Hefei Expat - China
Welcome, Guest. Please login or register.
Did you miss your activation email?
May 22, 2012, 04:16:16 PM

Login with username, password and session length
Search:     Advanced search
I'm looking for Recruiters - office@hefeiexpat.com
Great returns. $25 per week =$100 per month =$1000 per year, per teacher. (passive income).
4092 Posts in 902 Topics by 3107 Members
Latest Member: KeithEden
* Home Help Search Calendar Login Register
+  Hefei Expat - China
|-+  The World
| |-+  News and Opinion
| | |-+  Trading
| | | |-+  Kaibo Silver Surfer
| | | | |-+  The Coming Collapse of the Chinese Economy
« previous next »
Pages: [1] Print
Author Topic: The Coming Collapse of the Chinese Economy  (Read 119 times)
kaibo 开 博
Long Term Member
*****
Posts: 409


Silver Surfer rides again!


View Profile
« on: February 07, 2012, 10:33:27 PM »

Kitco

http://www.kitco.com/ind/Chang/feb022012.html
 

The Coming Collapse of the Chinese Economy
     

By Gordon G. Chang

Feb 2 2012 11:10AM
www.kitco.com
     

Can Beijing rescue the Chinese economy?

No one would have asked this question in September. Just a few short months ago, analysts were competing to give us the earliest date that China, with its double-digit growth, would overtake America to become the world’s largest economy.

Now, the global narrative has changed as we see signs the Chinese economy is faltering. There is, for example, overinvestment in infrastructure and industrial capacity, an accumulation of local government debt, a consequent buildup of questionable loans in the banking system, a slowing of growth, a precarious property bubble, and persistent inflation.

And the worst sign of all?  In November and December, China’s foreign reserves decreased by $92.7 billion, the result of Chinese businesses and people smuggling money out of the country.

Many analysts believe that, despite their severity, these problems are temporary because the Chinese economy is in a supercycle upward. Yes, China was in a three-decade upward supercycle for three principal reasons. First, there were Deng Xiaoping’s transformational “reform and opening up” policies. Second, Deng’s era of change coincided with the end of the Cold War and the elimination of political barriers to international commerce. Third, all of this was taking place while China was benefiting from its “demographic dividend,” an extraordinary bulge in the workforce.

Yet this “sweet spot” is over, because the conditions that created it either no longer exist or are disappearing fast. First, China is no longer reforming. Hu Jintao, the current leader, is presiding over an era marked by, on balance, the reversal of reform. He has, for instance, favored state enterprises at the expense of domestic entrepreneurs and tried to exclude foreign investors.  As they say in Beijing, “the Communist Party is now the economy.”

Second, China’s exports boomed in the post-Cold War period when countries wanted to integrate China into the international system and were indulgent, tolerating its mercantilist policies. But we have left that time of uninterrupted growth, and nations have in fact lost patience with Beijing. A year ago, it would have been inconceivable that Pacific Basin countries would launch a major trade round that excluded China, but that is exactly what happened last November when President Obama announced the Trans-Pacific Partnership negotiations. The terms of the deal will include provisions, such as restrictions on state enterprises, designed to keep the Chinese out.

Third, China, which during the reform era had one of the best demographic profiles of any nation, will soon have one of the worst. Perhaps as early as next year the absolute size of the workforce will first peak and then fall. Soon, one worker will support two parents and four grandparents.

So China’s economy is entering a down supercycle. It is in this adverse context—not the favorable one we have seen since the beginning of reform in 1978—that Chinese leaders will have to act. In other words, they will no longer be propelled by trends; going forward, they will have to succeed in spite of them.

In order to succeed, Beijing will have to rebalance the economy away from investment and towards personal consumption. In no country does consumer spending play a smaller role in the economy. Low consumption is the inevitable result of China’s growth model, not merely a remediable feature of it, and consumption’s role will not grow significantly until Beijing takes inherently risky steps to change the model.

No one in the Chinese capital, however, is willing to implement the decisions that are necessary to put the economy on a sustainable basis. Everyone knows what to do; they’re just not doing it.

Why?  China is in the midst of an historic political transition that could last for years. Until new leaders get settled in, no one will take the painful measures that everyone understands are necessary.

But by then, it will be too late.

High growth in China for decades has masked structural flaws. Now that growth is slowing, we are beginning to see fundamental problems. But just as this is happening, the political system is losing its ability to act.

So can Beijing officials rescue the Chinese economy?

