Speaking of “hard landings”, this little ditty goes out to all the gray-haired US Fulbright professors teaching Western liberalism at Chinese universities who’ve “disovered China” and young Chinese girls:

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=6FGk63Fv7t4

April 9, 2009 @ 6:30 pm | Comment

I read “Rich China, Poor China” and the first thought that came to my mind was all the net comments where someone claims, in China’s defense, that they are still a “poor, developing country.” I, like many I work with and speak to regularly, are sick to death of this excuse. Right now, with the possible exception of some oil-rich country, China has more money than anyone and the only reason they are still “developing” is to keep an advantage in the global labor/trade market. If the party really wanted to do something about the ≈ 900 million living in or near poverty they could have used the $2 trillion they hold in foreign reserves a long time ago to benefit their countrymen’s quality of life rather than the speculated reason they held onto it (which benefited very few on a large scale, and whole lot of people on a very small scale).

April 9, 2009 @ 7:05 pm | Comment

[…] The Peking Duck placed an observative post today on Hard Landing and the China ParadoxHere’s a quick excerptIt’s not possible to look over Nouriel “Dr. Doom” Roubini’s new report on China’s economy [PDF; must use proxy in China] without feeling kind of sick. This is the doomsayer who correctly predicted the current global mess more than two years ago. He is predicting a very rough road for China moving forward, with no real end in sight. Despite it’s being completely depressing, the report is well worth a read. It reinforces an observation I’ve been making recently, that everywhere you look there’ […]

April 9, 2009 @ 7:36 pm | Pingback

“Despite it’s being completely depressing, the report is well worth a read. It reinforces an observation I’ve been making recently, that everywhere you look there’s a dogged, cult-like insistence that the Chinese economy is safe and will grow by 8 percent in 2009, no matter what kind of statistical evidence you put in front of the “experts” explaining this is simply impossible based mainly on the catastrophic world demand for exports”

the five stages of grief:

1. Denial
2. Anger
3. Bargaining
4. Depression
5. Acceptance

which point is the ccp at? china will cope, but the idea it won’t be a long, hard slog given they have just lost a major part of their economy is ludicrous.

April 9, 2009 @ 7:41 pm | Comment

If US is not going any longer to overconsume, if EU is not going to consume, where is CH overcapacity going to be exported?

And if the overcapacity is not going to be exported, from where are the millions jobs CH needs be produced?

Hard times ahead.

April 9, 2009 @ 7:52 pm | Comment

Just a thought

It is also one of the reasons of this economy crisis the inability of CCP to get its legitimacy beyond overheated economic growth?

The need to fuel that growth, because of the need to rise CH masses out of poverty as legitimacy for their claim to power, may have well added a good lot of wood to the current crisis.

What would happen if there was not such legitimacy need?

April 9, 2009 @ 7:59 pm | Comment

How can China be “rich” and “poor” at the same time? I think the number 1.3 billion says it all.

I mean think about the US- greatest military power in the world, and yet a city like Detroit is decaying/deindustrializing so much parts of it are literally returning to wilderness. I mean what country anywhere fits neatly into a “developed”/”developing” category these days? Mobile service in northern Mozambique is better than in Canada.

I think the sooner we drop this whole global dichotomy of “developed”/”developing”, the better. These categories no longer make any sense (if they ever did). It’s like people need China to be either “poor” or “rich” to fit neatly into some category they’ve got in their mind- but unfortunately for analytical cleanliness, it will probably be a whole lot of both for decades, if not centuries, to come.

April 9, 2009 @ 9:22 pm | Comment

As a friend of mine put it recently, “The longer you stay here, the less you know.”

Translate into Chinese is like this : This is a wonderland,and miracle will happen.–Chairman Mao.

April 9, 2009 @ 9:23 pm | Comment

PB, I think we all understand that China is very very rich and very very poor. At issue in the Rich China, Poor China section of my post is the way they schizophrenically claim either devastating poverty or staggering wealth, depending on who they are talking to and what they want to get out of that conversation.

April 9, 2009 @ 9:38 pm | Comment

Richard, I agree with that. Countries like China have a lot to gain from the continuation of the “developed/developing” meme as well. But that is one of the major reasons I think people have to get beyond this mindset- it allows inaction to hide behind all sorts of “oh poor us” blabber. But this argument is wearing quite thin, and not just for China but all sorts of countries. Taking care of people, the environment, social issues is too expensive, but oh don’t look at that Maglev train or Manhattan Skyscraper “New City”.

China, you could say, is expertly playing on the persistence of the “Third World” imagery that dominates Western thinking. Everyone not in the “West” is dirt poor, riding a bicycle and living in a mud hut or something of the sort. The problem with that public relations approach is they are also puffing their chest and proclaiming riches and power simultaneously. Consumers get confusing by conflicting messages 🙂

But the state of the country is great to suit different audiences. Want to wow an African head of state? Fly him to Beijing and tour the Nouveau Imperial architecture. Want to show a climate change negotiator why China is “too poor” to stop building ten coal power plants a minute? Fly them to rural Henan. What a deal! 🙂

April 9, 2009 @ 9:53 pm | Comment

A rising power hailed to champion the global restructuring with its national currency promoted to function on the international economic arena, sizable impoverished households plighted by inadequate supply of food and shelter, these two vastly disparate images, when juxtaposed, unfold a comprehensive scenario of China.

