| FORUM | ARCHIVE |                    | TOTAL QUIZ RESULT |


  New Posts New Posts RSS Feed - China's trade surplus a threat?
  FAQ FAQ  Forum Search   Events   Register Register  Login Login


Welcome stranger, click here to read about some of the great benefits of registering for a free account with us and joining us in our global online community.


China's trade surplus a threat?

 Post Reply Post Reply
Author
Omar al Hashim View Drop Down
WorldHistoria Master
WorldHistoria Master


Joined: 05 Jan 2006
Location: Bush Capital
Status: Offline
Points: 7830
Post Options Post Options   Thanks (0) Thanks(0)   Quote Omar al Hashim Quote  Post ReplyReply Direct Link To This Post Topic: China's trade surplus a threat?
    Posted: 20 Apr 2010 at 00:08
A threat to America I hear you think? A threat to the rest of the world?
No! I mean a threat to China.
 
It occured to me that China has a very bad history when it comes to having vastly superior trading terms with other countries. Those countries tend to get pissed off, sack ports, take costal towns, or sell illicit matierals to China in an attempt to equalise the trade.
To my knowledge, this has happened in the 8th century when Arab and Persian merchants sack Guangzhou and the 18th and 19th, in the disputes between Europe and China that lead to the Opium wars.
 
Has this occured at any other time? Has China ever established a vastly superior trading relationship that didn't end in anger? How do you think this affects the next 50 years of China's future?
Back to Top
Sponsored Links


Back to Top
Reginmund View Drop Down
Caliph
Caliph
Avatar

Joined: 08 May 2005
Location: Norway
Status: Offline
Points: 2659
Post Options Post Options   Thanks (0) Thanks(0)   Quote Reginmund Quote  Post ReplyReply Direct Link To This Post Posted: 20 Apr 2010 at 12:53

Part of the problem in the past was the uneasy relationship between Chinese civilization and trade, which was usually characterized by strict regulations, bans and stigmization of merchants. I can't say if the chicken or the hen came first, but bad experiences with trade can hardly be avoided if you keep strangling it in favour of an isolationist agrarian policy, which although stable and predictable does not have the same potential. One would assume modern China has learned from history and adopted to the world of commerce as well as anyone.

Sing, goddess, of Achilles' ruinous anger
Which brought ten thousand pains to the Achaeans,
And cast the souls of many stalwart heroes
To Hades, and their bodies to the dogs
And birds of prey
Back to Top
Omar al Hashim View Drop Down
WorldHistoria Master
WorldHistoria Master


Joined: 05 Jan 2006
Location: Bush Capital
Status: Offline
Points: 7830
Post Options Post Options   Thanks (0) Thanks(0)   Quote Omar al Hashim Quote  Post ReplyReply Direct Link To This Post Posted: 20 Apr 2010 at 23:53
Originally posted by Reginmund Reginmund wrote:

Part of the problem in the past was the uneasy relationship between Chinese civilization and trade, which was usually characterized by strict regulations, bans and stigmization of merchants. I can't say if the chicken or the hen came first, but bad experiences with trade can hardly be avoided if you keep strangling it in favour of an isolationist agrarian policy, which although stable and predictable does not have the same potential. One would assume modern China has learned from history and adopted to the world of commerce as well as anyone.

I don't think that assumption holds. If anything they are conducting trade in the same manner as they did before, albeit at a greater level. Buisness in China is still characterised by strict regulations, bans and stigmtisation of merchants (who don't wish to obey the regulations). The Chinese stilll do buisness only out of a handful of trading ports while the rest of the country remains agrian.
 
A problem that everyone acknowledges is that there is a significant and growing gap between rural china and the trading ports such as Guangzhou, Shenzen, Shanghai and Beijing. Causing signficant migration into the cities. China opened for buisness in 1978, and it is certainly within their power to close for buisness if they wished too*. I'm not certain how much china really has learnt from the past, they appear to have adapted their previous habits to modern situations (which is both good and bad)
 
 
* I mean China as a nation, if the CCP decided to do something seriously unpopular that's a different story.
Back to Top
pikeshot1600 View Drop Down
King
King


Joined: 22 Jan 2005
Status: Offline
Points: 5076
Post Options Post Options   Thanks (0) Thanks(0)   Quote pikeshot1600 Quote  Post ReplyReply Direct Link To This Post Posted: 21 Apr 2010 at 00:18
As discussed in other threads, the Chinese are no more immune from financial anomalies than is anyone else.  They are just less familiar with the effects of them.  The Chinese authorities trying to adapt historical attitudes to modern economic realities - i.e. vicious cut throat competition - and the central control of policy (leftover communist thinking), that does nothing but stifle innovation, is a combination of challenges that China will need to overcome.
 
