If you only compare middle-income countries, China blows away every other country out of the water in terms of % of GDP devoted to R&D spending.
But yes, R&D spending takes some time before the results appear.
Chinese Economics Thread
- Thread starter Norfolk
- Start date
If you only compare middle-income countries, China blows away every other country out of the water in terms of % of GDP devoted to R&D spending.
But yes, R&D spending takes some time before the results appear.
If China does not internationalize its RMB, then US can still print money freely, with RMB in digital form, US printing money will slow or it will get a high inflation. The power of US is USD, which must be challenged first .
Yeah, I more or less agree with that, as far as China is concerned.
Restrictions on the capital account probably has nothing to do with Chinese consumers and consumption.
I don't want to sound racist, but Chinese are cheap.
Also, most Chinese live in apartment blocks, whereas Americans live in houses. You can fill the house will a lot more junk than the apartment.
Guess we can call that built in cultural reasons and structural reasons, heh, why Chinese consumption does not accelerate to American levels, but we probably should not expect that.
Chinese love to travel, maybe that goes into pushing up the consumption numbers. Education is consumption, but bit taboo to charge the poor.
China should try to develop more of an entertainment industry, have funds spent on that. But that is another structural reason in the way, the propaganda department.
At this point in China's development, very tough seeing manufacturing (factory wealths) pushing consumption up.
The best idea lately seems to be the DCEP - everyone gets $10 bucks and you must spend it by a certain time, that means instant consumption, along with fighting price deflation.
Give credit to CCP to think up something this diabolical, totally against the standard rules ... bwahahahahaha!
Yeah, I more or less agree with that, as far as China is concerned.
Restrictions on the capital account probably has nothing to do with Chinese consumers and consumption.
I don't want to sound racist, but Chinese are cheap.
Also, most Chinese live in apartment blocks, whereas Americans live in houses. You can fill the house will a lot more junk than the apartment.
Guess we can call that built in cultural reasons and structural reasons, heh, why Chinese consumption does not accelerate to American levels, but we probably should not expect that.
Chinese love to travel, maybe that goes into pushing up the consumption numbers. Education is consumption, but bit taboo to charge the poor.
China should try to develop more of an entertainment industry, have funds spent on that. But that is another structural reason in the way, the propaganda department.
At this point in China's development, very tough seeing manufacturing (factory wealths) pushing consumption up.
The best idea lately seems to be the DCEP - everyone gets $10 bucks and you must spend it by a certain time, that means instant consumption, along with fighting price deflation.
Give credit to CCP to think up something this diabolical, totally against the standard rules ... bwahahahahaha!
Honestly, it would be a mistake if China based its economy on mindless materialism and consumption like the US.
And I agree that China will develop more of a utilitarian consumption mindset. I think it will be more like Germany or Japan in that regard.
That said, there are still 600 million people in China living on less than $10 per day.
So a doubling of their consumption is by no means excessive.
D
Deleted member 15949
Guest
Nonsense. Australia wanted to cancel the deal when it was signed, before the "economic blackmail"
Like what I said, read the whole twitter thread, total bs by Pettis.
Once Pettis was debunked at High-speed rail, he still spews this crap.
This is unsustainable and is literally the thesis behind Involution. South Korea, Japan, and Taiwan went down this route of not explicitly forcing wages or job benefits up and basically all their young people either left the country or they decided to drop out of society. Also, cratering birth rates.
We are already seeing the leading edges of this phenomenon with the rise of 内卷 as an intellectual concept and the rise of Chinese neets, return to agriculture advocates, etc.
There are intense and negative trickle down social effects that unglue society itself from thinking zero-sum hyper competition is sufficient to force people to work. If I were a mainland worker not on the high end of the scale, I'd be insanely worried if I knew someone who thought like you was in a PRC ministry level position.
Wrong on the first bolded point. Not everyone can enter a higher value add industry and you need to have wages for lower skill jobs like janitorial staff wages track with cost of living increases.
Additionally, while R&D may be a necessary pre-requisite for a high income society, it is not a sufficient replacement for wage increases. My position is largely in line with the CPC on this one and if you want to argue that the Chinese government is also stupid to put so much emphasis on consumer demand (i.e. household income) then be my guest.