the chinese government is said to be about half way in the progress from a centralised command economy to a market driven, private enterprise economy.. .
link: http://www.canberratimes.com.au/business/china/private-capital-gets-more-bang-in-china-as-economic-reforms-step-up-20141023-11ah6z.html.
canberra times.
BOTR: Well, please don't encourage migration to the United States - written on behalf of all American taxpayers!
When/if the USA gets to an age average level of 50-55, you will welcome migration to the USA.
However, the context of my remark was China, and migration to China (likely from poorer - if they still are) S.E.Asian states, as a solution for the problems of an aging society.
the chinese government is said to be about half way in the progress from a centralised command economy to a market driven, private enterprise economy.. .
link: http://www.canberratimes.com.au/business/china/private-capital-gets-more-bang-in-china-as-economic-reforms-step-up-20141023-11ah6z.html.
canberra times.
Who will be among the oldest? By 2050, the majority of people in Japan, South Korea and Germany are expected to be older than 50. Some Latin American countries, which are now younger than the U.S., will likely be older than the U.S. by 2050.
The above Pew research graph, suggests that on the current trajectory in 2050 the average age in China will be 46 (up from current 35). Will that be unmanageable?
Alternately what can be done to manage the problem. First of all, now that population increase is stabilised (as it seems to be) can the birthrate be increased? I suggest that it could be increased. The first steps have already been taken by the recent relaxation of the regulations to permit some to have two children. I'd predict further relaxation in the future, and, further down the track the complete removal of all population controlling rules, with a possible exception of the ban on aborting female foetuses. From a population perspective, a stable population of around 1200 million sounds a good thing for China.
The next consideration is, can worker productivity be increased. Presently, it could be thought, too many people are engaged in agriculture, and their return is too low. Mechanisation of agriculture, at the level of the USA and Australia's examples, which is possible through more efficient broadacre farming, would permit the diversion of workers to other areas of activity, and at the same time, increase food production.
Another possible solution may be to encourage migration.
And the most important factor may be to increase productivity through the use of robots. That's also possible, already about 25% of the world's robotic machines are in China, and that can only increase
So, in the case of China, is an aging population the problem that some think it may be? I speculate that it need not be.
the chinese government is said to be about half way in the progress from a centralised command economy to a market driven, private enterprise economy.. .
link: http://www.canberratimes.com.au/business/china/private-capital-gets-more-bang-in-china-as-economic-reforms-step-up-20141023-11ah6z.html.
canberra times.
enlarged postate: Thank you. As an econ dude, I'm sure you've heard of Lewis turning points and their effects on growth. This is happening in China. Couple that with malinvestment (which you've covered) and an aging population, and it seems to me the question becomes whether the landing will be hard or soft, short or long, and when.
Having exceeded my allocation of time for this thread already, may I just respond to one point? And, that is the matter of an aging population.
An aging population is a serious matter in the west, but can be handled in a variety of ways. Australia (typically) is handling it through migration.
This web-site makes this prediction for China 2050: http://populationpyramid.net/china/2050/
Pew Research offers this information: http://www.pewresearch.org/fact-tank/2014/02/03/10-projections-for-the-global-population-in-2050/
Edited to add: Just lost a post so will come back to this a little later.
the chinese government is said to be about half way in the progress from a centralised command economy to a market driven, private enterprise economy.. .
link: http://www.canberratimes.com.au/business/china/private-capital-gets-more-bang-in-china-as-economic-reforms-step-up-20141023-11ah6z.html.
canberra times.
Ocean1111: Meaningless distraction imo. Russia, China and India, as examples, all scrapped socialism in 1990 and joined the worldwide market capital globalization effort with the Anglo-Americans. Thus "state capital" vs. "private capital" is pure baloney, even Communist USSR and China were private corporations themselves disguised as "government". Its all a ruse that led to a full globalization cycle after 1990. They all just happened to now create more billionaires in Russia, China and India than since their inception as nations—in 10 years! China even has a billionaire "landscape architect". LOL
Ummm! not sure where to start with your posts, mate! So still engaged in a thought process
the chinese government is said to be about half way in the progress from a centralised command economy to a market driven, private enterprise economy.. .
link: http://www.canberratimes.com.au/business/china/private-capital-gets-more-bang-in-china-as-economic-reforms-step-up-20141023-11ah6z.html.
canberra times.
DJS: FTS,
I referenced the Leslie Stahl 60 minutes piece on the uninhabited cites months ago in another Chinese miracle OP. This is real, vetted and reported by 60 minutes. You can view the video online if you wish. A transcript of Ms. Stahl's conversation with a Hong Kong based financial analyst is below
Thnx - for the reference point, now I can go to work and talk specifically rather than generally.
I will pick out five or six specific examples from that show, and we can examine them. Particularly focussing on the follwoing statements from 60 minutes.
Lesley Stahl: But they're not just building housing. They're building cities.
Gillem Tulloch: Yes. That's right.
Lesley Stahl: Giant cities being built with people not coming to live here.
Gillem Tulloch: Yes. I think they're building somewhere between 12 and 24 new cities every single year.
Unlike our market driven economy, in China it's the government that has spent some $2 trillion to get these cities built - as a way of keeping the economy growing. The assumption is "if you build it, they'll come." But no one's coming.
Lesley Stahl: Wow. This is really completely, totally empty and it goes up -
Gillem took us to this shopping mall that's been standing vacant for three years.
Lesley Stahl: Can I find this all over China?
