China's booming economy

File: image.jpg (62KB, 750x422px) Image search: [Google]

62KB, 750x422px

>>66899077
Confirmed by private figures as well

>>66899077
What happened to muh collapse, anons?

Only a year ago you all were claiming it would collapse.

saw the same thread yesterday and also the same second post

>>66899077
Was /int/ wrong again?

>>66899170
No one responded so I made a new one.
I just think its funny seeing /int/ellectuals forecasts proven wrong again and again.

How's your economy?

>>66899077
there is always a next time

>>66899308
Yeah after 45 years of growth I guess it would make sense for a recession to be coming?

Broken clock is right twice a day.

>>66899170
That's normal for /int/

File: image.jpg (24KB, 488x274px) Image search: [Google]

24KB, 488x274px

>inb4 debt bubble no profits

File: image.jpg (54KB, 488x370px) Image search: [Google]

54KB, 488x370px

Foreign data confirms as well

>/int/ellectuals

How can other """""economies""""" even compete?

>>66899716
Who are you and why are you in my thread?

Also, Chinese know that their economy is slowing. It's just hilarious seeing the fearmongering of a collapse because the number goes from 7 to 6.

>>66899614
This shows that foreign trade with China is picking up again. Signaling a rebound.

Maybe China's statistics are actually accurate and the doubts are overblown.

I don't seem to be triggering enoungh anons. Proper discussion is not popular on /int/.

I'll make a bait thread next time.

top kek, this pathetic OP is trying so hard

take it to /pol/ you stupid ass nigga

>>66899996
>I don't seem to be triggering enoungh anons
Because you're using shitty bait with inflated figures. Look at their electrical consumption

Better yet take this shit to /pol/ where they're stupid enough to fall for it

>>66900432
>look at their electrical consumption

Up 6% YoY.

>inflated figures
>what is the Li Keqiang index

>>66900186
>pathetic

What's pathetic is how bad /int/ "predictions" are.

>>66899077
>economy is on fire
That doesn't sound good

good for you. convenient excuses help you huh? nobody invests on China anymore though.

>>66902639
[Citation needed]

http://trade.ec.europa.eu/doclib/docs/2016/april/tradoc_154472.pdf

>>66902487
Better than it being on ice

File: coming-collapse.jpg (23KB, 420x630px) Image search: [Google]

23KB, 420x630px

>>66899343
>Yeah after 45 years of growth I guess it would make sense for a recession to be coming?

>Broken clock is right twice a day.

People have been predicting the immanent collapse of China for longer than I've been alive.

Let's face it. It just isn't going to happen.

>>66899077
>>>/pol/ not even good

>>66899077
>Implying growth can last indefinitely and without any recessions

It's retards like you that let the 2008 financial meltdown happen. China is literally having the exact same kind of insane housing bubble the US had pre-2008. Just watch this vide if you want proof.

https://youtu.be/BcyYyyaPz84

>>66899077
China is run by legions of engineers and economists, they won't collapse without a good fight

>>66899614
The overall trend here while not horrible is still a decline for China.

I for one, welcome a new commodity prices boom
I even hope Macri claims he had something to do with it. Rather have his party re-elected until the end of times than fucking p*ronism

>>66902387
>Li Keqiang
An index made by a guy who is part of the PRC government....
Yeah totally unbiased.

>>66909129
Except they are literally not.

Overall housing prices in China are up 8% this year. Since 2000 they are up 450%.
Meanwhile China's GDP rose 2400% during that time.

From 1996-2006 prices in the US rose 550%.
Meanwhile US GDP rose 25% during that time.

>>66909318
Well yeah, that's what happens when world commodity prices fall 60% and the world economy slows to 1% growth. Usually people trade less.

What matters is the fact it is back to growth after 2015 was bad for ALL countries' trade.

File: image.jpg (62KB, 750x422px) Image search: [Google]

62KB, 750x422px

>>66909405
You are showing how economically illiterate you are by this statement.

Here is a private estimate of China's economy.
It's actually outperforming the government estimates. 7%+ growth.

>>66909403
And when they collapse again he'll be out of office. Dumbass politicians in Latin Ameruca make the mistake of basing their legitimacy on commodity prices/GDP growth.

Hey look it's that 自干五 autist again

>>66910473
See China's GDP figures are smoothed.

2014-2015 were 6.5% growth years. They reported 7% growth. 2016 is a 7.5% growth year. They report 6.5% growth.

Does this mean my supply of Chinese breast milk is gonna get more expensive?

