PRC Economy and Industry: News and Discussions

Abhijeet · Post by **Abhijeet** » 23 Dec 2010 23:28

I'm not questioning that Chinese investment has passed the point of diminishing marginal utility, and that those ghost towns exist. But there are a few things that I think should be pointed out:

- My point about the Seoul/Beijing comparison was simply that it was unfair, since it was comparing countries at very different levels of development. If anything, the example of South Korea (as well as Japan, the UK and other industrialized countries) shows that almost any environmental degradation can be set right "later", after the country has gotten rich. So excessive worrying about ecological or heritage preservation is misplaced when most of the population doesn't have their basic needs satisfied.

- There are a lot of posts about how India is efficient and is developing "on the cheap". India hasn't even started deploying the huge sums of capital needed to truly address its infrastructural needs. As all the engineers on BR know, the complexity of running projects does not scale linearly. It may be relatively easy to deploy $5 billion a year efficiently, but the efficiency ratio will come down when $100 billion needs to be deployed. India will need to show that it is capable of deploying capital on as large a scale as China while maintaining its efficiency, because the current level of investment is simply not going to cut it. Hopefully, a more transparent banking system will help it get there, but that's not proven.

- There is a lot of inefficiency in the Indian system as well in terms of opportunity costs. All those people going to work in overcrowded buses and trains; all those roads that need repaving after every monsoon; all that lack of mechanization that results in several construction laborers taking weeks to complete what one person could build in a day elsewhere; all that is inefficiency as well. It may seem efficient to underinvest in everything, but that's just because the opportunity costs of all those sub-optimal processes is not taken into account.

- I really doubt the "Potemkin village" theory of China and I'm surprised that it's still making the rounds. From what I've read, while the shiny expressways and HSRs are being built (as well as the ghost towns), the less glamorous infrastructure -- rural roads, broadband lines -- is also being built. You couldn't sell 1 million cars per month in China otherwise, or have 400 million people using the Internet, or generate $2 billion a year from the decidedly "upscale" industry of online games. These are consumer goods so they're bought by people with their own money, not by government bureaucrats who want to impress the world. How can those markets be so robust if 98% of the population has been left far behind?

Anyway, it's not my intention to defend Chinese policies. But I think some of the smugness about India's "efficiency" is misplaced. There are huge costs to the chaos and poor execution we see everywhere in India.

chola · Post by **chola** » 24 Dec 2010 00:05

A poor nation, say North Korea, would scrounge its resources together to put up a Potemkin village. The image of wealth is a facade because there is only this one village.

But when you have dozens of Potemkin cities, not villages, and each one has its own Potemkin airport, Potemkin railway and Potemkin infrastructure then at this point the facade becomes reality. Perception can become reality when it brings in hard currency as investment. Shanghai, Shenzhen and the rest of them were built on FDI.

Perception begets investment which begets wealth. We can't ignore the fact that massive wealth is being created in cities across China even if they are showcases and even if the rest of the PRC is overwhelmingly poor. The chini ability to bring in FDI is directly related to its showcase cities and it is a major reason why they were able to lap us four times over since the 1970s.

shynee · Post by **shynee** » 24 Dec 2010 00:46

The limits of Chinese expansionism

Ameet · Post by **Ameet** » 24 Dec 2010 04:19

China’s Army of Graduates Struggles for Jobs

http://www.nytimes.com/2010/12/12/world ... l?ref=asia

....not far from the Olympic Village, where tens of thousands of other young strivers cram four to a room. Unable to find a bed and unimpressed by the rabbit warren of slapdash buildings, Ms. Liu scowled as the smell of trash wafted up around her. “Beijing isn’t like this in the movies,” she said.

In 1998, when Jiang Zemin, then the president, announced plans to bolster higher education, Chinese universities and colleges produced 830,000 graduates a year. Last May, that number was more than six million and rising.

Chinese sociologists have come up with a new term for educated young people who move in search of work like Ms. Liu: the ant tribe. It is a reference to their immense numbers — at least 100,000 in Beijing alone — and to the fact that they often settle into crowded neighborhoods, toiling for wages that would give even low-paid factory workers pause.

“Like ants, they gather in colonies, sometimes underground in basements, and work long and hard,” said Zhou Xiaozheng, a sociology professor at Renmin University in Beijing.

amit · Post by **amit** » 24 Dec 2010 07:21

This is hilarious!

X-posting from the Strat fora

Gerard wrote:Rent a White Guy

Not long ago I was offered work as a quality-control expert with an American company in China I’d never heard of. No experience necessary—which was good, because I had none. I’d be paid $1,000 for a week, put up in a fancy hotel, and wined and dined in Dongying, an industrial city in Shandong province I’d also never heard of. The only requirements were a fair complexion and a suit.

“I call these things ‘White Guy in a Tie’ events,” a Canadian friend of a friend named Jake told me during the recruitment pitch he gave me in Beijing, where I live. “Basically, you put on a suit, shake some hands, and make some money. We’ll be in ‘quality control,’ but nobody’s gonna be doing any quality control. You in?”

I was.

