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

China's GDP Growth Pace Was Inflated for Nine Years, Study Finds

bloomberg.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

61–70 of 97 posts

Re: China's GDP Growth Pace Was Inflated for Nine Years, Study Finds

#61

Post by threatofrain »

learc83 wrote: post #54
ksec wrote: post #51

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I am not sure why you are downvoted, agree with much of it, sort of disagree with > how hard will it be to grow at 6-7% to catch up with some in the middle of nowhere countries with $20k USD GDP per capita? It seems people are now downvoting comments they don't like . You may not like the above comment, but it is hard to argue against it as they are facts. This to me, is a much bigger problem on HN right now. The qua…

>It seems people are now downvoting comments they don't like. This isn't new. It's been part of HN since the beginning. pg said this a decade ago. >I think it's ok to use the up and down arrows to express agreement. Obviously the uparrows aren't only for applauding politeness, so it seems reasonable that the downarrows aren't only for booing rudeness. Maybe he or the current mods have changed their minds since then o…

I think the best reason to downvote or upvote is because you think it will improve the community or conversation. Why and how that vote leads to a result is up to you to theorize.

It may be that if you personally upvote strong comments, you aren't doing anything interesting because you're promoting an already strong predictor, something which the community has no trouble detecting.

Re: China's GDP Growth Pace Was Inflated for Nine Years, Study Finds

#62

Post by Theodores »

threatofrain wrote: post #61
learc83 wrote: post #54

Earlier quoted context omitted.

>It seems people are now downvoting comments they don't like. This isn't new. It's been part of HN since the beginning. pg said this a decade ago. >I think it's ok to use the up and down arrows to express agreement. Obviously the uparrows aren't only for applauding politeness, so it seems reasonable that the downarrows aren't only for booing rudeness. Maybe he or the current mods have changed their minds since then o…

I think the best reason to downvote or upvote is because you think it will improve the community or conversation. Why and how that vote leads to a result is up to you to theorize. It may be that if you personally upvote strong comments, you aren't doing anything interesting because you're promoting an already strong predictor, something which the community has no trouble detecting.

Gentle reminder - all of the above comments are against the guidelines - a.k.a. the house rules.

I have learned this the hard way by being flagged on China related topics. We aren't here for a flame-war or to even mention the word 'downvoted'.

I am personally of the opinion that China are way ahead of us and that there is a tide of lazy views relating to our hard working, highly educated Chinese friends. Fun fact: the Iron Age came to China 2000 years before we think the Iron Age happened.

Hence my suggestion. Rather than take the bait or think you can make a reasoned comment in response to something ignorant, use the 'flag' button. If it breaks the house rules, flag it and it goes. In this way we can hopefully improve discourse regarding anything China related.

Re: China's GDP Growth Pace Was Inflated for Nine Years, Study Finds

#63

Post by CogitoCogito »

adventured wrote: post #57
barry-cotter wrote: post #49

Earlier quoted context omitted.

China’s territorial claims in the South China Sea are ridiculously broad. The nine dash line in particular is insane, extending into the EEZ of six other countries. China claims that entire area, not as its EEZ but as territorial waters . https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Territorial_disputes_in_the_So... > The disputes involve both maritime boundaries and islands.[8] There are several disputes, each of which involves a…

Taiwan should also obviously be added to the list of China's territorial ambitions. They're openly aggressively intent on annexing Taiwan by any means required, despite it being a separate, self-governed nation for the last half century. They're the 21st largest economy in the world. It would be by far the biggest conquering event in terms of a major nation being annexed since the WW2 era.

I can’t understand the downvotes on this post. The PRC has never controlled Taiwan and has made annexing it (with other words to hide intent) an explicit goal. Of course Taiwan is a territorial ambition of the PRC.