>>66910761
>my supply of Chinese breast milk
?

And yeah. China is having 10% babies so far this year. They got completely rid of the 1 child policy.

Japanese bubble economy popped around 1991, and financial crisis happened around 1998. So I think if Chinese economy were to collapse there would be an interval of about 10+ years.

>>66908386
Lol, they will be doing the same thing to India as well (if the poo in loos actually get their shit together tho).
Some people are just insecure and threatened all the time. It's hilarious to watch.

>>66908386
I don't think China is going to "collapse", but it's naive to say China will never encounter a recession. Every country goes through a recession at some point.

>>66910761
Speaking of milk, why are the Chinese so obsessed with our baby powder that they'll pay ~10x our shelf price for it?

>>66912135
Would you feed your newborn Chinese-made formula?

>>66912135
Because ever since that milk powder scandal where several babies died, Chinese are very distrustful of domestic milk powder. To Chinese, foreign brand=safe and good quality.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/2008_Chinese_milk_scandal

>>66911064
Except the Chinese are growing 7% and you guys entered permanent recession-land

>>66912351
Oh wow that explains it.
Adding another to the list of innocuous items that will kill you in China.

>>66912351
Chinese can really fucking stupid tbqh

Just fucking nurse your own baby.

>>66909405
So, The Economist journalists are part of the PRC government?

>>66912594
85% of Chinese buy domestic, and none have become ill/died since the 2008 issue.

Nonetheless, rich Chinese usually only have one kid and so they try buying the what they percieve as the highest quality stuff for that child.

>>66912657
Ignore dumbasses. They can't be helped.

The index is literally a proxy for Chinese heavy industry growth based upon 4 very visible (hard to fake) factors.

At the same time, it misses out on all services and high tech.

>>66912619
Constantly nursing your baby may not actually be possible. The mother might have problems producing enough milk, their nipples could get sore, someone is babysitting and needs to feed the infant, etc. That's why milk powder exists in the first place.

>>66912770
Yeah sorry mothers did that for 1.5 million years well enough.

Milk powder is literally for 3 reasons
1. Mother is ill
2. Mother is working all day
3. Mother is spoiled and feels like she is "above" nursing her child.

>>66912887
So you don't think Chinese may buy milk powder for reasons 1 and 2?

>>66912967
Some should. Not 40% of the population.

Asians just work wayyyy too much

>>66912887
Not sure about situation in mainland China but TV ads here are telling people "our milk powder can provide these and that to babies! Feed your babies with our milk powder!" And it's only recently that they add a line for ants in their ads to say milk powder is only a substitute/complementary to breast milk. Also, hospitals are handing out some free milk powder packages and feed newborns with milk powder which doesn't help the situation

>>66912887
People also had to use wet nurses for thousands of years.

I for one think it's an improvement that we can just buy milk powder instead of paying strange women to nurse our babies.

File: 160747wz0t97buf9l7lz5q.jpg (117KB, 1600x1082px) Image search: [Google]

117KB, 1600x1082px

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=dVqTa_hclI0

Pssssh- No tears.

Only dreams now.

Glad that I studied Chinese.


Now, brb to my paper about how the Beijing Consensus delivers more socio-economic benefits to 3rd world countries than the kike-controled Washington Consensus.

>>66913632
>Beijing Consensus

Beijing hasn't even tried pushing its own "consensus" yet. At this point, the "Beijing Consensus" is just a meme invented by Western policy wonks.

File: kicking away the ladder - or how the west became the 1st world.jpg (256KB, 580x848px) Image search: [Google]

256KB, 580x848px

>>66913824
True, but the Chinese Model is still passively gaining traction around the world, especially in 3rd world countries and countries that have suffered dearly under the dictates of Western controled international institutions. Slowly, but surely, people are waking up to the meme and "myth of opportunity" that Washington and their allies are spreading for 60+ years. Slowly but surely, people realize that the have been climbing a ladder for vain for decades, using the prescriptions of the West - all while the West has long kicked away the ladder.

I can suggest this great study by the South Korean developmental economist, that is also suitable named:

>>66912135

we're selling bottled milk from tasmania to the chinese for $10 a litre, can you believe this shit

>>66913416
Sounds very much like the US before the (strong) EPA/FDA in the 50's-60's.

>>66913421
Rich women and old women.

>>66913824
Exactly. China doesn't even care about it.

>>66914238
It'll go down now since the Chinese allowed in US milk.

