China Economy: News & Discussion

[Vijyes]

Being self sufficient is one thing and having a healthy economy is another. China can't continue its massive economy on domestic S&D alone.

I don't think you understand economy well. Domestic economy is good enough for a country as large as China. Chinese population is larger than entire Europe and USA combined. So, there is plenty of room for self sustainable economy. There will be some requirement for imported petroleum for running Chinese economy but that can be easily offset with other export. Most ot Chinese forex expense is in the form of tourism, services and import of electronics, of which only electronics is the important item. If China manages to make the needed electronics itself, then the forex outgo can be drastically minimised.

 

[Cutting Edge 2]

I don't think you understand economy well. Domestic economy is good enough for a country as large as China. Chinese population is larger than entire Europe and USA combined. So, there is plenty of room for self sustainable economy. There will be some requirement for imported petroleum for running Chinese economy but that can be easily offset with other export. Most ot Chinese forex expense is in the form of tourism, services and import of electronics, of which only electronics is the important item. If China manages to make the needed electronics itself, then the forex outgo can be drastically minimised.

I am not saying Chinese economy will completely collapse but it can't continue to be the same size. Of course they can survive but there will be major limitations to their economic agenda.

 

[Vijyes]

I am not saying Chinese economy will completely collapse but it can't continue to be the same size. Of course they can survive but there will be major limitations to their economic agenda.

Why do you think other countries like India, Russia, SE Asia, west asia, Africa etc will stop dealing with China? What do they gain by following USA agenda? So, USA may end up isolating itself rather than limiting China

 

[Cutting Edge 2]

Why do you think other countries like India, Russia, SE Asia, west asia, Africa etc will stop dealing with China? What do they gain by following USA agenda? So, USA may end up isolating itself rather than limiting China

West will limit their companies to do business with Chinese. This will severely limit Chinese capabilities. Even today Chinese companies are way behind their western counterparts.

 

[rockdog]

Comrade, you have done a fine job. I will make sure that SF agency grant you a gold medal for your great contribution.

I am still working hard to be one of them, imagining one day General Zhang Zhaozhong will sign the contract with me ^_^

 

[IndianHawk]

Why do you think other countries like India, Russia, SE Asia, west asia, Africa etc will stop dealing with China? What do they gain by following USA agenda? So, USA may end up isolating itself rather than limiting China

Countries won't stop dealing with china but without us tech Chinese goods will be useless.
Huawei / honor sell a lot of smartphone in India but now after Google not giving android license for new phones who will buy a Huawei/ honor phone in India? No one.

And if in future the same restrictions are applied to xiomi /oppo/Vivo than their market in India will automatically Collapse as Indian only buy Chinese smartphone because of android . Nobody is going to buy a phone with Chinese operating system.

Same goes for almost all electronics laptops / smartwathes / smart android TVs.

People will rather buy micromax even if they have to pay a big more but will go with US/ android ecosystem .

Sent from my C103 using Tapatalk

 

[IndianHawk]

I don't think you understand economy well. Domestic economy is good enough for a country as large as China. Chinese population is larger than entire Europe and USA combined. So, there is plenty of room for self sustainable economy. There will be some requirement for imported petroleum for running Chinese economy but that can be easily offset with other export. Most ot Chinese forex expense is in the form of tourism, services and import of electronics, of which only electronics is the important item. If China manages to make the needed electronics itself, then the forex outgo can be drastically minimised.

China won't collapse but it won't prosper either.
Without trade surplus with USA /Europe it's foreign reserve will collapse and there goes belt and road drama as China won't be able to fund it.
Similarly aiib will be ineffective without funding in $ from China.

China has huge population but most of it has no purchasing power to consume high quality / high Margin sophisticated products. And without these products Chinese companies won't be able to compete globally and they won't have enough profit from domestic market to put money in r&d . Hence they will gradually fall behind rest of the connected markets.

Exports still make 15-20 % of Chinese GDP.
Chinese GDP could shrink 2-5 % . That will result in massive unemployment closure of thousands of factories and loss of income in trillion $. China will be send 10-15 years back and future progress will be stalled infinitely.

Sent from my C103 using Tapatalk

 

[Vijyes]

West will limit their companies to do business with Chinese. This will severely limit Chinese capabilities. Even today Chinese companies are way behind their western counterparts.

Chinese are just 5-6 years behind USA. That is not much. So, Chinese are capable 9f overcoming USA restrictions with minor hits.

Countries won't stop dealing with china but without us tech Chinese goods will be useless.
Huawei / honor sell a lot of smartphone in India but now after Google not giving android license for new phones who will buy a Huawei/ honor phone in India? No one.

And if in future the same restrictions are applied to xiomi /oppo/Vivo than their market in India will automatically Collapse as Indian only buy Chinese smartphone because of android . Nobody is going to buy a phone with Chinese operating system.