And so I became a fake businessman in China, an often lucrative gig for underworked expatriates here. One friend, an American who works in film, was paid to represent a Canadian company and give a speech espousing a low-carbon future. Another was flown to Shanghai to act as a seasonal-gifts buyer. Recruiting fake businessmen is one way to create the image—particularly, the image of connection—that Chinese companies crave. My Chinese-language tutor, at first aghast about how much we were getting paid, put it this way: “Having foreigners in nice suits gives the company face.”

Dongying was home to Sun Tzu, the author of The Art of War, and that’s just about all it has going for it. The landscape is dry and bleak, with factories in all directions. We were met at the airport by Ken, a young Canadian of Taiwanese extraction with a brush cut and leather jacket, whose company, we were told, had been subcontracted to manage the project.

The lobby at our hotel was dimly lit and smelled like bad seafood. “At least we have a nice view,” Ernie deadpanned as he opened the drapes in our room to reveal a scrap yard. A truck had been stripped for parts, and old tires were heaped into a pile. A dog yelped.

Ken drove us to the company’s temporary offices: small rooms with cement floors and metal walls arranged around a courtyard. We toured the facility, which built high-tech manufacturing equipment, then returned to the office and sat for hours. Across the courtyard, we could hear Ernie rehearsing his speech.

The next morning was the official ribbon-cutting ceremony. A stage and red carpet had been set up near the construction site. Pretty girls in red dragon-patterned dresses greeted visitors, and Chinese pop blared from loudspeakers. Down the street, police in yellow vests directed traffic. The mayor was there with other local dignitaries, and so were TV cameras and reporters. We stood in the front row wearing suits, safety vests, and hard hats. As we waited for the ceremony to begin, a foreman standing beside me barked at workers still visible on the construction site. They scurried behind the scaffolding.

“Are you the boss?” I asked him.

He looked at me quizzically. “You’re the boss.”

Actually, Ernie was the boss. After a brief introduction, “Director” Ernie delivered his speech before the hundred or so people in attendance. He boasted about the company’s long list of international clients and emphasized how happy we were to be working on such an important project. When the speech was over, confetti blasted over the stage, fireworks popped above the dusty field beside us, and Ernie posed for a photo with the mayor.

For the next few days, we sat in the office swatting flies and reading magazines, purportedly high-level employees of a U.S. company that, I later discovered, didn’t really exist. We were so important, in fact, that two of the guys were hired to stay for eight months (to be fair, they actually then received quality-control training).

“Lots happening,” Ken told me. “We need people for a week every month. It’ll be better next time, too. We’ll have new offices.” He paused before adding: “Bring a computer. You can watch movies all day.”

Pratyush · Post by **Pratyush** » 24 Dec 2010 13:31

People's republics

There are growing doubts over the sustainability of China's authoritarian model of development and greater recent praise for India's democratic version. In October, US President Barack Obama's economic adviser Larry Summers told a meeting of business leaders in Mumbai that the world in 2040 would be talking, not about a Washington or Beijing consensus, but a 'Mumbai Consensus' on economic development in the future. Chinese Premier Wen Jiabao did not go as far as Summers in elevating the Indian approach above China's. But the premier ended his three-day visit to India last week by declaring that India's rise had enhanced the confidence and strength of all developing countries.

Despite praise for both systems, the common wisdom is that the Chinese approach is superior to the Indian one in one respect: poverty reduction. After all, in 1980, around 80% of people in both countries lived in poverty. In India, it is now around 22% compared to about 12% in China. The assumption is that China's State-led authoritarian model, although more menacing than India's chaotic democracy, allow its leaders to plan China's rise in a more ordered and manageable environment, to the ultimate benefit of its poor. But such an argument is less compelling than it would first appear when we take a closer look at what actually occurred since China began its reforms in December 1978.

Because China has been growing at almost 10% since 1980 (except for the 'Tiananmen Interlude' period from 1989-1992), the assumption is that the country has followed one model towards prosperity and poverty alleviation. In fact, China has actually gone through two significantly distinct reform periods.

The first was from 1979 until the Tiananmen protests in 1989. After the disasters of centralised Maoism, Deng Xiaoping did two big things. First, power was decentralised and local officials were given much more power to make economic decisions. Second, the four-fifths of the population who were peasants were allowed to use their land in any way they wanted and sell their products at market prices.

This so-called 'household responsibility' structure gave rise to millions of 'township and village enterprises' (TVE) — small-scale industries that began the industrialisation and urbanisation process. These TVEs were technically owned by the local collective but many were run like private industries. In Deng's words, this was a "completely unplanned, spontaneous revolution that took us by surprise."

But it worked. Eighty percent of the poverty reduction that occurred in China took place from 1979-1989. It had little to do with any authoritarian model or supposed authoritarian qualities, or the far-sighted long-term planning and wise counsel of Chinese Communist Party (CCP) leaders. Significantly, it was actually about the CCP relinquishing economic and social control over the country.

During this period, the de facto private sector received about three-quarters of all the country's capital in the first 10 years of reform – the reverse of what is happening today. There was no discrimination against the private sector in favour of the State-controlled one; meaning that household incomes across-the-board were rising with the tide. It was a genuine bottom-up rather than the present top-down approach.