China’s phenomenal growth masks the enormous challenges that have plagued the country, and the flood of laudatory reportage of Western media conceals complexity facing China.

April 9, 2009 @ 9:55 pm | Comment

For all those words mentioned above, China will achieve a remarkable economic recovery and its goal of 8 percent growth rate will be accomplished, and rise from the recession the has engulfed the world as a more powerful nation.

April 9, 2009 @ 9:59 pm | Comment

“Chinese economy is safe and will grow by 8 percent in 2009”
While “Chinese economy is safe” is too simple a conclusion, its economy “will grow by 8 percent in 2009” is right. In recognition of the flawed exports-oriented structure and subsequent hardships to conquer, China has committed its efforts to reshape its economic makeup, and this sweeping overhaul secures the 8 percent growth rate, which is low compared with the double-digit number a few years ago. All the snapshots you captured in your previous blog articles, like the idle ships moored at the ports, massive laying-off migrant workers, large-scale disclosure of factories, just mirrored this nationwide industrial transformation. We should look beyond the superficial phenomena and draw conclusions based on in-depth analysis.

April 9, 2009 @ 10:12 pm | Comment

We should look beyond the superficial phenomena and draw conclusions based on in-depth analysis.

You should look at the PDF file I linked to (you’ll need to get around the firewall, or email me and I can send it to you). It’s got some in-depth analysis, but maybe not with the conclusions you’d like to see.

I would love to see China get out of this quickly. Unfortunately, it is simply too tied to the developed countries now mired in recession. This is going to be a long, painful struggle, and when its over there will be a whole new way of thinking about traditional social structures. Already, the mystique of the college education in China is fading as bright rural students question whether the gaokao is actually worth it, seeing how many graduates are jobless. I suspect there will also be some rethinking about whether the central government is actually as omnipotent as it once seemed.

PB, I don’t disagree with anything you say.

Ecodelta, I really don’t think it had to be that way. If the government had been a bit shrewder, a bit more patient, a bit less obsesses with immediate short-term fixes they’d be so much better off. Of course, it’s easy to say that in hindsight, as at the time nearly everyone was dazzled with the brilliance of it all.

April 9, 2009 @ 10:26 pm | Comment

“it is simply too tied to the developed countries now mired in recession. This is going to be a long, painful struggle, and when its over there will be a whole new way of thinking about traditional social structures.”
you are right

April 9, 2009 @ 10:34 pm | Comment

God bless China.
Have a nice weekend. 🙂

April 9, 2009 @ 10:51 pm | Comment

Roubini’s paper has many positive comments, about the leaders’ understanding about the problems, about the consertiveness of the financial regulators and decision-makers, and about the energy efficiency and enviorments.

Richard, there are lots of bright sides in that report. From Roubini’s view, the western economists’ views had a wide gap with Chinese leaders. I think that reason of his impression is more about the cultural gap. Chinese leaders might well know that 8% is nearly impossible to achieve. But it is politically incorrect to apart from the official line. The forum IMO was an event aimed to receive inputs from foreign economists and make some PR efforts to boost FDI. Definitely not a place to speak their minds.

April 9, 2009 @ 11:01 pm | Comment

He also has positive things to say about China’s control of pollution, which he says seems to be getting better. Aside from that, I found little I’d call positive, and I completely disagree that he sees the Western-Asian gap as anything like “a cultural gap.” No, it is purely a matter of mathematics. He thinks China is stuck in a mantra (8 percent) that is 100 percent “the party line” (a verbatim quote). The figures he proceeds to offer shatter that mantra like a wrecking ball. He also makes it clear he got quite a bit of input from private conversations with the “gurus” and that they indeed did “speak their minds” to him. Not sure how you’re drawing your conclusions.

April 9, 2009 @ 11:52 pm | Comment

The notion that China somehow “needs” 8-10 % growth makes no sense, IMHO. If China only grows at 6 % or 5 % or 4 % for a while, that still means that on average, its people will become richer.

In fact, any growth in excess of 0.5 % (the current rate of population growth) makes Chinese people richer on average. How this increased wealth is distributed, is another matter. It’s the duty of the Chinese government to make sure that increased wealth trickles down to the people and becomes available to those that need it the most.

April 10, 2009 @ 12:20 am | Comment

Beasue one shuold not be obsessed of the rhetoric of 8%. It is really not about economics, which Roubini is specialized with, but about Chinese politics, which Roubini seemed to have no idea about. It is something like the promises made in an election campaign. Some of them should be treated seriously. Others are just talk. If those Chinese officials really spoke their minds to Roubini, he should know better.

I guess that I am an optimist, who sees the half of the glass full. Al least the policies are now aimed to move resources gradually from over-capacity sector to under-capacity sector (healthcare infrastructures, rural infrastructure, railroad). One thing I’d like to see but not happened yet is education. There should be serious efforts on education reform, not only the money put in education, but also the system itself. Next step is implementation of policies. Hope that can be done right.

April 10, 2009 @ 12:25 am | Comment

I have long stopped listening to foreign experts predicting China’s feature. China should have collapsed many times if their predictions are of any worth.

For matters of China’s economy, I tend to believe Web Jiaobao. If he says 8% is doable, than it is very likely doable. China is a nation of doers. China’s governance model gives tremendous advantage to the government that wants to take actions.

