Chinese Economics Thread

hydrogenpi

Junior Member
Registered Member
So it seems increasingly likely this COVID19 epidemic is going full pandemic at this point. Even though China was the first to get hit and the country to get hit the hardest by far, it appears China is on path for a good recovery, at least from the disease itself... Global supply chains and JIT inventory logistics etc are for sure very intricate with lots of codependencies. The longer they are surpressed the harder it would be to restart without sustaining substantial damage. An analogy would be the brain and its billion of neurons and synapses and connections etc, if it goes without oxygen for more than five minutes then it deteriorate to a point where it cannot be recovered as too many of the nuerons have died out and the countless connections are lost, never to be rebuilt again.

We know that there is a battle going on in terms of economic trade war, tariffs, sanctions, and in this East versus West geopolitical hegemony tug of war the US has been trying very hard to convinence its allies and partners to isolate China be it with the anti-Huawei 5G campaign it has waged against China or something else.

While in terms of COVID19, though China may be the first to recover, it appears many if not most of the smaller nations in Europe and the rest of Asia will be likewise affected (though not to the extent that China had to suffer) and would have to go through a similiar cycle or process themselves. If so, it would seem that at least for a period of time (maybe one or two quarters) there will be almost a total shutdown of global trade.

Another analogy is the saying that it is hard to reroute a flowing river, in that trying to carve a new path for a river that is already rushing with water is exponentially more difficult than waiting until the river has depleted most of its water and the flow has slowed to a tricke, then it becomes much easier to reroute or bypass. Once the economics and trade of the nations of the world recover one by one and slowly come back to life, wouldn't it be reasonable to presume that America will be waiting in the wings to recruit them and take advantage of this golden window of oppurtunity to rewrite the rules and reroute the global supply chain in favor of the Western bloc? These sorts of alliances are more easy to sway/change when the deeply rooted impediments (the economic dependencies of complex trade systems prior to COVID19 etc that had largely involved China at center) have been largely dissolved. For example say Italy totally gets ravaged by COVID19 and basically economically goes offline for a year, and wouldn't be in a position to deploy 5G with Huawei even if it wanted to, but by the time it comes back online and starts opening to the world again, America would have built its own 5G and this time around Italy would be made much easier to say No to China/Huawei and yes to the USA.

I don't see a good way for China to counter this strategy if this US were to employ such a strategy to contain China's peaceful rise and to influence its trading partners to switch sides... But no matter what, it is more important than ever before for China to seek ways to become truly self-sufficent, this is not to say China should close its door nor become isolationists again, but that it needs to be self-sufficent to the point that even if America managed to isolate China and convinence a good portion of the world to bypass China that China could still survive and thrive. With over 4 times the population of the United States, if China was to refocus and shift its priorities on internal development of its own internal consumerism instead of giving free things to the US in exchange for fiat petrodollars etc then it would set a model for the rest of the world that has suffered US sanctions to switch to the Chinese side as an alternative geopolitical ecosystem... then at least China can still enjoy some of the economics of scale that comes with first being self sufficent but then secondly exporting that sufficiency to the rest of the world whom wants the China alternative to an increasingly hostile America hegemony...

Many have said that it was China whom saved the US during the 2008 great recession crisis, of course China did it for its own reasons to be able to have a market to sell to, but surely both sides have realized by now that decoupling is inevitable and its bound to happen at some point sooner rather than later, and if that is the case, and if 2020 ends up being another 2008, I see China fighting for its own survival this time around and won't come to the rescue to prop up America again.
 

manqiangrexue

Brigadier
For example say Italy totally gets ravaged by COVID19 and basically economically goes offline for a year, and wouldn't be in a position to deploy 5G with Huawei even if it wanted to, but by the time it comes back online and starts opening to the world again, America would have built its own 5G and this time around Italy would be made much easier to say No to China/Huawei and yes to the USA.

I don't see a good way for China to counter this strategy if this US were to employ such a strategy to contain China's peaceful rise and to influence its trading partners to switch sides...
For a year?? Why would it last that long? Also, virus is one thing but telecom is needed nonetheless. You think America will have its own competitor to Huawei in a year?? LOL Maybe there needs to be couple of real plagues one after the other for your situation to even have merit. Right now, American efforts to rival Huawei are divided between one group that wants to invest ridiculously low amounts of money (like in the millions as compared to billions that Huawei spends) into US companies to do it and another group saying that's nonsense and the only way would be to buy majority stake in Nokia/Ericsson. In a year, it's doubtful they'll even have decided which stupid strategy to fail with.
 