Same goes for almost all electronics laptops / smartwathes / smart android TVs.

People will rather buy micromax even if they have to pay a big more but will go with US/ android ecosystem .

Sent from my C103 using Tapatalk

You are being severely mistaken. The chinese phone makers are not using chinese parts but using USA parts. Qualcomm chipset, RAM, Memory and other critical items from USA are other important parts of these phones. So, Chinese only get money for a part of the phone like display and assembly charge. Rest is income for USA. So, this is not the main source of Chinese income.

Chinese income comes from sales of other items like TV, PCB, circuits, AC etc which are 100% made in China. These items will still be bought by India and other countries

Next, china also has its own electronics and makes low end phones like those LYF phones of JIO. At low price, these phones will also sell well. Even if Google disallowed Chinese companies, they still can sell their parts and get it assembled by Indian companies just like Qualcomm sells its chipsets independently.

China won't collapse but it won't prosper either.
Without trade surplus with USA /Europe it's foreign reserve will collapse and there goes belt and road drama as China won't be able to fund it.
Similarly aiib will be ineffective without funding in $ from China.

China has huge population but most of it has no purchasing power to consume high quality / high Margin sophisticated products. And without these products Chinese companies won't be able to compete globally and they won't have enough profit from domestic market to put money in r&d . Hence they will gradually fall behind rest of the connected markets.

Exports still make 15-20 % of Chinese GDP.
Chinese GDP could shrink 2-5 % . That will result in massive unemployment closure of thousands of factories and loss of income in trillion $. China will be send 10-15 years back and future progress will be stalled infinitely.

Sent from my C103 using Tapatalk

This is full of assumption without basis. Just like US has big economy without as big manufacturing base as China, China can also have big economy by domestic manufacturing. Job losses is not meaningful. As of now, Chinese are overworked and reduction in exports will means Chinese will have to work less and hence have better standards of living.

USA as of now buys Chinese goods on loan which means that China does not get payment but only collateral as Treasury bonds. Chinese workers don't get paid the money from exports but is held by Chinese Central bank bank as foreign exchange reserve. This is why USA says that China manipulates currency. So, as of now, China has lot of spare capacity and spare economic buffer. A drop in exports will only dip the buffer and not have any big effect

 

[Cutting Edge 2]

Chinese are just 5-6 years behind USA.

I fully disagree with that statement.


GDP (per capita)

China 9000

vs.

USA 60000

 

[Vijyes]

I fully disagree with that statement.


GDP (per capita)

China 9000

vs.

USA 60000

That is irrelevant. I am only taking of technology. Per capita income of China is lower due to higher population. Generally per capita depends on per capita resources

 

[Indx TechStyle]

That is irrelevant. I am only taking of technology.

By technology, it'd be even far far bigger miles. Technology in all aspects.

Per capita income of China is lower due to higher population.

China's GDP wouldn't have been same if its population wasn't.
Reason for lower Chinese income is that their economic booms was late.

Generally per capita depends on per capita resources

It rarely does. I've explained a lot earlier and given up on a gone case like you.

If what you said was so, USSR & China would have been much better during entire cold war.

Don't give the argument of ICBMs & weapon systems. That's old Russian experience that was transferred to China.
Afghanistan isn't a developed country, ROK is.

 

[IndianHawk]

Chinese are just 5-6 years behind USA. That is not much. So, Chinese are capable 9f overcoming USA restrictions with minor hits.


You are being severely mistaken. The chinese phone makers are not using chinese parts but using USA parts. Qualcomm chipset, RAM, Memory and other critical items from USA are other important parts of these phones. So, Chinese only get money for a part of the phone like display and assembly charge. Rest is income for USA. So, this is not the main source of Chinese income.

Chinese income comes from sales of other items like TV, PCB, circuits, AC etc which are 100% made in China. These items will still be bought by India and other countries

Next, china also has its own electronics and makes low end phones like those LYF phones of JIO. At low price, these phones will also sell well. Even if Google disallowed Chinese companies, they still can sell their parts and get it assembled by Indian companies just like Qualcomm sells its chipsets independently.


This is full of assumption without basis. Just like US has big economy without as big manufacturing base as China, China can also have big economy by domestic manufacturing. Job losses is not meaningful. As of now, Chinese are overworked and reduction in exports will means Chinese will have to work less and hence have better standards of living.

USA as of now buys Chinese goods on loan which means that China does not get payment but only collateral as Treasury bonds. Chinese workers don't get paid the money from exports but is held by Chinese Central bank bank as foreign exchange reserve. This is why USA says that China manipulates currency. So, as of now, China has lot of spare capacity and spare economic buffer. A drop in exports will only dip the buffer and not have any big effect

How will Chinese have better standard of living with less work ? In fact Chinese are lacking works and high wage employment. Why do you think they are trying belt and road drama , so that they can have work in Chinese factories!