>>66913999
While I agree with most criticisms of the Washington Consensus, I still think it's debatable if a "China Model" exists since Beijing currently isn't really pushing a "model" for the developing world, and instead emphasizes that China's experience suited its unique conditions. China's attitude seems to be "If you want to do business, let's do business, and we won't criticize your system". They don't seem too interested in other states learning from them.

Btw I'll check out that book, thanks for the recommendation anon!

>>66912619
In China today, both parents work to support the family while the grandparents raise their children and take care of the home.

literally propaganda

>look at this cherrypicked statistic from country I don't like let's spread it so people don't invest

American does it against China and Russia against Poland (eastern)

>>66914630
A small penis is a sign of intelligence.

Barbaric white retards won't understand.

>>66899301
Still on a thirty year plateau with no positive future.

>>66899667
hahaha

>>66912486
Japan's economy maxed out on it's tiny island. No more development left.

Plenty of development opportunities in China. Comparisons of an island of 100 million and a continent sized country is fucking ludacris.

>>66915138
>9 charts representing the economy
>all private figures

HURDUR IT IS FAKED HAHAHEHELELFJP

>>66915138
Mind explaining private estimates>>66910473
In 2015 you said the official figures were lies and the private figures were the reality.
Now you claim the private figures are wrong and "cherrypicked"? The GDP growth estimator is literally measuring the entire economy. How much less cherrypicked could it get?

>>66917040
>>66917120
>reading comprehension

>>66916797
Yeah the graph really makes you think

File: Eurostat-eurozone-GDP-2907.png (30KB, 725x313px) Image search: [Google]

30KB, 725x313px

Meanwhile in Eurocuckland.

>>66916995
To an extent you are correct, but Japan makes significantly less than Western Europe and the US in not only nominal, but also PPP terms.

It's failed economic policy that did that to Japan.

>>66917218
Eurocucks are old as fuck to be fair

>>66899077
How does China keep doing this!

>>66917338
Here's how>>66910473

>>66917330
China median age: 37
EU: 41

Not a huge difference between the two

>>66917441
Euros are older than 41 senpai

Germany itself is 51.
The youngest, France, is 39.

>>66899077
Do americans actually want China to collapse?

>>66917498
We are a jealous superpower anon.

Why do you think we are surrounding China with our military and remilitarizing Japan?

>>66917272
Yep. Abe won't change it either. They're in terminal decline.

>>66917794
Instead he waste his money on th military despite the fact nobody would invade his island, lol.

>>66917794
He's playing fireman when the entire house is on fire

I do appreciate some of what he has accomplished, but in many ways he represents the stagnation of Japan. He isn't willing or able to push through structural reform.

File: image.jpg (82KB, 615x462px) Image search: [Google]

82KB, 615x462px

>>66917952
>nobody would invade his island,

But someone already has

>>66899077
Someone explain how their economy is healthy when they have such a huge gap in nominal vs real gdp.
Wouldn't that lead to a shit ton of inflation?

>>66917987
Abe's a hardline conservative that would not change the fundamentals, when they really need a radically different politician to try to change shit.

Wouldn't work regardless. Japan has fallen from grace. Their apex was 1980.

>>66918289
>I don't know what I'm talking about

Unless you import most of your stuff, the amount of your local currency chasing the goods is all that matters.

>>66918338
>not 1990

Anon I...

Also, maybe Abe will impress us these next 3 years. Who knows. When you are in power for a long time you are able to make reforms.

The problem is that you are correct. Abe and the LDP are the party that put Japan in this stagnation. Japan needs a radical party willing to break the bureaucracy and change the system.

Abe's agenda was to temporarily boost the economy enough to get Article 9 reintepreted. He never even thought he was capable of changing the entire economic system.

Xi in China isn't all that different. Use talk of reform to gain political power.

>>66918435
When you are in power for a long time, your power slowly erodes and the people grow tired of you. I've seen this countless times with British PM's. I do not think Abe do anything extraordinary.

>>66919322
I guess. Abe has been in power for 4 years. That's a long time in Japan.

File: gni.png (86KB, 840x729px) Image search: [Google]

86KB, 840x729px

china's economy is still shit-tier
it's pretty natural for them to grow as long as they are a bit better than untermenschen

>>66917218
you honestly don't understand the differences between developing and developed. developed countries almost never grow as fast because there's no capacity building.

literally all primitive economies have had unchecked growth up until they fully industrialize and have competitive wages/standard of living as the rest of the world.

>>66913999
ha-joon chang is pretty good, he writes good starter macro-economics books.

>>66922646
Okay?