Westerns always underestimate China, because they refuse to understand the advantage of China’s governance model. In the times of current global crisis, China’s governance model will be shining even more brightly in terms of effects and efficiency over other governance models such as democracy.

April 10, 2009 @ 12:29 am | Comment

One thing to remember: China’s statistics office has insisted for many years that China’s GDP growth hardly fluctuates from year to year. That is highly unlikely, because everywhere else in the world, GDP growth fluctuates quite a bit. In other words, it is a sure thing that GDP growth numbers were massaged to show a “stable harmonious society” (which is not to say that official growth was understated – it simply smoothed out the cyclical ups and downs to some extent). So if the government really wants to show “around 8 % growth in 2009”, the numbers will probably show that outcome (or they will show 7.8 %, to show the world that China doesn’t completely cook its numbers). That doesn’t mean the economy really grew at 8 %. But the numbers will say that it has, and politicans can say that they have delivered on their promises.

April 10, 2009 @ 12:35 am | Comment

“God bless China.
Have a nice weekend. ”

Ha ha ha, I like this conscience 😉

April 10, 2009 @ 12:38 am | Comment

@Zjin
” One thing I’d like to see but not happened yet is education. There should be serious efforts on education reform, not only the money put in education, but also the system itself.”

Not only efforts in high education are needed, but also in vocational eduction. An apprenticeship and/or mastership on professional practice system like in Germany could be useful.

April 10, 2009 @ 12:46 am | Comment

Tom, all kind of Westerners make all kinds of predictions. I usually ignore most of them (and Asian predictors, as well). Roubini has a better track record and I think he’s quite smart. I, too, have said China would come out of this better than many others, but I think they’re also headed for a lot more anguish than most here now anticipate. Ignore this Westerner at your own risk.

April 10, 2009 @ 1:51 am | Comment

Thomas: The notion that China somehow “needs” 8-10 % growth makes no sense, IMHO. If China only grows at 6 % or 5 % or 4 % for a while, that still means that on average, its people will become richer.

If it has been growing by double digits for years and suddenly grinds to 6% or 4% that is cataclysmic, creating massive shock waves of unemployment and the resulting decreases in money spent, the additional strain on government, etc., etc. Why do you say this makes no sense? This is Econ 101.

April 10, 2009 @ 2:00 am | Comment

Richard,

I don’t disagree with Roubini’s prediction in any way. I think it makes sense, and the report you linked to certainly sounds well-researched.

But I disagree with the statement that growth of 4-6 % is a near-catastrophe. It needn’t be, because it is still growth.

April 10, 2009 @ 2:00 am | Comment

Growth of 4-6 % means that there is 4-6 % more GDP than the previous year. And typically, investment drops much more in a slowdown than consumption, so consumption growth would be substantially more than 4-6 % (because investment + consumption = total GDP).

Sure, the economy needs to adjust to a sharp slowdown, and it’s not easy. Lots of people lose their job, factories have to close, companies go under, etc.

But that doesn’t change the fact that the cake that can be distributed is still growing, not shrinking. And the government can redistribute it in a way that lessens the pain for those that are affected.

April 10, 2009 @ 2:05 am | Comment

Did you read this from the report, and my brilliant post?

For a country that has been growing at an average of 10% for the last decade (and as high as 13% in 2007 down to 9% in 2008) and that needs a growth close to 10% to move millions of poor rural farmers to the modern urban manufacturing sector every year, a growth rate of 5% would be the equivalent of a hard landing, and even 6% would be extremely weak. And the deceleration of growth in the last six months has been severe.

That is not theoretical. A drop this huge, from 9 to, say, 4 or 5, would leave any economy shell-shocked, and an economy as fragile as China’s in some serious trouble. And yes, for all its might China’s economy is fragile indeed because it is so dependent on one main source of economic fuel, i.e., exports. China’s economic engine is strong but it is not yet versatile.

Anyway, looking at your last comment, I suspect this discussion isn’t going to get us very far. When your economy is dependent on at least 9 percent growth and it plunges to 4 percent, most people would agree there is a serious problem. To shrug it off and say, “Well, it’s still growing, right?” is a tad naive and simplistic. Yeah, it’s growing over the previous year, but not nearly enough to keep moving vast numbers of Chinese people into new jobs this year. The drop also means millions more unemployed will become dependent on the state. Combined, these factors could spell big trouble ahead.

April 10, 2009 @ 2:16 am | Comment

China is inherently unpredictable to outsiders, because China can do a lot of things totally unexpected. The recent all-out medical initiative is a vivid example, what an impressive move and with such daring and speed.

If the Hu/Wen government can put forth such a huge program in such a short time and put it into action, what else China can not do?

April 10, 2009 @ 2:18 am | Comment

Quote: “I suspect this discussion isn’t going to get us very far”

What you mean is: You don’t expect me to agree with you.

Quote: “To shrug it off and say, ‘Well, it’s still growing, right?’ is a tad naive and simplistic.”

I’m not shrugging it off. I’m acknowledging that it creates problems. But it’s cetainly not a “doomsday scenario”.

Maybe you are aware that the Ukrainian economy is forecast to contract at a rate of more than 20 % this year. Russia will shrink by 5-10 %. Latvia will be down 10-20 %. Compared to these countries and various others, China has no serious problems. It’s all relative.