Gillem Tulloch: Yes, you can. They've simply built too much infrastructure too quickly.
the chinese government is said to be about half way in the progress from a centralised command economy to a market driven, private enterprise economy.. .
link: http://www.canberratimes.com.au/business/china/private-capital-gets-more-bang-in-china-as-economic-reforms-step-up-20141023-11ah6z.html.
canberra times.
If you'd like to check out Chinese TV, http://english.cntv.cn/ will give you some material in English.
You'll note some other differences. Chinese media is (IMO-grin, and at least in English editions) offering more of a world view. (In contrast, in the Anglosphere, the media tends to be insular-again IMO).
Another difference, its a bit more serious than anglosphere media, which tends to try too hard to be 'cool' and often becomes just frivolous. I guess, because they have to be, since it must have popular appeal, and if no-one buys their media, they are out of business. SO are they really free?
----------------------------------
William Penwell: public protest are banned.
Professor Kerry Brown ( at Sydney University - http://sydney.edu.au/china_studies_centre/en/staff/kerry-brown.shtml ) said recently that (in a special talk) that there ae 200,000 to 500,000 public protests a year in China.
Some are handled peacefully, some less so. But your own TV (in your own country) will often show violent confrontations between demonstrators and authority.
Have I challenged your view of China?
the chinese government is said to be about half way in the progress from a centralised command economy to a market driven, private enterprise economy.. .
link: http://www.canberratimes.com.au/business/china/private-capital-gets-more-bang-in-china-as-economic-reforms-step-up-20141023-11ah6z.html.
canberra times.
FTS: William, may I ask, what you see (or, think you see) in China, that leads you to call China a 'repressive' regime?
William Penwell: We can only go by what is reported to us in the news media. Just two examples in recent memory, according to what I have read from different news sources, the news media in China is controled by the Central Chinese government that no negative pictures are allowed to be published and public protest are banned. I call this repressive. We don't have to go to far for Russia, in the last winder Olympics and their ban on gay rights. Again you may not agree with this life style but I would say that was repressive
Thnx for responding William. and OK. now we can discuss your comment:
First,
We can only go by what is reported to us in the news media.
Yes, but as you go on to discuss, 'media' can be biased, because, as you suggest, the Chinese media is because it its 'government-controlled.' And, I agree, (and most days of the week, I read the web-based editions of the three web-based Chinese newspapers. Here they are:
http://english.peopledaily.com.cn/
http://www.globaltimes.cn/index.html
http://www.chinadaily.com.cn/ and for a USA edition: http://usa.chinadaily.com.cn/
Edited to add: Clumsy fingers hit the wrong button, so I'll continue on a second post.
the chinese government is said to be about half way in the progress from a centralised command economy to a market driven, private enterprise economy.. .
link: http://www.canberratimes.com.au/business/china/private-capital-gets-more-bang-in-china-as-economic-reforms-step-up-20141023-11ah6z.html.
canberra times.
A hit-and-run exercise.
DJS, I want to quickly take issue with this point in a previous post:
The housing boom is showing signs of having finally run its course. The boom was fueled by the 600,000 or so Chinese who had expendable income but with nothing to do with it (the Chinese stock market sucks the big one). Buying housing, and speculating that there would be buyers for it at a large profit, resulted in entire cities being built, many of which are not inhabited. Not houses or subdivisions. Entire freaking Cities. Got that? ENTIRE UNINHABITED CITIES. Got that????
Really? ENTIRE UNINHABITED CITIES. A little hyperbole is justifiable, but huge hyperbole brings one's ideas into question.
I suggest to you that if you dig a little deeper you will likely agree that this is a furphy.
Think for a moment, the Chinese government figures say that now approximately 50% of the population live in cities. I dont' know the precise figures, but when Mao died and the CPC changed course, the figure may have been 20% urbanised.
Working backwards off current population figures (about fourteen hundred billion -1,400,000,00) and claimed as steady at the moment that means roughly 700 million Chinese live in cities, (say) 250 million when Deng took the lead (I say lead, because, in spite of popular western opinion, Chinese leaders do not have unfettered power).
So if 350 million people have moved to cities in 30 years, that requires housing the entire population of the USA in the said 30 years - allowing 3 people to each housing unit, an average of nearly 4,000,000 new homes per year.
Some 12 years ago I worked on a project with an architectural/town planning office that had a contract to design a new city in China for a population of one million. He understood a number of these were being planned each year. Cant vouch for that, but that was his statement.
If you're attempting to plan new cities on that scale, it would be normal to have some errors of judgement, and some areas would have slower uptakes than others. And that I suggest is the source of this story.
Can you come up with just one city that is uninhabited, so that we can examine it?
the chinese government is said to be about half way in the progress from a centralised command economy to a market driven, private enterprise economy.. .
link: http://www.canberratimes.com.au/business/china/private-capital-gets-more-bang-in-china-as-economic-reforms-step-up-20141023-11ah6z.html.
canberra times.
DJS: I'm pulling for the Chinese. And the Russians. And the Liberians . . .
I'm sorry I cannot take the time (at the moment) to contribute more to this thread. There's only a couple of weeks until the end of the semester and the start of the examination period. So I've got all sorts of things to complete, plus a personal matter that's taken a bit of time. So most of what I've been posting is sort of like hit and run.
So in connection with your comment above, DJS, I'm sure this is what everyone wants, the opportunity for all to live a reasonable life.
I'll try and post something in response to your points also.
Ask another question.
What happened to your oxytocin levels when your son was born?