Chinese central bank keeps dollars but it issued domestic currently equivalent to dollar which pays to factories and workers.
All countries do the same including India.
What do you think Chinese factory workers must be paid in dollar directly by USA?

US dollar is not legal tender in china !!
It is not legal tender in India either! No one can be paid in foreign currency directly it has to go to central banks which issue equivalent domestic currency.

Chinese currency manipulation is not using those reserved dollars to defend yuan in open market. China could make yuan much stronger if it used it's reserve and released dollars in international markets . But china doesn't do that even to keep yuan cheaper. That is called currency manipulation by USA.

Frankly bro your fundamental understanding of economics is lacking.



Sent from my C103 using Tapatalk

 

[Vijyes]

By technology, it'd be even far far bigger miles. Technology in all aspect

For example? China has all Technology except for 22nm and 14nm semiconductor. This is the only drawback and nothing else.

China's GDP wouldn't have been same if its population wasn't.
Reason for lower Chinese income is that their economic booms was late.

Late or early doesn't matter. Things run on absolute value. As of now, China manufacturing is 2-3 times that of USA. Chinese agriculture is equal to USA. Which part is less in China to make it below USA? How does it matter if China developed late or early?

It rarely does. I've explained a lot earlier and given up on a gone case like you.

If what you said was so, USSR & China would have been much better during entire cold war.

Don't give the argument of ICBMs & weapon systems. That's old Russian experience that was transferred to China.
Afghanistan isn't a developed country, ROK is.

Again, talking like a retard and repeating same nonsense without even listening to others doesn't make you right. You simply refuse to accept the fact that with Arab agreeing to sell their oil in dollars, USA got control of 70% of world oil and hence completely dominated USSR & China in terms of resources. In addition, the ethnic difference in USSR led to USSR disintegrating while USA had ethnic homogeneity to good extent and survived.

If you don't have common sense to consider the access to resources to a country either because of indigenous presence or political alliance, then it is your stupidity, not mine. Afghanistan has no viable resources whereas Korea is gifted by USA of its its resources and 'temporqry Technology sharing'. How can Afghanistan be compared with Korea?

How will Chinese have better standard of living with less work ? In fact Chinese are lacking works and high wage employment. Why do you think they are trying belt and road drama , so that they can have work in Chinese factories!

Chinese central bank keeps dollars but it issued domestic currently equivalent to dollar which pays to factories and workers.
All countries do the same including India.
What do you think Chinese factory workers must be paid in dollar directly by USA?

US dollar is not legal tender in china !!
It is not legal tender in India either! No one can be paid in foreign currency directly it has to go to central banks which issue equivalent domestic currency.

Chinese currency manipulation is not using those reserved dollars to defend yuan in open market. China could make yuan much stronger if it used it's reserve and released dollars in international markets . But china doesn't do that even to keep yuan cheaper. That is called currency manipulation by USA.

Frankly bro your fundamental understanding of economics is lacking.



Sent from my C103 using Tapatalk

Do you even know how Chinese economy works? Do you know that China is centralised economy and doesn't run on normal free market floating currency.

China is not facing unemployment to go for OBOR. OBOR is a foreign policy tool to gain foreign assets while expending excessive dollar reserve it has. Since China has 3 trillion dollar reserve, this is a logical thing to do.

USA dollar is not legal currency in China but China doesn't give fair value to dollar to its companies. Chinese workers get paid in devalued Yuan which is indirectly paying less for their workers than the compared fair value. The devalued Yuan is a way of artificially lowering the standards of living of its population.

 

[IndianHawk]

For example? China has all Technology except for 22nm and 14nm semiconductor. This is the only drawback and nothing else.


Late or early doesn't matter. Things run on absolute value. As of now, China manufacturing is 2-3 times that of USA. Chinese agriculture is equal to USA. Which part is less in China to make it below USA? How does it matter if China developed late or early?


Again, talking like a retard and repeating same nonsense without even listening to others doesn't make you right. You simply refuse to accept the fact that with Arab agreeing to sell their oil in dollars, USA got control of 70% of world oil and hence completely dominated USSR & China in terms of resources. In addition, the ethnic difference in USSR led to USSR disintegrating while USA had ethnic homogeneity to good extent and survived.

If you don't have common sense to consider the access to resources to a country either because of indigenous presence or political alliance, then it is your stupidity, not mine. Afghanistan has no viable resources whereas Korea is gifted by USA of its its resources and 'temporqry Technology sharing'. How can Afghanistan be compared with Korea?

Do you even know how Chinese economy works? Do you know that China is centralised economy and doesn't run on normal free market floating currency.