Re: China's GDP Growth Pace Was Inflated for Nine Years, Study Finds

#64

Post by [deleted] »

ggm wrote: post #14

The article states that the provinces have a material reason to inflate. The provincial governments are far stronger than people routinely seem to understand, we're obsessed by the strong statist arguments of 'scary China' and don't think about their internal structure and where strength and weakness lies. I believe Chinese central planners don't like misleading numbers, it makes the five year plan much harder to des…

[deleted]

Re: China's GDP Growth Pace Was Inflated for Nine Years, Study Finds

#65

Post by Kliment »

learc83 wrote: post #30

Can we do something about every article remotely ctitical of China being flagged. I'm assuming that's what happened since this article very quickly moved from 1st place to below other articles that are older and have far fewer comments and upvotes. Edit: currently #21 despite more upvotes and comments and being newer than the top 3 articles.

I didn't flag it so can't speak of the motivation of those that did but my observation is that the vast majority of China-critical articles that have dropped in rank happen to be from bloomberg. I definitely wouldn't consider bloomberg a trustworthy source when it comes to analysis of china, so I could imagine that being a motivator.

Re: China's GDP Growth Pace Was Inflated for Nine Years, Study Finds

#66

Post by wholien »

Eh, it's really actually pretty hard to calculate GDPs. Many countries can't get within 1% due to reasons, so 1.6% per year isn't that big of a difference. China also has interesting accounting systems that actually might under-count the GDP, for example the GDP calculations mostly ignore the GDP of small firms.

> Companies with annual revenue below 360k RMB (roughly 53k USD) are exempt from VAT tax and all subsequent taxes. China has more than 65 million (2017 estimate) such micro companies, often single person, or single family (two people). If you multiply the two numbers together, it is up to 3.4 trillion USD per year. Just assuming only 1/4 to 1/2 is achieved, that is a 0.85 to 1.70 trillion USD economy, roughly 7% to 14% of overall Chinese GDP will have to be estimated, and can be potentially massively under reporting.

source: https://www.reddit.com/r/Economics/comments/aycs6x/chinas_20... - I will probably look this up in the future but can't verify this comment right now.

Here's a paper from the National Bureau of Economics Research that suggests that Chinese GDP might be understated: https://www.nber.org/papers/w23323 - this paper analyzes Chinese GDP by looking at its nighttime light usage. In this vein, I've heard that government actually tries to be conservative with the numbers so as to avoid the overstatement claims, but I have 0 sources on this.

For the Brookings paper linked in the post, one big issue with it is that it didn't account for a tax-related change that happened in 2008-09. See this reddit comment for details: https://www.reddit.com/r/Economics/comments/aycs6x/chinas_20... - this means that the overstatement is still there, but probably smaller. The author of that reddit comment emailed the authors but hasn't heard back.

It does seem like everyone will take the "OMG CHINA FAKES EVERYTHING" at face value as it confirms their biases. I don't want to speak on either side of it, growing up in China we/my parents/friends all make fun of the GDP numbers and call them chicken butt (鸡的屁 sounds like GDP). Maybe the core of the issue is that no one really has transparency so it's really hard to tell for sure, so no one, domestic or foreign, trusts the numbers given by the government. If so, maybe the objective ways of doing analysis, like satellite footage on night time lights, is the way to go (not to say the article I linked is thus 100% the truth). Anyone have other ideas on what indicators, like nighttime lights, can be used here?

Re: China's GDP Growth Pace Was Inflated for Nine Years, Study Finds

#68

Post by matthewrudy »

ido wrote: post #60
dis-sys wrote: post #39

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> It is ironic that Li Keqiang is premiere (#2) but Xi Jinping has decided not to use his index ( https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Li_Keqiang_index ) that gets around fudging with more accurate statistics. Li Keqiang Index has three components, electricity consumption, railway cargo volume and bank loans. They all had pretty good growth, e.g. https://www.caixinglobal.com/2018-12-06/china-railway-corp-s... https://www.ca…

China is huge and heterogeneous - the coastal cities are well developed and there are 100s of millions of people living in Shanghai, Beijing, Hong-Kong, Shenzhen etc who are well on their way towards western level of development. For example the Yangtze River Delta has more than 100m people (more than any European country) and GPD(PPP) per capita similar to Italy: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Yangtze_River_Delta

> Millions of people living in ... Hong Kong... who are well on their way towards western level of development

Hong Kong is a developed country.

