- Joined
- May 20, 2009
- Messages
- 5,133
- Likes
- 746
you conclusion is based a wrong data.Most of the exports of China are low cost goods like shoes, textiles, toys etc. Walmart and $ stores in North America are filled with Chinese goods.
Now why would you need to import raw materials for such things?
well, only 10-15% of chinese total export are "low-cost goods like shoes ,textile and toys"
,although those low-cost industry indeed provides many jobs.
most of chinese export are mid-tech mechanical & electronical products.
sorry, to increase your knowledge and keep you away from ignorance is not my duty...Secondly, do you have any statistics to support your theory of value addition?
if you really want to know more about it, pls read more articles on FT or WSJ.
GDP itself is a concept of addtional value ,but it is very funny that many people like compare the absolute value of export with GDP....
well, finially ,you get something right!Thirdly, regardless of whether or not you're adding value to the finished product, you're still exporting it overseas to earn foreign exchange. That is what drives your factories and generates employment to rural and semi-urban Chinese workers on a large scale. If your customers in the west suffer from a recession, the effect is going to be felt on poor Chinese workers-they will lose their jobs or be forced to work for less pay. I don't see how "absolute value of exports" vs "additional value of exports" makes any difference in this case.
the shut of coastal low addtional-value factory has not much direct damage to chinese GDP,but the increase of related layoff indeed is a big headache.
that is why chinese government makes out a stimulus of 4 trillion RMB.
the 4 trillion MB is pouring into thousands of huge projects like High-speed railways, airports, expressways, huge seaports,huge dams.....etc. any of those huge projects can provide thousands of jobs and decrease layoff.