Following the countrywide protests that almost brought down the regime, the CCP deliberately retook control of the economy from the mid-1990s onwards: favouring the State-controlled sector over the private one in key economic areas in order to prevent the emergence of an independent economic middle class. Although GDP has continued to expand at an impressive pace, household incomes have been growing at a paltry 1-3% each year even as profits in the State-controlled sector expand by 15-20% per annum. Significantly, since the rise of 'authoritarian development' in China, poverty reduction advanced by approximately 1.5% each year,meaning that China has underperformed vis-a-vis India since the latter began reforms in the early 1990s. Indeed, given the State-controlled bias that accelerated from this century onwards, poverty alleviation has remain stagnant and some studies even suggest that absolute poverty in China has actually increased.

Compared to the Indian bottom-up approach which is driven by the private sector and domestic consumption, China's top-down State-led model has created a country of some 150-200 million 'insiders' who benefit disproportionately from the fruits of economic growth. While measurements of income inequality have remained fairly constant even as India rises, Chinese society has become the most unequal in all of Asia. Although far from being a tranquil society, India does not have anywhere near the reported 124,000 instances of 'mass unrest' that occurred in China in 2009.

Even if Premier Wen and Prime Minister Singh would want to deny it, the Chinese and Indian approaches to economic development and poverty alleviation are being watched and compared by the 150 undeveloped and developing countries. Larry Summers might have been flattering his hosts in preparation for Obama's visit to India which took place in November. But the weaknesses of the Beijing Consensus mean that we will be hearing much more about the Mumbai Consensus in the years to come.

John Lee is director, Foreign Policy, Centre for Independent Studies, Sydney. The views expressed by the author are personal.

Posting in full as it deserves to be read in full. Provides a nice little contrast for us SDREs who start shivering in their Dhoties at the mear mention of PRC.

vina · Post by **vina** » 24 Dec 2010 13:51

Pratyush wrote:People's republics

Have to agree with this article. I have always maintained that the Pearl River Delta model vs Shanghai models existed in China and actually now the Shanghai model is just sucking up the surplus from the Pearl River delta model.

I do think that Deng Xiao Ping was the last of the true leaders in China. He paid his dues during the revolution alongside Mao and lived through the horrors and depredations of Mao's cultural revolution and the mass starvation and deaths in the country side and the Mao made famines of the great leap forward and knew first hand what worked and what didn't.

What we got after that was a bunch of block heads , especially when the hardliners "cleansed" the CPC of the civilized types after Tiananmen square and now the party seems to be filled with solely an absolutely limitless supply block heads minted in batches an assembly line and each more corrupt and unreal than the earlier batch. Few of the newer leaders would know the events and experiences of the earlier era first hand from a position of authority and none would have any experience or dealing with mass popular movements and aspirations with anything beyond the "clamp down hard/hit hard " kind of rubbish and trying to legitimize the CPC rule via blandishments of GDP (and hence more Shanghai stats and Beijing bean counting of everything) growth.

Tanaji · Post by **Tanaji** » 24 Dec 2010 16:06

Slightly OT:

Isnt it interesting and gratifying that there are Indians on this board that will defend the Chinese viewpoint and disagree with the majority? Contrast this if the situation was reversed, how many Chinese posters would be defending a minority Indian viewpoint on a Chinese forum?

I find this something to be proud of that people in India have the freedom to say what they want even if it is against the popular opinion.

Back to regular programming.

Singha · Post by **Singha** » 24 Dec 2010 18:08

I feel though the wide roads to ghost towns like ordos served no purpose, the improvements in long distance road and rail routes significantly boost economic growth wherever they reach into. in this, china has spent a lot more $$ more quicker than india.

chola · Post by **chola** » 24 Dec 2010 19:49

Tanaji wrote:Slightly OT:

I find this something to be proud of that people in India have the freedom to say what they want even if it is against the popular opinion.

Back to regular programming.

Actually, it's not off topic. I can't think of anything more debilitating to economics than communism. It stifles entrepreurship, innovation and accountability -- everything needed to build a sustainable growing economy.

It is no accident that the wealthiest nations on earth are all democracies and every democratic neighbor around China from Japan to Taiwan are at least a dozen times wealthier per head.

This law is unbroken. It doesn't matter if it was West Germany and East Germany in the past or South and North Korea today. Democracy trumps communism. If China remains communist, India will catch up and then overtake it.

Conversely if China becomes a democracy midstream, we could end up with a China with a per capita GDP of Taiwan and it is doubtful that we will ever catch up.

For India's security, it would probably be better if China were a democracy. But if we are racing with them to be the biggest economy, we would want China to remain what it is today for a long time.

jamwal · Post by **jamwal** » 24 Dec 2010 21:12

Amit saar,

chola wrote:
Perception begets investment which begets wealth. We can't ignore the fact that massive wealth is being created in cities across China even if they are showcases and even if the rest of the PRC is overwhelmingly poor. The chini ability to bring in FDI is directly related to its showcase cities and it is a major reason why they were able to lap us four times over since the 1970s.

