PRC Economy - New Reflections : Dec 15 2011

All threads that are locked or marked for deletion will be moved to this forum. The topics will be cleared from this archive on the 1st and 16th of each month.
pankajs
BRF Oldie
Posts: 14506
Joined: 13 Aug 2009 20:56

Re: PRC Economy - New Reflections : Dec 15 2011

Postby pankajs » 09 Jan 2012 23:16

China's Reform Irresolutions
China bulls like to argue that, whatever the challenges facing the economy, the smart leadership in Beijing is capable of making tough decisions and getting things done. A financial-system-related meeting over the weekend, at which those leaders did neither, highlights the strain the country is coming under and the increasing difficulty Beijing faces in keeping policy on track.

The National Financial Work Conference, a once-every-five-years affair, ended with a whimper on Saturday. Past sessions had tackled endemic bad-loan problems in the banks, planned for overseas initial public offerings of big financial institutions, or even created a sovereign-wealth fund. On paper, this year's event also produced some important policy decisions: to make bank lending more market-oriented, work toward yuan convertibility and finally get a grip on mushrooming local-government debts.

But then again, we've seen these New Year's resolutions before. Cynics are already questioning whether Beijing will—or rather, can—follow through this time.

For one thing, there are few details about how officials will accomplish their goals. Previous conferences settled on important but relatively discrete problems with straightforward, if still challenging, solutions. Beijing handled mounting bad loans in 1997 by creating "bad banks" and in 2002 by engineering major cash injections into large banks that then were partially sold off to investors.

That means Beijing already has tackled the easier reform measures, no matter how imperfectly. What's left are the hard things, such as ensuring capital reaches the small- and medium-sized businesses that are starved of it, or managing the systemic risks of a banking system that was used to pump billions of dollars of credit stimulus into the economy in recent years. No wonder the weekend's conference was short on details.

Only a wholesale reform of the financial system—including allowing the market to set interest rates on loans and deposits, and truly freeing banks from political interference in lending decisions—can accomplish Beijing's stated goals. Yet these would be so controversial among the business and political interests on which the Communist Party relies for support as to be politically dangerous for any leader who made the attempt.

Beijing's problem is that no matter how hard moving forward may be, standing still will be worse. Traditional export markets in the U.S. and Europe remain weak, and China is running out of firepower to stimulate the economy by building roads, bridges, tunnels and skyscrapers. Meanwhile, capital doesn't find its way to the small companies that ought to be powering growth and job creation. Inflation, while slowing somewhat, remains a concern after the 2009-10 credit binge. Households see their income diminished by artificially low interest rates on deposits, hindering a transition to domestic consumption.

For now, leaders reach instinctively for old remedies. This weekend also brought news of surprisingly strong credit growth in December, although small businesses still complain of less access to loans. For an economy feeling the bite of slack exports, this suggests policy makers are trying to push more and more money out the door to the same big, state-owned borrowers in the hope that at least some of it will stick. That's a short-sighted approach for leaders who try to cultivate the perception that they think five steps ahead.

Hopes for fresh Chinese reforms dashed
Signs that China is losing its appetite for key financial reforms are fuelling concerns that the country will remain on a path of unbalanced growth, increasing the chances of a future economic crisis.
Meanwhile, the costs of an unreformed financial sector are rising, as shown by the huge debts incurred during its 2009-10 stimulus, which are now starting to come due.

zlin
BRFite
Posts: 178
Joined: 07 Aug 2003 11:31

Re: PRC Economy - New Reflections : Dec 15 2011

Postby zlin » 10 Jan 2012 04:54

China bankrolls R&D while India plays the miser

NEW DELHI: Did Prime Minister Manmohan Singh underplay China's superiority over India in the field of science, research and technology? Analysis of new data shared at the National Science Congress shows that China has been far ahead of India for a decade and the wide gap between the two has only deepened over past years.

India published a mere 233,027 scientific papers in 2010 compared to 969,315 research articles by China. This is data from Elsevier, one the biggest publishers of scientific research in the world. China recorded a 22.83% growth in publishing scientific research compared to 14.27% by Indian researchers.

Elsevier data shows that Chinese scientists are also much more up to date than the Indian scientific community. On an index of state of art science, China was placed at 0.86 with India coming on the negative end of the scale at -2.48 though the citation levels (how many other researchers read the papers) was higher for India than China on average.

The publishing giant also looked at areas of competencies or quality research and again came up with the vast difference between the two. India had 159 areas of competencies in different scientific fields while China had 885 such areas. While India is publishing more in chemistry. engineering, biology and biotech, China is publishing a lot more in computer sciences, medical specialties, mathematics, physics and health sciences.

The vast difference between the two is not just in published science but also patenting of technology -- taking pure sciences forward into applications. China patents five times more than India for every billion dollars of GDP and the growth in registering new patents has risen rapidly over past five years. In 2005, China had filed 93,485 patents and this galloped to 153,060 in 2007.

There is a reason why India is nowhere close to the Chinese scientific behemoth -- Indian government doesn't invest half as much as the Chinese state does in scientific research and development and the distance between the two is widening. China is going to target investing 3% of its GDP into scientific endeavours by 2020 while India is still 'aspiring' to ramp it up from the current 0.9% to 2% by 2017.

Percentages, however, do not tell the whole story. China's GDP is $6,980 billion as per IMF compared to India's $1,843 billion. China investing about 2.5% of its GDP last year in S&T works out to $174 billion compared to India's 0.9% which works out to roughly $16.5 billion.

By Indian government's own admission, even a decade ago in 2002-03, China had 8.5 lakh researchers producing 40,000 PhD theses in sciences compared to India's 1.5 lakh people producing about 1,000 PhD theses in R&D.

The route both countries have taken to enhance their prowess in the world of science is also different. While China invests heavily through state-run scientific institutions, it also pulls in a large amount of private investment from outside. It has nearly 100 international research facilities that have come up since 2003.

India's public investment in R&D has, in comparison, gone down with time and has been unable to attract partnerships with the private sector as well. The PM indicated in his speech at Bhubaneswar on Tuesday that he would seek to increase the share of private investment in S&T (an oft repeated comment) but that may not be easy unless the state is ready to put its own money in this long gestation, high risk investment.

In the end, what former President A P J Abdul Kalam advised students at the Science Congress on Wednesday may make more sense than competing with China: do your own thing.

zlin
BRFite
Posts: 178
Joined: 07 Aug 2003 11:31

Re: PRC Economy - New Reflections : Dec 15 2011

Postby zlin » 10 Jan 2012 04:57

Go East, Young Man

By JONATHAN LEVINE

Published: January 8, 2012

NOT long ago, I was stuck in a dead-end job near Greenwich, Conn. I was in my early 20s, overeducated with a series of non-performing degrees from New York University and Columbia, and frustrated. When I saw the Occupy Wall Street protesters on TV, fed up with the economic status quo in the United States, I saw myself.

