean that literally nobody knows how large or small the Chinese economy is with any meaningful precision? There have been concerns about China inflating their GDP for awhile. Maybe it was national pride, as they claim to have surpassed Japan to be the second largest economy. http://money.cnn.com/news/economy/world_economies_gdp/ That's assuming China's numbers are anywhere near accurate. It's possible their real GDP is as little as half what they post.
|
# ? Apr 12, 2016 01:57 |
|
Krispy Kareem posted:There have been concerns about China inflating their GDP for awhile. Maybe it was national pride, as they claim to have surpassed Japan to be the second largest economy. Why do I get the feeling that nearly all Chinese growth past 2009 is from stimulus
|
# ? Apr 12, 2016 02:14 |
|
Mange Mite posted:Lol if you think anyone in the Chinese government gives a single poo poo about minorities beyond how to get rid of them About as much as I think the Zhang family gives a poo poo about hurting the feelings of the Chinese peoples.
|
# ? Apr 12, 2016 05:47 |
|
https://twitter.com/AP/status/720794737414942720 welp
|
# ? Apr 15, 2016 03:22 |
|
Has anyone proposed an economic theory that the closer China get to US's economic size, the closer China's growth is to the US?
|
# ? Apr 15, 2016 03:40 |
|
https://twitter.com/BaldingsWorld/status/720804549972234241 lmao
|
# ? Apr 15, 2016 03:50 |
|
http://www.ft.com/fastft/2016/04/15/chinese-data-fails-to-inspire-asian-markets/?ft_site=falcon&desktop=truequote:
|
# ? Apr 15, 2016 04:19 |
|
So with 6.7% officially, China's actual growth rate is probably 3.7% huh lol or it's 6.7% by means of writing down lovely loans
|
# ? Apr 15, 2016 04:29 |
|
quote:Chinese brokers are using attractive female analysts to tout stocks online http://qz.com/669079/chinese-brokers-are-using-attractive-female-analysts-to-tout-stocks-online/
|
# ? Apr 25, 2016 14:28 |
|
Looks like the States have found some common ground with the Chinese.
|
# ? Apr 25, 2016 21:03 |
|
Jumpingmanjim posted:http://qz.com/669079/chinese-brokers-are-using-attractive-female-analysts-to-tout-stocks-online/ Here's an off-the-wall idea: Why not treat stocks like Japanese treat girlbands? The more you buy, the greater your chance to win passes to meet your favorite stock idol.
|
# ? Apr 26, 2016 06:22 |
|
https://next.ft.com/content/4bb772de-1045-11e6-91da-096d89bd2173quote:China financial regulator clamps down on shadow banking wassup guys
|
# ? May 2, 2016 20:36 |
|
Cultural Imperial posted:https://next.ft.com/content/4bb772de-1045-11e6-91da-096d89bd2173
|
# ? May 2, 2016 22:35 |
|
Toplowtech posted:"See if i switch those numbers from column A and column B and noone notice or call us on our lies, we are actually billionaires!" This is how high finance in America works, too. As usual, though, they forget to do their ground work while blindly copying the US. You need to own the government before you can get away with this silly Chinese bankers
|
# ? May 2, 2016 23:07 |
|
Buy eggs now or be priced out forever!
|
# ? May 3, 2016 21:01 |
|
The hot new thing in the Chinese quote:The World's Most Extreme Speculative Mania Unravels in China http://www.bloomberg.com/news/articles/2016-05-09/world-s-most-extreme-speculative-mania-is-unraveling-in-china Typical market participant:
|
# ? May 10, 2016 03:47 |
|
Bloomberg has a new article panicking about Chinese college graduates taking American jobs. I can't assess how accurate this is, anyone with more knowledge of white collar global economy and China's education system want to try? http://www.bloomberg.com/view/articles/2016-05-23/trump-is-worried-about-the-wrong-china-threat quote:In the last decade, China has produced close to 60 million college graduates. By 2030, the World Bank expects there to be up to 200 million -- more than the entire U.S. workforce. They’ll join those from India and Latin America in an increasingly crowded global market for brainpower. quote:Losers need to be compensated, not stigmatized. That’s about fairness. It’s also the price of ensuring continued support for a process that in aggregate makes the world better off. Redistribution also serves another essential purpose -- leaning against the blow to demand that comes as globalization channels an ever-larger share of income to high-saving elites.