That's what I feel too. Let me put on Delhi's example again, Noida and Gurgaon to be exact which contain most of private sector offices, industry. Both places are terrible in terms of infrastructure, electricity, roads, law enforcement. Roads don't exist. the one that were constructed decades ago are all broken, dug up, encroached, contain more cattle and dogs than vehicles.
No building can function without it's own power generators and UPS.
Police and related law enforcement agencies instead of helping, harass and exploit people.

Contrast all this with Shanghai, Beijing or any other "touched up" Chinese city you so disdain.
I hope that even you'll admit that the basic infrastructure of these places where most foreign investors will conduct most of their business is light years ahead of India in every single way that one can think of.
Businessmen don't need to travel to villages, slum areas to see how much freedom authorities allow their citizens. Only things they are concerned with is cheap supply of labour, electricity, raw materials, internet etc.. Conditions afforded to citizens by their government is least of their worries.

I don't know about you, but if I was somebody looking for some place to establish my factory and given a choice between India and China after a tour of both, I don't think condition of oppressed people will make any difference to me.

As for stupidity-intelligence thing concerned, I don't think a country like China which is in control of 1000s of kms of Indian territory is run by idiots.

Theo_Fidel · Post by **Theo_Fidel** » 24 Dec 2010 22:52

Just to remind everyone. FDI in China is a relatively small chunk. The real miracle is this chart posted earlier. As with the real world, everything comes down to money. China saves and invest much more money hence more growth. Every thing else is window dressing.

Note that we started investing 35%+ only from 2005, hence our new found miracle growth. All these claims of Panda efficiency are garbage.

JwalaMukhi · Post by **JwalaMukhi** » 24 Dec 2010 23:09

jamwal wrote: Contrast all this with Shanghai, Beijing or any other "touched up" Chinese city you so disdain.
I hope that even you'll admit that the basic infrastructure of these places where most foreign investors will conduct most of their business is light years ahead of India in every single way that one can think of.
Businessmen don't need to travel to villages, slum areas to see how much freedom authorities allow their citizens. Only things they are concerned with is cheap supply of labour, electricity, raw materials, internet etc.. Conditions afforded to citizens by their government is least of their worries.

I don't know about you, but if I was somebody looking for some place to establish my factory and given a choice between India and China after a tour of both, I don't think condition of oppressed people will make any difference to me.

What is good for a corporation is not necessarily good for the city. The average life span of corporation is 30 years, while cities need to run for much longer. Anyways, here is a good piece that will help put things in perspective about cities. By no means, inefficiency of the Nehurvian economic model is supported.

http://www.nytimes.com/2010/12/19/magaz ... est-t.html

This raises the obvious question: Why are corporations so fleeting? After buying data on more than 23,000 publicly traded companies, Bettencourt and West discovered that corporate productivity, unlike urban productivity, was entirely sublinear. As the number of employees grows, the amount of profit per employee shrinks.

For West, the impermanence of the corporation illuminates the real strength of the metropolis. Unlike companies, which are managed in a top-down fashion by a team of highly paid executives, cities are unruly places, largely immune to the desires of politicians and planners. “Think about how powerless a mayor is,” West says. “They can’t tell people where to live or what to do or who to talk to. Cities can’t be managed, and that’s what keeps them so vibrant. They’re just these insane masses of people, bumping into each other and maybe sharing an idea or two. It’s the freedom of the city that keeps it alive.”

shynee · Post by **shynee** » 25 Dec 2010 09:55

Why I don’t want an Iphone for Christmas - Life @ Foxcon(n)

Hari Seldon · Post by **Hari Seldon** » 25 Dec 2010 10:00

jamwal,

Businessmen don't need to travel to villages, slum areas to see how much freedom authorities allow their citizens. Only things they are concerned with is cheap supply of labour, electricity, raw materials, internet etc.. Conditions afforded to citizens by their government is least of their worries.

I don't know about you, but if I was somebody looking for some place to establish my factory and given a choice between India and China after a tour of both, I don't think condition of oppressed people will make any difference to me.

Good point. While the condition of oppressed people may make no difference to you, it might start to matter if the gubmint in charge could just as easily oppress your business similarly and extract all its profits, tech and secrets. The same lack of recourse in law that doesn't aid the oppressed people won't come to your aid either, be assured. I'm told several hi-tech oiro firms, Aussie mining firms and a certain group of Surati diamond traders are discovering the joys of CCP ishtyle efficiency on the mainland only.

Still, some things need to be appreciated. PBoC repudiated all its goldman derivatives contracts and paid them not a dime. That takes balls which cheena apparently has in droves. Goldman has so far STFUed about it when they figured even they had zero options in china against the CCP. jai ho, jai hu and all that.

wig · Post by **wig** » 25 Dec 2010 12:42

one is probably correct about business persons not caring about the rights and lives of the common persons. but it also implies that the govt of that land works through something similar to imperial fiat. the decisions of comissioning or decommissioning industries and developing roads, infrastructure etc are based on the whims, fancies and decision making ability and quality of an elite. this elite is self replicating and over the last few decades has developed vested interests.
as an industrialist in such a nation; doubtless, you can commence manufacturing whatever you want in a jiffy.- please also keep in mind that the govt decides in its wisdom what you are to pay as taxes, rent, salary whatever. and this govt is not answerable or transparent to its own people, leave alone an outside business person.
in my opinion the essential defining difference is that you have no rule of law and worse no right to appeal. in India we have three or four levels of appeal right up to the Supreme Court and a vociferous press that can be depended on to agitate all and anything.