Or rather, I saw my old self, before I figured a way out.

To the occupiers and their sympathizers, I say vote — not with the ballot, but with your feet. Now that your encampment has disbanded, don’t just leave Zuccotti Park: leave America.

For China. At least, that’s what I did. It was the best decision I ever made.

In February of last year, I moved to Beijing, having landed a job teaching American culture and English at Tsinghua University. While I was not a global neophyte, I had never set foot in Asia. China had 1.3 billion people, and I didn’t know any of them.

But now, after living almost a year here, I feel that China is my second home. My work is fulfilling and my workload is manageable enough to give me time to travel. I have found friends among China’s large expatriate community, my colleagues and, of course, my eager students. The food is outstanding and caters to both the gastronomically meek and the profoundly adventurous.

Most of all, my experiences here have been enriched by the Chinese people themselves. Their patience, courtesy and hospitality leave me in no hurry to return home anytime soon.

And guess what? I’m not so special.

China wants you. Job prospects are abundant. The effects of the Great Recession of 2008 may be felt in the United States for years, but they barely scratched China. Demand for native English speakers is white-hot. ChinaJob.com, TheBeijnger.com and Dave’s ESL Cafe are just a few of the places where you can search for work.

There are problems here, of course. China is a nation that unapologetically rejects Western democracy — and yet I am surprised to find that Chinese citizens and the news media have as much freedom as they do. For my money, CCTV News English, a channel offered by China’s major state television broadcaster, is more fair and balanced than Fox News.

Pollution is bad. Beijing, like much of China, is often enveloped in what local residents euphemistically call “mist.” But there are nice days, too, more than you might think.

Many critics have rightly pointed out the shocking failures of the Chinese food safety system — the most famous being the tainted-baby-formula scandal of 2008. But what you may not know is that China meted out swift justice in that case to the perpetrators. That is more than can be said for the handling of many corporations in the United States that have harmed their consumers and remain unpunished.

We live in grim times, but fortune favors the bold. So if you are reading this from some occupied encampment, a soul-crushing cubicle, your parents’ basement or anywhere else in America really, maybe you should consider paying me a visit.

I’ll buy you a duck.


Jonathan Levine is a lecturer in American studies and English at Tsinghua University in Beijing.

Austin
BRF Oldie
Posts: 23387
Joined: 23 Jul 2000 11:31

Re: PRC Economy - New Reflections : Dec 15 2011

Postby Austin » 10 Jan 2012 11:50

China’s foreign trade reaches 3.64 trillion dollars 2011

BEIJING, January 10 (Itar-Tass) —— China’s foreign trade turnover in 2011 made 3.64 trillion dollars, the country’s Chief Customs Department reported on Tuesday.

The report reads that against the previous year, the trade turnover grew by 22.5 percent, though the country’s trade balance in 2011 reduced by 14.5 percent to 155.14 billion dollars.

Lately, experts have been forecasting deceleration of China’s foreign trade growth in 2012, which is caused by “the complicated global economic situation.” China’s government, in its turn, stated repeatedly that the country would activate growth of its foreign trade, expand import and support balance in the foreign trade.

In 2010, china began rapid reconstruction of its foreign trade, which in 2009 due to the international financial crisis slump by 13.9 percent to 2.21 trillion dollars. Besides, from 2011 there is a clear tendency to reduce the positive balance of foreign trade due to rapid growth of import. In the first quarter of 2011, the foreign trade deficit made 1.02 billion dollars. Experts say that the tendency to reduce the positive balance of China’s foreign trade will remain for coming months.


VikramS
BRFite
Posts: 1864
Joined: 21 Apr 2002 11:31

Re: PRC Economy - New Reflections : Dec 15 2011

Postby VikramS » 10 Jan 2012 21:25

http://www.wantchinatimes.com/news-subc ... 4&cid=1103
Indignant workers threaten suicide at Foxconn park in Wuhan

This sad and reminiscent of Farmer suicides in India. Are these kind of protests new in China or it is just the word that is getting out? Again food for though for Indian planners.

zlin:
Thanks for posting the link. Shows how India progresses in spite of the govt...

Theo_Fidel

Re: PRC Economy - New Reflections : Dec 15 2011

Postby Theo_Fidel » 10 Jan 2012 21:44

That is a puff piece.

There is no such thing as a 'chinese scientific behemoth'. In world science they are pretty much at level zero. Mostly spurious and ripped off patent material.

Bade
BRF Oldie
Posts: 7212
Joined: 23 May 2002 11:31
Location: badenberg in US administered part of America

Re: PRC Economy - New Reflections : Dec 15 2011

Postby Bade » 10 Jan 2012 22:33

^^ This high publications is achieved with greater number of collaborations with the west. The way china has gone about this, is over the past two decades increase the number of higher education seeking students and pushing them over to the west. Here the good ones get sorted out by the western system and they find positions in research institutions and federal positions over time. The final closing of the circle comes when the established Chinese immigrants in the west, re-establish old connections and collaborate and publish. This has definitely helped the Chinese scientists who stayed back in China or returned back when they could not get a adequate position in the west. So that is the 'Chinese scientific behemoth' with roots and reach all over the western world which keeps them abreast of activities elsewhere.

Theo_Fidel

Re: PRC Economy - New Reflections : Dec 15 2011

Postby Theo_Fidel » 10 Jan 2012 23:54

So how much useful research can they do without 'collaboration', paying to add their name to papers. :((

abhischekcc
BRF Oldie
Posts: 4277
Joined: 12 Jul 1999 11:31
Location: If I can’t move the gods, I’ll stir up hell
Contact:

Re: PRC Economy - New Reflections : Dec 15 2011

Postby abhischekcc » 11 Jan 2012 00:07

Look, number of research papers (or patents, by extension) itself does not mean anything.

To be really useful, a research paper has to be cited (and a patent has to be used in other research). Does anybody here have access to Thomson Reuters' publication called "World of science"? Check it for how many Chinese research papers are cited by other researchers. You will come to know of the shallow quality of their research.

Theo_Fidel

Re: PRC Economy - New Reflections : Dec 15 2011

Postby Theo_Fidel » 11 Jan 2012 00:49

I can tell you that in my line of work the Chinese scientific presence is non-existent. This despite the fact that they have lost more people to earthquakes than just about anyone else. Only time was when I ran into a piece on research on 'forecasting' earthquakes using frogs or snakes or lights in the sky or some such other wonder. This is simply not where the scientific consensus is.

This is simply not where 99% of the science community is. They can collaborate all they want but they simply don't have any sense of where the world consensus on science is. It is at the consensus line that 99% of research occurs and is cited and used as Abhishek points out.

This line is very very fast moving. Often on the order of 6 months - 12 months the entire consensus line has moved on based on new facts and real world incidents and reports from the experimental community.