It has a public housing system, a public healthcare system, and amazing transport.

It has massive issues with income equality, and particular poverty in old age.

However, it doesn't belong in a comparison beside cities in China.

Re: China's GDP Growth Pace Was Inflated for Nine Years, Study Finds

#69

Post by dis-sys »

ido wrote: post #60
dis-sys wrote: post #39

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> It is ironic that Li Keqiang is premiere (#2) but Xi Jinping has decided not to use his index ( https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Li_Keqiang_index ) that gets around fudging with more accurate statistics. Li Keqiang Index has three components, electricity consumption, railway cargo volume and bank loans. They all had pretty good growth, e.g. https://www.caixinglobal.com/2018-12-06/china-railway-corp-s... https://www.ca…

China is huge and heterogeneous - the coastal cities are well developed and there are 100s of millions of people living in Shanghai, Beijing, Hong-Kong, Shenzhen etc who are well on their way towards western level of development. For example the Yangtze River Delta has more than 100m people (more than any European country) and GPD(PPP) per capita similar to Italy: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Yangtze_River_Delta

> For example the Yangtze River Delta has more than 100m people (more than any European country) and GPD(PPP) per capita similar to Italy

I won't make such comment by completely ignoring the wellbeings of other hundreds million people who live just a couple hours drive from the so called Yangtze River Delta. To name a few examples -

Anhui province is so poor to the extent that it is offensive to ask people questions like "so you came from Anhui?" in Shanghai.

http://www.sohu.com/a/212534231_578851

Henan province has 100 million population on its own, it is nothing really different from the least developed part of Africa.

http://www.sohu.com/a/196108368_100023515

Those are real people & real lives. How the other 100 million slightly better off Chinese living in Shanghai or Beijing doesn't change the absolute poverty suffered by those hundreds millions not living in tier-1 or tier-2 Chinese cities. Anything painting China as a rich/developed/modern/high tech country is nothing else but cheap propaganda.

Let's make it crystal clear - China's GDP per capita is below the world average. The OP article further pointed out that such reported GDP figures might be inflated as well. When the GDP per capita is below world average, how it is not a poor country significantly under developed?? The only real risk China can possibly pose to the world/west is the fact that a collapsed China can trouble the whole world/west.

When China is damn poor, it is thus much easier to develop and grow 6-7% each year. It is like cutting 1s is easy when it takes you 20-25s to run 100 meters, but it is close to impossible to do the same when you are already finishing 100 meters in 11s. China's GDP is growing 6-7% not because it is smart/modern/strong, it is the complete opposite, it is because China's GDP per capita is well below world's average!

Re: China's GDP Growth Pace Was Inflated for Nine Years, Study Finds

#70

Post by contingencies »

nradov wrote: post #55
contingencies wrote: post #31

Earlier quoted context omitted.

As an outside observer, another example would be the constant redefinition of US unemployment (I hear it is now "people who haven't actively sought work for 3 months are no longer considered unemployed") which IIRC from an article has dropped US unemployment figures. It sounds like reality may differ substantially, and there is certainly a huge underground/cash economy.

You do not recall correctly, and since the correct information is so readily available I suspect you're just lying to try and make a political point. The definition of unemployment hasn't changed in our lifetimes. https://www.bls.gov/cps/cps_htgm.htm#concepts

Err, I stand corrected. Thanks for assuming the worst of my character! I must have remembered reading some kind of article around the time summarized at https://www.americanthinker.com/articles/2011/12/os_legacy_u...
Post reply on HN