Hacker News Board Hacker News, browsed like a classic message board
Live data from Hacker News

Chinese banks cause alarm as capital flight measures intensify

asiamarkets.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

181–190 of 270 posts

Re: Chinese banks cause alarm as capital flight measures intensify

#181

Post by di4na »

grugagag wrote: post #74
simonh wrote: post #19

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Buy crypto in China, sell it abroad. At least that was one approach. Note if you do it fairly quickly it doesn't matter what the value of the crypto is, just the liquidity. Another way is 'business' investments in other SE Asian countries, that then get liquidated and moved further abroad. China does a lot of business with S. Korea for example. If you have an export company, and China exports a lot, you can hold a po…

> Buy crypto in China, sell it abroad. I heard this many times and I can’t figure out how it works. Crypto is sortof banned in China for a while for this reason and yet it’s still a route to take money out of China. But how? Who is going to give you crypto for yen in China?

Why do you think the crypto industry crashed when that ban started being enforced...

Re: Chinese banks cause alarm as capital flight measures intensify

#182

Post by refurb »

fuoqi wrote: post #103
refurb wrote: post #3

Meanwhile, China’s ruling party is intent on attracting inbound foreign capital. Somehow i think that may be a challenge. There may be money to be made in China, but if you never know if you can get it out thats going to put a damper on things.

They do not need foreign capital per se. They need foreign business expertise and technology in areas where domestic ones are not sufficient at the moment. For pure capital they have more than enough in US debt, maybe even too much, since they try to allocate as much of it as possible (e.g. using the one belt initiative) without launching RMB exchange rate into space. With the mounting up US sanctions, trade wars, an…

True, but foreign business expertise and technology uses goes hand in hand with foreign investment (otherwise, why bother?). So China isn't going to get the former, if they don't make the later easier.

Ease of capital flow is one reason why Singapore has done so well (among many reasons). You can turn Singapore dollars into whatever currency you want, in whatever quantities and move it out of the country with no barriers at all.

Plus the rule of law, which means the government is predictable in its decision making. Singapore isn't going to turn around and nationalize a bunch of foreign industries any time soon, because they realize the second they do, all that foreign capital is going to disappear very quickly.

Re: Chinese banks cause alarm as capital flight measures intensify

#183

Post by andsoitis »

fuoqi wrote: post #112
coffeeblack wrote: post #70

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Rich Chinese are getting their money out of the country, because if their money is in China, they don't really own it. The CCP could take it any day and there would be nothing they could do about it. And then there is Western capital, used to rule of law and personal property. They don't see that reality as a realistic threat. So they keep pumping money into China. It will work. Until it doesn't. And then the CCP wil…

>because if their money is in China, they don't really own it The same can be said about money moved to the West, just with a different risk profile. As the Russian situation has shown, your property can be creatively taken away if your country of origin pisses off the US too much.

The Russians whose capital had been frozen have direct ties to and prop up Putin.

I don’t think you’d be able to name a single case that isn’t T like that.

Re: Chinese banks cause alarm as capital flight measures intensify

#184

Post by s1artibartfast »

andy_ppp wrote: post #66
logifail wrote: post #60

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> there’s nothing the US wants less than borders starting to be changed by wars I think it's a major mistake to talk about any country as if it's one homogenous, unanimous entity. There are those in the US, and elsewhere, who stand to make a great deal of out of money from war.

Which part of the American government forced Putin to invade Ukraine? I presume you have some evidence of this because you sound so sure it was all planned?

Nobody forced Putin to invade.

However, the US government certainly signed off on pre-war decisions to extend Nato into Ukraine, paying to modernize the Ukrainian military, and Joint military exercises in the Black Sea.

Not being part of these decisions, You and I can only speculate on how they fit into overall US strategy and how the risk-rewards were weighed.

My concern as a US citizen is that the current war in Ukraine seems to be a great benefit for the USA in almost all regards. I am skeptical but would hope this was not a factor in the decisions leading up to the war.

Re: Chinese banks cause alarm as capital flight measures intensify

#185

Post by fmajid »

jacquesm wrote: post #57
passwordoops wrote: post #46

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Could be all of the above, but for at least a year I have been reading how the real estate bubble that's underpinning the Chinese growth economy is starting to pop with the potential to bleed into the banking system, e.g. [0] If this happens, and is at bad as some analysts say it could be, then the model propping up the CCP effectively ends [1] and they'll have bigger things to worry about than re-unification or tari…

And that in turn might cause them to start a war... Because when the regime has nothing to lose all bets are off, even though it makes no sense whatsoever. They will have to distract from their culpability somehow.