Bade
BRF Oldie
Posts: 7212
Joined: 23 May 2002 11:31
Location: badenberg in US administered part of America

Re: PRC Economy - New Reflections : Dec 15 2011

Postby Bade » 11 Jan 2012 02:03

It can differ depending on the field of research. Categorically stating that they are all stupid and not worthy does not lead anywhere. If you look at basic sciences, and that too just in the US, the numbers are large. It is not like US takes bad quality, just to fill empty positions. Of course there is plenty of dynamics in hiring even when the US is largely open competition. My point, if China is not doing something good, one would not see such a large number of researchers from China filling up American universities. There is a definite cross fertilization going on. Denying that entirely will be at our peril.

zlin
BRFite
Posts: 178
Joined: 07 Aug 2003 11:31

Re: PRC Economy - New Reflections : Dec 15 2011

Postby zlin » 11 Jan 2012 04:51

Huawei Introduces World's Thinnest Smartphone


Huawei leapfrogs LTE leaders in Europe
SAN JOSE, CA—China's Huawei won the lion's share of the business for LTE macro base stations in Europe last year, narrowly beating traditional leaders Ericsson and Nokia Siemens Networks who ranked second and third.

vina
BRF Oldie
Posts: 6046
Joined: 11 May 2005 06:56
Location: Doing Nijikaran, Udharikaran and Baazarikaran to Commies and Assorted Leftists

Re: PRC Economy - New Reflections : Dec 15 2011

Postby vina » 11 Jan 2012 07:42

Well, what does this have to do with economy you might ask. But if you can't separate fact from fiction, you really dont know the economic truth either (real economy from make believe). A great article in Bloomberg.

Victims tears for dictators honor a shared past commentary

Victims’ Tears for Dictators Honor Their Shared Past: Junheng Li
By Junheng Li - Dec 29, 2011

I was born in China in 1976, just a few months before the death of Mao Zedong. So when I saw footage of thousands of North Koreans in tears after the death of Kim Jong Il, their leader, two thoughts hit me hard. One: They must be brainwashed. And two: Were we Chinese that brainwashed under Mao (bigger point, aren't they STILL brainwashed ) ?

Curious, I called my mother in Shanghai. Both of my parents were survivors of Mao’s brutal Cultural Revolution. Like countless others, they were taken out of urban schools and sent to rural areas to be “re-educated,” weaned off bourgeois culture. And they were the lucky ones -- they survived a campaign that killed millions.

“Were you relieved when Chairman Mao died?” I asked.

“Not at all!” my mother said without hesitation. “People were genuinely sad.”

This seemed preposterous. “How could you feel sad at the death of a criminal -- someone who robbed you of your youth by sending you to a backwater to hoe turnips?”

“The country was completely closed and isolated,” she said. “Communism was a religion, and doubting your leader was out of the question.”

Her use of the word “religion” triggered a memory. In September 2007, I was working as a hedge-fund analyst in New York, and I traveled to Beijing to visit a dozen or so Chinese companies that were listed in the U.S.
Mao’s Loyalists

It was a beautiful fall afternoon and I had a few hours to stroll downtown. A Chinese businessman offered to be my guide. As we ambled through Tiananmen Square, with its enormous mural of Mao, I spotted amid the fashionable urban Chinese a group of not-so-chicly attired tourists from the hinterlands. All of a sudden, they dropped to their knees and began kowtowing to the Mao portrait.

“Wow,” I thought. Having lived in the U.S. for almost a decade, I had assumed that Mao worship was a relic of the distant past and that most Chinese had come to the conclusion that Mao had been a cruel dictator, regardless of his intentions or convictions.

The CEO saw my reaction and started to laugh. “You’ve been away too long,” he said. “This scene takes place every day.”

He went on: “Mao is a religion and always will be. He made mistakes in his later years, but his intentions were good. He truly believed that a totalitarian state was the best political system for China. He was a world-class politician and a true leader.”

The memory vanished as I refocused on my mother’s voice.

“Blind conviction is the definition of religion,” she said. “The Cultural Revolution is long over. What’s the use of dwelling on it? We are all good and happy now.”

And there was a partial answer. If Chinese, long removed from Mao’s tyranny, still embraced the man, it should come as no surprise that North Koreans, still very much in thrall to the Kim dynasty, feel genuine sorrow at the loss of their leader.

But there was also a bigger question: What did this suggest about our future? When does the spell break?

There was a clue, it seemed, in my mother’s candor and her refusal to regret crying for someone who, in so many ways, damaged her life profoundly. You can renounce a religion, but it’s much harder to disown your own past, particularly when you share that past with many others.

Maybe it’s different when you take part in a mass movement to overthrow a dictator -- a Muammar Qaddafi, say, or a Saddam Hussein. When rebellion or invasion prompts a nation to judge its ruler, the triumph, the shared effort of defeating evil, gives people a chance to own their past miseries. However, when one is simply released from repression by the dictator’s death, there’s no shared vindication. “Forgetting” --- as China has done with the Cultural Revolution --- might just be the easiest choice.
My Father’s Dreams

There are exceptions to the rule. My father, for one.

“Dad must have been relieved when Mao died, right?” I asked.

My mother snorted. The answer was so obvious that she would not even indulge the question.

The Cultural Revolution seemed to traumatize my father in unique ways. His dreams and ambitions as an impressionable and hot-blooded young man were dashed by Mao’s policies. My guess is that the Cultural Revolution made him cynical about anything and everything around him. Distrustful of the state media, he bought a portable radio and listened to Voice of America obsessively. When I was a little girl, he instructed me not to believe out of hand anything printed in the People’s Daily (very very very important. There is still hope for the human spirit in China.Panda drones and N. Ram of "The Hindu"please note).

Many Chinese people know now what my father understood decades ago and yet we don’t talk about it much; some of us continue to kowtow in Tiananmen Square, keeping the fiction of Mao’s greatness alive.

In this way, we’re not all that different from our North Korean brethren. Our collective “forgetting” prevents us from accepting the cause of our past tragedies. However painful, this reckoning must happen if we are ever able finally to reject the censorship and propaganda that still enforce our “isolation.”

(Junheng Li is the founder and senior equity analyst of JL Warren Capital LLC, an independent equity research firm in New York. The opinions expressed are their own.)

To contact the writer of this article: Junheng Li at junhli@yahoo.com

amit
BRF Oldie
Posts: 4325
Joined: 30 Aug 2007 18:28
Location: The Restaurant at the End of the Universe

Re: PRC Economy - New Reflections : Dec 15 2011

Postby amit » 11 Jan 2012 13:14



This particular piece is another example of shallow research that goes for journalism in India. While China has certainly made some impressive strides, like in other sectors, by pouring money into R&D, how effective that money has been is open to questions. Typical of China there is huge wastage with cronism even in research grants.

Two IP experts, University of Maryland's Anil Gupta and Hiyan Wang have done some impressive research into innovation and IP creation in China and India. In a recent article in WSJ, a cashed copy of which is this has some very interesting points.