The point was that everyone was screaming collapse last year, and now China defies all expectations.

>>66922761
>literally all primitive economies have had unchecked growth up until they fully industrialize and have competitive wages/standard of living as the rest of the world.

Explain India/Pakistan/Bangladesh/MiddleEast/LatinAmerica.

>>66923328
It checks. Save for some of those being literal war zones with foreign powers fucking around, you can actually go check and see the GDP of those countries have increased a lot in the last 50 years. Way more than already developed countries. And their living conditions too. They are still shitholes but stuff like HDI, inequality, infrastructure and such have been improving steadily too.

>>66910601
Wellp, at least our current politicians seem to have more of a long term vision than Peronists.
Most foreign and national economists have said that during the last boom in the mid 2000s, Argentina as a commodities exporter had one of the best global geopolitical contexts on it's history, but the government at the time couldn't see past the next election so they let slip one of our major opportunities to develop for the last decades.
Overall, peronists just ramp up public spending, help the entrpeneurs they are friends with, and when stuff goes bad, they just start printing money. Then of course, they leave the house and the next government tends to be a non-peronist. Their solution is the good old cutting down of spending, normalization of the economy, devaluation if necesary. And suddenly, the population remembers fondly those government checks that peronists sent everywhere, and the "ebil gubment trying to take our moniz, devaluatening and fucking us poor workers. we want peronism"

I don't want this young party to go to waste because people remember our last government with the prices bubble way more than our current government that just happen to take office when the prices were down

>>66923435
Yeah but they have grown and developed far less than China, even though they all started at similar points in the 1940's.

>>66923560
At the same time, the Kirchners did better than many other president of Argentina. They brought stability, and I believe strengthened democracy (and weakened the military's grasp on politics).

Too often I hear Argentinians throw away all of 2001-2015.

Macri and his government have a longer term vision, but I somehow doubt that they will be able to implement it fully. There will be compromises along the way, and eventually the Peronists will be back in power.

It's setting up a system that remains strong and cannot be easily reversed, that really matters.

>>66918353
I never claimed to know what I was talking about.
The China shit is mainly new territory for economists anyways.
I was just gathering people's opinions on it. I thought that the gap would eventually catch up with them, and I still think that. It's not a recipe for longterm stability.

>>66899077
After discussing with some Chinese friends, they believe the spike in this index is due to the national policy on reducing stock of coal and unsold apartment in the country, which would automatically cause an increase in bank loan and transported cargo volume, two of the three main factors being used to calculate this index.
Probably we should watch these indexes for a few more seasons first, although any crashes seems unlikely to happen

>>66923672
What

If you slow coal production then railroad use will decrease which hurts the index.

>>66923672
But the reason it grew has to do with the housing strength and commodities around the world coming off their February low.

>>66923618
>They brought stability
Nah, Duhalde did that. He was the previous president to the Kirchners, implemented a bunch of stabilizing laws packages and stuff like that. The economy was already bouncing back in 2003 when Kirchner came in.
Most people regard their first 4 years as good, but after that, the good old peronism began. Shady deals, private vaults with government money, using the local intelligence agency in illegal ways, bullying the media that didn't align themselves with them, manipulated the judges that were supposed to control them, etc. One of their ministers once went to a company's voting session for stock holders with bodyguards and a couple of boxing gloves. Threatened to fight anyone who dared to vote. They also began to manipulate the local census bureau to make it seem like we had less povertry than Germany and an anual inflation of 5%. Turns out it was something like 25% povertry and 20% inflation rates.
We've had major leaks on ther corruption every month for the last year. Some people estimate that they and their friends illegally made the equivalent of an entire GDP in the 12 years they were in government.
Imagine Obama and company stealing 17 trillion dollar from the government.
As for the military's grasp on politics... they used that as their flagship, and it is kind of correct, but people lost any trust on the military back in the 80s, I feel like their "we hate the military guys" was to farm votes. Of of their croonies was a General that had charges for human rights back from said dictatorship. They made him Chief of Staff of the Army. They themselves profited a lot during that dictatorship.
Overall, I'd say they weakened our institutions strengths a lot on those years. Most political authors regard them as some of the worst we've had up to date.

>>66923722
>>66923826
Right.
http://finance.sina.cn/2016-09-26/detail-ifxwevmc5490077.d.html
Apparently, after selling away those apartment in excess, developers now have money to build more apartments, so that its demand on steel increased, and in turn lead to increase in coal demand. But coal demand was already reduced before that, so they have to increase the coal production for now to match the demand