DavidD · Post by **DavidD** » 25 Dec 2010 13:18

amit wrote:
DavidD wrote:So you're agreeing with me that google image doesn't constitute research? I'd be happy to retract that post if that means you and theo will retract your last 2 pages' worth of "research."
David,

Theo has been saying something else as well.

And that is many Chinese have learnt to speak and write grammatically correct English but they've yet to understand the nuances of the language. Please don't take it as a knock down on you and your countrymen. You guys have made great strides in the language. Even on BRF I've see how successive generations of Chinese posters have come and each generation is better in the language than previous ones. However, due to historical reasons the Indians have a head start in the language...

What I meant was a rather snide comment on the state of Internet freedom in China - the Baidu reference was in relation to the recent spat between Google and the Chinese govt and the fact that China was the only place in the world were Google - due to govt pressure - is not the No1 search engine, Baidu has 70 per cent share. Yet you as a Chinese first turned to Google as an adjective... You didn't say: I'll do a Baidu and show you how poor India is!

As for your other arguments, they merit a more serious discussion. For example, why does China have so much more FDI but not as much GDP growth? Just look at the numbers! What did that diplomat say, $50-60 billion? What percentage of China's GDP is that? Like 1%? Instead of immediately seeking an answer that you want to hear, which is that India is more efficient, the real answer is much simpler: GDP is about much more than just FDI. Now, that doesn't mean that India is not more efficient, it may very well be, but this is no proof of it.
I'm afraid you don't understand the numbers here. You can't just say $50 billion is just x per cent of GDP and so not important. You gotta spell out FDI especially the I to understand why. Any investment has a multiplier effect or should have on the economy in order to be "sound" investment. If FDI was so unimportant in economic growth then why does China even bother to attract it. The reason is FDI also brings in new knowhow, technology etc and these have a multiplier effect.

The HSRs technology or the stuff which Huawei and ZTE build first came into China via FDI didn't it? If they didn't come in do you think you guys would have been able to copy the technology?

No sir, in the years we are discussing $50-$60 billion FDI was very important to China. And there's no shame to admitting that.

In India capital is used much more efficiently. Almost everybody who invests acknowledges that. If you haven't seen evidence of that then tough luck!

No need to be patronizing amit, I've been attending school in the states since middle school, I have a degree in Electrical Engineering from an American college and and am pursuing a MD degree from an American medical school. I'm pretty sure my English is better than that of at least 90% of BRFites. Maybe not in grammar, actually, but definitely in idioms and such.

Now, I got your Baidu reference, and I chose to ignore it since it falls into the "snide comments" category which I talked about. In any case, it's irrelevant to the conversation at hand.

As for the FDI, I never said it's not important, but you were treating it as the ONLY source of GDP growth with your 10 times the FDI should give you 10 times the growth comment, and that just isn't even close to being true.

DavidD · Post by **DavidD** » 25 Dec 2010 13:27

wig wrote:one is probably correct about business persons not caring about the rights and lives of the common persons. but it also implies that the govt of that land works through something similar to imperial fiat. the decisions of comissioning or decommissioning industries and developing roads, infrastructure etc are based on the whims, fancies and decision making ability and quality of an elite. this elite is self replicating and over the last few decades has developed vested interests.
as an industrialist in such a nation; doubtless, you can commence manufacturing whatever you want in a jiffy.- please also keep in mind that the govt decides in its wisdom what you are to pay as taxes, rent, salary whatever. and this govt is not answerable or transparent to its own people, leave alone an outside business person.
in my opinion the essential defining difference is that you have no rule of law and worse no right to appeal. in India we have three or four levels of appeal right up to the Supreme Court and a vociferous press that can be depended on to agitate all and anything.

The proof of the pudding is in the eating. You can talk about laws and systems all you want, but how could such a transparent government allow something like the 2G scandal to happen? Shouldn't something like that be nipped in the bud if the government were truly transparent? It's also a little hypocritical to label the Chinese government a consort of self-replicating elites when no family in China holds the power the Ghandis do in India, no?

amit · Post by **amit** » 25 Dec 2010 15:11

DavidD wrote:The proof of the pudding is in the eating. You can talk about laws and systems all you want, but how could such a transparent government allow something like the 2G scandal to happen? Shouldn't something like that be nipped in the bud if the government were truly transparent? It's also a little hypocritical to label the Chinese government a consort of self-replicating elites when no family in China holds the power the Ghandis do in India, no?

Indeed David, the proof of the pie is in eating it. Your response is typical of someone who does not know how a democratic set up works. This government has been in power since 2004 and this scam happened during the time this government was/in power.

And yet you have situation where the government officials under the investigative agencies under the all powerful Home Ministry have unearthed the scam and the Judiciary has put the government to dock. And parties in opposition to this government is taking advantages of this and all could result in the overthrow of this government.