China is not facing unemployment to go for OBOR. OBOR is a foreign policy tool to gain foreign assets while expending excessive dollar reserve it has. Since China has 3 trillion dollar reserve, this is a logical thing to do.

USA dollar is not legal currency in China but China doesn't give fair value to dollar to its companies. Chinese workers get paid in devalued Yuan which is indirectly paying less for their workers than the compared fair value. The devalued Yuan is a way of artificially lowering the standards of living of its population.

OBOR is a tool to utilize Chinese excess capacity. Chinese produce 800 million ton of steel compared to 85 of USA and 100 for india.

How much Chinese consume? If Chinese can't export this surplus steel then these all factories will have to close. Now repeat this for cement , machinery etc .
Thus OBOR funding on condition of Chinese cement and steel and equipment to be used.

Undervalued yuan keeps Chinese export alive without it Chinese export will go down and so will it's gdp. Chinese worker can only be paid when they have jobs. These jobs depend on exports . Export sector alone contribute for 15-20 % of Chinese economy and is labour intensive ( textile , clothing , toys) hence contribute to 20% + employment in china .



Sent from my C103 using Tapatalk

 

[Indx TechStyle]

For example? China has all Technology except for 22nm and 14nm semiconductor. This is the only drawback and nothing else.

Drawing those technologies isn't that small job. Specially when semiconductors are a moving target.
There are lot lot of examples in aviation, naval, space, nuclear, softwares and even techs of daily life.

Late or early doesn't matter. Things run on absolute value. As of now, China manufacturing is 2-3 times that of USA. Chinese agriculture is equal to USA. Which part is less in China to make it below USA? How does it matter if China developed late or early?

It does matter. You're too stupid to explain that China's GDP per capita isn't low because of its high population. But its total GDP is high because of its high population. If China's population would have been likes of Japan & Russia, things would have been different totally.

Late & early matters very much. A country sustained high growth for 70 years vs another for 30 years have a big difference due to gaps in duration of economic booms.
Countries who experienced this in 60s are developed countries today, countries who experienced in 90s are not.


China's population is four times of USA. So, it just has to achieve 1/4th of US GDP per capita to catch up with.
USA itself isn't most developed but biggest developed country. So is Brazil in league of Latin America and so is India in league of other developing countries except China.

Again, talking like a retard and repeating same nonsense without even listening to others doesn't make you right.

It's you who has pathetically failed, giving excuses repeating same thing over & over while every single example of any developed or developing country complies with my elaboration. Same case isn't with you.

I'm still waiting because you haven't been able to bring any single country to contradict me.

You simply refuse to accept the fact that with Arab agreeing to sell their oil in dollars, USA got control of 70% of world oil and hence completely dominated USSR & China in terms of resources. In addition, the ethnic difference in USSR led to USSR disintegrating while USA had ethnic homogeneity to good extent and survived.

I never refused the fact that resources are important.
But I rejected your stupid rant that "Wealth is usually a result of natural resources" outrightly.
Countries who are rich or poor today are rarely because of natural resources.

Stability, economic diversity, demographic dividend and similar other factors play actual role in countries' development. Countries who produce finished goods make money faster than who produce raw goods.
Resources don't even make into top 5.
Most of countries developed lately followed economic diversification and free market within the country. They somehow managed to import resources from other parts of world.

But countries who didn't do so have failed or are failing. No matter what if they got resources or not.

If you don't have common sense to consider the access to resources to a country either because of indigenous presence or political alliance, then it is your stupidity, not mine.

Fine, finally stick to the context of "natural resources". As you claimed that prosperity depends upon natural resources per capita, we'll stay on it and argue on it while I rubbish.

Don't claim that smaller countries imported resources for free.

Afghanistan has no viable resources whereas Korea is gifted by USA of its its resources and 'temporqry Technology sharing'. How can Afghanistan be compared with Korea?

Korea managed arrange automotive technology, metal working techs, advanced electronics and so on high end techs to diversify economy with profitable ones. It's high investment in education helped it to create a large skilled labour.

Natural resources were imported.

Afghanistan has one of largest reserves of natural resources like rare earth metals and semiconductors which would be very much viable if this instability wasn't there. Soviets attacked them for a reason.
They never had a long term policy for economic leap and socialism screwed them further.


And the person who thinks any other way without explaining is an idiot of top order.

 

[Vijyes]

OBOR is a tool to utilize Chinese excess capacity. Chinese produce 800 million ton of steel compared to 85 of USA and 100 for india.

How much Chinese consume? If Chinese can't export this surplus steel then these all factories will have to close. Now repeat this for cement , machinery etc .
Thus OBOR funding on condition of Chinese cement and steel and equipment to be used.

Undervalued yuan keeps Chinese export alive without it Chinese export will go down and so will it's gdp. Chinese worker can only be paid when they have jobs. These jobs depend on exports . Export sector alone contribute for 15-20 % of Chinese economy and is labour intensive ( textile , clothing , toys) hence contribute to 20% + employment in china .



