# Can China save the world? (BBC News)



## SN NewsCaster (Mar 5, 2007)

Despite an economic slowdown, large-scale building projects in China continue to drive growth, even as exports slump. 

More from BBC News...


----------



## billyboy (Jul 6, 2005)

Not sure about saving the word but China is certainly supplying the world.
Everything I look at seems to have "Made in China" on it.
Last week my wife bought a genuine "Black and decker" multitool...Made in China.
Almost all the motorcycle engines under 200 cc are made in china.
cant wait for the Tee shirts "laid in China"


----------



## McCloggie (Apr 19, 2008)

Surprised you have not got one already Billyboy!!!

McC


----------



## tunatownshipwreck (Nov 9, 2005)

Don't know if Chairman Mao would jump up clapping or itch himself to death.


----------



## billyboy (Jul 6, 2005)

McCloggie said:


> Surprised you have not got one already Billyboy!!!
> 
> McC


What me?...nah, clean living lad me. (Jester)


----------



## Jocko (Oct 31, 2011)

I went to China a couple of times about 5 years ago. A very impressive country, Shanghai has more skyscrapers than New York. Everywhere we went they were building 100+ floor buildings, bridges and on the Yangtze river I saw a ship drydocked by being hauled up the riverbank. The place was spotless, we definately had to admire them.


----------



## Satanic Mechanic (Feb 23, 2009)

Personally I am totally convinced the worlds economic order is about to change dramatically, mostly at the expense of the USA and Europe. Its one of the reasons I am so pro EU - we desperately need to be part of a strong trading block to weather these changes.

On that note I am not that unhappy about whats going on in Europe - it needed a good shake down and I find myself agreeing with Cameron (!!!!!!!did I really just write that) that now is the time for the UK to get more involved with Europe and to make it more acceptable to us.


----------



## barrinoz (Oct 9, 2006)

They're busy building entire cities in China with not a single occupant. You gotta ask yourself why are they doing that? The Chinese have got themselves into a sulk over Obama's recent committment to increase the USA's military presence in Australia. I'm far from a Gung-Ho kinda guy but this is definitely a good move. China's expansion policies are self-evident. I'll never tire of repeating myself. We'll rue the day we sold our souls to the Chinese for the sake of saving a few pennies on, mostly, worthless crap! Now, we're almost totally dependent on them. There will be those who'll lecture us on the sound economic principles behind it, of course-the extreme irony! Subsistence farming, here we come.
barrinoz.


----------



## needadditionalinformation (Jan 30, 2006)

barrinoz said:


> They're busy building entire cities in China with not a single occupant. You gotta ask yourself why are they doing that? The Chinese have got themselves into a sulk over Obama's recent committment to increase the USA's military presence in Australia. I'm far from a Gung-Ho kinda guy but this is definitely a good move. China's expansion policies are self-evident. I'll never tire of repeating myself. We'll rue the day we sold our souls to the Chinese for the sake of saving a few pennies on, mostly, worthless crap! Now, we're almost totally dependent on them. There will be those who'll lecture us on the sound economic principles behind it, of course-the extreme irony! Subsistence farming, here we come.
> barrinoz.


When one looks at the tremendous power a small country like the UK was able to wield over the the whole planet, what the Chinese could choose to do given their size should bring a shudder.

I hope it goes o.k., but my personal experience with how people in a position to abuse power usually do so worries me.

Between the moral vac*** Mao & his cultural revolution caused, and the way they're being suckled on american style capitalism and greed, it will be a challenge.


----------



## needadditionalinformation (Jan 30, 2006)

Satanic Mechanic said:


> Personally I am totally convinced the worlds economic order is about to change dramatically, mostly at the expense of the USA and Europe. Its one of the reasons I am so pro EU - we desperately need to be part of a strong trading block to weather these changes.
> 
> On that note I am not that unhappy about whats going on in Europe - it needed a good shake down and I find myself agreeing with Cameron (!!!!!!!did I really just write that) that now is the time for the UK to get more involved with Europe and to make it more acceptable to us.


I really hope things go o.k. For Europe & Britain. America is hopeless. The way things are going is completely unsustainable, and China has repeatedly warned they're going to stop loaning their share of the 2-3 billion dollars america has been barrowing EVERY DAY. Japan is at about 225% debt to gdp, how long can they keep the loans up?

The UK was, last I heard, the third biggest buyer of our debt, and they have their own situation to deal with, domestically and with Europe.

Sorry, I've been told the British have a fancy for understatement, but it's just impossible to overstate how finished America is. The strains of the fat, medically needy baby boomer generation would be the coup de grace if the place could hold out that long, but it won't.

And I'm not just saying this for personal reasons, or because I also want to leave this rathole for Europe.

More and more people are seeing it this way as well. And Americans are starting to act like it too.

There were international media covered mass protests here in the Wisconsin state capitol over state budget cuts recently. 

