81–90 of 153 posts
Earlier quoted context omitted.
If each Chinese citizen were to sell $1000 worth of yuan back to the Chinese government in return for 1000 USD, a trillion-dollar reserve would be depleted.
I don't get this. My mental image is all the toddlers of Beijing queuing at the banks, with a wad of banknotes in one hand and a pacifier in the other, unsure which one to give to the teller.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
Last I looked, China was a big export economy. So the population size is irrelevant. Look elsewhere for indicators of China's future economic growth. And never forget, that big revolutionary wave of iPhones and iPads? It came from China manufacturers. In today's world, if you only look ahead, you will be blindsided from the rear. China is not China any more.
Which markets in the world, besides the US, have a stable enough economy for China to rely on their consumption? Europe still has significant headwinds, Canada and the middle east...that's pretty obvious with $30/barrel oil prices, Russia of course not doing terribly great, capital flooding back to the US from Central and South America due to interest rates rising. Keep in mind, a lot of manufacturing is moving back…
I really really really really really hope so but man... I don't know... the Mainlanders have waayy too much money and the existing owners of multiple properties won't let the properties go anyway so we may have a stagnant period (good) for a while until either China gets better or... well, I hope the market goes down a bit :D.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
Last I looked, China was a big export economy. So the population size is irrelevant. Look elsewhere for indicators of China's future economic growth. And never forget, that big revolutionary wave of iPhones and iPads? It came from China manufacturers. In today's world, if you only look ahead, you will be blindsided from the rear. China is not China any more.
You do realize that Apple is one making the realy money from iPhones and iPads, not the contract manufacturers, right?
http://www.wsj.com/articles/foxconn-aims-to-fashion-its-own-...
Earlier quoted context omitted.
I'll guess your country isn't on this list. > Instances of the United States overthrowing, or attempting to overthrow, a foreign government since the Second World War. (* indicates successful ouster of a government) China 1949 to early 1960s Albania 1949-53 East Germany 1950s Iran 1953 * Guatemala 1954 * Costa Rica mid-1950s Syria 1956-7 Egypt 1957 Indonesia 1957-8 British Guiana 1953-64 * Iraq 1963 * North Vietnam 1…
That list is very suspect. Ukrainian government saw an overthrow by the US in 2014? Is it referring to the Ukrainian revolution[0]? This list requires some citations. [0] https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/2014_Ukrainian_revolution
http://www.amazon.com/Killing-Hope-Military-Interventions-II...
Re: Ukraine. Overthrowing a democratically-elected government is a revolution or a coup depending on who you ask. That the US favored a "transition" and was a major power broker isn't really disputed. It's interesting that there's no mention of Victoria Nuland, US ambassador to Ukraine, in that wiki article.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
> China has a big us against the world mentality. It is a typical pattern on authoritarian mentalities and regimes. You'll find the same in Russia, widely spread among the Latin American left and the supporters of far right Republican candidates (Trump & Cruz). The best to do is to "give them enough rope so that they hang themselves", unfortunately. Authoritarian, centralized and anti free trade regimes end up broken…
And yet, people will continue to praise people like Bernie Sanders. Centralizing government authority does not make the world better.
Sanders: "If an institution is too big to fail, it is too big to exist."
Government can centralize things, yes. It can also break up existing centralized markets...and increase healthy competition.
What I'm about to say is unfortunate but true. China has a big us against the world mentality. Economic "attacks" are often seen as attacks by nation states, not by individuals, and as such, directly reflect foreign policy attitudes. Language like this only adds fuel to the fire. Given the different worldview about how the world works, motivations will always be suspect. Official party mouthpieces will never view suc…
If this speculation hurts China, then some citizens US citizens have used a tool to attack and 'injure' a soverign nation. Seems like that would be our responsibilty the same way it'd be our responsibilty if we had a citizen milita that staged a raid into another country. Or it's your responsiblity if your kid breaks your neighbor's windows.
And what makes that 'seat of the pants' lawyering correct is that we're talking about soverign entities without an enforcable body of law to regulate their conduct, so we can't get off on a technicality.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
You do realize that Apple is one making the realy money from iPhones and iPads, not the contract manufacturers, right?
This is not exactly true the contract manufacturers are being paid to learn to make their own phones and they are. http://www.wsj.com/articles/foxconn-aims-to-fashion-its-own-...
Earlier quoted context omitted.
The main problem is a devalued currency stokes inflation, so consumer costs go up (so do producer costs, but that's offset by better export earnings). China is in the middle of a shift from an export-driven economy to a consumption-driven economy, part of the normal development arc of major economies. But increasing export profits at the expense of households pushes that balance in the wrong direction. For more (much…
$57 trillion in world debt is something quite unlike a savings glut. And that is just public debt, and it is growing quickly. http://www.economist.com/content/global_debt_clock But in general I agree with your overall statement... everyone talks about China's "ghost cities" as if they are some sort of quixotic or keynesian tomfoolery... but a simpler explanation is simply that China wants to urbanize and grow a middl…
China's economic growth simply isn't sustainable, and that's even if it was true growth. There isn't a top economist alive who believes China's self-reported GDP numbers aren't fudged in one way or another (source: http://www.businessinsider.com/economist-reactions-to-chinas... ). Either one of those situations (an economic slowdown, China fudging the numbers, or the more likely situation: a combination of both) make…
>China's economic growth simply isn't sustainable, and that's even if it was true growth People have been naysaying China for a while but it's kept merrily growing. Mostly it's because the Chinese tend culturally to be pro education and hard working but in China were reduced to very low incomes by Mao's communism and have since been recovering and getting back towards the kind of economy they have in Taiwan, Hong Kon…
Ironically, these unemployed million of disgruntled workers will not move into the empty buildings in the city; They'll most likely move back to the countryside. They will, however, be back in the city for protesting.