Sent from my C103 using Tapatalk

Just explain to me how is USA richer than China despite manufacturing much less than China? The answer is clear - USA bloats its currency because of petrodollar agreement. It is simply that USA can print money and pile up huge debt which other countries take. So, it is not rocket science to say that if China bloats its currency and gets rid of petrodollar deal, then it can also become richer than USA. So, even if the production of China decline, it will still have an edge over USA simply due to the scale of infrastructure and capacity it has.

Drawing those technologies isn't that small job. Specially when semiconductors are a moving target.
There are lot lot of examples in aviation, naval, space, nuclear, softwares and even techs of daily life.

Arms and semiconductor are the only advantage. Even in aviation, Chinese have reasonable alternative and only advantage of USA is in small fuel saving Technology. So, the major lead is in semiconductor only. Even in semiconductor, China has 28nm Technology which is an acceptable alternative to 22nm if priced lower. So, China is not much disadvantaged here either. It is a small gap.

It does matter. You're too stupid to explain that China's GDP per capita isn't low because of its high population. But its total GDP is high because of its high population. If China's population would have been likes of Japan & Russia, things would have been different totally

China GDP per capita is low because of its high population and currency devaluation. It is also true that its GDP growth is high due to high population. Chinese population only helped in ensuring that China can make cheap goods and forcefully export is items despite political restrictions of USA. But, even here, if China didn't have enough resources to be self sufficient, it would not have been able to manufacture in the current scale. So, it is only partially correct to say that Chinese GDP is because of its large population. It is a combination of various factors.

Late & early matters very much. A country sustained high growth for 70 years vs another for 30 years have a big difference due to gaps in duration of economic booms.
Countries who experienced this in 60s are developed countries today, countries who experienced in 90s are not.

We are not taking average GDP for 50 years but current GDP on annual basis. How is it meaningful to speak of early or late? Moreover, you seem to be a fanboy if S.Korea. Korea itself boomed after 1995 and was a shithole even in 1980s with massive anti-USA riots taking place. So, how will your favorite Korea fit in your theory ot early or late boom? South Korea has GDP per capita of $32000, comparable to Italy, Spain, Portugal etc. So, where is the late and early difference?

China's population is four times of USA. So, it just has to achieve 1/4th of US GDP per capita to catch up with.
USA itself isn't most developed but biggest developed country. So is Brazil in league of Latin America and so is India in league of other developing countries except China

I hope you understand that GDP per capita can't be separated from yourself GDP.

It's you who has pathetically failed, giving excuses repeating same thing over & over while every single example of any developed or developing country complies with my elaboration. Same case isn't with you.

I'm still waiting because you haven't been able to bring any single country to contradict me.

I have listed several example to justify how natural resources access is key to economic success. You simply refuse to accept that and inside in same nonsense if technology and other qualitative aspects. Deal in quantity and numbers instead if qualitative things.

I never refused the fact that resources are important.
But I rejected your stupid rant that "Wealth is usually a result of natural resources" outrightly.
Countries who are rich or poor today are rarely because of natural resources.

That is your whimsical opinion without any basis. Every country today is Rich either because of own natural resource or resources via political alliance. Not even 1 single country exists which is otherwise. You just waste time like retards by giving example of city states like Singapore with 50lakh population. Or you insist like retards that korea became rich without resources despite open evidence that usa gifted free resources to korea in the name of investment.

Stability, economic diversity, demographic dividend and similar other factors play actual role in countries' development. Countries who produce finished goods make money faster than who produce raw goods.
Resources don't even make into top 5.
Most of countries developed lately followed economic diversification and free market within the country. They somehow managed to import resources from other parts of world.

But countries who didn't do so have failed or are failing. No matter what if they got resources or not.

Again nonsense. Resources is politically controlled and can't be imported without political alliance. So, even if a country has advanced technology, it will be poor without resources. In fact, a country without resources will be continually suppressed from gaining technology by countries like USA by instigating riots and war.

It is true that manufacturing is more lucrative than resource production but getting the resource is politically restricted and hence it is the Access to critical resources which is the highest priority and what enable wealth.

Fine, finally stick to the context of "natural resources". As you claimed that prosperity depends upon natural resources per capita, we'll stay on it and argue on it while I rubbish.

Don't claim that smaller countries imported resources for free.

It is a fact that countries like korea, Taiwan got free resources from usa political alliance. It is also a fact that Korea, Taiwan got Technology in lease from USA. Wealth depends on resources and technology. But resources is the key component which decide the quantity and hence GDP as long as one doesn't have advantage in Technology Monopoly.

Korea managed arrange automotive technology, metal working techs, advanced electronics and so on high end techs to diversify economy with profitable ones. It's high investment in education helped it to create a large skilled labour.

