Chinese General news resource thread

[no_name]

That looks like a neat if massive piece of work and also seems can also be modularised.

Could potentially be a tourist attraction too.

 

[kwaigonegin]

This one is funny. Obama is rallying for Made in America.

[video=youtube;T2iMeiPXy4o]http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=T2iMeiPXy4o[/video]

Now I would understand if they just didn't know but since they put an American flag over the Chinese company name and characters, they knew it was there.

OK that was embarrasing!! OTOH Gubment Motors sells more cars in China than the do the US.

 

[AssassinsMace]

Please, Log in or Register to view URLs content!

Drone mission impossible over Forbidden City, says photographer

eijing (AFP) - A New Zealand-based photographer attempting to fly a drone above Beijing's ancient Forbidden City -- which sits next to China's top-secret leadership compound -- says he has had his plans thwarted by police.

Trey Ratcliff, who used a camera attached to a remote-controlled helicopter near the popular tourist site and former residence of China's emperors, said on his website that he was briefly detained by police.

The Forbidden City is directly next to Zhongnanhai, the high-security compound where some of China's top ruling Communist party leaders live and hold meetings. It is heavily guarded and not open to the public.

A Chinese assistant gave Ratcliff "absolutely zero help" in warning him that he was about to fly the device near top-security buildings, the photographer said.

Ratcliff was approached by a police officer who gave him a "bad vibe" and was "really harshin' my mellow" as he prepared to launch the drone over the Forbidden City, he added in the account, posted to

Please, Log in or Register to view URLs content!

on Thursday.

He was escorted to a "detention centre" and told not to fly the drone in central Beijing, he wrote, adding that he had struck up a brief rapport with several of the officers.

"Hello Nice Chinese Military Police Man! I forgot your name, but thanks for not doing bad stuff to me and stuff," Ratcliff wrote.

Pictures posted on the website showed aerial shots of Beijing landmarks including the striking headquarters of state broadcaster CCTV, designed by Dutch architect Rem Koolhaas, and Ming dynasty tombs.

"Beijing is the seat of all Chinese government power," Ratcliff admitted. "So, deciding to fly a drone over China is kind of like Luke Skywalker deciding to ride his landspeeder on the Death Star."

This guy's choice of words says he was a trouble-maker and not naïve. And he wasn't treated extremely so why is this even a story if the guy wasn't seeking publicity? Yeah like he would be treated different if he were flying a drone around DC?

 

[Equation]

This guy's choice of words says he was a trouble-maker and not naïve. And he wasn't treated extremely so why is this even a story if the guy wasn't seeking publicity? Yeah like he would be treated different if he were flying a drone around DC?

The guy is an idiot and was looking for public exposure. Of course some media pundits will look at him as hero for making such a "daring" attempt in the face of such "hostile police" state capital, when common sense says it's a security liability no matter what country you're in.

 

[Blackstone]

The Economists has an article on another potential Hong Kong-China showdown. It's an interesting read on its view on the "one country, two systems" arrangement. Given The Economists' self-admitted bias for greater (total?) Hong Kong autonomy, it's not surprising the article frames China as the oppressor.

Please, Log in or Register to view URLs content!

OR years after the return of Hong Kong to Chinese sovereignty in 1997, China’s leaders surprised the world by adhering scrupulously to Hong Kong’s unusual political set-up of “one country, two systems”. Under the terms of the handover, Hong Kong was to retain a high degree of autonomy for 50 years, an ingenious solution for reintegration of a former colony. In recent years, however, party leaders in Beijing have become less respectful of that system, and that is stirring up resentment.

On June 22nd a protest group called Occupy Central will hold an informal referendum on Hong Kong’s politics. Since 1997 Hong Kong’s chief executive has been chosen by a hand-picked committee of 1,200 local worthies, all friends of Beijing. China has promised that in 2017 the choice will be by “universal suffrage”, but it still insists that the candidates must be chosen by the worthies. This weekend’s referendum offers voters three choices, all of which give Hong Kongers the right to choose the candidates. Occupy Central says it will promote the most popular option. China has said none is acceptable.

To add spice to all this, the regime in Beijing has issued a white paper reminding the territory that Hong Kong’s “autonomy” is entirely at the discretion of China’s leaders. It adds that the judiciary is part of the government and has a “basic political requirement” to “be patriotic”. That flies in the face of Hong Kong’s independent judiciary and its common-law, English legal system. The response of many Hong Kongers has been more angry than at anything since 1997. Occupy Central has threatened to bring the business district to a standstill.