China has a number of daunting economic challenges that will test Chinese intellect and Chinese resources going forward.  China is an environmental cess pool that will have to be dealt with sooner rather than later.  China can not continue to support 1,000,000,000 paupers indefinitely, with a central committee that has been used to ignoring the effects thereof.
 
Chinese business practices in relation to non-Chinese vendors/customers/developers have been overly concentrated on bribes - the successful business partner gets the contract because he paid for it.  Believe me, through unofficial sources I know this to be the case.
 
      
Back to Top
Al Jassas View Drop Down
King
King


Joined: 07 Aug 2007
Status: Offline
Points: 5000
Post Options Post Options   Thanks (0) Thanks(0)   Quote Al Jassas Quote  Post ReplyReply Direct Link To This Post Posted: 21 Apr 2010 at 00:25
Good God how westerners are pissed off when another country exceeds them and scenarios of doom and gloom erupt like wild fire.
 
Do you even know what is the second country in the world in terms of trade surplus? here is a hint, Germany.
 
Switzerland, the Netherlands and France too is high on the list and several other countries. Even the US with all its trade deficit is the 3rd largest exporter in the world and its largely the oil imports that tip the balance.
 
China's trade surplus (in per capita terms) is paltry compared with other developed countries plus it has been diminshing in value for years. Yet euros and especially Americans spread this doom and gloom scenarios about China to hide the real causes of their own problems like stupid taxation and financial policies as well as the effects of natural economic cycles and transitions from an industry based economy to a services based economy as Graham pointed out here several times before.
 
Al-Jassas 
Back to Top
SPQR View Drop Down
General
General
Avatar

Joined: 31 Oct 2007
Location: United States
Status: Offline
Points: 917
Post Options Post Options   Thanks (0) Thanks(0)   Quote SPQR Quote  Post ReplyReply Direct Link To This Post Posted: 21 Apr 2010 at 00:59
I agree, it gets so tiresome when I hear fellow Americans saying oh China is rising and one day they will own us and that America is on the brink of collapse.... c'mon get real, I hate it how so many Americans see China only as a threat and rule out any possible future of collaboration with them.
Nationalism is an infantile disease. It is the measles of mankind.

- Albert Einstein
Back to Top
Guests View Drop Down
Guest Group
Guest Group
Post Options Post Options   Thanks (0) Thanks(0)   Quote Guests Quote  Post ReplyReply Direct Link To This Post Posted: 21 Apr 2010 at 01:01
I would say that China's trade surplus is a threat, but not in the way Omar imagines. China is fully capable of winning a defensive war with anyone: she has nukes should things get truly out of control.

The real threat to China from her trade surplus is that the distribution of wealth has been so unequal. Very few have benefited, and those who have benefited flaunt their wealth with an ostentatiousness that would make even the best off in the western world cringe. I will never forget the last business dinner I had in China, where the company directors and symbiotic CCP officials treated us to a dinner. They sprinkled gold dust on it, and deliberately ordered three times more food than they had any intention of consuming just to show off.

The typical Chinaman is an obedient and modest creature. So I suspect they will patiently endure the increasingly grotesque distribution of wealth that results from China's favourable trading conditions and cronyist culture. But it can't last forever. This is the modern world, they have TVs and they can see for themselves how people in other countries live. If some of that wealth doesn't start to 'trickle' down, we can expect increased discontent.
Back to Top
drgonzaga View Drop Down
King
King
Avatar
Plus Ultra