Korea got all these Technology on LEASE from USA. It also got resources as SOFT LOANS from USA. Regardless of how educated koreans are, it is the gifts from USA that keeps Korean economy high. USA got these resources for free from Arabs and other allies like Australia as well as indigenous reserves.

Afghanistan has one of largest reserves of natural resources like rare earth metals and semiconductors which would be very much viable if this instability wasn't there. Soviets attacked them for a reason.
They never had a long term policy for economic leap and socialism screwed them further.

Again, retarded socialist bashing. Afghanistan was at war since 1975 with severe Jihadi infestation. Moreover, Afghanistan never was a resource hub even before 1975. Moreover, Afghanistan survives on the basis imported food.

Soviets didn't attack Afghanistan for resources but for access to middle east to conquer middle east. Afghanistan was always a beggarly state and a desert. If a desert doesn't have energy resources to give cooling (air conditioning) and logistics to its people, then such a desert can never have big time economy even if it has other minerals.

 

[IndianHawk]

Just explain to me how is USA richer than China despite manufacturing much less than China? The answer is clear - USA bloats its currency because of petrodollar agreement. It is simply that USA can print money and pile up huge debt which other countries take. So, it is not rocket science to say that if China bloats its currency and gets rid of petrodollar deal, then it can also become richer than USA. So, even if the production of China decline, it will still have an edge over USA simply due to the scale of infrastructure and capacity it has.


Arms and semiconductor are the only advantage. Even in aviation, Chinese have reasonable alternative and only advantage of USA is in small fuel saving Technology. So, the major lead is in semiconductor only. Even in semiconductor, China has 28nm Technology which is an acceptable alternative to 22nm if priced lower. So, China is not much disadvantaged here either. It is a small gap.


China GDP per capita is low because of its high population and currency devaluation. It is also true that its GDP growth is high due to high population. Chinese population only helped in ensuring that China can make cheap goods and forcefully export is items despite political restrictions of USA. But, even here, if China didn't have enough resources to be self sufficient, it would not have been able to manufacture in the current scale. So, it is only partially correct to say that Chinese GDP is because of its large population. It is a combination of various factors.


We are not taking average GDP for 50 years but current GDP on annual basis. How is it meaningful to speak of early or late? Moreover, you seem to be a fanboy if S.Korea. Korea itself boomed after 1995 and was a shithole even in 1980s with massive anti-USA riots taking place. So, how will your favorite Korea fit in your theory ot early or late boom? South Korea has GDP per capita of $32000, comparable to Italy, Spain, Portugal etc. So, where is the late and early difference?


I hope you understand that GDP per capita can't be separated from yourself GDP.


I have listed several example to justify how natural resources access is key to economic success. You simply refuse to accept that and inside in same nonsense if technology and other qualitative aspects. Deal in quantity and numbers instead if qualitative things.


That is your whimsical opinion without any basis. Every country today is Rich either because of own natural resource or resources via political alliance. Not even 1 single country exists which is otherwise. You just waste time like retards by giving example of city states like Singapore with 50lakh population. Or you insist like retards that korea became rich without resources despite open evidence that usa gifted free resources to korea in the name of investment.


Again nonsense. Resources is politically controlled and can't be imported without political alliance. So, even if a country has advanced technology, it will be poor without resources. In fact, a country without resources will be continually suppressed from gaining technology by countries like USA by instigating riots and war.

It is true that manufacturing is more lucrative than resource production but getting the resource is politically restricted and hence it is the Access to critical resources which is the highest priority and what enable wealth.


It is a fact that countries like korea, Taiwan got free resources from usa political alliance. It is also a fact that Korea, Taiwan got Technology in lease from USA. Wealth depends on resources and technology. But resources is the key component which decide the quantity and hence GDP as long as one doesn't have advantage in Technology Monopoly.


Korea got all these Technology on LEASE from USA. It also got resources as SOFT LOANS from USA. Regardless of how educated koreans are, it is the gifts from USA that keeps Korean economy high. USA got these resources for free from Arabs and other allies like Australia as well as indigenous reserves.


Again, retarded socialist bashing. Afghanistan was at war since 1975 with severe Jihadi infestation. Moreover, Afghanistan never was a resource hub even before 1975. Moreover, Afghanistan survives on the basis imported food.

Soviets didn't attack Afghanistan for resources but for access to middle east to conquer middle east. Afghanistan was always a beggarly state and a desert. If a desert doesn't have energy resources to give cooling (air conditioning) and logistics to its people, then such a desert can never have big time economy even if it has other minerals.

Because USA holds the technology and collects rant on it. Chinese pay royalty to Western tech giants to use android , windows , car engine , microprocessor etc.
Your logic is flawed petrodollars give USA advantage but Europe is also much much richer than china despite euro not being petro currency. Japan also have huge debt to GDP despite not having yen which is again not petro currency.

