It is kinda funny how people understand that hyperbolic and scandalous language grabs our attention, their attention gets grabbed by hyperbolic and scandalous language and then they laughing at those who used that language. You got played. They aren't wrong as much as you didn't understand what they are doing. An investor is rewarded for having the correct opinion but only if everyone else is wrong. They are professional liars. So they get money because they misled the public and they get money for the attention that they generated. They cashed in twice.
Personally, I do think china will face great economical challenges in the near future though. E.g. The collapse of evergrande and the consequences on the whole sector will make some waves. Let's hope the public won't suffer.
Before anyone wants to jump at me for shitting on china and praising the west (I did neither), I think e.g. america is a dumpster fire economically speaking and the eu is struggling at best.
If anyone is interested to share with me their opinion on a (in my opinion, a very probable) collapse of Tesla will impact the EV market, especially the Chinese market, please do!
China will be the best country in the world the same day fusion reactors will be available. Always in ten years. No matter when you read this.
This was a couple of years ago but I think the numbers are still the same: sending a shipping container from Hong Kong to Newark cost about $3000 while sending the same container in the opposite direction cost about $500. This is because we badly want the shit China makes while they don't want anything we make (the same situation that led Great Britain to force China to accept opium at gunpoint almost two hundred years ago). Sending a container to China is so cheap that for a stretch we were actually filling them with our garbage because it was less expensive to dispose of it there.
Anyone who think this represents economic weakness on China's part is batshit crazy.
This is because we badly want the shit China makes while they don’t want anything we make
That's not entirely true. China produces a lot of low-margin industrial goods that Americans then assemble into finished products. Americans produce an assortment of agricultural and mineral goods that are in high demand in China (oilseeds and grains, particularly soybeans, followed by mineral fuels and oil). We also produce a number of high-margin technology components (include aircraft and parts, electrical machinery and TV parts, and nuclear reactor parts and mechanical appliances) that are expensive but comparatively smaller by volume than the products China sends our way.
Think of it this way. If China sends us a pound of feathers and we send them a pound of iron, even if they're the same price one of them is going to fill up a shipping container a lot faster than the other. The end result is a net positive number of shipping containers coming into the US.
Anyone who think this represents economic weakness on China’s part is batshit crazy.
It's a generally symbiotic relationship and one that any neoliberal economist would laud. We've stratified our industrial economies such that we're highly specialized in respective fields. It isn't weakness on either side's part any more than the heart is stronger/weaker than the lungs because one beats faster than the other breaths.
Containers as cheap home starting points in US is also a function of this dynamic. No need to ship empty ones back to Asia.
The problem isn't the lack of ability to build new houses, it's the lack of land that's in a liveable area, zoned for new development and not already taken. The land doesn't exist.
Not entirely true, they love our soy beans and alfalfa.... But Chinese junk and cattle feed are both horrible for this world. In fact, you can pack a freighter full of alfalfa and hardly add to its weight.
“Imminent collapse” is a fairly common theme among modern economies
imminent collapse is a fairly common theme among anything we’ve learned to engineer fairly well… if a bridge isn’t in imminent danger of collapse under its theoretical maximum loading, it used too much material and was thus over-built which means fewer bridges for people
if an economy isn’t in imminent danger of collapse then it’s resources aren’t being used efficiently and that means fewer luxuries - and bridges - for people
We haven't learned to engineer economies well.
At least no country leaders have.
a common theme song among capitalist economies
It's a built in, central facet:
Eww Reinhart and Rogoff, all my homies hate Reinhart and Rogoff.
TL:DR Reinhart and Rogoff infamously cherry picked their data and had coding errors to support austerity measures that fucked over much of the world, subsequent meta analyses found that austerity doesn't work.
Growth in a Time of Debt - Wikipedia - https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Growth_in_a_Time_of_Debt
An evil authoritarian regime that is committing human rights abuses and does not follow democratic norms ..... but we'll do billions of dollars worth of trade with them and base a lot of our industries around trading with them. But they're still evil.
Love how the exact same thing is now being said about the US lmao (the collapse part at least), I LOVE the media machine
hahahaha this one is hilarious
FEED THE MACHINE
Open up for trade! Wait no you're not supposed to benefit, only us!
These two aren’t necessarily mutually exclusive.
What is mutually exclusive, though, is reality and China's "imminent collapse" which has been looming just around the corner for the past 20 years
Pundits have been predicting the economic collapse of the PRC for decades, there's an entire sub-industry dedicated to "China Watching" that makes good revenue from predicting xyz economic collapse, and it exists because the West wants the PRC to open up its markets for foreigners to plunder freely, rather than the current situation where trade in China is heavily controlled and managed.
Agreed. I'm not saying that "collapse is imminent is accurate", but don't act like these are mutually exclusive when the idiom "a candle that burns twice as bright burns half as long" is accurate (to itself - literally the candle).
Much like the US, they can simultaneously have an economy that SHOULD collapse, but also be so ingrained in global trade that nobody is actually willing to call them to the carpet.
If China were Greece, they'd probably have gone bankrupt multiple times already.
What exactly does "should" mean in this context? Either it does it it doesn't, and saying it "should" just sounds like saying reality is wrong for not conforming to your economic theory.
What exactly does “should” mean in this context?
I think the implication is that it's essentially being prevented from collapse because it's so ingrained in international trade that if it were to collapse it would hurt you and your allies too much, so you don't allow it to collapse when it otherwise might.
It is economy
Run the gauntlet yeye
China is following the playbook of Japan, South Korea, Taiwan and similar countries. The all used window guidance to quickly grow targeted industries, which actually worked very well. All of them are wealthy countries today. However that dependence on how good the window guidance is. They take on a lot of debt to invest and it only works as long as the investment is actually smart. If not the debt increases and that causes massive problems down the line. So it creates a bubble and when it pops it hurts badly. After decades of growth those bubbles probably are nasty.
its communist, but they've got billionares
To get terminology out of the way, they are building towards Communism through Socialism, ie an economy where public ownership is the principle aspect of the economy. In other words, large firms and key industries are overwhelmingly publicly owned, so the Bourgeoisie doesn't have power over the state.
Now that terms are out of the way, you're correct, China does have billionaires. Even though that number is decreasing in recent years while working class purchasing power and wages are rising, that isn't enough of an answer as to why they still exist. Billionaires represent a contradiction the CPC must resolve. But how is the best way to go about that? What time scale? The CPC's role is to gradually resolve contradictions within Socialism in favor of the Proletariat in any inter-class dispute. They have to erase the foundations for billionaires, not the billionaires themselves.
I recommend checking out China Has Billionaires. The important thing to understand is that contradictions exist in all systems, and it is the process of working out these contradictions that provides room for advancement.
Its run by the communist party, whose purpose is guiding the country to communism and self dissolution; which has necessitated not skipping over the industrial and consumer revolutions, both of which likely require capitalism, but in any case have been done with capitalism so that path is easier and known, allowing them to benefit from the waste from less competent countries.
Or in other words, they're the only country in history to execute billionaires, whatever they are is objectively better than the US or EU.