Oh, and Germany grew 2 % last year. It is forecast to contract 5-6 % this year. No cataclysm anywhere, though. (Not fair as a comparison, as Germany is much richer than China. But the slowdown of 7-8 % compared to last year is much more than in China.)

April 10, 2009 @ 2:27 am | Comment

Quote: “…needs a growth close to 10% to move millions of poor rural farmers to the modern urban manufacturing sector every year…”

It doesn’t need to move all those farmers into manufacturing every year. Ideally, it wants to do that. But if they need to stay farmers for a few more years before they can eventually move on to more “modern” pursuits, it won’t let the country fall apart.

They won’t starve, if the government takes its job seriously. China has lots of resources. It just needs to use them the right way, and it will be able to cope with a growth slowdown.

April 10, 2009 @ 2:29 am | Comment

i must be missing something here, but we’re dealing with a communist government, right? why is anyone taking their “statistics” seriously? I mean, are we for real? we’ve been through this with the USSR. the numbers will be what the government deems them to be, truth be damned. they are pushing this 8% magic because they want everyone to believe that everything is ok and there are no problems, even if the problems are staring them in the face. remember what happened with the famine in ukraine?
i don’t see why this is so surprising. china’s actual growth will slow, there will be problems, but the government will somehow manage to still paint a picture of a “harmonious” society and things will go on as before.
or did i miss something crucial here?

April 10, 2009 @ 3:30 am | Comment

Thomas makes a good point about urbanization- it’s not like a stated percentage of rural Chinese residents migrate to the cities every year like zombies regardless of economic conditions and this somehow has to be accommodated at all costs. With the export engine deflating, what are they going to do? This approach gives a tremendous lack of agency to Chinese migrants. Of course in the past decade or two there has been a massive migratory trend- but China was also “booming” led by its export manufacturing. Are rural migrants really going to keep pouring into cities like lost lemmings if there is no opportunity there? This “stalled modernization” (although I hesitate to call it that because the idea that farmer is somehow not a “modern” pursuit is crazy- what the hell are we all eating?) might not be what China WANTS in its quest for industrial greatness, as Thomas points out, but unfortunately life isn’t a series of 5-year plans.

April 10, 2009 @ 3:36 am | Comment

I am very bullish on China. China continues on her lucky streak.

Just take the example of this newly minted all-out medical care initiative that aims to provide basic service to all rural population in China.

This kind of program is desperately needed in China for economic and humane reasons but would be absolutely impossible in normal circumstance. It would be unthinkable given the long established tradition of neglect and deprivation of the rural population.

But all a sudden such gigantic socialist and humane program become not only acceptable but almost necessary in the name of stimulus and of developing rural China.

With this medical care initiative and a whole slew of other rural programs, China is on the move in huge scale in tilting resources towards the long neglected rural population. Such a move will go a long way in reviving rural economy, in raising rural living standard, in reducing urban-rural disparity, in improving China’s overall stability by reducing the migrant population.

China has this global crisis to thank for finally being determined and able to take this strategic move towards building the New Rural Society that will transform China into yet again an unknown new China.

April 10, 2009 @ 3:40 am | Comment

“China has this global crisis to thank for finally being determined and able to take this strategic move towards building the New Rural Society that will transform China into yet again an unknown new China.”

“The New Rural Society”? What is this the “Great Leap Forward”? According to my understanding, the plan has merely been published for general debate, and from early comments, I hear it has little substance, and a lot of rhetoric (sort of like all your comments).

I agree it’s an important step, but give it a little time for God’s sake before you start writing things like “The recent all-out medical initiative is a vivid example, what an impressive move and with such daring and speed.”

I don’t understand why the propagandists log on to this site to make comments (and it’s obvious that tom is one, since no one is responding to him, but he seems intent on informing us all of the the healthcare plan and the “New Rural Society”-I would be interested if his comments were substantial instead of sycophantic) What is the point in convincing a few China obsessed loawai and some overseas Chinese of the CCP’s “glorious” healthcare plan? Go to work on Tianya or Qiangguo Luntan…or at least try to inform us of its merits, rather than just saying how “wonderful” it is without providing any reasons.

April 10, 2009 @ 9:27 am | Comment

@AndyR

Do you like 163.com? It always provides very “smart” insights by netizens.

April 10, 2009 @ 10:47 am | Comment

Andy, you took the words right out of my mouth on the Great Leap Forward! I am watching all the praise of the greatness and genius of the CCP leaders because they rolled out plan. Gee.

Tom: China is inherently unpredictable to outsiders, because China can do a lot of things totally unexpected. The recent all-out medical initiative is a vivid example, what an impressive move and with such daring and speed.
If the Hu/Wen government can put forth such a huge program in such a short time and put it into action, what else China can not do?

Tom, I think you’ve fallen victim to CCP Infatuation Syndrome, the belief, which I have seen many times, even in brilliant people here, that the government can always move earth and heaven and do what is best for its people. Look carefully at your words I quoted. Westerners can never understand China. China can do amazing things, They can even work miracles. It doesn’t matter if its own statistics say they need a certain level of growth to avoid a major recession. Just because they are China, they will triumph and soar. Look, they put out an ambitious plan for healthcare in such a short time and put it into action! (Only trouble, we have no idea how long this has been cooking, and it has not been put into action.)