AndrewS

Brigadier
Registered Member
So it seems increasingly likely this COVID19 epidemic is going full pandemic at this point. Even though China was the first to get hit and the country to get hit the hardest by far, it appears China is on path for a good recovery, at least from the disease itself... Global supply chains and JIT inventory logistics etc are for sure very intricate with lots of codependencies. The longer they are surpressed the harder it would be to restart without sustaining substantial damage. An analogy would be the brain and its billion of neurons and synapses and connections etc, if it goes without oxygen for more than five minutes then it deteriorate to a point where it cannot be recovered as too many of the nuerons have died out and the countless connections are lost, never to be rebuilt again.

We know that there is a battle going on in terms of economic trade war, tariffs, sanctions, and in this East versus West geopolitical hegemony tug of war the US has been trying very hard to convinence its allies and partners to isolate China be it with the anti-Huawei 5G campaign it has waged against China or something else.

While in terms of COVID19, though China may be the first to recover, it appears many if not most of the smaller nations in Europe and the rest of Asia will be likewise affected (though not to the extent that China had to suffer) and would have to go through a similiar cycle or process themselves. If so, it would seem that at least for a period of time (maybe one or two quarters) there will be almost a total shutdown of global trade.

Another analogy is the saying that it is hard to reroute a flowing river, in that trying to carve a new path for a river that is already rushing with water is exponentially more difficult than waiting until the river has depleted most of its water and the flow has slowed to a tricke, then it becomes much easier to reroute or bypass. Once the economics and trade of the nations of the world recover one by one and slowly come back to life, wouldn't it be reasonable to presume that America will be waiting in the wings to recruit them and take advantage of this golden window of oppurtunity to rewrite the rules and reroute the global supply chain in favor of the Western bloc? These sorts of alliances are more easy to sway/change when the deeply rooted impediments (the economic dependencies of complex trade systems prior to COVID19 etc that had largely involved China at center) have been largely dissolved. For example say Italy totally gets ravaged by COVID19 and basically economically goes offline for a year, and wouldn't be in a position to deploy 5G with Huawei even if it wanted to, but by the time it comes back online and starts opening to the world again, America would have built its own 5G and this time around Italy would be made much easier to say No to China/Huawei and yes to the USA.

I don't see a good way for China to counter this strategy if this US were to employ such a strategy to contain China's peaceful rise and to influence its trading partners to switch sides... But no matter what, it is more important than ever before for China to seek ways to become truly self-sufficent, this is not to say China should close its door nor become isolationists again, but that it needs to be self-sufficent to the point that even if America managed to isolate China and convinence a good portion of the world to bypass China that China could still survive and thrive. With over 4 times the population of the United States, if China was to refocus and shift its priorities on internal development of its own internal consumerism instead of giving free things to the US in exchange for fiat petrodollars etc then it would set a model for the rest of the world that has suffered US sanctions to switch to the Chinese side as an alternative geopolitical ecosystem... then at least China can still enjoy some of the economics of scale that comes with first being self sufficent but then secondly exporting that sufficiency to the rest of the world whom wants the China alternative to an increasingly hostile America hegemony...

So what happens in 1 year's time?

Let's look at the semiconductor industry as a representative example.

Last year, China accounted for more semiconductor usage than the rest of the world combined.
Roughly half was for domestic consumption inside China.
The other half was for re-export overseas.

Companies are still going to need a China-specific supply chain to serve China.
Yes, they can diversity with a secondary supply chain, but this will likely be more expensive and will take more than a year to do.

But the China supply chain will be faster, lower cost etc, and will tend to outcompete the secondary supply chain anyway.
 

AndrewS

Brigadier
Registered Member
@hydrogenpi

Thinking about it, the Coronavirus represents a huge opportunity for a Chinese company like Alibaba.

In China, they've already deployed:
1. Algorithms to diagnose the Coronavirus via CT Scan
2. A mobile health app which has 100,000 doctors available for coronavirus consultations
3. A mobile warning app which let's you know your coronavirus risk status (Red/Amber/Green)

These are all very useful globally, so we're talking about potentially billions of users outside of China.

Then those users would need to pay for medical goods and services, which would be done through Alibaba's Alipay.
Alipay then leads Aliexpress ecommerce, food delivery, ride sharing etc etc etc

---
So if I were Alibaba, I'd be rapidly testing and scaling up these applications for deployment all over the world, in the next year.

I expect there will be countless other Chinese companies which will be at the forefront of anti-coronavirus technologies.
 

hydrogenpi

Junior Member
Registered Member
I think one silver lining of this whole ordeal is the refocus on work-from-home or remote-work. More and more jobs can be done remotely on a laptop or phone, there is no need for these jobs to be "in the office". Japan has a culture that is focused on being "in the office", and for a while some years back in the US there was supposed to be a "work from home" revolution but that never happened due to employers not trusting employyes to do the right things. But remote distant learning and working from home should and must be a trend of the future for China.