Joined: 01 Oct 2005
Status: Offline
Points: 6262
Post Options Post Options   Thanks (0) Thanks(0)   Quote drgonzaga Quote  Post ReplyReply Direct Link To This Post Posted: 21 Apr 2010 at 01:13
The secret is cheap food and by that I mean essential staples guaranteeing a healthy diet for the general population. That large percentages of the American population opt for scandalous consumption (a $5 cup of coffee) is irrelevant when for $2.50 you can purchase a one pound tin of excellent bean and brew your own for a week! For $200 a month a single indivdual can enjoy everything from prime steak to a classic country breakfast as well as a variety of lunches each day. I chose that sum because not only does it represent the "safety net" [the amount fixed by the national food stamp program for an individual] but it actually is representative of a well balanced diet if you go to the "extreme" of preparing your own meals! When other countries can do that we can then begin to worry over such abstractions as the balance of trade and supposed surpluses and deficits.
Honi soit qui mal y pense
Back to Top
Guests View Drop Down
Guest Group
Guest Group
Post Options Post Options   Thanks (0) Thanks(0)   Quote Guests Quote  Post ReplyReply Direct Link To This Post Posted: 21 Apr 2010 at 01:16
Originally posted by drgonzaga drgonzaga wrote:

The secret is cheap food and by that I mean essential staples guaranteeing a healthy diet for the general population. That large percentages of the American population opt for scandalous consumption (a $5 cup of coffee) is irrelevant when for $2.50 you can purchase a one pound tin of excellent bean and brew your own for a week! For $200 a month a single indivdual can enjoy everything from prime steak to a classic country breakfast as well as a variety of lunches each day. I chose that sum because not only does it represent the "safety net" [the amount fixed by the national food stamp program for an individual] but it actually is representative of a well balanced diet if you go to the "extreme" of preparing your own meals! When other countries can do that we can then begin to worry over such abstractions as the balance of trade and supposed surpluses and deficits.


Now now, we both know that with economic enrichment comes changes in the Chinese diet. While well behind the west in terms of obesity, China is catching up. This is a far cry from the day of Mao which, for all its flaws, did ensure China's people were fit (at least when they were not dying in their millions from economic mismanagement). Like with fashion and technology, China will also orient herself towards the west when it comes to modifying her diet. To her detriment....
Back to Top
Omar al Hashim View Drop Down
WorldHistoria Master
WorldHistoria Master


Joined: 05 Jan 2006
Location: Bush Capital
Status: Offline
Points: 7830
Post Options Post Options   Thanks (0) Thanks(0)   Quote Omar al Hashim Quote  Post ReplyReply Direct Link To This Post Posted: 21 Apr 2010 at 03:41
Originally posted by pike pike wrote:

As discussed in other threads, the Chinese are no more immune from financial anomalies than is anyone else.

Yes they are. You don't need oil to run a bicycle. Worst case scenario is a long way for westerners, its how they grew up for Chinese.
Quote The Chinese authorities trying to adapt historical attitudes to modern economic realities - i.e. vicious cut throat competition - and the central control of policy (leftover communist thinking), that does nothing but stifle innovation, is a combination of challenges that China will need to overcome.

Pike, I started this thread to discuss how China's historical trade relations may affect the future. Radical capitalism such as you describe has never been a part of China's past nor present, and arguably is major combination of challeneges that the US, not China, has to overcome. The CCP model thus far has done exceptionally well in modern economic realities. That's my point really, in the past they were "too good" and "too controlled" so go attacked and undermined. Is it feisable that China is again making the same mistake and irritating its trade partners by being too good (your post probably indicates a yes)
Originally posted by CXI CXI wrote:

China is fully capable of winning a defensive war with anyone: she has nukes should things get truly out of control.
True, which probably means we're more looking at 17-18th century parallels than 19th century ones, though I did not solely mean aggressive wars. I also include underhand tactics to equalise trade such as selling opium.
Quote The typical Chinaman is an obedient and modest creature. So I suspect they will patiently endure the increasingly grotesque distribution of wealth that results from China's favourable trading conditions and cronyist culture. But it can't last forever. This is the modern world, they have TVs and they can see for themselves how people in other countries live. If some of that wealth doesn't start to 'trickle' down, we can expect increased discontent.