Now we haven't heard about any scams in China because there's no way in hell that millions stolen by the powers that be will come out in the open.

You see the democratic system is not only about honesty and upright leadership - that type can come up in type of political dispensation. The democratic system is about check and balances - systems that ensure that if a 2G type scam happens every Indian gets to know about it and the perpretrators are found out. The feudal, autocratic dictatorship (it's an insult to call the CCP Comminist anymore) does not have this type of checks and balances.

Your point about the Gandhi family is laughable to say the least. This family is the head of one political party and this family has been in the head of the party when it was in opposition. This is different from the CCP Politburo heads who are chosen by a small coterie of people and the Chinese mass has no say or cannot remove them if they don't like them.

So when you try to do equal-equal please understand what democracy is all about before even coming to the table.

rsingh · Post by **rsingh** » 25 Dec 2010 20:11

We can find thousands of pics like those. Point is Chinese regularly copy and produce western goods and then portray it as their own. Same thing for those superfast trains.

PrasadZ · Post by **PrasadZ** » 25 Dec 2010 23:40

no need to be patronizing amit, I've been attending school in the states since middle school, I have a degree in Electrical Engineering from an American college and and am pursuing a MD degree from an American medical school. I'm pretty sure my English is better than that of at least 90% of BRFites. Maybe not in grammar, actually, but definitely in idioms and such.

And with that background, you post on an Indian jingo forum about the strength of the Chinese economy and it's ability to build military aircraft?!

Anyhoo

Fdi is a big driver of Chinese GDP growth. Google it or check economist.com
bubbles are nearly certain to form in a command economy and china is no exception. I can cite research but economics is not engineering so you will have to choose an ideology at some point in the analysis and I would ask you whether you accept the market ideology of your host country ?

jamwal · Post by **jamwal** » 26 Dec 2010 00:13

JwalaMukhi ji,

There was a news story about an Italian windmill manufacturer posted just 1-2 pages back which was facing same govt. sponsored theft that you mentioned. But that didn't stop them or many other companies from shifting their manufacturing to China.

DavidD
Degree in Electrical and MD from Medical school ? I guess am too ignorant of US educational system.

sanjaykumar · Post by **sanjaykumar** » 26 Dec 2010 01:51

Not one of you four are lying.

DavidD · Post by **DavidD** » 26 Dec 2010 02:50

PrasadZ wrote:
no need to be patronizing amit, I've been attending school in the states since middle school, I have a degree in Electrical Engineering from an American college and and am pursuing a MD degree from an American medical school. I'm pretty sure my English is better than that of at least 90% of BRFites. Maybe not in grammar, actually, but definitely in idioms and such.
And with that background, you post on an Indian jingo forum about the strength of the Chinese economy and it's ability to build military aircraft?!

Anyhoo

Fdi is a big driver of Chinese GDP growth. Google it or check economist.com
bubbles are nearly certain to form in a command economy and china is no exception. I can cite research but economics is not engineering so you will have to choose an ideology at some point in the analysis and I would ask you whether you accept the market ideology of your host country ?

Hah yea, my dad is pretty into military and geopolitics stuff, so I guess I got a bit into it as well.

As for the importance of FDI, I don't think the economist is a good source. I was once sucked by their name to believe that they're experts on economic matters as well...but turns out they really just specialize in charts

shynee · Post by **shynee** » 26 Dec 2010 10:22

China Shows Elite Hand

Focus on Bank of China, not the Fed

zlin · Post by **zlin** » 27 Dec 2010 19:33

Swedes name China most innovative in future

A new Swedish study has revealed that respondents from six countries believe that China will become the world's most innovative country in 10 years, followed by India and the US.

Anglo-Swedish pharmaceutical company AstraZeneca interviewed 6,000 people in six countries, the US, Japan, England, Sweden, China and India, for its major innovation study.

Overall, all respondents in the six countries predicted China will become the world's most innovative country by 2020. Second on the list is India, while the US and Japan are expected to move down to third and fourth respectively.

China and India boast strong optimism in terms of their abilities to develop through innovation, contrary to the perceptions of residents in western countries.

zlin · Post by **zlin** » 27 Dec 2010 22:23

3 Chinese Companies were listed in 10 Top Innovative Companies by TheStreet.com
10 Top Innovative Companies

4. HTC

HTC had been making Windows Mobile phones for quite a while before introducing the world to the Android OS with its Dream handset. Now its Droid Incredible for Verizon(VZ_) and Evo 4G for Sprint(S_) have helped Android stand toe-to-toe with Apple and Research in Motion(RIMM_), and Google is hoping its technology can help and Android tablet pummel the iPad.
How good was HTC this year? Its share price is up 13% but, perhaps more tellingly, it was directly targeted by Apple in a complaint filed with the Federal Trade Commission in March alleging infringement on Apple patents -- something HTC vehemently denies. With Android demand growing and Microsoft pushing for Windows 7 smartphone success, HTC has found a way to reap all of the benefits of its handsets while dodging the criticism thrown at their operating systems.