Another refocus is AI and automation and robotics especially as it pertains to the critical infrastructure of CHina and upkeeping and maintaining things like growing food, utilities, and as much robotic manufacturing as possible. More and more productivity can and should be automated away and taken off the burden of human mental or physical labor.

Andrew Yang had the right idea about UBI but the political system in America would never allow its adoption. I think some version of UBI could be beneficial to China as the demographic ages and as more and more jobs will inevitably be replaced by AI/robotics and automation. This is a good thing, however a system and governence such as China is uniquely capable of making it work whereas UBI would never work in America. If Xi wants to lift the remaining 2% out of poverty this year, he just has to give them a UBI to do this... Given the effects of the COVID19 outbreak hitting China the hardest by far, during recovery there will be need for some form of stimilus package and what better way than to do it "bottoms up" by also giving money directly to the people as part of China recovery from COVID. How about sell off some of the US dollars China has been holding to accomplish thing.

As AI/automation adoption really takes off, this will have ultimately the effect of reducing the cost of labor down to zero, or rather replaced with the capitial costs of automation machinery and the electric/power costs of running these sytems. So its possible that globalization will reverse, because there would be no way that cheap labor of offshoring and outsourcing could complete with AI. Manufacturing and a lot of economic activity will once again be localized again, and with advances in 3dprinting and other technologies the reliance on the global supply chain is going to get reduced. This is why I don't think India is going to become the next China, at least not by going the same route that gave China success. No longer can a poor nation bootstrap itself out of poverty by the cheap labor technique. No human labor no matter how cheap can compare or compete with AI anymore ...

This is why China most focus strategically on high tech. There is no future for cheap labor. High tech /AI /automation is where it is at and will the wealth production will be even more so in the future.
 

hydrogenpi

Junior Member
Registered Member
Here is a thought experiment on UBI (Universal Basic Income). Pretend hypothetically that we had Star Trek or even "Q" technology (not Q-anon but the omnipotent Q species as depicted in Star Trek franchise that could manipulate directly the entire continuum of space and time itself etc) and during every employed adult's "working hours" some all-powerful God-like AI was able to replicate an exact copy of each person, identical up to the moment of copying, and but it would just be a hologram copy and not flesh and body, and this holographic copy of ourselves would replace us and go on and do the work that we otherwise would have done for the entire period of our work shift, and the hologram would be turned off, and it would cease to exists once the work shift was over, and the entire process repeats again the next working day, forever. Under such a scenario, the exact amounts of good and services produced, and GDP or whatever metrics used would remain exactly identical on a personal level and also indistinguishable on a national level. Nothing would have changed, the holograms don't mind, in fact aren't even aware and are none the wiser, and no one is going to complain that someone else is doing less work or that it is a "communistic" society because guess what everyone's holographic copy are always carrying on as usual as if nothing had ever changed.

So under this thought experiment scenario it wouldn't be a redistribution of wealth or resources or transfer of labor or time from the rich to the poor, and it wouldn't be trickle up nor trickle down... very simply everyone would be freed from ever having to ever work again, and relinquished from having to shoulder the burden of the number of hours they were sacrificing from what otherwise would have been their "free time", and from the nature and type of work they otherwise would have to continue to do and in fact were doing priorly. Essentially everyone would get back about the rough equivalent of an extra 40 hours a week every week for the rest of their lives. This would be the most ideal form of a true "freedom dividend" in that we are given back perhaps one of the most previous and certainly the most irreplaceable human resource ever, our youth, our energy and our time.

Given a society or civilization with significantly advanced technology I don't see how the above scenario wouldn't be realistically possible to implement. In fact the analogy is just to set an example, in reality it would be far easier than replicating holographic workers to fly planes, drive trucks, crunch numbers, etc etc and any society with sufficient technology could simply use advanced AI (which we are already half way there) to perform all the related labor, work and tasks, and in a such a fully automated society the AI would be far more effective and efficient than any possible manned counterpart workforce could ever hope to become, etc.

Imagine again this time we already have such an automated society with AI producing full abundance of all goods and services anyone could ever need, it has solved the deepest mysteries and found the unifying theory of everything and mastered nuclear fusion for a source of almost limitless energy and other things that reverse the tide of pollution and climate change and removed all disease and scarcity in the world... so in such a state of abundance let’s say ever living human being is gifted an allotment of the purchasing power equivalent of about $100,000 (USD in 2020) money/resources free to spend or save however they wanted.