The "inputs" for innovation are impressive. China's R&D expenditure increased to 1.5% of GDP in 2010 from 1.1% in 2002, and should reach 2.5% by 2020. Its share of the world's total R&D expenditure grew to 12.3% in 2010 from 5.0% in 2002, placing it second only to the U.S., whose share remained steady at 34-35%. According to UNESCO, China now employs more people in science and technology research than any other country.


At first blush, data on "outputs" also look impressive. According to the World Intellectual Property Organization, Chinese inventors filed 203,481 patent applications in 2008. That would make China the third most innovative country after Japan (502,054 filings) and the U.S. (400,769).


The top two quotes has all the flavour to make our Chinese drones drool in the mouth. However, as with all things Chinese once you scratch the surface, something else altogether comes up. Read on...

Yet there's less here than meets the eye. Over 95% of the Chinese applications were filed domestically with the State Intellectual Property Office. The vast majority cover Chinese "innovations" that make only tiny changes on existing designs. In many other cases, a Chinese filer "patents" a foreign invention in China with the goal of suing the foreign inventor for "infringement" in a Chinese legal system that doesn't recognize foreign patents.

A better measure is to look at those innovations that are recognized outside China—at patent filings or grants to China-origin inventions by the world's leading patent offices, the U.S., the EU and Japan. On this score, China is way behind the others.


The most compelling evidence is the count of "triadic" patent filings or grants, where an application is filed with or patent granted by all three offices for the same innovation. According to the OECD, in 2008, the most recent year for which data are available, there were only 473 triadic patent filings from China versus 14,399 from the U.S., 14,525 from Europe, and 13,446 from Japan. Data for patent grants in 2010 by individual offices paint a virtually identical picture.


So much for the sooper dooper investment in R&D which has the Economic Times reporter drooling.

Starkly put, in 2010, China accounted for 20% of the world's population, 9% of the world's GDP, 12% of the world's R&D expenditure, but only 1% of the patent filings with or patents granted by any of the leading patent offices outside China. Further, half of the China-origin patents were granted to subsidiaries of foreign multinationals.


Why is there such a big gap between innovation inputs and outputs? Partly it may simply be a matter of time. Innovation requires not just new efforts but also a rich stock of prior knowledge. As new players on the technology frontier, Chinese organizations will need several years to build the requisite stock of knowledge.

But other factors are also at work. For instance, processes for allocating government funds for R&D projects remain highly politicized and inefficient. Policy makers have a strong penchant for megaprojects backed by individual ministries and give R&D grants based largely on political clout and connections rather than scientific peer review.


As Yigong Shi and Yi Rao, deans of Life Sciences at Tsinghua and Peking Universities respectively, observed in a recent editorial in Science magazine, for grants ranging from tens to hundreds of millions of yuan, "it is an open secret that doing good research is not as important as schmoozing with powerful bureaucrats and their favorite experts.. . . . China's current research culture . . . wastes resources, corrupts the spirit, and stymies innovation."


While the situation in India can certainly be improved, things are not that bleak.

In another report here the same authors say this:

China's indigenous innovation program, launched in 2006, has alarmed the world's technology giants. A recent report from the U.S. Chamber of Commerce even went so far as to call this program "a blueprint for technology theft on a scale the world has not seen before."

The goal of the indigenous innovation program is to accelerate China's move up the technology ladder. Using a variety of mechanisms (such as making access to China's market dependent on transfers of leading-edge technologies and R&D labs to China), the program supposedly helps Chinese companies assimilate, absorb and re-innovate upon the proprietary technology developed by foreign companies.


Again at first cut very ambitious. But...

Virtually every assessment of the indigenous innovation program has framed it as a win-lose proposition—a win for China and a loss for foreign multinationals. Our analysis, however, suggests that indigenous innovation measures have been counterproductive for China itself. Instead of inducing technology giants to shift leading-edge R&D work to China at a faster pace, its effect has been exactly the opposite.


So much for all the grand top down plans framed by party bosses.

China today hosts about 1,000 foreign-owned R&D labs. Yet, with rare exceptions, these labs focus primarily on local adaptations of innovations developed elsewhere, rather than the development of leading-edge technologies and products for global markets.

Tech company executives are eager to leverage the quality and scale of China's talent pool. However, given the indigenous innovation measures, they do not trust China as a secure location for leading-edge R&D.


Now, here's the comparison with India:

A comparison with India is illustrative. India has no equivalent to indigenous innovation rules. The government also is content to allow companies to set up R&D facilities without any rules about sharing technology with local partners or the like.


Typical SDRE, right? Hang on...

These policy differences appear to have a significant influence on corporate behavior. Consider the top 10 U.S.-based technology giants that received the most patents from the U.S. Patent and Trademark Office between 2006 and 2010: IBM, Microsoft, Intel, Hewlett-Packard, Micron, GE, Cisco, Texas Instruments, Broadcom and Honeywell.

Half of these companies appear not to be doing any significant R&D work in China. Between 2006 and 2010, the U.S. Patent Office did not award a single patent to any China-based units of five out of the 10 companies. In contrast, only one of the 10 did not receive a patent for an innovation developed in India.

India has proven more fertile territory for these companies. For the 10 tech giants taken together, India-based labs received more patents (1,119) than did China-based labs (886) during this period.


A WTF moment... for the Drones and their apologists right?

At a company level, the difference can be even more striking. For the seven out of 10 companies where Indian units received more patents than Chinese labs, the aggregate numbers were 978 vs. 164. Only a strong showing for China from two outliers, Microsoft and Intel, pulled up its aggregate filings—Chinese labs at those two companies secured 722 patents compared to 141 from Indian labs.


So China gets all those shiny new facilities but the grunt work is being done in SDRE offices in Bangalore and elsewhere. Go figure.

The R&D disparity is all the more striking given China's three seemingly major advantages over India. With a GDP more than three times larger, China offers a much bigger market than India. China also spends four times as much as India on R&D. And China produces a much larger number of Ph.D.s.


Just a note. China spends about 12.5 per cent of world spending on R&D, while India spends about 2.5 per cent. Yet India produces half as many patents as China does. Who is more efficient?

gakakkad
BRF Oldie
Posts: 4475
Joined: 24 May 2011 08:16

Re: PRC Economy - New Reflections : Dec 15 2011

Postby gakakkad » 11 Jan 2012 19:52

Amit ,most of the Chinese patents are fake. As far as number of papers is concerned ,some of them seem to be written by non Human drones . Quite often , a single paper will be published in different journals with 'different authors' . Forget the Americans , even the CHINESE themselves know , that it is a fraud.