The little I know about Chinese politics includes that there is a divide between far left Communists, moderates, and far right capitalists in the CCP. The communists lost much influence during Deng Xioping's reign, who was a moderate. With an increasing economic gap it would seem to me likely that the leftys and communists in the CCP would gain much popular support and influence. Causing an increase in socialist policies. There is a balance between socialism and capitalism in most western democracies (excepting the US of course) a similar thing is likely to happen in China I'd expect.

Edited by Omar al Hashim - 21 Apr 2010 at 03:41
Back to Top
gcle2003 View Drop Down
WorldHistoria Master
WorldHistoria Master
Avatar
PM Honorary Member

Joined: 06 Dec 2004
Location: Luxembourg
Status: Offline
Points: 13262
Post Options Post Options   Thanks (0) Thanks(0)   Quote gcle2003 Quote  Post ReplyReply Direct Link To This Post Posted: 21 Apr 2010 at 11:03
Originally posted by pikeshot1600 pikeshot1600 wrote:

modern economic realities - i.e. vicious cut throat competition
 
Why on earth is 'vicious cutthroat competition' 'modern'? That modern markets are competitive, let alone 'viciously' so, is about as exploded a theory a theory can be.
 
Of course the pretence of viciousness suits the image of the macho executive, but it bears little resemblance to reality.
Citizen of Ankh-Morpork.

Never believe anything until it has been officially denied - Sir Humphrey Appleby, 1984.

Back to Top
pikeshot1600 View Drop Down
King
King


Joined: 22 Jan 2005
Status: Offline
Points: 5076
Post Options Post Options   Thanks (0) Thanks(0)   Quote pikeshot1600 Quote  Post ReplyReply Direct Link To This Post Posted: 21 Apr 2010 at 13:21
Omar,
 
We will see if the Chinese are immune from financial anomalies when the Shanghai real estate bubble bursts.  Unless you think bubbles are no longer anomalies and have become a normal course of events (which they may be).
 
And what does riding bicycles have to do with financial anomalies?
 
 


Edited by pikeshot1600 - 21 Apr 2010 at 15:52
Back to Top
pikeshot1600 View Drop Down
King
King


Joined: 22 Jan 2005
Status: Offline
Points: 5076
Post Options Post Options   Thanks (0) Thanks(0)   Quote pikeshot1600 Quote  Post ReplyReply Direct Link To This Post Posted: 21 Apr 2010 at 13:24
Originally posted by gcle2003 gcle2003 wrote:

Originally posted by pikeshot1600 pikeshot1600 wrote:

modern economic realities - i.e. vicious cut throat competition
 
Why on earth is 'vicious cutthroat competition' 'modern'? That modern markets are competitive, let alone 'viciously' so, is about as exploded a theory a theory can be.
 
Of course the pretence of viciousness suits the image of the macho executive, but it bears little resemblance to reality.
 
Please explain to us why modern markets are not competitive.
 
 
Back to Top
Al Jassas View Drop Down
King
King


Joined: 07 Aug 2007
Status: Offline
Points: 5000
Post Options Post Options   Thanks (0) Thanks(0)   Quote Al Jassas Quote  Post ReplyReply Direct Link To This Post Posted: 21 Apr 2010 at 15:31
Hello to you all
 
China has amongst the highest personal saving rates in the world, around 30% of disposable income. This coupled with strict financial regulation and almost no social safety net make China quite immune from major financial earthquakes and able to (as we have seen in the current financial crisis) finance the world's recovery.
 
As for the Chinese bubble bursting, the Chinese economy is still far away from financial saturation when the supply exceed the demand. China is huge, there are over a hundred cities with population over 1 million and China continues to invest in new projects attracting new capital and creating new supply-demand conditions.
 
Al-Jassas
Back to Top
pikeshot1600 View Drop Down
King
King


Joined: 22 Jan 2005
Status: Offline
Points: 5076
Post Options Post Options   Thanks (0) Thanks(0)   Quote pikeshot1600 Quote  Post ReplyReply Direct Link To This Post Posted: 21 Apr 2010 at 15:46
The mystique of oriental immunity from what affects everyone else seems to have been transferred from the Japanese to China.  Twenty years ago Japan was the engine that could, and after its real estate and banking bubbles burst, it has been in need of an overhaul since. 
 