It will come as no great surprise that this newspaper thinks the chief executive should be chosen democratically. The Beijing government would have done better to stick to its original promise, not least because in a free election Hong Kongers would have probably chosen a pro-China candidate anyway. Now that such an election is an impossibility, both sides should be looking for a way to climb down.

When a panda throws its weight around
For the democracy activists, that means accepting that most Hong Kongers are pragmatists. However suspicious they are of the Communist Party, they are also disinclined to back radical street politics. Hong Kong is still freer (and richer) than the rest of China. Provoking a clampdown hardly seems wise.

But neither is China’s hardline stance. Many Hong Kongers moved towards the radicals’ camp after a senior mainland figure talked about dealing with disorder by sending in the Chinese army. Attacking the independence of the judiciary in the white paper was also barmy, even by the undemocratic regime’s own aims. The economy is still its priority, and Hong Kong is its most global financial centre. Rule of law and press freedom are the foundations of Hong Kong’s prosperity (and a reason why Shanghai still has not caught up). If China’s president, Xi Jinping, is serious about fighting corruption, then he should be working out how the legal system of the rest of the country can become more like Hong Kong’s.

China is harming itself in other ways. By breaking promises to Hong Kong, it is hardly reassuring Taiwanese voters that “one country, two systems” could be the basis for reunification. And by throwing its weight around, it is doing nothing for its image as a bully in the region. This week an attempt to patch up things with Vietnam failed noisily. A showdown in Hong Kong will not help China’s peaceful rise.

 

[Blackstone]

Reuters has a contrarian view of China property market ups and downs not leading to real estate implosion.

Please, Log in or Register to view URLs content!

(Reuters) - The first fall in Chinese home prices in two years has crystallised worries of a messy end to a housing boom, but some analysts say fears of an imminent collapse similar to that in the United States after the sub-prime crisis are overblown.

The property market has definitely been slowing this year, and is cited as one of the main risks to the health of the world's second-largest economy.

But high downpayments, low household debt, some government support - and expectations of more to come - have some experts forecasting the downturn will be short lived, with prices expected to recover as economic growth steadies in the second half of the year.

Average new home prices across 70 cities fell 0.2 percent in May from April, and the annual rise of 5.6 percent was the slowest in 13 months. Prices fell on a monthly basis in 35 cities, official data showed on Wednesday.

"If you look at China from the balance sheet point of view, the only balance sheet that has not been destroyed is the household balance sheet," said Bo Zhuang, an economist at Trusted Sources, a U.K.-based investment consultant.

"It is the most healthy balance sheet at the moment."

The International Monetary Fund agrees. In a paper published in April, it ranked China as having the fourth-lowest level of household debt among 11 Asian countries, at around 12 percent of its gross domestic product (GDP).

In New Zealand and Australia, where households are the most indebted, debt levels exceed 90 percent of GDP, IMF data shows.

Downpayments of 30 percent for first home purchases and between 60-70 percent for second homes, and laws which make borrowers liable for debts even if they default on repayments have banks viewing mortgages as among their safest assets.

It also means those who fear that a sharp decline in home prices would rock China's financial sector by inundating banks with bad debt may be overstating the case.

Further, a reduction in the amount of reserves that banks must hold to boost lending to small firms and the farm sector has inadvertently freed up some cash for the property sector.

"Funds are like water," said Fan Xiongchong, vice-president of Sunshine 100 China, a mid-sized developer based in Beijing. "Eventually, it will more or less flow into the property market via various channels."

NOT WITHOUT RISKS

This is not to say the housing market, which accounts for about 15 percent of GDP, is without risks.

For one, despite the moderation this year, prices are still near record highs and affordability rates near an all-time low. Construction has also fallen sharply this year, which would affect employment and spending.

The statistics show that Wenzhou, a wealthy city with a thriving private sector, has been hardest hit in the current slowdown with prices down 4 percent in May from a year ago.

Experts disagree about the extent of housing oversupply in China, but agree that slower property investment would be a drag on the economy. A sharp drop in home prices would destroy household wealth, undermining confidence and spending.

"Comfort comes from the fact that we see the Chinese government taking action - they are not oblivious to what is happening," said London-based Yerlan Syzdykov, an emerging markets debt fund manager at Pioneer Investments.

"That's why this 'stop-go' policy... on one hand they want to cool off the market, and on the other they don't want it to hurt growth," Syzdykov said, referring to earlier and prolonged government attempts to rein in red-hot home prices.