One result was an investigation over two Wisconsin State Supreme Court Justices who, while debating a case over related issues actually went to blows with one elderly Justice grabbing another by the neck and choking them. An anecdote, yes, but I live here, and I'm telling you, the wheels are coming off this piece of junk, and we're headed for the ditch.

I'm sure Europe and Britain can survive and even prosper, and I hope they do. I may need somewhere to raft to.


----------



## Jocko (Oct 31, 2011)

Barrinoz,
The Chinese built quite a lot of new cities. The reason being that they constructed the largest dam in the world notable The Three Gorges on the Yangtze river to save thousands of square miles of the plains from being flooded every year. The facts that I have are that due to these floods 321,000 people have been drowned by these floods in the past 100 years. This dam is also the largest hydro power system in the world. The dam meant a massive increase on the Yangtzes water level submerging dozens of cities along the river. A staggering 1,136 million people are being resettled. Come on give them a bit of credit, what other country in the world could acheive this.
As far back as the 1950s it was Japan who showed us how they could get back on their feet, now it`s China and India. Let`s face it the Asians know how to work. I bet there isn`t too many scroungers on benefits in those countries. I say fair play to them.


----------



## stein (Nov 4, 2006)

Economics is not a game where what one gains someone else loses. The very basis of trade is that both sides gains on it. China might overtake the US and Europe in economic size, but there is no reason this should be to US and Europe's detriment. China it should be remembered has no other use of British Pounds but to buy what’s payable with British Pounds.

It used to be (this was long ago) that riches was thought to be gold in the kings coffers, and the good idea for the king was for his country to sell more than it bought, that is: increase the king’s gold stash. As time wore on it dawned even on the kings that the point of money was to buy things, and the cheaper you could get your goods, imported or homemade, the more you could buy. 

As for a centrally ruled European economic union, what on earth indicates that this would assure the allocation of resources to their best use? Every part of history indicates the very opposite, particularly the history of the EU, which is a history of wastage on a Soviet size scale. Do away with tariffs and subsidies, fire all “economic planners” and you have a global market, there’s no need for trade hampering “trading blocks.”

And maybe we don’t absolutely have to save all the Euro banksters, I suspect that this horror scenario where the whole of Europe lies in ruins if the money owed to a cartel of politically affiliated banks is not forthcoming, either through debasing the money or hocking the children, is one big bluff. You could at least do as Norway did in our massive bank failures of 1991-92: rescue the depositors in failed banks up to a reasonable sum, and pay the shareholders the value of their shares according to the bank’s losses (they weren’t happy about that I remember!), and throw out the board of directors and management, etc, etc - they call it orderly bankruptcy. (Jester)


----------



## needadditionalinformation (Jan 30, 2006)

*Now hiring British machinists, competitive wages- 2£ per day!!!*



stein said:


> Economics is not a game where what one gains someone else loses. The very basis of trade is that both sides gains on it. China might overtake the US and Europe in economic size, but there is no reason this should be to US and Europe's detriment. China it should be remembered has no other use of British Pounds but to buy whats payable with British Pounds.
> 
> It used to be (this was long ago) that riches was thought to be gold in the kings coffers, and the good idea for the king was for his country to sell more than it bought, that is: increase the kings gold stash. As time wore on it dawned even on the kings that the point of money was to buy things, and the cheaper you could get your goods, imported or homemade, the more you could buy.
> 
> ...


If people in the First World could compete with a Third World business cost structure, free trade might work.

Free trade didn't put China in the position of industrial capability it's in, massive technology transfers and foreign direct investment did, and almost overnight. The point being that if they had gradually earned their way up, like we did, they would probably have a First World business cost structure.

There are first world costs to first world domestic businesses. Comparatively massive First world wage, rent, and tax costs are what generate the comparatively massive first world consumer markets and their spending levels. 

It would be nice to get first world sized economic benefits with third world sized economic costs, but that is plainly unsustainable. 

Third world production, when employed instead, undercuts the first world employment that generated the first world consumption being taken advantage of to begin with. This can go on for a while, but will probably not end pleasantly.

Chinese folks are paid about a tenth what Americans are. 

Wouldn't we all like benefits without the costs that generated them? 

I would love to buy a Rolls Royce for a tenth what was required to make it, but if enough of us get that kind of deal, Rolls Royce will become a footnote of automotive history very quickly.


----------



## needadditionalinformation (Jan 30, 2006)

well, more than a footnote, but history regardless.


----------



## stein (Nov 4, 2006)

Didn't you already post this on another thread? And has it anything to do with my quoted posting?


----------



## needadditionalinformation (Jan 30, 2006)

I think trade is, at best, something nations can get away with. Trading with countries with similar cost structures is, in practice, probably not typically a huge problem.

But were Europeans to buy nothing but American goods, lots of Europeans would find themselves out of work very quickly. 

If Americans could produce everything for half what Europeans could, it may extend (double?) the time it takes Lars, Simon, Valentino, and Francois to get their pink slips, but that's all.