8. BYD

Back in 2008, a tiny branch of Berkshire Hathaway bought a 10% interest in China's BYD -- which makes cell phone batteries, solar panels and environmentally friendly automobiles -- for $230 million. Warren Buffett's piece of that company was worth $2 billion by the end of last year as BYD profits tripled and its stock price grew 400%. That's not on the way down, either, as BYD announced a plug-in hybrid vehicle earlier this year and was commissioned by China, in a joint venture with Germany's Daimler, to help that nation's green push by building electric cars. Early estimates have those hybrids and electrics being shipped to Europe by next year; the company is testing a fleet of its F3DM electric cars with the Housing Authority of Los Angeles this year; has an eye toward U.S. electric bus sales by next year; and car sales by 2012.

10. Haier

Quick, who's the No. 1 appliance maker in the world? If you didn't guess that Chinese company you'd never heard of that made the college dorm fridges you saw at Home Depot(HD_), Lowe's(LOW_) and Sears(SHLD_) all summer, shame on you. According to Euromonitor International, Haier has ascended to the top spot in global appliance sales, commanding 6.1% of the world's white goods market.
That is a 20% improvement from last year, but it also masks Haier's 12.5% share of the world's refrigerator market and 9.8% of its laundry machine purchases. Revenue is up roughly 22% since 2006, and it's based on two factors: price and demographic. It doesn't take an innovator to offer cheap mini-fridges, microwaves and air conditioners, but innovation helps if you want to do all of that and cater to twentysomething urbanites by nearly cornering the market on wine refrigerators, portable washers and countertop dishwashers. Its growing share of the keg refrigerator/tap market, while not nearly as inexpensive, also seems to speak to a very specific audience.
-- Written by Jason Notte in Boston.

putnanja · Post by **putnanja** » 27 Dec 2010 22:40

HTC is a taiwanese company, not a chinese company. It has a democratic govt, rule of law, patent protection and a good independent judiciary, unlike China. To claim HTC as a chinese company is like pakistan claiming infosys to be a pakistani company

rsingh · Post by **rsingh** » 27 Dec 2010 22:42

htc is Taiwanese( And yes Taiwan is not China)
Making copy cat cars not big achivment, we know that. Other examlples are above.
And Whatever -led.................... a good copy but still a copy.

Want to impress about what Sweds think...................why be selective They also think that
-Chnia is a big jail
- human rights in China are ..........you know the story
- That Chinese copy things and then bring it in market at low price
-etc etc

And do not think that by putting INDIA on second you will make some friends here. We are far away but on solid foundation.

Will delete this ASAP

zlin · Post by **zlin** » 27 Dec 2010 23:02

China’s First expressway in Tibet to open May’11
(TibetanReview.net, Dec16, 2010) China said Dec 14 that it was on course to complete the first expressway in the Tibet Autonomous Region by Mar’11, in time for its opening in May’11. The expressway, a four-lane road linking Lhasa city proper and Gongkar Airport, had entered its final stage and would open in six months as expected, reported China’s official Xinhuanet news service Dec 14.

The report said that about 85 percent of the 38-km expressway had been completed, and workers were now focused on a 389-metre tunnel in the craggy mountains near Gongkar Airport. It cited Li Dingkun, an ethnic Chinese who is the leader of the construction team, as saying the tunnel would be completed by Mar’11, in time for the expressway to open in May’11 as scheduled.

The Lhasa-Gongkar Expressway runs along the southern bank of the Lhasa River, a tributary of Yarlung Tsangpo (Brahmaputra in India).

The report added that the 1.55 billion yuan (US$232.7 million) project would ease traffic pressure along the Lhasa section of the No. 318 national highway that sees frequent flooding and traffic jams.

rsingh · Post by **rsingh** » 27 Dec 2010 23:22

Chinese labour camps

I will be not proud of such a country..........even if we make expressway to moon.

JE Menon · Post by **JE Menon** » 27 Dec 2010 23:27

Guys, the thread is getting derailed...ignore the trolls. Don't feed the trolls. If the trolls cross the line admins will take care. Discuss with those who are able to ...

zlin · Post by **zlin** » 28 Dec 2010 09:24

China Surpasses Japan in R&D as Powers Shift

By GAUTAM NAIK
China is on the verge of overtaking Japan as the second-biggest spender on research and development after the U.S., marking another key shift in the rivalry between the world's economic powerhouses, a new report shows.

China is expected to spend $153.7 billion on R&D in 2011, up from the $141.4 billion it will spend this year, according to Battelle Memorial Institute, a nonprofit that does scientific research for the government and industry. By comparison, Japan is expected to spend $144.1 billion next year, up from $142 billion in 2010.

Even in areas where it once lagged a long way, China is quickly catching up. The report describes the growth of Huawei Technologies Co. a Chinese telecommunications company founded in 1988, which is now the third-largest maker of mobile infrastructure equipment. More than half of Huawei's 60,000 employees work in R&D, Battelle says.

China's "double digit growth in R&D tracks its economic growth. Few expect this high rate of growth to slow in the near future, and some suggest that it might accelerate," the report concludes.

shynee · Post by **shynee** » 28 Dec 2010 09:26

China's Real-Estate Frenzy - WSJ

amit · Post by **amit** » 28 Dec 2010 10:07

zlin wrote:China Surpasses Japan in R&D as Powers Shift

By GAUTAM NAIK
China is on the verge of overtaking Japan as the second-biggest spender on research and development after the U.S., marking another key shift in the rivalry between the world's economic powerhouses, a new report shows.

