MS

Current strategy of Chinese military in hegemony conflict with United States. What is the end game here ?

Recommended Posts

35 minutes ago, 0R0 said:

How about Remake it, the bot provide some factual components in his criticisms? I am sure his handlers can make the effort.

There really is no point because you have said things which you believe and often do not even make sense such as

14 hours ago, 0R0 said:

The recent generation of entrants to the workforce in China are 40 some % fewer than before

and even if you meant 40% fewer there is no context as to when before.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

(edited)

China labor force entry age population 20-24, retirement age group 50 -55 women + 60-65 men,  net additions

2010 130 mil    , 68 mil , 62 mil

2015 106 mil    . 89 mil, 17 mil

2020 78 mil    , 98 mil, -20 mil

2025 74 mil    , 84 mil , -10 mil

Why don't you choose your appropriate wording.

5 year groupings

Edited by 0R0
Added info
  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

35 minutes ago, 0R0 said:

China labor force entry age population 20-24, retirement age group 50 -55 women + 60-65 men,  net additions

2010 130 mil    , 68 mil , 62 mil

2015 106 mil    . 89 mil, 17 mil

2020 78 mil    , 98 mil, -20 mil

2025 74 mil    , 84 mil , -10 mil

Why don't you choose your appropriate wording.

5 year groupings

Nobody uses data like that unless they are fudging statistics - please get some help from @Marcin.

  • Haha 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

So I should not look at statistics? And arithmetics is not produce legitimate calculations? 

I should  rely only on your unsupported commentary?

Your handlers can reply with something factual.

  • Rolling Eye 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

China most definitely has an ageing population as @Marcin has pointed out previously.

This is perhaps China's biggest challenge to overcome for the next decade or 2

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

(edited)

On 1/13/2020 at 11:52 AM, Rob Plant said:

China most definitely has an ageing population as @Marcin has pointed out previously.

This is perhaps China's biggest challenge to overcome for the next decade or 2

It is no longer doable. There is a disproportion of males to females, and a gender segregation as rural Chinese send the women off to do service and small hand work in the cities and the men stay behind working the fields and supporting industries. The South China Morning Post has run an article on discrepancies in state reported births, in that there is a 2-3 million annual over reporting at the provincial level (IIRC) that does not show up later in school attendance at kindergarten age. 

So in context of the 5 year entrants to the workforce grouping, the run rate would be 50-60 million and declining in the next 10-15 years. In the meantime, the rest of their baby boom generation will retire. The Chinese economy will then shrink after a generational financial crisis. 

China will continue seeing increasing labor costs and incomes while demand does not grow in tandem as its baby boomers save for retirement and then retire. Thus the large debt funded capital base will be 30-40% worthless and need to be restructured, as the high income world can not absorb exports that capital could produce, and labor will be too tight to staff it.

At the run rate of 9% of GDP (average for the last 6 years) in Municipal, provincial and central govt. deficit spending. (2/3 off the books) the country is running out of balance sheet capacity. After fighting shadow banking for 3 years, China has given up and prefers seeing its contribution to funding growth rather than control it via policy as they do for banks, which have failed to supply the private economy with credit (ex mortgages) due to incapacity of loan officers to understand business plans and cash flow projections without the state dictated pricing and supply volumes. They tried, it failed miserably, nearly creating a recession in the private economy. Big egg on Xi's face.. 

If you watch Chinese shows about student age dorm dweller's lives, then you will notice that the rooms have only 50% occupancy and some of the 8 beds used by 4 students serve as cabinet frames for storage. It will look more lonely in the future.

Edited by 0R0
Added info

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

The prominent figure in creating narratives, Minister of Propaganda of Nazi Germany, Doctor Joseph Goebbels said:

"If you tell a lie big enough and keep repeating it, people will eventually come to believe it. The lie can be maintained only for such time as the State can shield the people from the political, economic and/or military consequences of the lie. It thus becomes vitally important for the State to use all of its powers to repress dissent, for the truth is the mortal enemy of the lie, and thus by extension, the truth is the greatest enemy of the State. "

The same is with Chinese problem with ageing and demographics. Problem of Chinese demographics exists, like in every society, but it is not going to restrict Chinese economic development in any significant way.

Two liner for people that do not like to read: Japan has very bad demographics, actually the worst in the world, but it is not restricting its economic development. And Japan has no significant migration, they are somehow able to have 2nd largest economy, very high level of GDP per capita, with very bad demographics.

@0R0 is right that Chinese yearly cohorts of people entering the job market, decreased significantly. From 25-27 million of people born in early 1970s, till 16-18 million people born in 2010s. So, even adjusting for much lower present mortality rate of children under 5, now and then, there was much more people entering labour force in 1990s than is now, or will be in 2030s-2040s.

It again could be true that population of China will peak at 1.45 billion in 2030, and decrease to 1.3 billion in 2050 or 2060. So what ?

Everybody would be more than happy, cause land of China is not designed for 1.4 billion people to live. It would be much better if there would be 1.3 billion or even 1.2 billion Chinese in 40 years time. Less strain on resources.

I would not give % of employment in agriculture, industry and services. Everybody knows how these processes are going, and how they are presented in statistics. You simply do not need all these people in the workforce.

At the end of the day, in developed and industrialized country, industrialized like South Korea or Japan, agriculture is maximum 5% of labour force, industry/manufacturing 20% tops. The rest are services. When you have too much labour force you can have millions of cleaners, waiters, door openers and low value textile industry. When labour force is scarse: doors are opening automatically, cleaners use sophisticated machinery (do work of 10 of their Indian fellows) and waiters are just more expensive, and you have all you can eat, because food is relatively cheaper than service.

40% of Chinese labour force were moved from agriculture to industry/services in recent 40 years ( I could be off the exact number). This move from agriculture to industry/services caused that their effectiveness has risen 4-5 times. China is trailing step by step the path of development of South Korea and Japan (although in scale 12-27 times larger).

And when people get even more expensive you employ industrial robots in manufacturing (China is the largest in installations, South Korea and Japan have highest density, we already know why, demographics).

But what I know, the German classic I mentioned in the beginning is the classic because he just has a really good track record in spreading lies and is a true mentor of mass media, not only in the United States.

 

  • Great Response! 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

(edited)

46 minutes ago, 0R0 said:

It is no longer doable.

It is your opinion and based on stereotypical understandings of how China works which simply is nothing like Western economies and opinions like yours have now been rife for 20 years and will probably persist for 20 more without ever coming to grips with why they are so wrong.

Edited by remake it
See Marcin's explanation posted at same moment which is not complete but very good.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

(edited)

Last and but not least, it is also about education, quality of workforce: in 1998 China had 1 million graduates yearly, and 20 years later in 2018 they had 8.5 million graduates.

1 Chinese with tertiary education and a good job has value added (50,000 USD per year)  of 100 street cleaners in India (500 USD per year).

Edited by Marcin2
typo

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

3 minutes ago, Marcin2 said:

Last and not least

Western nations think of the individual as an economic unit but Chinese think of family an an economic unit.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Join the conversation

You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.

Guest
You are posting as a guest. If you have an account, please sign in.
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Paste as plain text instead

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.