From the Chinese Academy of sciences
Publication Bubble Threatens China's Scientific Advance


Chinese researchers published more than 1.2 million papers from 2006 to 2010 -- second only to the United States but well ahead of Britain, Germany and Japan, according to data recently published by Elsevier, a leading international scientific publisher and data provider. This figure represents a 14 percent increase over the period from 2005 to 2009.
The number of published academic papers in science and technology is often seen as a gauge of national scientific prowess.
But these impressive numbers mask an uncomfortable fact: most of these papers are of low quality or have little impact. Citation per article (CPA) measures the quality and impact of papers. China's CPA is 1.47, the lowest figure among the top 20 publishing countries, according to Elsevier's Scopus citation database.
China's CPA dropped from 1.72 for the period from 2005 to 2009, and is now below emerging countries such as India and Brazil. Among papers lead-authored by Chinese researchers, most citations were by domestic peers and, in many cases, were self-citations. {I publish a paper and cite it myself a few times. And perhaps get friends cite the paper .What a racket.That way the paper gets more citations}


This is the same country , which has bought millions of dollars of super compooters just for H&D purpose . One of its 'patents' include the Apple I-Pad .he he.. remember them suing apple for this recently ?

The only significance of the Chinese is the top 1.5% population. That provides a market bigger than the size American upper middle class. The bottom 95% are poor , malnourished cave dwellers .

Theo_Fidel

Re: PRC Economy - New Reflections : Dec 15 2011

Postby Theo_Fidel » 11 Jan 2012 21:10

WRT research, one of my co-workers just commented that at least in engineering Panda research is all politically driven. Panda state decides what new fangled world idea to 'acquire' and the science groups go out and does research on acquiring said technology.

Best example is Panda HSR. They have spent a fortune in R&D, written hundreds of papers and yet not a single new technology or idea has come out of that explosion of political money. Yes they can make cheaper knock-offs of Japanese or German technology, but that is not research. The key test is when they can build a train that others try to knock off. Their greatest latest innovation was a Stainless Steel edged front cowling, inspired by a medieval swords look,(Really)(H&D) on a tired looking old design that it has been pointed out would fail in most wind tunnel tests.

amit
BRF Oldie
Posts: 4325
Joined: 30 Aug 2007 18:28
Location: The Restaurant at the End of the Universe

Re: PRC Economy - New Reflections : Dec 15 2011

Postby amit » 12 Jan 2012 07:07

<<<<Deleted; Duplicate>>>>>
Last edited by amit on 12 Jan 2012 07:10, edited 1 time in total.

amit
BRF Oldie
Posts: 4325
Joined: 30 Aug 2007 18:28
Location: The Restaurant at the End of the Universe

Re: PRC Economy - New Reflections : Dec 15 2011

Postby amit » 12 Jan 2012 07:07

gakakkad wrote:Amit ,most of the Chinese patents are fake. As far as number of papers is concerned ,some of them seem to be written by non Human drones . Quite often , a single paper will be published in different journals with 'different authors' . Forget the Americans , even the CHINESE themselves know , that it is a fraud.

From the Chinese Academy of sciences
Publication Bubble Threatens China's Scientific Advance




Agree 400 per cent. The authors I quote are essentially saying the same thing.

However, one should keep in mind that the average well educated middle class Chinese are extremely bright, hardworking and most importantly pragmatic.

In way I agree with what Chola has been writing on this thread. We can thank our stars that the CPC rules over China - they are India's best friend.

Given the creativity, energy and cultural knowledge that the Chinese civilization possesses we would have fallen irrecoverably behind if it hadn't been for the handicap of having the CPC ruling over them.

I'd like to think that the CPC handicap is a bigger millstone around the Chinese neck than is the inefficient, corrupt and short-term outlook that our political class imposes on us (our millstone). That's why we're still in the same frame of reference with China.

If China becomes like a normal society and we still belabor under our handicap then God help us.

So, long live CPC!

amit
BRF Oldie
Posts: 4325
Joined: 30 Aug 2007 18:28
Location: The Restaurant at the End of the Universe

Re: PRC Economy - New Reflections : Dec 15 2011

Postby amit » 12 Jan 2012 07:18

Theo_Fidel wrote:WRT research, one of my co-workers just commented that at least in engineering Panda research is all politically driven. Panda state decides what new fangled world idea to 'acquire' and the science groups go out and does research on acquiring said technology.

Best example is Panda HSR. They have spent a fortune in R&D, written hundreds of papers and yet not a single new technology or idea has come out of that explosion of political money. Yes they can make cheaper knock-offs of Japanese or German technology, but that is not research. The key test is when they can build a train that others try to knock off. Their greatest latest innovation was a Stainless Steel edged front cowling, inspired by a medieval swords look,(Really)(H&D) on a tired looking old design that it has been pointed out would fail in most wind tunnel tests.


Theo,

I personally feel that HSR was a massive lemon which the Germans foisted on the Chinese. The very nature of HSR in terms of cost of operations ensures that it can never be a mass market high scale set-up. Low cost air travel would always beat it due to the simple fact that it requires less built up infrastructure and services can be provided on a on demand basis, meaning if a route becomes unviable the service can be either scaled down or withdrawn, alternatively it can be scaled up rapidly. On a HSR route you don't have that luxury, you have to build for maximum capacity from Day 1 and hope that you're calculations are right.

HSR is viable only on a few routes, for example the famous Tokyo-Osaka bullet train. Siemens and other Cos, did a con job with CPC Mandarins and convinced them that HSR could be built on a grand scale. As a result Chinese have spend hundreds of billions of dollars and now have an unviable 10,000 km network of HSR.

A lot of that money has gone to the pockets of foreign companies. I think they really don't care that their tech was ripped off by the Chinese because they knew that they wouldn't be able to sell it anywhere else. I'd wager companies like Siemens made more money in China with HSR tech than they would have been able to in the rest of the world combined.

g.sarkar
BRF Oldie
Posts: 2597
Joined: 09 Jul 2005 12:22
Location: MERCED, California

Re: PRC Economy - New Reflections : Dec 15 2011

Postby g.sarkar » 13 Jan 2012 09:35

http://www.economist.com/node/21542777
China’s property market
Marriages and mergers
China’s housing downturn will benefit state-owned developers
Jan 14th 2012 | HONG KONG |
"COULD the arrival of the year of the dragon rescue the country’s beleaguered property developers? As Chinese new year approaches later this month, tens of thousands of couples are preparing to marry under what is considered an auspicious sign. To win over a bride in a country undersupplied with women, it helps a lot if the aspiring groom first proves his worth by buying a home.
China’s developers need all the help they can get. Keen to cool overheating residential-property markets, the central government has restricted purchases of multiple homes, demanded larger down-payments and curtailed opportunities for speculators to “flip”, or quickly sell on, properties. It has curbed developers’ access to bank lending and cut off credit from new trust companies. It is also encouraging the use of property taxes like those introduced in Shanghai and Chongqing last year. The government remains committed to policies of this ilk.
Taken together, these measures have splashed cold water on the market. Price growth has been slowing since early 2010 (see chart). Analysis by Soufun Holdings, the country’s largest property website, suggests that prices fell during December 2011 in 60 of the 100 cities it monitors. Land prices are falling fast, too. A recent survey of leading developers by Standard Chartered indicates that land prices are a third off their peaks of late 2010. There are also reports of land auctions run by local governments—a prime source of assets for developers and of funding for local exchequers—failing across the country. All of which presages an overdue consolidation of the industry......."
Gautam