Now the Chinese are so smart they can control supply, demand and expectations that they probably cannot keep up with?  Sorry, I am not buying that.  China is not immune; they have not yet had their teeth kicked in.  I am not hoping for it to happen, as it will have global effect, but I do think it will happen - as it has happened to every other economy, and often more than once.
 
 


Edited by pikeshot1600 - 21 Apr 2010 at 15:54
Back to Top
Al Jassas View Drop Down
King
King


Joined: 07 Aug 2007
Status: Offline
Points: 5000
Post Options Post Options   Thanks (0) Thanks(0)   Quote Al Jassas Quote  Post ReplyReply Direct Link To This Post Posted: 21 Apr 2010 at 16:09
There is a world of difference between today's China and yesterday's Japan. By the 1980s Japan was already a well developed economy that simply reached the limit of its potential. There was simply no more possible ways to invest since everyone was rich, everything that needs developing was developed and most importantly inflation was so high that people simply couldn't afford to live anymore.
 
China on the other hand still has 700 million people who are in a level of developement no better than that of Nigeria and enormous potential that has not been realised yet. Property prices when adjusted to their counterparts in the US, Japan and the EU are still quite low not to mention the still low interest rate in China that makes money supply cheap. If a bubble happens it will be a localised one and due to competition from other cities in China a general collapse in China's finances will not happen anytime soon.
 
Al-Jassas
Back to Top
Omar al Hashim View Drop Down
WorldHistoria Master
WorldHistoria Master


Joined: 05 Jan 2006
Location: Bush Capital
Status: Offline
Points: 7830
Post Options Post Options   Thanks (0) Thanks(0)   Quote Omar al Hashim Quote  Post ReplyReply Direct Link To This Post Posted: 22 Apr 2010 at 02:07

Originally posted by pike pike wrote:

We will see if the Chinese are immune from financial anomalies when the Shanghai real estate bubble bursts.  Unless you think bubbles are no longer anomalies and have become a normal course of events (which they may be).

Bubbles probably always have been normal events, but different factors make the affect of the bubble greater or worse.
I don't know about Shanghai real estate. What do you think it will do?
Quote
And what does riding bicycles have to do with financial anomalies?

The damage to the ordinary person of a financial meltdown is limited by the countries economic development. Primary Industries have some insulation from financial affects because ultimately their services are needed. Someone has to grow rice, people have to eat every day. As long as a primary industry company has sufficient fat it won't suffer from things like the GFC.
For the bulk of agriarian China away from the Special Economic Zones the only risk from a GFC style event is political instability


Pike, I don't know why your saying people think China has some magic shield. China will have its own problems caused by its own excesses- I started the thread by trying to explore some of the previous ones. It seems to me that you're more irritated that the GFC affected the USA much more than it affected China. That's true, the "global" financial crisis affected the West and Japan badly but was only a minor blip in the east. The reason for that is radically different economies and management. Not some kind of immunity. The west's excesses caused their crisis, but did not affect people with different excesses - such as China.

Back to Top
drgonzaga View Drop Down
King
King
Avatar
Plus Ultra

Joined: 01 Oct 2005
Status: Offline
Points: 6262
Post Options Post Options   Thanks (0) Thanks(0)   Quote drgonzaga Quote  Post ReplyReply Direct Link To This Post Posted: 22 Apr 2010 at 06:18
You are essentially correct, Omar, however the GFC was not what one might properly call a global financial crisis, but rather a banking debacle in which one arm of international finance was twisting the other consequent to the blurrying of distinctions between banks as holders of capital and investment traders as the conduit for paper. In some respect the crisis that should have taken place in Asia did not because the U.S. Treasury intervened in the dissolution of AIG. That tentacled behemoth--with its links to Singapore, Hong Kong and elsewhere--remains the glaring question mark...
 
 
 
 
The Pru deal is but the tip of the iceberg and one must step back in horror over the pall of silence-- as well as dead-links--disguising the mountains of policies and derivative instruments AIG shaped with Asian markets in mind.
 