|
# ? May 24, 2016 22:10 |
|
The article assumes that all college graduates are created equal when Chinese institutions are essentially glorified degree factories, and even Western institutions have pressure applied to them to pass wealthy Chinese even if they aren't particularly qualified. It's another one of those cases where China looks really strong on paper but the paper doesn't match the reality. Western-educated graduates are going to continue to be considered top tier for the foreseeable future.
|
# ? May 24, 2016 22:21 |
|
Can we page grand autismo to the thread to tell his story about buying diplomas?
|
# ? May 24, 2016 22:23 |
|
Also lol at the notion of Chinese apps being popular outside of China and a handful of other middle-income countries. I'm not even convinced they would be particularly popular in China itself if the Chinese market wasn't so inaccessible to outsiders. White people have been writing articles like that with grand predictions about China's future for like a decade now that completely ignore the reality on the ground in favor of "What if China was another America, but with a billion people?!?" and there have been a surge of "Watch out, China is innovating now!" articles over the past few months because "thing is now more popular in China than western brands (because the Chinese market is becoming more and more opaque and Western brands are being forced out by the government while domestic brands are subsidized) A great example of this was when the totally impartial and independent Chinese courts made the "Iphone" trademark in China freely available for use by loving everyone. Fojar38 fucked around with this message at 22:45 on May 24, 2016 |
# ? May 24, 2016 22:40 |
|
Fojar38 posted:Also lol at the notion of Chinese apps being popular outside of China and a handful of other middle-income countries. I'm not even convinced they would be particularly popular in China itself if the Chinese market wasn't so inaccessible to outsiders. Half the realtors in Vancouver now list their WeChat ID on their ads.
|
# ? May 24, 2016 22:45 |
|
McGavin posted:Half the realtors in Vancouver now list their WeChat ID on their ads. Is that because they want to use them or because like 90% of their customers are from mainland China?
|
# ? May 24, 2016 22:46 |
|
The latter.
|
# ? May 24, 2016 22:46 |
|
Okay. I don't think that is a particularly good example of a Chinese brand going global. China isn't even where Japan was in the 70's and 80's as far as branding is concerned yet and to be frank, they probably never will be. I can only name a handful of Chinese brands off the top of my head and I pay a ton of attention to China. My guess for your average joe anywhere but China would be 0.
|
# ? May 24, 2016 22:49 |
|
McGavin posted:Half the realtors in Vancouver now list their WeChat ID on their ads. Gotta launder that sweet sweet tea money somehow.
|
# ? May 24, 2016 23:00 |
|
China is miserable at comp sci education. Almost all the good Chinese developers are educated in the west. If you are a third rate programmer but you're white and tall you can write your own ticket to manage a bunch of terrible chinese educated developers in Chengdu
|
# ? May 25, 2016 04:33 |
|
Fojar38 posted:Okay. I don't think that is a particularly good example of a Chinese brand going global. China isn't even where Japan was in the 70's and 80's as far as branding is concerned yet and to be frank, they probably never will be. I can think of some exceptions, Xiaomi, Lenovo and Huawei for example.
|
# ? May 25, 2016 11:48 |
|
feedmegin posted:I can think of some exceptions, Xiaomi, Lenovo and Huawei for example. Volvo, Hummer, and Smithfield!
|
# ? May 25, 2016 14:53 |
|
feedmegin posted:I can think of some exceptions, Xiaomi, Lenovo and Huawei for example. Yeah, but those brands are no Sony's or Toshiba's. Their success is chiefly in China and other middle-income economies and even China's titans like Alibaba have had difficulty breaking into high-income markets.
|
# ? May 25, 2016 16:25 |
|
|
# ? May 27, 2024 02:58 |
|
Fojar38 posted:Yeah, but those brands are no Sony's or Toshiba's. Their success is chiefly in China and other middle-income economies and even China's titans like Alibaba have had difficulty breaking into high-income markets. Not really? Lenovo in particular is a widely known brand of laptop in the West, and the other two make cheapo smartphones which are edging up in market share worldwide. They're not Apple-premium or anything but they're definitely a thing in the developed world.
|
# ? May 25, 2016 16:27 |