zlin
BRFite
Posts: 178
Joined: 07 Aug 2003 11:31

Re: PRC Economy - New Reflections : Dec 15 2011

Postby zlin » 13 Jan 2012 10:00

Historical Development of Expressway Length in China

Year Distance (KM)
01-01-1988 0
01-01-1989 147
01-01-1990 271
01-01-1991 522
01-01-1992 574
01-01-1993 652
01-01-1994 1145
01-01-1995 1603
01-01-1996 2141
01-01-1997 3422
01-01-1998 4771
01-01-1999 8733
01-01-2000 11605
01-01-2001 16314
01-01-2002 19453
01-01-2003 25200
01-01-2004 29800
01-01-2005 34300
01-01-2006 41005
01-01-2007 45339
01-01-2008 53913
01-01-2009 60346
01-01-2010 65065
01-01-2011 74000
01-01-2012 85000

Image

Suraj
Forum Moderator
Posts: 13650
Joined: 20 Jan 2002 12:31

Re: PRC Economy - New Reflections : Dec 15 2011

Postby Suraj » 13 Jan 2012 13:31

Great Satan Yumrica swindles poor innocent Chinese.
Enraged shoppers pelt Beijing Apple store with eggs
Apple Inc's flagship Beijing store was pelted with eggs on Friday when hundreds of enraged shoppers, many of whom had waited in line overnight, were told the store would not begin sales of the iPhone 4S as scheduled.

Apple's latest iPhone, with voice-activated technology, was being introduced in China on Friday to great anticipation. But fears of chaos given the unruly crowd outside the store apparently prompted the cancellation.

"I got in line around 11 p.m., and beyond the line the plaza was chock full with people," said Huang Xiantong, 26, outside the store in Beijing's trendy Sanlitun district.

"Around 5 a.m. the crowds in the plaza broke through and the line disappeared entirely. Everyone was fighting, several people were hurt," said Huang, who wanted to buy a new iPhone for his girlfriend. "The police just started hitting people. They were just brawling." :lol:

Customers demanded explanations, and some, who had had the thought to bring raw eggs with them in plastic bags, perhaps anticipating problems, 8) heaved them at the store's tall glass windows.

"I've been waiting here since yesterday afternoon, then this morning they say they won't sell," said a man in his 20s outside the store. "They broke customers' hearts," the man told Reuters TV. "Apple isn't acting decently."

"We're suffering from cold and hunger," shouted another man in his 20s. "They said they're not going to sell to us. Why? Why? :(( "

Purush
BRF Oldie
Posts: 2445
Joined: 26 Oct 2001 11:31
Location: Loc Muinne

Re: PRC Economy - New Reflections : Dec 15 2011

Postby Purush » 13 Jan 2012 14:00

^Idiots with misplaced priorities. Aapil and these clowns deserve each other :mrgreen:
----------------
EDIT-2. Nevermind.

Some snippets from another link.
http://www.irishtimes.com/newspaper/bre ... king8.html

Angry customers threw eggs at Apple's flagship Beijing store today after its opening for the Chinese launch of the iPhone 4S was cancelled due to concerns over the size of the crowd.

Apple reacted to the scuffle by postponing iPhone 4S sales in its mainland China stores to protect the safety of customers and employees. It said the phone will still be sold online and through its local carrier.

Customers including migrant workers hired by touts in teams of 20 to 30 to buy iPhones for resale at a mark-up to Chinese gadget fans waited overnight in freezing weather at the Apple store in Beijing’s eastern Sanlitun district.

.....

Ms Wu declined to comment on what Apple might know about touts buying iPhones for resale.


Purush
BRF Oldie
Posts: 2445
Joined: 26 Oct 2001 11:31
Location: Loc Muinne

Re: PRC Economy - New Reflections : Dec 15 2011

Postby Purush » 13 Jan 2012 14:16

amit wrote:HSR is viable only on a few routes, for example the famous Tokyo-Osaka bullet train. Siemens and other Cos, did a con job with CPC Mandarins and convinced them that HSR could be built on a grand scale. As a result Chinese have spend hundreds of billions of dollars and now have an unviable 10,000 km network of HSR.

A lot of that money has gone to the pockets of foreign companies. I think they really don't care that their tech was ripped off by the Chinese because they knew that they wouldn't be able to sell it anywhere else. I'd wager companies like Siemens made more money in China with HSR tech than they would have been able to in the rest of the world combined.


Interesting and plausible scenario Amit Mian.

This would nicely explain why apart from making a few loud noises about 'ip theft' and 'copying', none of these HSR tech companies have done anything to move operations out of China. From the companies' POV, the options would be (a) let the cheenis buy/steal whatever they need from the HSR ip as long as Siemens etc recoup a few billion $$ (b) protect the ip safe and not see a penny from the rest of the world. They obviously chose (a)

I hope our babus and netas are never bribed/coerced into building such white elephants. :-?

amit
BRF Oldie
Posts: 4325
Joined: 30 Aug 2007 18:28
Location: The Restaurant at the End of the Universe

Re: PRC Economy - New Reflections : Dec 15 2011

Postby amit » 13 Jan 2012 14:44

HSR on a few routes where the traffic is heavy is not a bad idea, say for example Hyderabad-Bangalore or Bangalore-Chennai, even Bangalore-Mumbai. Such short routes, where travel time would be at most a couple of hours makes sense IMO since the main passengers would be business people for whom time is money. For example a TCS employee in Bangalore would be able to travel to the TCS office in Chennai and be back the same day. However, if you do, say a Chennai-Delhi, where the distance is over 1,000 km. I'm convinced it would never be viable.

But whichever way you look at it 10,000 km network is pure hubris.

Purush
BRF Oldie
Posts: 2445
Joined: 26 Oct 2001 11:31
Location: Loc Muinne

Re: PRC Economy - New Reflections : Dec 15 2011

Postby Purush » 13 Jan 2012 14:53

True; short distances between high-commerce cities with point to point travel time+costs meeting or beating airline fares would be good conditions for HSR implementation.

Anything more widespread would probably be unviable.

The maintenance and monitoring costs for the tracks alone would be a killer I'd guess.