I love China. I will not dizzily praise its leaders over public press conferences (which is all the health plan is at the moment). They are lying to their people about the growth track they are on, they are all like robots chanting “8 percent, 8 percent” – and that should make you a little worried. That’s a government-directed thought being instilled. Meanwhile, I am watching them try to deal with some relatively trivial issues, such as what to do with the Bird’s Nest, and am amazed at despite that wonderful facade of omnipotent engineers who can step in and solve every problem, they have no fucking clue what they’re doing. They have no long-term plan (same as with the US dollar purchase), no strategy. And again, I hope they great;y surprise me because I want them to win.

Thomas, I dont necessarily want you to agree with me – I disagree with many, even most people here. But when you say something like a drop from double-digit growth isn’t bad because there’s still 4 percent growth, and hey, that’s growth! – when you say something like that I feel the conversation isn’t on a very mature level and is not taking into account the millions and millions of students and laid off flooding the job market who require far higher growth if there are to be enough jobs for them. That, and the aforementioned migrant workers, plus shutting factories that go out of business with each percentage drop and the ripple effect the closings have in their communities and….. As long as you say, “well, it still means China’s growing and that’s great!” – then I don’t see it as a serious discussion.

April 10, 2009 @ 11:30 am | Comment

Glad to see that everyone is starting to acknowledge who fragile China really is. Still, I think all these discussions are missing the main point: China’s current development model is not viable. It doesn’t matter if the CCP manage to survive the current turmoil, but whether or not they will use the crisis in order to make painful structural changes that would put them on a sustainable development path. By sustainable, I don’t only mean a model that takes into account the environment, and not even one that invests in education and health care. By sustainable I mean a model that couples economic and political freedoms – free press, free speech, independent judiciary, and the ability to hold politicians to account. Otherwise, China is just buying time until the next and inevitable crisis.

Also, if we keep running to economists for moral guidance and expect them to show us the right path, we will always be losers. As long as we treat economists as priests and oracles and don’t take moral and social responsibility for our own lives and the society in which we live, the never ending cycle of economic boom and bust will continue. See my take on economics as the new religion here.

April 10, 2009 @ 11:47 am | Comment

Too bad Roubini writes like crap. Practically unreadable at points.

April 10, 2009 @ 11:48 am | Comment

@tom: There’s a big big difference between announcing a program and implementing it. And money is not everything. You need doctors, you need nurses, you need facilities, and you need public servants who can make sure that all the public money you invests actually goes to where you planned it to go to, and with great efficiency. China’s totalitarian system allows it to make decisions quickly, but it hinders its ability to implement them, especially when it comes to “soft” issues that require long term investment in human capital and cannot be easily measured and quantified.

So, in theory, China has a good healthcare system. In practice, it still doesn’t, and even if the Hu/Wen plan goes well, it will be many years before it does.

April 10, 2009 @ 11:52 am | Comment

Susan Shirks’ “Fragile Superpower”. good read on exactly this topic of insecure Chinese Leadership overcompensating on projected GDP growth.
China needs to learn the lesson from the US. You can’t consume your way out of a crisis. China is still working on America’s now proven failed model of Capitalism. Also, where is the energy debate? China will be dying of thirst before the Economy crash lands anyway.

Living in China is inefficiency central. My analogy I like to use is ” can’t use a hammer to weld”. That is how I feel china’s economy is equipped right now to handle a 21st century economy. Fuckin’ trying to put a round peg into a square hole.

April 10, 2009 @ 12:14 pm | Comment

The severity of the downturn depends on whom you talk to in China. If you talk to someone in their sixties they will say: “We lived through the Great Leap Forward and Cultural Revolution; this is nothing.” But for younger Chinese, this is a very painful downturn. After all, they didn’t live through those periods in history.

However, there can be no doubt that the party/government has doubled up on its controls over society during these hard times. This time, the controls are often subtler and more targeted and, for that matter, more effective.

They are learning.

April 10, 2009 @ 12:17 pm | Comment

@Paul Denlinger: “They are learning.” ?!?!
Do you think that firming their grip on society and trying to control everything will bring prosperity to China’s people?

April 10, 2009 @ 12:40 pm | Comment

Richard,

“I feel the conversation isn’t on a very mature level … As long as you say, “well, it still means China’s growing and that’s great!” – then I don’t see it as a serious discussion.”

I obviously don’t think things are “just groovy”, as I have repeated a few times. But somehow, you keep repeating that what I write is “not mature”, “naive”, and that I’m “unaware of the fundamentals of Econ 101”.

You have the opinion that China is in big big trouble. Fine. But I don’t have that opinion. I happen to think that China is in comparatively small trouble. All sorts of reasons why I think so, and they can be debated and possibly disagreed with.

But that difference of opinion doesn’t make me immature or naive. If you say that, it just means that you are convinced that you are right, and different opinions are wrong because they are different.

As for Econ 101, I’ve actually taught Econ 101 and various other Econ classes. Feel free to visit my Economics blog, which also containts lots of discussions on the Chinese economy.

April 10, 2009 @ 2:17 pm | Comment

@Dror

I think you misunderstand Paul Denlinger,he means ignorance leads to happiness ,now we are learning. And he also implies that stability is of top.

April 10, 2009 @ 2:27 pm | Comment

amadeus: Happiness is a subjective feeling. Someone can be poor, sick, and happy. Here we are talking about objective indicators of social and economic development. Being ignorant in face of a crisis might keep you happy, but it will not help you survive the crisis or prevent future ones.

