The Chinese Economy

davidtrios

In the last 30 years, China has grown into the 2nd largest economy in the world, yet, their economy is mainly state-run...lots of govt control and regulation.


let me ask you this:

since they've prospered economically, mind you through the great recession they were not hit nearly as hard as the USA, would you agree that more gov't can be a GOOD thing for economic prosperity?

peacefrompaul

China is also made up of 70% farmers and is behind us in demographic transition. More government control has not brought them the technology they so desperately crave.

And yes, I take demography from a Chinese professor.

It would be nice to get Byrnzie in on this

lukin2006

davidtrios wrote:

In the last 30 years, China has grown into the 2nd largest economy in the world, yet, their economy is mainly state-run...lots of govt control and regulation.


let me ask you this:

since they've prospered economically, mind you through the great recession they were not hit nearly as hard as the USA, would you agree that more gov't can be a GOOD thing for economic prosperity?

Nope ... they have much, much cheaper labor ... and probably extremely lax regulation on worker rights, health and safety issue, environmental issues and I'm sure many more things ... but I'll say extremely cheap labor is why.

Jason P

Did anyone watch 60 minutes and their report on China's ghost cities? I've read about them, but holy crap is it nuts. Apparantly the middle class is investing heavily in apartments because the return is so good right now. So they just keep building these skyscrapers and entire cities are practically empty.

They were interviewing the head of a residential construction company that has $53B in assets and he seemed freaked out by a potential housing market bubble bursting.

Byrnzie

Well, the fact is that China as a whole has grown wealthier over the past 30 years since the reform and opening movement initiated by Deng Xiaoping. Even poor farmers have more money and opportunity than they ever had before. As for ghost cities, I've never come across one in all my travels around the country, so I doubt the problem is as great as some media story may be portraying it.

A good little audio piece here by Peter Hessler, an American writer who came to China in 1996 to work as English teacher, and ended up staying for ten years. He's written three books on China - I've read them all - and has documented it's gradual emergence out of the Maoist years. This little interview has him discussing some of the most glaring changes that have taken place in the country since he arrived here nearly 20 years ago:

http://thestory.org/archive/2013_02_27_ ... c.facebook

peacefrompaul

Byrnzie wrote:

Well, the fact is that China as a whole has grown wealthier over the past 30 years since the reform and opening movement initiated by Deng Xiaoping. Even poor farmers have more money and opportunity than they ever had before. As for ghost cities, I've never come across one in all my travels around the country, so I doubt the problem is as great as some media story may be portraying it.

A good little audio piece here by Peter Hessler, an American writer who came to China in 1996 to work as English teacher, and ended up staying for ten years. He's written three books on China - I've read them all - and has documented it's gradual emergence out of the Maoist years. This little interview has him discussing some of the most glaring changes that have taken place in the country since he arrived here nearly 20 years ago:

http://thestory.org/archive/2013_02_27_ ... TLKu2htmCc

Could you try that link again, please? It doesn't appear to work

brianlux

I'm no economics expert but it at least appears that it is possible for more government to be good for economic prosperity, if that's your goal. But factor in dwindling resources, a trashed environment, far too many toxic work conditions and slave labor, and I don't see economic prosperity on it's own as being all what it's cracked up to be. The irony is that if more government were focused on a simpler concept of prosperity, reign in consumption of resources, transition toward the durable and sustainable and cleaning up the place, we could have a much better world to live in and a longer stay here.

Smellyman

brianlux wrote:

I'm no economics expert but it at least appears that it is possible for more government to be good for economic prosperity, if that's your goal. But factor in dwindling resources, a trashed environment, far too many toxic work conditions and slave labor, and I don't see economic prosperity on it's own as being all what it's cracked up to be. The irony is that if more government were focused on a simpler concept of prosperity, reign in consumption of resources, transition toward the durable and sustainable and cleaning up the place, we could have a much better world to live in and a longer stay here.

It's an interesting topic. Living in Hong Kong many people compain about the China pollution and how terrible China is. People are starting to notice and have got new factories stopped from being built because they don't want pollution in their cities.

Workers rights and factory regulations are becoming more strict (good thing). consequently more companies are moving elsewhere like Viet Nam.

People like to complain until they start paying more for their goods. Then they are really concerend.

Byrnzie

peacefrompaul wrote:

Byrnzie wrote:

Well, the fact is that China as a whole has grown wealthier over the past 30 years since the reform and opening movement initiated by Deng Xiaoping. Even poor farmers have more money and opportunity than they ever had before. As for ghost cities, I've never come across one in all my travels around the country, so I doubt the problem is as great as some media story may be portraying it.

A good little audio piece here by Peter Hessler, an American writer who came to China in 1996 to work as English teacher, and ended up staying for ten years. He's written three books on China - I've read them all - and has documented it's gradual emergence out of the Maoist years. This little interview has him discussing some of the most glaring changes that have taken place in the country since he arrived here nearly 20 years ago:

http://thestory.org/archive/2013_02_27_ ... TLKu2htmCc

Could you try that link again, please? It doesn't appear to work

Try this: http://thestory.org/stories/2013-02/return-fuling-china

Byrnzie

brianlux wrote:

I'm no economics expert but it at least appears that it is possible for more government to be good for economic prosperity, if that's your goal. But factor in dwindling resources, a trashed environment, far too many toxic work conditions and slave labor, and I don't see economic prosperity on it's own as being all what it's cracked up to be. The irony is that if more government were focused on a simpler concept of prosperity, reign in consumption of resources, transition toward the durable and sustainable and cleaning up the place, we could have a much better world to live in and a longer stay here.