Now with regard to the Chinese state itself, its acquisition of US Treasury paper can hardly be understood in terms of global finance because the Chinese Central Bank hardly participated in any of this risky trading and what capital it does have is directed at maintaining a rather old industrial plant. Nor is any fear that this ownership represents any threat to the internal economy of the United States--instead, it symbolizes an integrative interaction that makes the Chinese the least unlikely entity to wish the US economy caught a cold!
Honi soit qui mal y pense
Back to Top
gcle2003 View Drop Down
WorldHistoria Master
WorldHistoria Master
Avatar
PM Honorary Member

Joined: 06 Dec 2004
Location: Luxembourg
Status: Offline
Points: 13262
Post Options Post Options   Thanks (0) Thanks(0)   Quote gcle2003 Quote  Post ReplyReply Direct Link To This Post Posted: 22 Apr 2010 at 11:35
Originally posted by pikeshot1600 pikeshot1600 wrote:

Originally posted by gcle2003 gcle2003 wrote:

Originally posted by pikeshot1600 pikeshot1600 wrote:

modern economic realities - i.e. vicious cut throat competition
 
Why on earth is 'vicious cutthroat competition' 'modern'? That modern markets are competitive, let alone 'viciously' so, is about as exploded a theory a theory can be.
 
Of course the pretence of viciousness suits the image of the macho executive, but it bears little resemblance to reality.
 
Please explain to us why modern markets are not competitive.
Briefly, because there is more money to be made more easily with less effort and less risk through collaboration. The efforts of economic players in modern markets (just as indeed most historical markets) are primarily devoted to distorting the freedom of the market in their favour.
 
There is of course competition in the sense of producers vs consumers, employers vs employees or market actors vs regulators but that's a different sense from one producer vs another producer.
 
Non-competitive strategies include of course implicit (and sometimes explicit) price-fixing, concession of product niches, joint lobbying for instance, all of which are more beneficial to the people involved than competition. Even organised crime learnt that lesson long ago.
 
Note that this applies to relations between buyers as well as relations between sellers.
 
Citizen of Ankh-Morpork.

Never believe anything until it has been officially denied - Sir Humphrey Appleby, 1984.

Back to Top
gcle2003 View Drop Down
WorldHistoria Master
WorldHistoria Master
Avatar
PM Honorary Member

Joined: 06 Dec 2004
Location: Luxembourg
Status: Offline
Points: 13262
Post Options Post Options   Thanks (0) Thanks(0)   Quote gcle2003 Quote  Post ReplyReply Direct Link To This Post Posted: 22 Apr 2010 at 11:41
China's savings rate is in a sense immaterial. What matter is not what monetary savings are being tucked away, but what the savings are being invested in (if anything).
 
That savings equals investment is one of those 'lies-to-children', and anyway ignores the fact that not all investment has a return or is successful.
 
That said, I really don't know how China is structuriing its investment.
Citizen of Ankh-Morpork.

Never believe anything until it has been officially denied - Sir Humphrey Appleby, 1984.

Back to Top
drgonzaga View Drop Down
King
King
Avatar
Plus Ultra

Joined: 01 Oct 2005
Status: Offline
Points: 6262
Post Options Post Options   Thanks (0) Thanks(0)   Quote drgonzaga Quote  Post ReplyReply Direct Link To This Post Posted: 23 Apr 2010 at 00:11
Why, they are being totally realistic not to mention capitalistic!
 
 
What! You want detailed analyses? How unchinese...


Edited by drgonzaga - 10 Jun 2010 at 16:17
Honi soit qui mal y pense
Back to Top
Kruska View Drop Down
Housecarl
Housecarl


Joined: 10 Jun 2010
Location: Shanghai
Status: Offline
Points: 44
Post Options Post Options   Thanks (0) Thanks(0)   Quote Kruska Quote  Post ReplyReply Direct Link To This Post Posted: 10 Jun 2010 at 12:16
Originally posted by gcle2003 gcle2003 wrote:

China's savings rate is in a sense immaterial. What matter is not what monetary savings are being tucked away, but what the savings are being invested in (if anything).
 
That savings equals investment is one of those 'lies-to-children', and anyway ignores the fact that not all investment has a return or is successful.
 
That said, I really don't know how China is structuriing its investment.
Hello gcle2003,
 
Savings isn't such a big issue in China in regards to those who have $ in abundance. They and even the lower middle-class will and do purchase property - actually flats and condos. It is one of the main reasons and contributers to the ever expanding property market.
 