April 10, 2009 @ 2:40 pm | Comment

@Dror

Yes,I know. But as a Chinese I do not wanna talk further.The most I can say is that The problem of the government is the government itself–said by one of the American Presidents,I do not remember the name,sorry.

April 10, 2009 @ 2:59 pm | Comment

Thomas, sorry if I sound harsh or critical. But it was these words that make me think you are over-simplyifying, and that you don’t understand how serious a dip from double-digit growth to 4 or 5 percent can be:

The notion that China somehow “needs” 8-10 % growth makes no sense, IMHO. If China only grows at 6 % or 5 % or 4 % for a while, that still means that on average, its people will become richer.

That is not a conclusion that a true economist would ever arrive at.

Amadeus, that quote about the government being the problem was from our idiot-in-chief Ronald Reagan. It was from that mentality that the deregulation movement blossomed, leading the way to catastrophe, Governments certainly can be the problem, but we’ve all seen what happens when we let people with power and money do their thing without rules or oversight or accountability.

April 10, 2009 @ 3:06 pm | Comment

En regardant les arbres
On oublie trop souvent la forêt
Étudiant des hommes
Tu ne comprendras jamais l’humanité
Tes pensées limitées par des murs immuables
Aux douanes des cultures, même des espaces physiques
Tournent en rond, arrondissent les mêmes vagues préjugées
Sans faille tu tombes car les failles des systèmes
De pensée, de gouvernement, de croyance
Sont énormes et sans nombre.

April 10, 2009 @ 4:07 pm | Comment

AndyR

What do you mean by “general debate”?

The state counsel document released yesterday has outlined all principles for the new healthcare initiatives. This is pretty much it.

In China, government does not debate.

As for the details, I am sure various ministries and departments already have their detailed regulations and plans. The initiatives cover the whole population of 1.3 billion people, of all villages, townships, counties, cities, mega cities, private and state companies, government entities, everything and everyone in China.

There will be 4 separate ties of healthcare system initially, but by 2020, they will be integrated.

As for the rural villages, people already begin budgeting and planning in terms of clinics, medical equitment and medicine, staff and training and etc. China is the most efficient on that kind of things. By 2011, there will be about 30,000 new village clinics.

The most challenging part of this initiative has to do with the population in 城镇. 城镇 can be a mega rural township, a county seat city, or an emerging township bordering an expanding city. The population in城镇 tend to be very fluid.

OK, now for the new buzz phrase New Rural Society.

This is actually a variation of Hu Jintao’s slogan, the Chinese phrase is 社会主义新农村, or literally the Socialist New Rural Village.

New Rural Society is a positive spin on the old and vexing Sannong Problems (三农问题, 农民农村农业), which are the problems of farmers, the rural governance and the agriculture.

Under the Sannong Problems umbrella, there can be a slew of deeper issues such as rural land ownership, healthcare or village governance and leadership, all tough issues with far reaching consequences.

What’s the big deal and why rural villages are so important, you might ask.

Well, that is because much of China’s problem originates from rural villages. It is the problem of China’s huge population.

China still has a mega sleeping weapon for rural economy and that is the land ownership. People have been talking about it for some times but nobody dare to touch it. Last year there was a test balloon for new policy to allow farmers to lease out land allocated to them. But when the party convened the new policy was not mentioned.

If China is to liberalize the land ownership in rural villages, I don’t know what exactly would happen, but I can promise you this, you will see yet another new China.

If you are really interested in China, listen carefully what Wen Jiabao says. When he says China still has reserve for stimulus, he dose not just mean money but also policy. In China, policy is money and more than money.

April 10, 2009 @ 9:47 pm | Comment

What’s the big deal and why rural villages are so important, you might ask.

Tom, do you post here under another name, Math? Just wondering. That “you might ask” is very, very Math. So is the cult-like fawning over the party and warning the world to get out of the way while China takes off.

This attitude that the CCP can do no wrong and can never fail is kind of droll. I mean, the CCP can be extremely effective at getting certain things done, but then it can be so hopelessly clueless and helpless, not to mention downright awful. If you look at China’s constitution on paper, it is heavenly. Free speech, complete toleration and all sorts of goodies. Unfortunately, what’s on paper is often quite separate from what’s actually practiced. Likewise the new health initiative. It’s a great thing that they’re focusing on healthcare. But to wave a piece of paper around and declare victory as though it’s already happened is foolish. Who knows if they have the resources and the coordination and bureaucratic administration in place to provide all these services? Rural healthcare has been a disaster for years. You can’t just turn it around by writing some legislation, although it’s a good place to start. I wish them luck, but will reserve judgment on the actual practicality of the plan until I see it in action.

Anyway, you sound like a fanatic.

April 10, 2009 @ 10:43 pm | Comment

Tom, Does laowai look retarded as they appears?

April 10, 2009 @ 10:59 pm | Comment

Richard,

About you doubt on China’s ability to carry out rural healthcare.

Do you know how China enforces its One Child policy in rural villages?
Do you know how hard it is?
And don’t forget there are 200 million migrant people in China mostly from these rural villages.

If China can manage to enforce One Child policy in rural villages with reasonable effects, would China also be able to manage rural healthcare system?