And lets not forget, while the greater degree of industrialization is probably part of why Germany is bailing out Greece, and manufacturing does produce greater wealth through the greater amount of value added by manufacturing processes, even the inferior service jobs can be off-shored, as Americans are finding out. Calling in an order for pizza in America can, thanks to modern tehnology, leave you on the phone with an overseas call center!!


----------



## needadditionalinformation (Jan 30, 2006)

stein said:


> Didn't you already post this on another thread? And has it anything to do with my quoted posting?


Well, we're discussing similar themes in both places, so the similarity isn't surprising. And since you are discussing free trade and a lack of regulation, yes, it would be 
relevant. 

Free trade answered with free speech.


----------



## barrinoz (Oct 9, 2006)

I know about the Three Gorges Dam project, Jocko, and you're right. It's impressive and from the flooding point of view, necessary, perhaps. We can only make our assumptions on information gleaned from Western sources, that from the Chinese being notoriously unreliable. The information I've seen on the empty cities made no mention of housing the flooded inhabitants of the Yangtzee river banks but plenty of mention of unaffordability and incredibly poor workmanship - actual footage being shown of already crumbling buildings. 
Brazil's Environment Minister is currently committing political suicide by defending the flooding of the Amazon forest and the displacement of its inhabitants all in the name of profit and progress-but only for a few (mostly multi-national conglomerates). Build them a shoddy concrete and glass slum and let them live there, ungrateful bums that they are!!
I expect folks to oppose my opinions on the Chinese. No probs!
barrinoz.


----------



## needadditionalinformation (Jan 30, 2006)

barrinoz said:


> I know about the Three Gorges Dam project, Jocko, and you're right. It's impressive and from the flooding point of view, necessary, perhaps. We can only make our assumptions on information gleaned from Western sources, that from the Chinese being notoriously unreliable. The information I've seen on the empty cities made no mention of housing the flooded inhabitants of the Yangtzee river banks but plenty of mention of unaffordability and incredibly poor workmanship - actual footage being shown of already crumbling buildings.
> Brazil's Environment Minister is currently committing political suicide by defending the flooding of the Amazon forest and the displacement of its inhabitants all in the name of profit and progress-but only for a few (mostly multi-national conglomerates). Build them a shoddy concrete and glass slum and let them live there, ungrateful bums that they are!!
> I expect folks to oppose my opinions on the Chinese. No probs!
> barrinoz.


I may be able to solve the riddle of the empty cities. 

First, China has been buying up US Treasuries to sustain our ability to unevenly trade with them, this having been so advantageous for them.

Since the Obama has been elected, there have been a number of statements from the Chinese government which have received wide coverage in our news media.

Shortly after the Obama was elected, they started demanding assurances, etc. As to the safety of their investment (their pile of treasuries). You'll recall there was trillions in bail out and stimulus money being thrown around at the time.

Shortly after that, they announced they were going to start selling their treasuries and spending the proceeds on domestic investment projects. Reading between the lines, I think they want to sell as many treasuries as they can while thy're still worth something.

Recall also that our problems have caused a slump in their exports, which has caused some unemployment for them.

While the U.S. has built some empty housing lately, unlike the U.S., China still reportedly has hundreds of millions of poor subsistance farmers. Last I heard the number was at least twice the entire American population. If it is planned to bring these folks into the fold of modernity, this could justify such investments.

There should be no reason for the Chinese to be excluded from living as well as we do. The way it has happened hasn't had the greatest effect on the American middle class, but as a whole, they've gladly laid down for it. The American rich have been making money hand over fist off of this transformation, and the middle class has been fine with this, to the point of not even making them pay sufficient taxes, some times none at all!

As was widely covered, General Electric, which probably does business with and in China, payed zero taxes on $14 billion in profits for year 2010.

As for the Obama's military posturing, that probably wouldn't be possible without the almost countless billions the Chinese are loaning us to begin with. 

If the Chinese do anything less than swoop in with their military and shove drugs down western throats to pay off their bills, they'll look better than some of us in history's eyes anyway.


----------



## tunatownshipwreck (Nov 9, 2005)

needadditionalinformation said:


> I may be able to solve the riddle of the empty cities.
> 
> First, China has been buying up US Treasuries to sustain our ability to unevenly trade with them, this having been so advantageous for them.
> 
> ...


"The Obama"? There's no such title.


----------



## needadditionalinformation (Jan 30, 2006)

tunatownshipwreck said:


> "The Obama"? There's no such title.


My point being that someone needs to tell him that. It was mockery. 

There's really no point now, I just need to find a comfortable, sustainable place to watch the morons finish themselves off from. 

Not quite alone, but apparently outnumbered, I've been trying to dissuade the imbecility every way I could for years, yelling my head off the whole time. Fine. There is no truth, no objective reality, no means yes, and doing things that history says never work, even repeating recent failures over & over, is clearly the way to go.


----------

