Only " Tibet Water to Xinjiang Project" can save China from severe economic&social unrest

A lot of the idle workers in the cities have already started moving back to the countryside a long time ago.
The Chinese government has also funded several secondary cities to relieve the population pressure in the primary cities.
Most of the development effort has gone there lately. Still there is plenty of evidence that larger cities lead to increased GDP/capita.
I doubt you will see the Chinese government totally abandon the development of the main cities.

China should IMHO improve its food, energy, and clean water/air sectors. To a large degree the government is doing this already.
Massive efforts into high-speed rail and electric vehicles.

Post virus period will be a huge backlash against China from Europe and US.
Belt and Road project is about bringing the goods and excess capacities through land westward and ultimately to EU.
But after the virus thing, so many European died, and perceived China action of trying to be a medical savior further fuel anger against China from UK, France and Germany. I think trade relationship with EU will not be the same.

Before, I always thought of a scenario , what happened if China can't relied upon both EU and US. What can China do?
Obviously, its own domestic consumption is not enough to absorb all those excessive capacities.

So, the obvious thinking would be less industrial over capacity and more agriculture.
But China land for agriculture is limited. Therefore I propose this "Only Tibet Water to Xinjiang Project can save China from severe economic and social unrest"

Looks like I am spot on again.

Post Virus scenario will be severe as western nations both from EU and US are cutting back from China simultaneously. Belt and Road project now looks like not withstanding.

Only creating a New China on the Western side capable of absorbing hundred of millions of people can rebalance the current industrial over capacities and stagnation.

After the current frenzy of medical supply period, China will again fall back to the hole. A new idea is needed.

yes, @tidalwave ... you are always right ... like my son always said that (not anymore though)

tidalwave said:

Post virus period will be a huge backlash against China from Europe and US.
Belt and Road project is about bringing the goods and excess capacities through land westward and ultimately to EU.
But after the virus thing, so many European died, and perceived China action of trying to be a medical savior further fuel anger against China from UK, France and Germany. I think trade relationship with EU will not be the same.

Before, I always thought of a scenario , what happened if China can't relied upon both EU and US. What can China do?
Obviously, its own domestic consumption is not enough to absorb all those excessive capacities.

So, the obvious thinking would be less industrial over capacity and more agriculture.
But China land for agriculture is limited. Therefore I propose this "Only Tibet Water to Xinjiang Project can save China from severe economic and social unrest"

Looks like I am spot on again.

Post Virus scenario will be severe as western nations both from EU and US are cutting back from China simultaneously. Belt and Road project now looks like not withstanding.

Only creating a New China on the Western side capable of absorbing hundred of millions of people can rebalance the current industrial over capacities and stagnation.

After the current frenzy of medical supply period, China will again fall back to the hole. A new idea is needed.

Click to expand...

Creating agricultural production and new cities in the interior isn't a solution.

Agricultural employment and GDP is only 1-2% of a modern economy.

Plus new cities in the isolated interior will suffer from very high transport costs.
And they won't be big enough to sustain a competitive knowledge/industrial/innovation cluster.

The solution to the problem (a loss of USA/Europe) is still the Belt and Road Initiative.

---

But we'll have to see what the world looks like in 2 years time.

In terms of the USA, relations are going to go downhill anyway as it sees China as a rival that threatens them in every domain.

In terms of Europe, it is going to be even more divided internally between nations. But overall, there will be a more skeptical/hostile attitude to China. However, that attitude is going to manifest as anti-Americanism at the same time.

Maybe a solution should be to delete a Hukou? Big cities will get the workforce they need.

AndrewS said:

Creating agricultural production and new cities in the interior isn't a solution.

Agricultural employment and GDP is only 1-2% of a modern economy.

Plus new cities in the isolated interior will suffer from very high transport costs.
And they won't be big enough to sustain a competitive knowledge/industrial/innovation cluster.

The solution to the problem (a loss of USA/Europe) is still the Belt and Road Initiative.

---

But we'll have to see what the world looks like in 2 years time.

In terms of the USA, relations are going to go downhill anyway as it sees China as a rival that threatens them in every domain.

In terms of Europe, it is going to be even more divided internally between nations. But overall, there will be a more skeptical/hostile attitude to China. However, that attitude is going to manifest as anti-Americanism at the same time.

Click to expand...

Creating a second min China on western side is more than just agriculture. There will new cities and cluster , infrastructure forming.
competitive knowledge/industrial/innovation can be transferred and redistributed.

If you said the transportation cost inside China is high, what's Belt and Road transportation cost compared?