China has very strong management capability in rural villages because China used to have commune system. The economic aspect of commune system is gone during the 80s, but the political and management parts are mostly intact. This is why China is able to enforce the One Child policy in rural villages – the most difficult rural policy in China and probably in the world.

I am not sure why you would call me a fanatic. Is it the first time you see somebody articulating on behalf of China for its actions and polices?

But do my arguments make sense?

Does my argument of China’s commune system legacy and China’s ability to enforce One Child policy make sense to you?

Does my previous discussion on Sannong Problems make any sense to you?

How much do you know China’s problems in rural areas, the Sannong Problems?

How much do you know the 200 million strong migrant people?

How much do you know what effects are these migrant people to their families and villages and to future viability of rural China?

April 11, 2009 @ 12:53 am | Comment

China is going to collapse. That’s news

April 11, 2009 @ 1:38 am | Comment

I went to sina.com and there is whole section devoted to the plans and policies for this ambitious healthcare initiative.

Here are some highlights for the rural villages:

29,000 clinics
5,000 second tier medical community centers.
1,370,000 medical staff
Education and Training schools and programs specifically for rural clinic staffing.

All to be done in less than 3 years!

This rural plan is just a small and relatively simple part of the whole healthcare initiative.

Still, problems and issues abound. For instance, there are currently 800,000 uneducated and indigenous “medicine men”, many of them former barefoot doctors, serving rural China. What do you do with these “barefoot doctors” after 2011?

Would the educated staff be more effective than barefoot doctors? Would local peasants trust educated staff from outside or the indigenous barefoot doctors.

April 11, 2009 @ 4:51 am | Comment

Carrying out the 2-child policy or the hukou policy and other policies that do not require vast amounts of expensive equipment and skills attainable only by many years of university study c are not quite the same as implementing rural healthcare. I congratulate China for announcing they will be doing it and I wish my own country would offer universal healthcare for all citizens (America’s shame). I will not congratulate this yet as a done deal, however, because I see too many obstacles to put it all in place rapidly. They could make a similar announcement saying they are going to make rural education in China world-class. I’d applaud it, but reserve my praise because I believe it would take many years to actually do this, again based on infrastructure and personnel needs. I am not saying anything you are claiming is false. Only that it is too early to celebrate it as if it were already done. Period.

Okay, we’ve had our say about the healthcare issue. Time will tell. Anything else about the Rich China-Poor China phenomenon or the painful hard landing China will be going through?

April 11, 2009 @ 10:17 am | Comment

I just did a rough calculation. This healthcare initiative can create 6 million jobs.

There about 2 million medial staff in new clinics – 1.37 million for rural clinics, 0.45 million for urban (poor) clinics, 0.16 million for rural township or county town.

The massive training programs for the 2 million staff will create another 0.2 million jobs. BTW, the training is free with the commitment to work in clinics.

There will be 29,000 rural clinics, 11,000 urban (poor) clinics and 5,000 second tier rural centers. The construction of these facilities will create 1 million jobs.

Non medial and administration staff, 1 million jobs.

The manufacturing of building materials, medial equipment, medicine, office equipment, electric and electronic equipment and transportation, 0.5 million jobs.

So far we have 4.7 million new jobs, just for the new clinic section, there are other sections that I have not yet read, but clinics will create most jobs.

I think overall 6 million new jobs is a conservative estimate. It is over three years, so each year 2 million new jobs.

We know that in China 1 point in additional GDP creates 1 million jobs. So in terms of employment, the healthcare initiative roughly creates 2% GDP for three years.

As far as I can tell, this healthcare initiative alone can pretty much guarantee the “protecting 8% GDP” goal. GDP is just GDP, who cares. What really is important for China now is the employment.

April 11, 2009 @ 11:55 am | Comment

BTW, when Roubini was considering China’s doom,s day scenario, did he have slightest idea that China is about to put forward and carry out this healthcare initiative?

Did he know it is just anthor piece of cake for China to carry out such gigantic project that is equivalent of 2% GDP?

Did he know China can liberalize land ownership in rural areas that can stimulate God knows how many percent of GDP?

If not, what credit he has in predicting China’s future?

Right now knowing what I know, I actually am in a better position then Roubini in predicting China’s GDP.

So forget about Roubini. He knows nothing about China. He is nobody in China.

April 11, 2009 @ 12:51 pm | Comment

Tom, you’re a funny guy.
“So forget about Roubini. He knows nothing about China. He is nobody in China.”

I don’t think anyone knows China too well. This is why nobody should try to manage it single-handedly. It will only lead to additional chaos and suffering. I hope that one day soon, China could join its neighbors – Korea, Japan, and others – and become a prosperous country, ruled by democracy with Chinese characteristics.

April 11, 2009 @ 1:23 pm | Comment

@tom

Thanks for all the “details”, but unfortunately all your efforts still amount to what politicians Chinese or otherwise are best at: 吹牛

As Richard says above, it’s all a lot of talk until we see it implemented, hopefully, it will be implemented well, but that remains to be seen.