10k km in India would be laughable.

gakakkad
BRF Oldie
Posts: 4475
Joined: 24 May 2011 08:16

Re: PRC Economy - New Reflections : Dec 15 2011

Postby gakakkad » 13 Jan 2012 18:43

one of the biggest mistakes these idiots have made w.r.t HSRs is that they don't take freight. trains cant profit without cargo.

zlin miya , nice graph . Looks like something else .(HINT ,A men's best friend went privacy permits)

Theo_Fidel

Re: PRC Economy - New Reflections : Dec 15 2011

Postby Theo_Fidel » 13 Jan 2012 19:43

Amit,

That is a good observation. The Japanese however did withdraw from the Panda HSR market but more due to Panda cutting of corners that they frowned upon. They think there will be regular HSR accidents in China. The GErmans definitely made millions despite the rip-offs. For instance there will never be another Mag-lev built, ever. Wonder why the French stayed out.
--------------------------------------------------------------------------

HSR's by definition can not take freight. No where in the world does HSR take substantial freight, esp. bulk freight. But yes freight is the main money spinner.
------------------------------------------

Even the traffic between Chennai and Bangalore would be questionable. A HSR is typically High Volume. 10 pairs of trains every hour are not unheard of. Roughly 200,000 people moving in either direction every day. Roughly 3% of the entire population of Chennai/Bangalore combined. Is there such a number of IT/VITY type meeting wallahs?

gakakkad
BRF Oldie
Posts: 4475
Joined: 24 May 2011 08:16

Re: PRC Economy - New Reflections : Dec 15 2011

Postby gakakkad » 13 Jan 2012 21:53

given the size of HSR network the din dongs are planning , they better begin taking freight (if it is technically possible) . But coming to think of it ,even if they take freight they can't make their white dinosaur project profitable . Wonder if ladbrokes is offering bets on the year panda hsrs close down .

anishns
BRFite
Posts: 1342
Joined: 16 Dec 2007 09:43
Location: being victim onlee...

Re: PRC Economy - New Reflections : Dec 15 2011

Postby anishns » 13 Jan 2012 23:57

Hot Money Heads for China's Exit

A hurried exit of capital from China is flashing a warning sign for investors in the world's second-largest economy.

For the first time since the Asian financial crisis, China's foreign exchange reserves shrank in the last three months of 2011. A $20.6 billion slip still leaves Beijing with a monumental $3.18 trillion in reserves—more than enough for a rainy day.

But a quarterly fall has not been seen since investors fled Asia in the 1998 financial crisis. It reflects a marked turn of sentiment on the Chinese economy.

A smaller trade surplus, combined with valuation adjustments resulting from a fall in the dollar value of the euro share of the reserves, explains part of the fall. But the most significant cause of the decline appears to be the flow of capital out of China.

A drop in China's foreign-exchange reserves is highlighting the flow of capital out of the country.

Accounting for China's reserves is murky, but estimates suggest as much as $100 billion of capital may have left China in November and December. The last time hot money exited in such large quantities was the end of 2008.

The departure of speculative capital from the Chinese economy at this point makes a lot of sense. The yuan gained 5.1% against the dollar in 2011, but in 2012 is expected to gain just 2% to 3%. Property prices are falling and expected to fall further. The Shanghai Composite Index dropped 21% over the course of 2011 and sentiment in the equity markets remains fragile.

In short, all of the normal arguments for investors to keep their money in China no longer apply. When that's the case, it's natural that capital will start to head for the exit.


http://online.wsj.com/article/SB10001424052970204409004577158512853067358.html


vina
BRF Oldie
Posts: 6046
Joined: 11 May 2005 06:56
Location: Doing Nijikaran, Udharikaran and Baazarikaran to Commies and Assorted Leftists

Re: PRC Economy - New Reflections : Dec 15 2011

Postby vina » 14 Jan 2012 07:15

Wonder why the French stayed out

Weren't allowed in . French sold Mirage 2000s to Taiwan and put serious khujli in Panda's soup-e-rear.

Now guess who the largest prospective customer of the Rafale is.Taiwan of course. The French will make a massive sale there, cos the Taiwanese have really no other supplier other than Unkil. Euros (Germans etc daren't sell without Panda chopping the foot of German businesses in China) cant sell, French have no hang ups, will sell.

Singha
BRF Oldie
Posts: 66601
Joined: 13 Aug 2004 19:42
Location: the grasshopper lies heavy

Re: PRC Economy - New Reflections : Dec 15 2011

Postby Singha » 14 Jan 2012 08:36

imo even the high traffic corridors like mysore-blr-chennai, chennai-vijaywada, vijaywada-warangal-hyd, delhi-kanpur-lucknow, delhi-amritsar, kolkata-kharagpur, mumbai-pune, mumbai-ahmedabad, kochi-trivandrum DO NOT in india have enough people who'd be able to afford the much higher ticket prices of a HSR. there are plenty of travellers just not enough rich ones. heavy subsidies will be a permanent drain.

we are imo much better off improving the BRIDGES (1000s of ancient ones reduce the speed of trains for safety reasons), signaling, track and alignment to permit passenger trains an avg of 100kmph (which to account for stops means they would go upto 150kmph in many parts ..... the current rolling stock and locos can handle that) and BUILD additional 3rd lines dedicated to frieght, which will both move freight faster and keep 2 lines clear for up and dn pax trains. the new freight corridors delhi-kolkata (still in proposal stage) and delhi-mumbai will get such a freight line I believe.

thats the only prudent and useful course of action to me, not a few shiny ding dong HSR that will run mostly empty.

amit
BRF Oldie
Posts: 4325
Joined: 30 Aug 2007 18:28
Location: The Restaurant at the End of the Universe

Re: PRC Economy - New Reflections : Dec 15 2011

Postby amit » 14 Jan 2012 09:11

The Atlantist has an interesting article here which is relevant to this current discussion.

China’s train system—a mark of modernization and national pride {the CPC tendency to always proclaim that it has the biggest d*ck in the world} —has had significant and tragic challenges this summer, to say the least. July’s tragic high-speed rail crash in Wenzhou that killed 40 and injured almost 200 seemed to bear witness to the problems that come with rapid modernization and development. The trains were built quickly and run fast, but at the expense of detailed evaluation that comes from more voices weighing in on the problem.
Similarly, an escalator accident almost two months ago in a Beijing metro station left one teenager dead and about 30 people injured when it suddenly switched directions. In both events, the Chinese government was quick to blame the manufacturer of the equipment. Following the incidents public outrage exploded. In response, internet censorship of blogs and news sites exacerbated the negative attention already on the government, as newspapers were instructed to only accept stories offering positive remarks on the government’s response. When the machine for growth fails, the people have no ability to affect change for improvement or even offer comment. In China, the CCP may be on a collision course with the greater population.


In stark contrast, government shortcomings and the immediate pangs of development top the headlines of Indian newspapers. India has its own host of developmental and political problems, but at least voices can be heard. Coverage of the Commonwealth Games, which New Delhi hosted in October, was rife with stories of corruption, inefficient construction, and broken promises on the deliverable venues. However, the games went on, and despite pre-game frustrations, were largely a success (and provided a huge incentive to massively expand Delhi’s metro system). Add to this the telecom scandal of the past year, which attracted widespread media attention and public criticism, and significantly shook the government’s reputation. Still, the world’s largest democracy clings to the principle that slow and steady will win the race for a developed, modern society, complete with democratic ideals and values and free media to promote it.