China is expected to spend $153.7 billion on R&D in 2011, up from the $141.4 billion it will spend this year, according to Battelle Memorial Institute, a nonprofit that does scientific research for the government and industry. By comparison, Japan is expected to spend $144.1 billion next year, up from $142 billion in 2010.

Even in areas where it once lagged a long way, China is quickly catching up. The report describes the growth of Huawei Technologies Co. a Chinese telecommunications company founded in 1988, which is now the third-largest maker of mobile infrastructure equipment. More than half of Huawei's 60,000 employees work in R&D, Battelle says.

China's "double digit growth in R&D tracks its economic growth. Few expect this high rate of growth to slow in the near future, and some suggest that it might accelerate," the report concludes.

Such reports are meaningless and unworthy of a paper with the heritage of WSJ.

First of all one needs to categorize what exactly is being counted as R&D otherwise anyone can pull out a number from the place where the sun never shines and claim that's research.

Also per capita spend on R&D is a more accurate way of counting how innovative a country is.

If 127 million people spend $144 billion on R&D, that's certainly more impressive than 1.3 billion folks spending $153 billion on R&D.

However, I do believe the editors of WSJ know all this. Despite that they (and others) run such articles for a purpose. In a autocratic society dominated by Confucius thought, this is a good way to show "respect" to the party bosses to get favors in other areas.

Confucius was somebody to be be admired. He also said this:

By three methods we may learn wisdom: First, by reflection, which is noblest; Second, by imitation, which is easiest; and third by experience, which is the bitterest.

(Here's a quiz for you naughty boys and gals of BRF, guess why I bolded the above

)

And Oh yes he also said something else which I think the Chinese posters on this forum need to drill into their heads:

He who speaks without modesty will find it difficult to make his words good.

And I can assure our Chinese guests that the interest in China, especially what it is doing with its economy (Do note, I've stated more than once, some of it has been spectacular) is because as Confucius said:

If I am walking with two other men, each of them will serve as my teacher. I will pick out the good points of the one and imitate them, and the bad points of the other and correct them in myself.

The two "men" India is walking with is the US and China. And now I hope you guys get the hint and stop this stupid attempt to use Sun Tzu tactics of trying to sow doubt in minds of your adversaries (Indians) with shock and awe pictures and articles.

Every time you do it you'll be taken to the cleaners!

Instead try to engage in a serious discussion and I'm sure there are a lot of things we can learn from each other.

JMT and all that.

zlin · Post by **zlin** » 28 Dec 2010 10:11

Cities at Night, Northern China, Cool night shot from NASA astronaut

wig · Post by **wig** » 28 Dec 2010 10:15

some more cool news from inside china:China's top blogger shuts down magazine

China's most popular blogger has announced shutting down of his freewheeling print magazine 'Party' after just one issue because government officials appear to have blocked the printing of new editions.

Han Han, a novelist and race car driver, has amassed millions of regular readers with his sly online critiques of China's social problems and hoped to tap that audience with his arts and literature magazine.

Han wrote in a blog post Tuesday that 'Party' had closed because the publisher refused to print its second issue.

He said government departments were behind the closure but it wasn't clear who had halted printing or why?

China's media is tightly controlled by the government, which censors, fines or shuts publications seen to be treading on politically sensitive issues.

http://timesofindia.indiatimes.com/worl ... 176524.cms

Theo_Fidel · Post by **Theo_Fidel** » 28 Dec 2010 11:50

amit wrote:Instead try to engage in a serious discussion and I'm sure there are a lot of things we can learn from each other.

JMT and all that.

Amit,

BR has been blocked from China for a loooong time. It most definitely was blocked from Wuhan 3 years back. I remember someone running a test to show it was blocked in China 6 months ago. Can anyone who knows how to, check again please.

Any main lander posting on this forum is 'officially' certified to do so. Other wise these guys are NOT from china. In fact there is a good chance that just by posting here the panda machinery will track them for further 'follow up' if they should ever dare to visit panda paradise.

Which is why I've always called them trolls and ignored them.

amit · Post by **amit** » 28 Dec 2010 12:40

Theo_Fidel wrote:Which is why I've always called them trolls and ignored them.

Boss understand that. But like I wrote before, I think there are times we need to counter the shock and awe strategy (aka Sun bhaiya) that is being employed to confuse folks here and sow seeds of doubt.** We've seen quite a bit of that haven't we?

** That operation seems to have now shifted to the China Military Watch thread and hence low activity here.

RamaT · Post by **RamaT** » 28 Dec 2010 14:26

http://www.businessinsider.com/andy-xie ... 11-2010-12

Andy Xie's latest sees the liquidity war getting worse in 2011.
America will continue to pump the financial system with liquidity via tax cuts and quantitative easing. China will keep the yuan cheap and avoid clamping down on inflation.
The tense equilibrium can't last for long, as either sovereign debt or inflation gets too heavy to bear. Whoever lasts longer, wins.