There are problems in China, but it's not as bad as people imagine. They report on the pollution in Beijing and people believe that shit applies to the whole country. It doesn't.
As for workers rights, e.t.c. Things are slowly changing for the better and will continue to do so. Remember, China only emerged from Mao's Stone-Age bullshit ideal about 30 years ago. The country has come a long way since then.
Listen to the radio link I posted. Hessler makes some insightful observations.

brianlux

Smellyman wrote:

People like to complain until they start paying more for their goods. Then they are really concerend.

That is almost universally true... but there is another side that I think is worth looking at. Personally, I don't mind paying more for something that is durable. I would rather pay $100 for a quality item that will last 10 years which, if I keep replacing the item, will cost me $400 over 40 years, than I would to pay $45 for something that will last 4 years which will cost me $450 over 40 years PLUS use more resources PLUS cause more pollution. Quality pays in many ways.

This applies to most things- cheap things that don't last as long usually cost more in the long run in many ways than durable items that cost more at the outset.

Of course the argument against that is that people can't afford to buy the more expensive items. The way around that in many cases is to learn to budget. Budgeting, consuming less stuff, buying used items, repairing older items and buying things that are quality, durable and healthier all lead to a greater, simpler form of prosperity. It's not as hard as it sound and the time is well spent.

brianlux

Byrnzie wrote:

brianlux wrote:

I'm no economics expert but it at least appears that it is possible for more government to be good for economic prosperity, if that's your goal. But factor in dwindling resources, a trashed environment, far too many toxic work conditions and slave labor, and I don't see economic prosperity on it's own as being all what it's cracked up to be. The irony is that if more government were focused on a simpler concept of prosperity, reign in consumption of resources, transition toward the durable and sustainable and cleaning up the place, we could have a much better world to live in and a longer stay here.

There are problems in China, but it's not as bad as people imagine. They report on the pollution in Beijing and people believe that shit applies to the whole country. It doesn't.
As for workers rights, e.t.c. Things are slowly changing for the better and will continue to do so. Remember, China only emerged from Mao's Stone-Age bullshit ideal about 30 years ago. The country has come a long way since then.
Listen to the radio link I posted. Hessler makes some insightful observations.

I'm glad to hear about the progress over there, Byrnzie. I've read about folks in China who are doing great things to make things better there. My comments were not meant to be disparaging to the country as a whole. Most if not all of us of us live in places that could much better as well. It's a planetary issue, really.

It's way late here on the west coast- I'll try to remember to check out link tomorrow. This place keeps me up late. Well, no, I keep myself up late posting here.

Smellyman

brianlux wrote:

Smellyman wrote:

People like to complain until they start paying more for their goods. Then they are really concerend.

That is almost universally true... but there is another side that I think is worth looking at. Personally, I don't mind paying more for something that is durable. I would rather pay $100 for a quality item that will last 10 years which, if I keep replacing the item, will cost me $400 over 40 years, than I would to pay $45 for something that will last 4 years which will cost me $450 over 40 years PLUS use more resources PLUS cause more pollution. Quality pays in many ways.

This applies to most things- cheap things that don't last as long usually cost more in the long run in many ways than durable items that cost more at the outset.

Of course the argument against that is that people can't afford to buy the more expensive items. The way around that in many cases is to learn to budget. Budgeting, consuming less stuff, buying used items, repairing older items and buying things that are quality, durable and healthier all lead to a greater, simpler form of prosperity. It's not as hard as it sound and the time is well spent.

but the most expensive, durable, qualtiy items are also made by China.

Always a misconception that cheap, bad qualtiy items come from China. Everything comes from China. from poor quality to the best.

brianlux

Smellyman wrote:

brianlux wrote:

Smellyman wrote:

People like to complain until they start paying more for their goods. Then they are really concerend.

That is almost universally true... but there is another side that I think is worth looking at. Personally, I don't mind paying more for something that is durable. I would rather pay $100 for a quality item that will last 10 years which, if I keep replacing the item, will cost me $400 over 40 years, than I would to pay $45 for something that will last 4 years which will cost me $450 over 40 years PLUS use more resources PLUS cause more pollution. Quality pays in many ways.

This applies to most things- cheap things that don't last as long usually cost more in the long run in many ways than durable items that cost more at the outset.

Of course the argument against that is that people can't afford to buy the more expensive items. The way around that in many cases is to learn to budget. Budgeting, consuming less stuff, buying used items, repairing older items and buying things that are quality, durable and healthier all lead to a greater, simpler form of prosperity. It's not as hard as it sound and the time is well spent.

but the most expensive, durable, qualtiy items are also made by China.

Always a misconception that cheap, bad qualtiy items come from China. Everything comes from China. from poor quality to the best.

That may be true some of the time, Smellyman, because the US has outsourced much of it's production, although the US still produces some well-made goods. Any quality and durable items produced wherever are fine with me but it makes more sense to me to purchase domestic items in order to save resources- in this case, fuel to ship items half way around the world. Part of the quality/durable formula should include closest-to-home production. Local economy makes the most sense. I often recommend reading James Howard Kunstlers The Long Emergency to get a clearer picture of these ideas.