In this world, on such a planet, we could still have 'capitalism' where everyone starts at a baseline of $100,000/year. This is more than sufficient for anyone to live a rather comfortable and easy life, and gives them all the time in the world to pursue intrinsic hobbies and passions subjective and unique to each individual. Everyone is in abundance forever but this doesn't set any caps and it doesn't mean that all members of society would end up at the same level of abundance. For example when everyone is untethered from the chains of having to work to make money in order to survive and thrive and make ends meet etc we can dramatically shift our notion of 'work' (if we were still to want to even call it that) and other meaningful activities and processes to include things like art, singing, making decorations or just photography and creativity and a million other different things that in our current society doesn't make money (and even when it does it is a brutal tiny slice of 'winner takes all' at the very top of the global pyramid)... people can then freely trade their art for other's art and there would be an environment where even the most niche of niches could survive and thrive (since basic necessities are always taken care of etc) and no longer is it tied to the constraints of having to be positive ROI, or metrics like the bottom line, paying back loans, appeasing shareholders etc... So even in such a UBI world it could still be extremely capitalistic in that the more popular work products would get more attention and so even in such a world we would still have "successful businessmen" or very popular and rich artists and athletes and celebrities etc... (even though everyone gets the same $100k a year, and starts out equal, it doesn’t mean there would be variations in net worth depending upon influx and outflow, since some people will simply be more popular than others) but at the same time, no one has to make it to the top in order just to survive and sustain their passions, for example if you loved baking but no one ever bought your goods, if you truly enjoyed the subjective intrinsic act of baking cakes or whatever, you could keep on doing that even if you were baking just for yourself as a form of art or to pass the time. If you love sports you could be a football player even if your team wasn’t even professional level and the rest of the world aren’t lining up to pay tickets to see you play etc. To me this is the true freedom of UBI in an advanced AI society. This is what it means to have real abundance.
 

AssassinsMace

Lieutenant General
Why would their be holographic replicas of real people? If that technology existed, you can have holographic nothings doing all the work. You ever hear you're only as strong as your weakest link? So why need to replicate a real person with all their differing and varying flaws when this technology can create a super holographic being to do the job? Technology is about efficiency. Your idea is taking the long way around when technology is about finding the shortest possible way from point A to point B. If that kind of technology existed, your idea would be in the realm of going way off course meaning not an efficient use of technology.

There are things money can't buy or technology can't create. Some people just want power. Does a rapist rape because he wants sex? Will just creating a holographic human being or having a woman volunteer to have sex with him satisfy his urges? No, because rape is about power over another human being not about sex. They get off forcing people to do what they want them to do and the key point is it's against their will. That's where conflict will arise.
 

AndrewS

Brigadier
Registered Member
I think one silver lining of this whole ordeal is the refocus on work-from-home or remote-work. More and more jobs can be done remotely on a laptop or phone, there is no need for these jobs to be "in the office". Japan has a culture that is focused on being "in the office", and for a while some years back in the US there was supposed to be a "work from home" revolution but that never happened due to employers not trusting employyes to do the right things. But remote distant learning and working from home should and must be a trend of the future for China.

Another refocus is AI and automation and robotics especially as it pertains to the critical infrastructure of CHina and upkeeping and maintaining things like growing food, utilities, and as much robotic manufacturing as possible. More and more productivity can and should be automated away and taken off the burden of human mental or physical labor.

Andrew Yang had the right idea about UBI but the political system in America would never allow its adoption. I think some version of UBI could be beneficial to China as the demographic ages and as more and more jobs will inevitably be replaced by AI/robotics and automation. This is a good thing, however a system and governence such as China is uniquely capable of making it work whereas UBI would never work in America. If Xi wants to lift the remaining 2% out of poverty this year, he just has to give them a UBI to do this... Given the effects of the COVID19 outbreak hitting China the hardest by far, during recovery there will be need for some form of stimilus package and what better way than to do it "bottoms up" by also giving money directly to the people as part of China recovery from COVID. How about sell off some of the US dollars China has been holding to accomplish thing.

I'm not opposed to direct cash transfers for the poorest, but they should be tied to some sort of activity around health or education etc.

I think Bolsa Familia is a model worth studying.
Please, Log in or Register to view URLs content!

As AI/automation adoption really takes off, this will have ultimately the effect of reducing the cost of labor down to zero, or rather replaced with the capitial costs of automation machinery and the electric/power costs of running these sytems. So its possible that globalization will reverse, because there would be no way that cheap labor of offshoring and outsourcing could complete with AI. Manufacturing and a lot of economic activity will once again be localized again, and with advances in 3dprinting and other technologies the reliance on the global supply chain is going to get reduced. This is why I don't think India is going to become the next China, at least not by going the same route that gave China success. No longer can a poor nation bootstrap itself out of poverty by the cheap labor technique. No human labor no matter how cheap can compare or compete with AI anymore ...

This is why China most focus strategically on high tech. There is no future for cheap labor. High tech /AI /automation is where it is at and will the wealth production will be even more so in the future.

Yes, manufacturing will become a lot more local in an age of AI and robots.

But the overall supply chain still matters, because certain steps in the production process are best concentrated.
So to minimise overall transport costs, supply chain clusters will still exist.
 
Top