The point is our politicos may be turds but even they daren't touch the freedom of society. Too scared of the lynch mob.
In a way that's the biggest difference between India and China. The later loves to be a authoritarian society where the God-king directs what normal citizens do. Indians by very nature are always questioning authority - that has its disadvantages but the one huge advantage is understood by the author of this article:

There are two reasons why India could beat China in the development battle based on its accessible freedom and democracy. First, having no outlet for grievances or public frustration with the government will ultimately lead to instability. Authoritarian regimes in the Middle East have finally seen the results of this compressed dissatisfaction with the government. And instability, as we have also seen, can lead to major government breakdown. Second, even without instability or an insurgency, the Chinese government is not taking advantage of its human capital. Ideas and criticisms are not freely expressed, and thus the best ideas, options, and solutions are never heard. India is not immune from many of the problems that plague China, but as long as the people keep voicing their opinions and priorities, I can’t help but think slow and steady will, eventually, win out.[


All in all a well written article and a must read for the CPC drones who still have a part of their brains intact.

amit
BRF Oldie
Posts: 4325
Joined: 30 Aug 2007 18:28
Location: The Restaurant at the End of the Universe

Re: PRC Economy - New Reflections : Dec 15 2011

Postby amit » 14 Jan 2012 09:15

Theo_Fidel wrote:Even the traffic between Chennai and Bangalore would be questionable. A HSR is typically High Volume. 10 pairs of trains every hour are not unheard of. Roughly 200,000 people moving in either direction every day. Roughly 3% of the entire population of Chennai/Bangalore combined. Is there such a number of IT/VITY type meeting wallahs?


Theo,

You're probably right. I was kite-flying a bit. The point remains only high density routes where there is a lot of business people moving around it makes sense to have HSR, provided that it's still cheaper than airlines.

amit
BRF Oldie
Posts: 4325
Joined: 30 Aug 2007 18:28
Location: The Restaurant at the End of the Universe

Re: PRC Economy - New Reflections : Dec 15 2011

Postby amit » 14 Jan 2012 09:55

Singha wrote:imo even the high traffic corridors like mysore-blr-chennai, chennai-vijaywada, vijaywada-warangal-hyd, delhi-kanpur-lucknow, delhi-amritsar, kolkata-kharagpur, mumbai-pune, mumbai-ahmedabad, kochi-trivandrum DO NOT in india have enough people who'd be able to afford the much higher ticket prices of a HSR. there are plenty of travellers just not enough rich ones. heavy subsidies will be a permanent drain.

we are imo much better off improving the BRIDGES (1000s of ancient ones reduce the speed of trains for safety reasons), signaling, track and alignment to permit passenger trains an avg of 100kmph (which to account for stops means they would go upto 150kmph in many parts ..... the current rolling stock and locos can handle that) and BUILD additional 3rd lines dedicated to frieght, which will both move freight faster and keep 2 lines clear for up and dn pax trains. the new freight corridors delhi-kolkata (still in proposal stage) and delhi-mumbai will get such a freight line I believe.

thats the only prudent and useful course of action to me, not a few shiny ding dong HSR that will run mostly empty.


+100

Edit: On second thoughts, with Musharaff back in action: +400%
:)

Singha
BRF Oldie
Posts: 66601
Joined: 13 Aug 2004 19:42
Location: the grasshopper lies heavy

Re: PRC Economy - New Reflections : Dec 15 2011

Postby Singha » 14 Jan 2012 10:45

IR does need to phase out the old rolling stock and get the new "LHB" type light and modern rakes into mass production. with 100,000+ passenger rakes its a giant task , even @ 5000 coaches / annum it would take 20 yrs .... we need some scalable soln to this issue. the locos being much fewer are easier soln and all the latest WDM and WAP locos are capable of hauling 25 rake trains @ 150kmph, though many bridges and older rakes are not fit for such speeds.

having a 3rd line on high density corridors will definitely cut by hours the time for long haul express trains. for example if we had a 3rd line from chennai to howrah and from chennai - vijaywada - warangal - itarsi - delhi, trains like the coromandel exp/howrah mail and TN Exp/GT exp could easily cut hours off. huge benefits for freight movement also.

vina
BRF Oldie
Posts: 6046
Joined: 11 May 2005 06:56
Location: Doing Nijikaran, Udharikaran and Baazarikaran to Commies and Assorted Leftists

Re: PRC Economy - New Reflections : Dec 15 2011

Postby vina » 14 Jan 2012 11:27

having a 3rd line on high density corridors will definitely cut by hours the time for long haul express trains. for example if we had a 3rd line from chennai to howrah and from chennai - vijaywada - warangal - itarsi - delhi, trains like the coromandel exp/howrah mail and TN Exp/GT exp could easily cut hours off. huge benefits for freight movement also.


All that can be done only when there is rationality in pricing and passenger services are not the "loss leader" they are now and freight massively cross subsidizes passenger traffic.

Passenger fares are terribly underpriced and needs to go up .Freight needs to compete head on with road freight and win. Today an Volvo Chennai-BLR is around Rs 600 to 700, while a Shatabdi ticket is some 300 (including meals) or so I think.

Theo_Fidel

Re: PRC Economy - New Reflections : Dec 15 2011

Postby Theo_Fidel » 14 Jan 2012 22:22

HSR tickets would actually compete with Airline. so on the order of Rs1,500 for Chennai Bangalore. But yes even train tickets must be raised for the resources to really upgrade.Actually IR only has about 30,000 long distance passenger coaches. 5000 coaches a year would clear the entire lot in 6 years!.We should do what Panda did. Build entire integral trainset rakes. That way we can mass produce and change a one go rather than mixing new coaches in with the general population which will cause chaos.

The key problem is that it is not easy working on an existing train right of way where trains run every 10 minutes or so. Even a 4 hour maintenance block is hard won these days. This is the reason Panda too went for separate dedicated lines.

It is a construction challenge. We should import some skilled english speaking construction managers who relish such a challenge. The solution would be to built the third line and barrier in the right of way while keeping the mainlines operational. Then one by one the other two lines could be diverted through the new line while they are upgraded in turn. Working on the centerline would be scary while trains thunder past on both sides.Something like a rolling covered shield tunnel might be useful to keep the workers safe.

gakakkad
BRF Oldie
Posts: 4475
Joined: 24 May 2011 08:16

Re: PRC Economy - New Reflections : Dec 15 2011

Postby gakakkad » 15 Jan 2012 07:14

^^ Isn't someone planning an HSR in India ? I Heard that delhi-mumbai route is being planned .

zlin
BRFite
Posts: 178
Joined: 07 Aug 2003 11:31

Re: PRC Economy - New Reflections : Dec 15 2011

Postby zlin » 15 Jan 2012 07:58

30-story building built in 15 days by a Chinese company


Return to “Trash Can Archive”

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 14 guests