The bottomline of the ability to put every capable person to work and abundance of food so no body will get hungry inside China that alone will solve alot of problem regardless of other factors.

tidalwave said:

Creating a second min China on western side is more than just agriculture. There will new cities and cluster , infrastructure forming.
competitive knowledge/industrial/innovation can be transferred and redistributed.

If you said the transportation cost inside China is high, what's Belt and Road transportation cost compared?

The bottomline of the ability to put every capable person to work and abundance of food so no body will get hungry inside China that alone will solve alot of problem regardless of other factors.

Click to expand...

No one is really getting hungry in China now. Agriculture is a necessity but a poor value added industry. Also too much food creates its own health problems like diabetics etc.

Remember that what in Tibet is also limited, the glaciers are expected to be mostly gone in a 100 years (I don't actually believe that because it is based on a linear projection). Then what will water the cities and farms in Xinjiang? The reason cities are where they are is beacuse they had water there for 1000s of years.

If you want China to focus on agriculture then it is value added agriculture they should focus on. Reduce farming pollution, increase yield per acre, higher value products, and adding value to products (wine vs grapes).

tidalwave said:

Creating a second min China on western side is more than just agriculture. There will new cities and cluster , infrastructure forming.
competitive knowledge/industrial/innovation can be transferred and redistributed.

If you said the transportation cost inside China is high, what's Belt and Road transportation cost compared?

The bottomline of the ability to put every capable person to work and abundance of food so no body will get hungry inside China that alone will solve alot of problem regardless of other factors.

Click to expand...

If you want to build new cities in China on completely empty land, you're better off with the empty grasslands of Inner Mongolia, instead of the Xinjiang deserts in the distant West.

Inner Mongolia does actually get some rainfall, and it is only 500km to Tianjin seaport or 400km to Beijing.

Transportation costs by railway or road are so much higher than by sea.
So if you're close to a seaport, you can plug into the global trading network.
It's cheaper to send a container from China to Europe/USA, than from China to Xinjiang.

The Datong-Qinhuangdao freight railway is another example.
400million tonnes of coal is sent from Central China to Qinhuangdao port. Then it is shipped mainly to South China.
They do it this way, because rail transport direct from Central China to South China is much more expensive.

Belt and Road Initiative is mainly about the seaports and connectivity to billions of consumers along the way.
The railways and roads from China to Central Asia are secondary - because of rail transport costs and the lack of population in these areas.

Food is not such an issue. As I mentioned before, agriculture is only 1-2% of a modern economy.

ILikeChina said:

Maybe a solution should be to delete a Hukou? Big cities will get the workforce they need.

Click to expand...

My understanding is that this has already happened for many cities in China already.

It's not about getting the workforce.

AndrewS said:

If you want to build new cities in China on completely empty land, you're better off with the empty grasslands of Inner Mongolia, instead of the Xinjiang deserts in the distant West.

Inner Mongolia does actually get some rainfall, and it is only 500km to Tianjin seaport or 400km to Beijing.

Transportation costs by railway or road are so much higher than by sea.
So if you're close to a seaport, you can plug into the global trading network.
It's cheaper to send a container from China to Europe/USA, than from China to Xinjiang.

The Datong-Qinhuangdao freight railway is another example.
400million tonnes of coal is sent from Central China to Qinhuangdao port. Then it is shipped mainly to South China.
They do it this way, because rail transport direct from Central China to South China is much more expensive.

Belt and Road Initiative is mainly about the seaports and connectivity to billions of consumers along the way.
The railways and roads from China to Central Asia are secondary - because of rail transport costs and the lack of population in these areas.

Food is not such an issue. As I mentioned before, agriculture is only 1-2% of a modern economy.

Click to expand...

Agree that food is not an issues anymore from China, but remember that China import the majority of soy bean even I know most of them is for animal feed.

Food/agriculture is a strategic industry, China must protect them and keep the 95% food self-sufficiency ratio intact. When a crisis happen, nobody would export their food to anybody (which is understandable), including of course the USA.

About a month ago, Vietnam banned all rice export ... if you relay on rice import from Vietnam, you would be in big trouble. Thats why Japan want to have domestic rice still intact, even probably 5x more expensive than international price and Japan very much ~100% self-sufficient in rice.

Singapore, Hongkong, Middle East countries, some African countries and some others would be in big trouble if we had big crisis that no grains/foods can be imported

Japan’s food self-sufficiency ratio on calories basis was 79 per cent in 1960 and had declined continuously reaching 39 per cent in 2015


China's overall food self-sufficiency is likely to fall from 94.5% in 2015 to around 91% by 2025


This is good picture of China's self-sufficiency