NO BIG CRASH

The biggest problem is a misallocation of resources, said Ting Lu, an economist at Bank of America-Merrill Lynch.

With only about one-third of the 1.3 billion population living in urban centres, too many homes that will never be filled have been built in small cities. That would likely see a sharp spike in bankruptcies among small developers, Lu said, but would not cause "a big crash".

Wages in China are still growing faster than house prices, with average incomes in cities and rural areas climbing 10-12 percent last year, on par or faster than a 10 percent rise in property prices.

"This is a cyclical correction," said Rosealea Yao, an economist at Gavekal Dragonomics. "We see no signs of imminent collapse."

(Additional reporting by Umesh Desai in Hong Kong; Editing by John Mair)

 

[AssassinsMace]

Please, Log in or Register to view URLs content!

Here's an interesting video posted by Gigori in another forum on someone with common sense regarding war. Talk a bit about China comes around the 9min mark. He talks about how states can't win wars today against one another because the aftermath will probably be worse that the government in power the other country didn't like.

Obama and Hillary are prime examples of what this guy is talking about. Because they're the darlings of the left who are suppose to be about peace and cooperation, it makes them especially more irresponsible when no one dares to question them. Since they were both inspired by the Arab Spring, there does seem to be a policy in place to undermine governments by inspiring revolutions within to hopefully bring down regimes they don't like with no regard of any certainty that the next government will be one they like.

Even though I can agree with people like Lind having some common sense, there's one thing these people never dare to entertain. Lind brings it up where people around the world don't like it where someone dictates to them that they know what's best for everyone else. That's an assumption that the one dictating what's best is motivated by good intentions. What's worse than someone dictating what's best for everyone else? The person dictating is actually motivated by what's best for him or herself and not everyone else.

 

[Blackstone]

David Shambaugh is one of my favorite authors and lecture speakers on contemporary China. He recently wrote a thought-provoking article on Chinese power, and in it, he made some good points on China being a “partial great power,” overrated by many foreign and domestic pundits. It’s a contrarian view of China, and I don't agree with many of his views, but the article's well-reasoned, and as always, a good read.

Just in case the article gives readers the wrong impression of Shambaugh, he writes lots of positive things about China too.

Please, Log in or Register to view URLs content!

CONVENTIONAL WISDOM has it that the China juggernaut is unstoppable and that the world must adjust to the reality of the Asian giant as a—perhaps the—major global power. A mini-industry of “China rise” prognosticators has emerged over the past decade, all painting a picture of a twenty-first-century world in which China is a dominant actor. This belief is understandable and widespread—but wrong.

.
.
.

Thus, observers should not blindly assume that China’s future will exhibit the dynamism of the past thirty years, or that its path to global-power status will necessarily continue.

 

[siegecrossbow]

This guy's choice of words says he was a trouble-maker and not naïve. And he wasn't treated extremely so why is this even a story if the guy wasn't seeking publicity? Yeah like he would be treated different if he were flying a drone around DC?

Especially in light of recent terror attacks in China...

 

[Doombreed]

David Shambaugh is one of my favorite authors and lecture speakers on contemporary China. He recently wrote a thought-provoking article on Chinese power, and in it, he made some good points on China being a “partial great power,” overrated by many foreign and domestic pundits. It’s a contrarian view of China, and I don't agree with many of his views, but the article's well-reasoned, and as always, a good read.

Just in case the article gives readers the wrong impression of Shambaugh, he writes lots of positive things about China too.

Please, Log in or Register to view URLs content!

...intended primarily to enhance the Chinese Communist Party’s (CCP) legitimacy among domestic audiences...

Quoted from the article. I think the analysis failed to realise this particularly salient point, even through it mentioned it specifically. You will be amazed how little shit the CCP really gives for anything outside of Chinese borders. If you frame their actions with the lense of "for domestic consumption only", it will make a lot more sense.

Several Sinologists now argue that the CCP itself is the principal impediment to future growth and development in China. The party is an increasingly insecure, sclerotic and fragile institution that has become paralyzed since 2008.

Although I tend to agree in principle. You would be surprised how responsive and adaptive the CCP can be when their existence is at stake.

Of cause, the whole article can be read as "everybody is shit, EU is shit, Russian is shit, Brazil is shit, Japan is shit". This of cause lead to the inevitable question of, "well then who isn't shit?" Pax Americana forever? The American Thousand Year Reich?

Maybe all China has to do is to be a little bit less shit than other...