Most Chinese so far are not into spending much money for holiday or hobbies. Very rarely one will find a modern with arts object displayed apartment. Or an exclusive hobby and collection.
 
I would estimate that about 60% of the cash goes into property and another 30% into luxury commodities - fashion - automobiles, watches and off course LV Wink
 
Regards
Kruska
Men who goes to bed with itchy bumb, wake's up with smelly finger - Confucius?
Back to Top
gcle2003 View Drop Down
WorldHistoria Master
WorldHistoria Master
Avatar
PM Honorary Member

Joined: 06 Dec 2004
Location: Luxembourg
Status: Offline
Points: 13262
Post Options Post Options   Thanks (0) Thanks(0)   Quote gcle2003 Quote  Post ReplyReply Direct Link To This Post Posted: 10 Jun 2010 at 12:28
Doesn't sound good for the Chinese. We've seen several times, notably recently, what socking away too much money into property can do for a country.
Citizen of Ankh-Morpork.

Never believe anything until it has been officially denied - Sir Humphrey Appleby, 1984.

Back to Top
Kruska View Drop Down
Housecarl
Housecarl


Joined: 10 Jun 2010
Location: Shanghai
Status: Offline
Points: 44
Post Options Post Options   Thanks (0) Thanks(0)   Quote Kruska Quote  Post ReplyReply Direct Link To This Post Posted: 10 Jun 2010 at 13:48
Hello gcle2003,
 
well, it has been very good for the Chinese economy buildup so far, since they have not taken loans such as in Europe, USA or e.g. Asia-Thailand. I would estimate that more then 80% of the property is payed cash.
However the Chinese government is reacting towards further price increases on the property market to ease the preassue on the average population - that has difficulties to follow up on the price hikes since 2004.
The odd - or dangerous issue in China is the past lending practise from the banks. So loans could be obtained at a very easy proceedere in regards to industrial and business development. These loans then went to a large extend into the property market.
 
As such the property market is solidly financed via full cash payment, and not long term installments. Only upon a recession or weakening of the economy - some and later many persons will have to resort to selling off their property. then causing a drop in property prices - which I and millions of others wouldn't mind at all Wink - since prices have risen way beyond reality since 2004.
 
Regards
Kruska
Men who goes to bed with itchy bumb, wake's up with smelly finger - Confucius?
Back to Top
gcle2003 View Drop Down
WorldHistoria Master
WorldHistoria Master
Avatar
PM Honorary Member

Joined: 06 Dec 2004
Location: Luxembourg
Status: Offline
Points: 13262
Post Options Post Options   Thanks (0) Thanks(0)   Quote gcle2003 Quote  Post ReplyReply Direct Link To This Post Posted: 10 Jun 2010 at 15:36
My point is mostly that money spent on property is money not spent on productive investment, including education among the more normal investments
 
But like I said I don't know much about the Chinese economy, in particular what kind of fraction that private investment is of investment by the government, which I assume is a much bigger factor than it is in the west.
Citizen of Ankh-Morpork.

Never believe anything until it has been officially denied - Sir Humphrey Appleby, 1984.

Back to Top
Seko- View Drop Down
WorldHistoria Master
WorldHistoria Master
Avatar

Joined: 01 Sep 2004
Location: United States
Status: Offline
Points: 11725
Post Options Post Options   Thanks (0) Thanks(0)   Quote Seko- Quote  Post ReplyReply Direct Link To This Post Posted: 10 Jun 2010 at 18:20
Welcome to AE Kruska. Your presence is appreciated as is your perspective from China itself.

Seems there has been a contraction filling vacant buildings in your country recently. China's growth has been mercurial. As long as she continues to export in tons and not become a slave to loans she has a bright outlook. I believe the discussion over investments may be over my head yet I was always told that investing in property is more secure than market fluctuations.
Back to Top
gcle2003 View Drop Down
WorldHistoria Master
WorldHistoria Master
Avatar
PM Honorary Member

Joined: 06 Dec 2004
Location: Luxembourg
Status: Offline
Points: 13262
Post Options Post Options   Thanks (0) Thanks(0)   Quote gcle2003 Quote  Post ReplyReply Direct Link To This Post Posted: 10 Jun 2010 at 18:52
Investing in property is more seure than investing in the stock market, except when it isn't. Lik everything else it is subject to both supply and demand fluctuations.
 