China can't unilaterally get rid of petrodollars as OPEC will have to agree to it. And India Japan Korea will also demand same treatment.

If it was as easy as just bloating currency and getting rid of petrodollars why has China not done that already? Why other nations including Russia India Japan Brazil do that?
Can you not see the flaw of your reasoning even Chinese know it's stupidity.

Sent from my C103 using Tapatalk

 

[Vijyes]

Because USA holds the technology and collects rant on it. Chinese pay royalty to Western tech giants to use android , windows , car engine , microprocessor etc.
Your logic is flawed petrodollars give USA advantage but Europe is also much much richer than china despite euro not being petro currency. Japan also have huge debt to GDP despite not having yen which is again not petro currency.

China can't unilaterally get rid of petrodollars as OPEC will have to agree to it. And India Japan Korea will also demand same treatment.

If it was as easy as just bloating currency and getting rid of petrodollars why has China not done that already? Why other nations including Russia India Japan Brazil do that?
Can you not see the flaw of your reasoning even Chinese know it's stupidity.

Sent from my C103 using Tapatalk

China doesn't pay royalty for anything. It imports Technology which it doesn't hqve, mainly semiconductor. Rest is made fully in China.

Japan has high internal debt to gdp, not external debt. I am only speaking of external debt of USA, not total debt to gdp. In geopolitics, only external debt count.

Japan, Korea are slave states of USA and run on Technology leased from USA. You can't compare independent country like China with these. If USA withdraws its Technology from Korea, Japan, they will go back into stone age.

European economy is also reliant on alliance with USA. Remember Marshall plan to understand this. European countries have been in alliance with USA and in return USA gives political advantage. USA even convinced GCC into giving preference to us allies of Europe. So, despite not having Petro euro, European countries are rich by piggybacking on petrodollar.

I agree that petrodollar is difficult to be removed but that still doesn't mean China can be beaten down. GCC and others are waiting for petrodollar to collapse on its own. GCC already has demanded that USA must not import oil for petrodollar to continue. So, the motion of removing petrodollar is in place. China & Russia are asking GCC to use a basket if currency abd not just yuan or Ruble for replacing dollar. Even here, the demand is feasible.

What i am saying is indeed practical. China is not going it's currency because it does not want to get into USA like position of high external debt uncertainty. USA is collapsing and the Chinese are here for long term, not just appear rich for small periods of time by bloating currency

 

[rockdog]

 

[Indx TechStyle]

I'm wondering how stupid someone could be. Writing same line over & over without any explanation.

Again nonsense. Resources is politically controlled and can't be imported without political alliance. So, even if a country has advanced technology, it will be poor without resources. In fact, a country without resources will be continually suppressed from gaining technology by countries like USA by instigating riots and war.

You just need a political engagement and not political alliance for resource. I agree that resources are important but not most important.

You claimed that "wealth is a usually result of natural resources" which is factually incorrect. It's rather a result of diversified industry working on imported or indigenous natural resources.

Natural resources usually are not reason for prosperity of nations but industry is. Both rich & poor countries have access to high amount of natural resources but its utilization that makes them different.

It is true that manufacturing is more lucrative than resource production but getting the resource is politically restricted and hence it is the Access to critical resources which is the highest priority and what enable wealth.

Only manufacturing is lucrative. Rarely any country is world sits without access to natural resources.

Most of countries who are poor and rich today aren't because of natural resources and you can't write a contradiction. Because there isn't any.

Arms and semiconductor are the only advantage. Even in aviation, Chinese have reasonable alternative and only advantage of USA is in small fuel saving Technology. So, the major lead is in semiconductor only. Even in semiconductor, China has 28nm Technology which is an acceptable alternative to 22nm if priced lower. So, China is not much disadvantaged here either. It is a small gap.

The fuel saving techs, improved designs and manufacturing basis aren't small advantages at all.

China GDP per capita is low because of its high population and currency devaluation.

GDP besides income generated due to basic wealth accumulated with you (including natural resources) doesn't fall straight on head of population.

GDP is gross domestic income generated by people of a country every year. If you think cutting down population won't cut GDP down, you are even more stupid.

It is also true that its GDP growth is high due to high population.

No, GDP is high due to high population.
GDP growth is high due to structural reasons. These are letting money flow freely and discovering new fields of manufacturing that add more income.

Chinese population only helped in ensuring that China can make cheap goods and forcefully export is items despite political restrictions of USA.

Chinese population also used to work & earn. It increased total production, total salaries and hence overall GDP was high.

So, it is only partially correct to say that Chinese GDP is because of its large population.

Partially yes only because it would be easy to obtain goods from a single concentrated big factory than small workshops around.

