6 ms·

They have been investing in infrastructure, housing and energy. The return on that investment has been decreasing. The CCP has been kicking the can down the roa

They have been investing in infrastructure, housing and energy. The return on that investment has been decreasing. The CCP has been kicking the can down the road as best it can trying to maintain growth numbers, which in part acts as justification for its single party rule.

throwaway4good 5y ago
You (and most other western commentators) underestimate just how long the road is.
- starfallg 5y ago
  China is rapidly heading towards the middle-income trap. All of the positioning in the past decade is in the hope of avoiding it. This is a massive challenge as the prosperity of the upper classes is based on cheap labour. All of the advanced economies overcame this by moving jobs up the value chain. China can't easily to do this due to its massive population, a large part of not very well educated. There is a real risk of social instability when semi-skilled jobs dry up.
  - dragonelite 5y ago
    I 100% believe that the main reason a country stays stuck in the middle income trap is its capability to create high tech IP which the nation can use to suck up what I would a global rent for lending out its IP. That why the patent system is so toxic for the global south its like cutting off the steps on the value chain stair.
    - throwaway4good 5y ago
      10 years ago people were also chatting about China being caught in the middle income trap because China was unable to create its own global brands and original products, and was destined to be a cheap factory for western brands forever, never would be rich enough to have an internal market. Today we have global brands like Xiaomi, Huawei, Tiktok in every corner of the planet. And there is just going to be more of it.
      - starfallg 5y ago
        Middle income trap doesn't have much to do with global brands. It has to do with whether there is enough capacity to absorb excess labour when economic growth necessitates transition away from agriculture and manufacturing to service and information industries. Export driven growth is also very risky as geopolitical issues (as we can see now with Huawei) can happen on a dime. In order to develop China up to western standards, the world needs to supply resources for a population well over all the western countries (EU+US+CANZUK+Asian Tigers) combined. All of the countries that have achieved had good relationships with their importing trading partners, China on the other hand is moving in the opposite direction due to political reasons.
        throwaway4good 5y ago
        The point is it hasn’t happened and it doesn’t happen. Employment is high, internal consumption is growing, companies climb up the value chain etc. Instead predicting that it is going to end abruptly tomorrow, the intellectual powers of commentators would be better spent on explaining why it continues and why it has continued for so long.
        starfallg 5y ago
        > The point is it hasn’t happened and it doesn’t happen. Employment is high, internal consumption is growing, companies climb up the value chain etc. All of which are beside the point. It is the type of jobs that are available and their relative value. Internal consumption needs to effect a shift in the economy towards services, which isn't happening. Off-shored high-tech manufacturing is moving away to more political acceptable countries. >Instead predicting that it is going to end abruptly tomorrow, the intellectual powers of commentators would be better spent on explaining why it continues and why it has continued for so long. Mainly because they created an unequal system with capital controls and ownership rules to siphon foreign capital and IP. This is supercharged by an hyper aggressive business environment and in general large appetite for risk, leading to sky-high asset prices, which is a concern for advanced economies, but much more of a concern for a developing one.
      - 5y ago
    - starfallg 5y ago
      What's important is high-value jobs. You need these to transition excess labour away from unskilled and semi-skilled jobs. The key is creating and sustaining these jobs. Obviously tech is a part of this, but also financial services as well as resource/energy industries. IP is less of an issue than it first seems, it's the ability to execute in a market that is more important.
- another_story 5y ago
  I never put a timeline on it.
- another_story 5y ago
  I'm Chinese and not living in the west. Don't make assumptions.

throwaway4good 5y ago

You (and most other western commentators) underestimate just how long the road is.

starfallg 5y ago
China is rapidly heading towards the middle-income trap. All of the positioning in the past decade is in the hope of avoiding it. This is a massive challenge as the prosperity of the upper classes is based on cheap labour. All of the advanced economies overcame this by moving jobs up the value chain. China can't easily to do this due to its massive population, a large part of not very well educated. There is a real risk of social instability when semi-skilled jobs dry up.
- dragonelite 5y ago
  I 100% believe that the main reason a country stays stuck in the middle income trap is its capability to create high tech IP which the nation can use to suck up what I would a global rent for lending out its IP. That why the patent system is so toxic for the global south its like cutting off the steps on the value chain stair.
  - throwaway4good 5y ago
    10 years ago people were also chatting about China being caught in the middle income trap because China was unable to create its own global brands and original products, and was destined to be a cheap factory for western brands forever, never would be rich enough to have an internal market. Today we have global brands like Xiaomi, Huawei, Tiktok in every corner of the planet. And there is just going to be more of it.
    - starfallg 5y ago
      Middle income trap doesn't have much to do with global brands. It has to do with whether there is enough capacity to absorb excess labour when economic growth necessitates transition away from agriculture and manufacturing to service and information industries. Export driven growth is also very risky as geopolitical issues (as we can see now with Huawei) can happen on a dime. In order to develop China up to western standards, the world needs to supply resources for a population well over all the western countries (EU+US+CANZUK+Asian Tigers) combined. All of the countries that have achieved had good relationships with their importing trading partners, China on the other hand is moving in the opposite direction due to political reasons.
      - throwaway4good 5y ago
        The point is it hasn’t happened and it doesn’t happen. Employment is high, internal consumption is growing, companies climb up the value chain etc. Instead predicting that it is going to end abruptly tomorrow, the intellectual powers of commentators would be better spent on explaining why it continues and why it has continued for so long.
        starfallg 5y ago
        > The point is it hasn’t happened and it doesn’t happen. Employment is high, internal consumption is growing, companies climb up the value chain etc. All of which are beside the point. It is the type of jobs that are available and their relative value. Internal consumption needs to effect a shift in the economy towards services, which isn't happening. Off-shored high-tech manufacturing is moving away to more political acceptable countries. >Instead predicting that it is going to end abruptly tomorrow, the intellectual powers of commentators would be better spent on explaining why it continues and why it has continued for so long. Mainly because they created an unequal system with capital controls and ownership rules to siphon foreign capital and IP. This is supercharged by an hyper aggressive business environment and in general large appetite for risk, leading to sky-high asset prices, which is a concern for advanced economies, but much more of a concern for a developing one.
    - 5y ago
  - starfallg 5y ago
    What's important is high-value jobs. You need these to transition excess labour away from unskilled and semi-skilled jobs. The key is creating and sustaining these jobs. Obviously tech is a part of this, but also financial services as well as resource/energy industries. IP is less of an issue than it first seems, it's the ability to execute in a market that is more important.
another_story 5y ago
I never put a timeline on it.
another_story 5y ago
I'm Chinese and not living in the west. Don't make assumptions.