True that over modern times property has been a better investment for the investor in most places most of the time, but there have been occasional drastic differences - apart from the recent experience in the US and the property slump c. 1990 in the UK, one of the worst drops was caused by ww1 in the UK. A friend of mine's father made a multimillion pound fortune out of buying up property cheap during the war. (The losers of course being the people who sold to him.)
 
There are no safe bets, not even old masters and diamonds.
 
The other point is that what is good for the investor is not necessarily good for the long-term growth of the economy. For instance money used to buy existing shares on the stock exchange is a dead loss to the economy, no better than stuffing it under the mattress.
Citizen of Ankh-Morpork.

Never believe anything until it has been officially denied - Sir Humphrey Appleby, 1984.

Back to Top
Seko- View Drop Down
WorldHistoria Master
WorldHistoria Master
Avatar

Joined: 01 Sep 2004
Location: United States
Status: Offline
Points: 11725
Post Options Post Options   Thanks (0) Thanks(0)   Quote Seko- Quote  Post ReplyReply Direct Link To This Post Posted: 10 Jun 2010 at 19:10
Indeed dear gcle2003. Duly noted. Your objective summary is most rational. Property value will have its ups and downs just like any other investment. I should have added that as an addendum to my post but you said it for me and more clearly than I would have.  
Back to Top
Kruska View Drop Down
Housecarl
Housecarl


Joined: 10 Jun 2010
Location: Shanghai
Status: Offline
Points: 44
Post Options Post Options   Thanks (0) Thanks(0)   Quote Kruska Quote  Post ReplyReply Direct Link To This Post Posted: 11 Jun 2010 at 18:11

Hello Seko and thanks for the welcome.

Wow!! 10,000 posts plus, you been busy Smile. Sorry for directing the topic too much towards property which off course were not my intensions towards this thread. I just tried to forward a picture of how the wallet of the citizens is being placed into action.

The labor costs have risen in China to a level which is actually making those low cost producers e.g. textiles or electronics seek their fortune now more towards Vietnam. The Chinese government has just announced a 10% raise towards the minimum wage, so in Shanghai now basic income adds up to about 1200 Rmb or around US$180. That is about 15% more than in 2008.

China is not pursuing anymore towards low cost industry, unless some investment is projected towards the outer-rim, e.g. Tibet, Inner-Mongolia or Xinxiang. I believe it to be a good policy and marks a separation of the Chinese economic policy from India. It is IMHO a major mistake by many European investors to build their investment- prognosis upon cheap labor in China. China and its population is still very eager to purchase European and US products and technology. A better understanding towards each other will automatically show us foreigners the huge opportunities that China offers at present and for the future.

Regards

Kruska   


Edited by Kruska - 11 Jun 2010 at 18:18
Men who goes to bed with itchy bumb, wake's up with smelly finger - Confucius?
Back to Top
Lao Tse View Drop Down
Colonel
Colonel
Avatar
Editorial Staff

Joined: 20 Jun 2012
Location: Louisville, KY
Status: Offline
Points: 678
Post Options Post Options   Thanks (0) Thanks(0)   Quote Lao Tse Quote  Post ReplyReply Direct Link To This Post Posted: 20 Jun 2012 at 10:44
All I have to say about Chinese trade is that Britain, Russia, Japan, America, Germany, and France should have stayed out of Chinese trade in the first place, then we might have be self-sufficient still and I would have a better job! China was corrupted too much with britain and their opium. Now imperialism was destroyed by the most flawed republic in history, and that so-called republic which made me fear leaveing my front door was destroyed by Japan and communism. If people continue to complain about trade with China, then have them close the factories, fill it in with ggod soil and compost, and build farms so we can be self-sufficient again!
在財富的害處,而是一件好事永遠不持續。我在和平中仅居住在新的風下。 Wei Jia Hong No harm in wealth, but a good thing doesn't last forever. I live only among peace under
Back to Top
 Post Reply Post Reply
  Share Topic   

Forum Jump Forum Permissions View Drop Down

Forum Software by Web Wiz Forums® version 11.10
Copyright ©2001-2017 Web Wiz Ltd.

This page was generated in 0.078 seconds.