We are not taking average GDP for 50 years but current GDP on annual basis. How is it meaningful to speak of early or late?

Seriously? How dumb you are?
What relevance has a "50 years average GDP" has relevance? In which way your mind moves?
GDP of every country grows or declines year on year.
Two countries have a GDP per capita of $100 each at initial point. One grows at 6% for 10 years. Other grows at same rate for 50 years. Gap will be large for sure.

Countries annual GDP isn't a result of what it just did this year. It has a base.

S.Korea. Korea itself boomed after 1995 and was a shithole even in 1980s with massive anti-USA riots taking place. So, how will your favorite Korea fit in your theory ot early or late boom?

Shithole? Korea was as good as any upper middle income economy in 80s. It had a bigger boom after 1995 transforming it into a developed country, won't change the fact that it was one of fastest growing economy for decades even earlier.

I hope you understand that GDP per capita can't be separated from yourself GDP.

It's actually a waste of time to argue with an idiot like you who believes GDP of a country is definite while only population changes to change GDP per capita.

I have listed several example to justify how natural resources access is key to economic success. You simply refuse to accept that and inside in same nonsense if technology and other qualitative aspects. Deal in quantity and numbers instead if qualitative things.

You have not a single one. Every country has to use natural resources to make something.

There are much more countries with resources around world. Successful ones are those convert resources into finished goods.


Which example you have given anyway? I'd like to know. At least I haven't seen any because every country's disagrees with you. They have periods of economic booms that enriched them.

That is your whimsical opinion without any basis. Every country today is Rich either because of own natural resource or resources via political alliance. Not even 1 single country exists which is otherwise. You just waste time like retards by giving example of city states like Singapore with 50lakh population. Or you insist like retards that korea became rich without resources despite open evidence that usa gifted free resources to korea in the name of investment.

It's you who is imposing your opinion as fact despite it being proved factually incorrect multiple. If natural resources are topmost reason of wealth, most countries with them should be rich. But they aren't.

For me, I've even provided an excellent reference earlier.
http://atlas.cid.harvard.edu/rankings/growth-projections/

It is a fact that countries like korea, Taiwan got free resources from usa political alliance. It is also a fact that Korea, Taiwan got Technology in lease from USA. Wealth depends on resources and technology. But resources is the key component which decide the quantity and hence GDP as long as one doesn't have advantage in Technology Monopoly.

Technology is key component, then secondary is stability and tertiary is free market. Resources are easier to obtain and come after all these things.

There are rarely any countries without any resources.
So, natural resources aren't the usual reason of wealth.

Korea got all these Technology on LEASE from USA. It also got resources as SOFT LOANS from USA. Regardless of how educated koreans are, it is the gifts from USA that keeps Korean economy high.

That's called financing. Anyone generates finance from where it can get. US gave and gives aid to lot other countries, why they aren't showing any signs of improvement? Obviously, ROK did something different.

Most certainly, loans aren't natural resources. Don't spin your argument and stay on your words.

USA got these resources for free from Arabs and other allies like Australia as well as indigenous reserves.

Elaborate, which resources US, ROK or any country got in "free" from others.

Add, last time which country enriched because of foreign aids? Countries changed because of structural changes in society and economy. As for USA, it tries to rather control natural resources as part of its dominance to carry out economic sabotages. We all know how much effect it has.

Again, retarded socialist bashing. Afghanistan was at war since 1975 with severe Jihadi infestation. Moreover, Afghanistan never was a resource hub even before 1975. Moreover, Afghanistan survives on the basis imported food.

It's you who's a retard. Afghanistan was same as that of any neighboring states at a time who lagged behind in all aspects due to wars.
If it survived on imported foods and now even donated stuff, it just proves my point that natural resources aren't primary reason for prosperity. Afghanistan has worth $4 trillions resources. Case is different that never were exploited.

Soviets didn't attack Afghanistan for resources but for access to middle east to conquer middle east.

Soviets had multiple reasons and this too was one of them.
Unique location of AfPak belt made them surrounded by USSR, PRC, India and Iran. That was enough elevate their geostrategic importance.

If a desert doesn't have energy resources to give cooling (air conditioning) and logistics to its people, then such a desert can never have big time economy even if it has other minerals.

This isn't even argument. Afghanistan isn't poor by default. Nor its neighbor are richer than it by default.
Afghanistan can't provide facilities to its people isn't result of its economic failure but it's economic failure is the result of former problem.

Many countries avoided this problem altogether while some partially did.

Just explain to me how is USA richer than China despite manufacturing much less than China? The answer is clear - USA bloats its currency because of petrodollar agreement.

US is much richer in PPP as well. Currency appreciation de-appreciation can't affect country's living standard and income levels besides that involved in international trade.

US has industrialized far far before China, has far more diverse economy and enriched in past. It's slow now relatively. not