Except if they think there is a significant likelihood they will lose, which would guarantee the downfall of the regime. The Argentinian junta thought the UK would be unable to respond to their invasion of the Falklands (and if they had waited a couple more years, they may well have been right), but I doubt China dismisses the US out of hand, specially after the sobering experience of Russia in Ukraine.

Re: Chinese banks cause alarm as capital flight measures intensify

#186

Post by jacquesm »

anonymouskimmer wrote: post #147
jacquesm wrote: post #72

Earlier quoted context omitted.

There is a fair chance of that happening. But: The cult of the individual leader has always been a strong component in China historically. So it wouldn't be a new thing, more a regression to the norm.

It's been a strong component the world over. Even in the US we've got exemplars such as George Washington, FDR, and the Adams and Bush dynasties. Democracies as political-individual-leader absent as Switzerland are the exception, not the rule. And the less so for other forms of government.

I see significant differences between those. Xi is a dictator in all but name now, that does not hold for the others listed in your comment.

Re: Chinese banks cause alarm as capital flight measures intensify

#187

Post by fmajid »

chaostheory wrote: post #76
andy_ppp wrote: post #61

Earlier quoted context omitted.

The ever centralisation around one man is incredibly short sighted. The Chinese system used to be much more sophisticated, having both a very capitalistic view of the world and a very communistic view. They have completely lost half of that and even the communism will disappear if things start going wrong - all that will be left is maintaining the dictatorship at all costs.

Deng Xiaoping created the seeds of destruction for his reforms when he crushed the peaceful democracy protesters in Tiananmen. This has led to mess after mess with Jiang Zemin, leading eventually to the biggest disaster of them all: Xi In an alternate timeline, one can imagine what a democratic China would look like: - Silicon Valley would have been long overtaken by Shenzhen - Chinese media would have been a strong…

Jiang was actually very pragmatic and good for the economy, building on Deng's legacy, as was Hu.

Re: Chinese banks cause alarm as capital flight measures intensify

#188

Post by fuoqi »

andsoitis wrote: post #183
fuoqi wrote: post #112

Earlier quoted context omitted.

>because if their money is in China, they don't really own it The same can be said about money moved to the West, just with a different risk profile. As the Russian situation has shown, your property can be creatively taken away if your country of origin pisses off the US too much.

The Russians whose capital had been frozen have direct ties to and prop up Putin. I don’t think you’d be able to name a single case that isn’t T like that.

How about Arkady Volozh? He got sanctioned not because he has "direct ties to and props up Putin", but because Yandex operates in Russia and has to follow its rules.

Just look at the length of the list with sanctioned persons. Are you seriously saying that all of them have "direct ties to and prop up Putin"?

Re: Chinese banks cause alarm as capital flight measures intensify

#189

Post by andsoitis »

stevev wrote: post #90
ChemSpider wrote: post #40

Earlier quoted context omitted.

That possibility makes me really nervous. A few weeks ago I was pretty sure that Beijing would not be that stupid, and simply stick with sending tons of dual-use goods, to keep up the plausible deniability. But Chinese rockets hitting Ukrainian kids in Kyiv/Europe? That would trigger dramatic sanctions. I don't think that is priced into the current world stock market.

Well meanwhile the US is sending military aid targeting the donbas region, so what’s the difference?

> what’s the difference?

Morality.

Sending military aid to a country to defend themselves is not the same as sending aid to a country to invade another.

If this doesn't resonate, maybe this analogy does: giving a gun to a murderer is different to giving a gun to someone who is going to be murdered.

Re: Chinese banks cause alarm as capital flight measures intensify

#190

Post by mistermann »

logifail wrote: post #60
andy_ppp wrote: post #53

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Bought fully into the Russian propaganda then… you’d do well to listen to pretty much any interview by Fiona Hill and you’d quickly realise there’s nothing the US wants less than borders starting to be changed by wars; there are so many disputed lines that it could lead to conflicts all over the world. China starting a proxy war with the US and Europe is going to be extremely bad for business.

> there’s nothing the US wants less than borders starting to be changed by wars I think it's a major mistake to talk about any country as if it's one homogenous, unanimous entity. There are those in the US, and elsewhere, who stand to make a great deal of out of money from war.

>> there’s nothing the US wants less than borders starting to be changed by wars

> I think it's a major mistake to talk about any country as if it's one homogenous, unanimous entity

Not to mention mind reading! It's become so common and acceptable in our culture, we don't even realize when we're doing it anymore.

I swear, this simulation is becoming so bizarre it wouldn't even shock me if one day flood lights came on and we discovered we've been on a giant TV set this whole time.

On the brighter side though: what a show! How will it all end I wonder.

Post reply on HN