The answer to the question is they probably cannot, but worse, they’re not even trying.

By Gordon G. Chang

Gordon G. Chang is the author of The Coming Collapse of China and a columnist at Forbes.com.  Follow him on Twitter @GordonGChang.
Logged

SSS Silver Surfer Syndicate
kaibo 开 博
Long Term Member
*****
Posts: 409


Silver Surfer rides again!


View Profile
« Reply #1 on: February 07, 2012, 11:20:30 PM »

This might be an interesting view ...

http://www.kitco.com/ind/Chang/feb022012.html

The story comes via Kitco and is being quoted these days by Jon Nadler. I see some merit in what Chang says but also some possible shortsightedness as well. We must always remember that sometimes controversy sells books. China is a fast-developing economic superpower and a nation in focus. A controversy on Chinese growth can easily sell books, on account of the fact that, Chinese growth is a positive for all markets. Therefore, a financial collapse across this nation will effect the world.

Chang uses as examples to support his view:

1) over-investment in infrastructure and industrial capacity

China has no doubt made provision for future growth. In the city where I am the infrastructure is certainly advanced for the current population level and current industrialized level in some respects. It perhaps lacks centralized quality infrastructure in educational institutions for primary and secondary students and in likewise facilities for aged care and medical fields. The healthcare and education facilities are second-rate nationwide; even bordering on third world status in some hospitals I have been in. I can't say the same for new development zones and in some aspects of university facilities. They are grand on scale but perhaps under-equipped in some sectors. I have witnessed first hand first tier universities that are well equipped but have been informed by some students their particular universities are under-equipped.

Industrial capacity is certainly over invested in. In our case, HETDA (Hefei Economic & Technical Development Area) is grand and magnificent on a massive scale. It is fast becoming a world class estate and has a new canal being linked via the Chang Jiang River. That in itself compensates for 'future' potential but it has massive competition to face from other highly competitive jurisdictions. It is vast and future infrastructure is prepping the attractive development to promote their investment abroad and domestically. But I can't help but notice the vast acreage of factory space that is not even utilized. It seems to be over-capitalized for sure. It seems an imbalance is evident that industry gets such a boost but things such as aged care and healthcare facilities get 'noted' but largely passed over as a family problem. The latter social engineering problems are fast becoming a national issue and a global issue that at present have few immediate solutions.

On industrial capacity; in 2006 I recall reading an article stating the iron and steel industry. It stated that of the 70 new steel mills that had been constructed, only 10% would be viable by world standards. The other 63 operated by lower or decreased wages and relatively unsafe and less costly work practices. They were also subsidized by state funded injections. That was quite some time ago and since then, I recall that following the 2008 downturn the central govt. surveyed the industry and identified the over-capitalization in the market and set a new policy to streamline operations to dissolve the excess and promote the profitable mills. It seems to me that the current admin here is far from daft as Chang might suggest as every action has a reciprocal target.

2) an accumulation of local government debt

Not being privy to the figures here, but being a party to streaming information from all levels on the street, it seems that the ship is leaking. The central admin does an awesome job to contain such a vast land with 'multiplicit' (Ulysses) governance. We were all made aware of the unsolicited loans scandal that began to surface last year and the problems it may cause central governance in the future.

A similar problem occurred under Maoist reign, when the instituted program the 'Great leap Forward' failed. Fearing the heavy hand of governance, many local governors at the time 'falsified' reports to the central authorities and before it became known in reality the damage had been done.

In like manner, it seems that unsolicited loans and possible corruption at provincial level is still causing havoc for the authorities. It was reported that the former financial official of the province where I reside was executed some years ago for corruption at the highest level. It is a damn pity the USA and global governance can't try and execute the bastards who are engineering this global depression. They are above the law and are doing a great disservice to the nations. On that note I think Chang is biased and off key somewhat.

3) a consequent buildup of questionable loans in the banking system

No research - no comment

4) a slowing of growth

Painted as a disaster waiting to happen is the fact that the 'cooling down' in the current trend is engineered to avert the problems associated with soaring property prices and over speculative property investors. We can roll into this the battle against inflation. When the 'tools' to cool the economy down have run their race the pressure will be eased which in effect is a much smarter option than the central banks in the Euro Zone and the US have waged. In effect, although disconcerting and possibly damaging some sectors, the fact that the policy is marking time as being effective to achieve an aim should never be overlooked. It is a delicate balance and currently precariously positioned it seems. However reports issued today expect the policy to remain until the fourth quarter at a minimum. I applaud the action although it affects other sectors.

