4 ms·

? China won, all that money invested was almost all to Chinese construction overcapacity. So that capacity was exported to useless prestige projects. Poor cou

? China won, all that money invested was almost all to Chinese construction overcapacity. So that capacity was exported to useless prestige projects. Poor countries paid the bill ( mostly) and China is paid twice (foreign loans going to Chinese workers is a double win).

havetocharge 3y ago
I mean.. they did loan the money, with all the associated responsibilities and risks of loaning money. And they did do the work. All the agreements were entered voluntarily, so what's the fault here?
Symmetry 3y ago
Clearly the Chinese construction companies that got the contracts won, but to the extent that the loans aren't paid back its money from Chinese taxpayers going to the people who own those companies. Japan had a big problem with this sort of corruption when they organized their foreign aid this way, which is why they no longer do.
- NicoJuicy 3y ago
  The mostly state owned companies? :) And getting back the money from loans is also a win.
  - yorwba 3y ago
    If this was such a win, why did they stop? A lot of that money didn't "get back" but ended up in various officials' offshore bank accounts. ( Many executives at China Development Bank got busted for corruption https://www.caixinglobal.com/2021-11-08/chart-of-the-day-corruption-at-chinas-biggest-policy-bank-101802139.html https://www.caixinglobal.com/2021-11-08/chart-of-the-day-cor... ) And then there's the opportunity cost of not having those companies build something useful instead.
    - NicoJuicy 3y ago
      Because the road one belt failed. They didn't gain much influence with it, they did the opposite. Eg. the delivered projects aren't good quality either. And it wasn't going to get any better. They did also succeed at a small coverup for their construction overcapacity at home. But let's be clear: all those projects had to be paid. There's just a difference to get the money without actually delivering those projects, not everyone is happy :)
deleted 3y ago
[deleted]

havetocharge 3y ago

I mean.. they did loan the money, with all the associated responsibilities and risks of loaning money. And they did do the work. All the agreements were entered voluntarily, so what's the fault here?

Symmetry 3y ago

Clearly the Chinese construction companies that got the contracts won, but to the extent that the loans aren't paid back its money from Chinese taxpayers going to the people who own those companies. Japan had a big problem with this sort of corruption when they organized their foreign aid this way, which is why they no longer do.

NicoJuicy 3y ago
The mostly state owned companies? :) And getting back the money from loans is also a win.
- yorwba 3y ago
  If this was such a win, why did they stop? A lot of that money didn't "get back" but ended up in various officials' offshore bank accounts. ( Many executives at China Development Bank got busted for corruption https://www.caixinglobal.com/2021-11-08/chart-of-the-day-corruption-at-chinas-biggest-policy-bank-101802139.html https://www.caixinglobal.com/2021-11-08/chart-of-the-day-cor... ) And then there's the opportunity cost of not having those companies build something useful instead.
  - NicoJuicy 3y ago
    Because the road one belt failed. They didn't gain much influence with it, they did the opposite. Eg. the delivered projects aren't good quality either. And it wasn't going to get any better. They did also succeed at a small coverup for their construction overcapacity at home. But let's be clear: all those projects had to be paid. There's just a difference to get the money without actually delivering those projects, not everyone is happy :)

deleted 3y ago

[deleted]