5 & 6) a precarious property bubble and persistent inflation.

It is without question problems exist here but nevertheless I have searched far and wide on the property scenario because I am a speculator and have invested. Fortunes can be made but fortunes can be lost as we know. I hope I am one of the lucky ones.

This is a great article and not one of the only ones I have observed which state why the Chinese situation is not the same as Japan or the USA.

BubbleOmics 101: China Does Not Have a Residential Property Bubble

http://www.marketoracle.co.uk/index.php?name=News&file=article&sid=21644

We have to be aware that guys like Chang, and to a greater extent Jon Nadler, who negates China's market potential on an almost daily basis these days, are 'parroting' what they think they might know as being a fact! I don't know for sure but I am not so emphatic.

The big question I have is that with a reported 85 million uninhabited apartments across China, if there is a global depression (in my mind a foregone conclusion in the affirmative) then as many investors try to dump property back on the market there could be a massive swing down in prices. That will impact in a potentially negative way for sure. That is a like-risk we all face in this world as nothing is certain except death. We gamble - we win some we lose some perhaps.

We can also glean info from the old article below which does not draw conclusions alongside Japan. I personally think there is a leveling of the economic growth here not a reversal - certainly not yet.

http://www.economist.com/node/15270708

In order to be balanced, here is a negating article that can be considered.

http://au.finance.yahoo.com/news/Chinas-Real-Estate-investopedia-5402565...

And another ...

http://pul.se/Why-Chinas-So-Called-Attempt-To-Cool-Its-Real-Estate-Bubbl...

In summary, I weigh up Chang's article with some merit but let me throw this in. It states an 'outflow of foreign reserves.'

First, inflows and outflows are periodical and is to be expected but it is possible a rat is in the works as well. I am not convinced of the legitimacy of such claims. I am of the opinion that some of this outflow maybe regulated and planned and has possibly gone into gold, some of it has gone into propping up international central banks in the Euro zone and possibly the US or IMF etc. Of course some of it has been sucked out as a normal discourse of the ebbs and flows of economic cycles. If Chang wants to make such statements then he will need to provide proof of the discourse to convince the reader. It is also possible that it has gone into ailing businesses abroad.

The above is purely a speculative view; but for so much to go out undetected is to suggest that the Chinese central bank has lost control. Somehow I strongly doubt this scenario. In fact Chang suggests the 'party is now the economy.' So what is Chang suggesting, the whole party is about to defect to foreign countries taking the spoils with them? Does he think that the movement of large cash reserves - billions - is going to be expressly published abroad in times of an economic war? I think not to both scenarios.

Your honour, I rest my case!

Happy days guys and gals.

Kaibo888_SSS Silver-Surfer-Syndicate 开博
Logged

SSS Silver Surfer Syndicate
Aussie Mike
Da Xiong
Administrator
Long Term Member
*****
Posts: 833


Love life, Live life, Be happy

mikedann
View Profile WWW
« Reply #2 on: February 08, 2012, 02:55:40 AM »

As is typical right across the board here, there is a serious discrepancy of wealth distribution. Some schools and hospitals are lacking in everything where others show a level of opulence which would be the envy of any nation. This I believe is closing but the difference is still too great.

As for a financial collapse... Not likely in my view... When it come to a crunch, the poorer will get poorer and the wealthy will still be financially secure.

When it comes to development, anything constructed after 2000 is exceptionally modern but the older is neglected until it is to be re-developed.  With the average building age being 40-60 years, it won't be long before China is way ahead of most other countries.

However, more focus should be on schools and hospitals.  After-all, an educated, healthy population is a nations best resource for it's future.  In the same breath, it must be pointed out that, 100 years ago few people had an education, a little over 50 years ago (1956) saw the introduction of compulsory education where that generation received approx, 5-9 years of schooling where the next generation advanced to 12. Now, more than 1/2 the population of the younger generations continue their education through university.

China will no doubt go through some serious issues with the aging population syndrome however, we are seeing some cultural and political changes here to lessen the impact.

« Last Edit: February 08, 2012, 02:57:57 AM by Aussie Mike » Logged

Pages: [1] Print 
« previous next »
Jump to:  

Bozhou China      Study TCM in China      Expat-English.com
Powered by MySQL Powered by PHP Powered by SMF 1.1.16 | SMF © 2011, Simple Machines Valid XHTML 1.0! Valid CSS!