By the way, it took about 20+ years for the one child policy to be effectively enforced and in some areas they are still having trouble enforcing it, they didn’t do it overnight, let alone 3 years, but you’re right they’ll do all this in three, because as we know, the Chinese government is like a perfectly controlled body with a brilliant brain, every decision at the top is implemented on the ground to perfection…

You are a fanatic because you write like a fanatic, because you keep fighting to make your point after your audience has clearly lost interest, because you believe that just because the Party has put some words to paper that means it shall be done, finally and most importantly, you are a fanatic because from what I read in your writings you “believe” rather than “think”

Anyway, I hope we’re done with this, thanks for the CCP’s health care plan “talking points”, I’ll be crossing my fingers that they get it right, since their last reform of the health care system worked so brilliantly…

April 11, 2009 @ 3:06 pm | Comment

Quote Richard: “That is not a conclusion that a true economist would ever arrive at”

Who decides what a “true economist” can arrive at? What’s your definition of a “true economist”? Are you one?

April 11, 2009 @ 10:48 pm | Comment

Andy,

You need to know China a little better before attacking me.

First of all, have you even been in China? Don’t tell the last time you were in China was during the 80s.

Why do you think the healthcare initiative is just talk?

Which part that I have talked about do you think is not possible?

Do you doubt China can build 45,000 clinics in 3 years?
I know it is a frightening number for most Americans, after it takes 20 plus years for the city of Boston to build a tiny section of highway.
But go to China and look around, in most cities, you need a new map each year because they change and expand so fast. Shanghai used to have 3 new streets each day.

Do you doubt China can train 2 million medial staff in 3 years?
China is churning out at least 2 million college graduates too many right now.

Richard certainly has a point about the difficulty in managing the huge healthcare systems. But that would be the “software” part of the plan and 3 years later. This healthcare initiative is actually a second attempt on China’s healthcare reform. The first attempt is a miserable failure. This attempt will have a lot of problem and may even fail as well.

But that is not the point. The point here is that at least China would have the “hardware” infrastructure ready in 3 years which would be a huge achievement by itself and which will create 6 million jobs that China needs most right now.

BTW, where did you get the imagination that it took China 20+ years to implement One Child policy? China’s management capability in rural villages is actually deteriorating each year not getting better because so many people leaving for migrant work. During the Mao ear of commune system, China has much stronger capability.

April 11, 2009 @ 11:19 pm | Comment

no matter what kind of statistical evidence you put in front of the “experts” explaining this is simply impossible based mainly on the catastrophic world demand for exports.

Nothing is impossible. Let’s say you are 2% short of your growth target, which you must achieve, you can increase your fiscal deficit by 2% of GDP, hire unemployed people to dig holes on the ground and then cover them back up, as a part of your “stimulus” program. Sure afterward your overall fiscal health will be worse. Noubini’s data seems to be very crude and his interpretations of the latest data seem to be mired with his own confirmation bias. Personally 6% growth won’t be bad, if it’s quality growth. If that’s “hard landing”, so be it.

The real question in hand is, can China achieve that without the fiscal deficit going over 3%? If you listen to Wen and the economists report to him, so long as the world trade doesn’t deteriorate further, likely China doesn’t need further stimulus to achieve the 8% growth. Oh, BTW, at this point the fiscal deficit in the US is projected to be some 12%, including the Social Security surplus and not including the states’ deficits. The insistence of being still fiscally disciplined in this environment, speaks volume on the quality of Chinese leadership.

I don’t think you need the Chinese media to tell you that China is holding up pretty well. GM and Mercedes-Benz both achieved some 20% y-t-y sales growth in China in March, compared to 40+% decrease in the US. Divergence is happening as we speak — some of us just refuse to see it.

April 11, 2009 @ 11:33 pm | Comment

Above all fiscal deficit percentages are to GDP.

April 11, 2009 @ 11:43 pm | Comment

Here’s the thing. Even if the Central Government is absolutely correct and their plans are total genius, one of the biggest problems in China as I see it is that the Central Government says one thing and many of the provincial and local governments shrug and go on their merry way. Look at environmental policies and “required” reviews for things like dams. Sure, SOME of these projects are carefully researched and regulated and go through the government’s stated process, but plenty of them don’t. SOME factories follow the rules and don’t pollute to excess, but plenty do not.

I think from what I’ve heard about the Chinese stimulus plan that it sounds great, and the infrastructure improvements (and yeah, the fabulous healthcare plan) are much more the kinds of stimulus I’d like to see in the States, but it’s really foolish to pretend that China is not going to suffer from this downturn and that there is a huge degree of fragility to the economy, e.g., the need to keep millions and millions of people working through growth that is ultimately not sustainable.

April 12, 2009 @ 12:35 am | Comment

Sigh….”that there is NOT a huge degree of fragility…”

I had to wake up way too early today and I’m still undercaffeinated.

April 12, 2009 @ 12:36 am | Comment

JXie is using exactly the right words: Quality growth.

In China, quality growth is much more important than a fixation on 6pc vs. 8pc or whatever other growth rate. What counts is: What does GDP growth consist of, and who benefits from it. With the right kind of growth, 4pc is far from catastrophic. With the wrong kind of growth, 8pc is not enough and too much at the same time.

April 12, 2009 @ 12:36 am | Comment

At the risk of sounding like a representative from CCP propaganda department, let me share with you some hidden weapon and asset that few Westerns have slightest clue.

Do you remember the SARS crisis in China in 2003?

Remember all health experts in the world worrying and predicting China’s doom?
Remember because China had 100 million migrant population at the time that made it seemingly impossible to contain the spread of disease?

Remember the same Wen Jiabao busy touring China and telling the world China can defeat SARS but no one in the world would listen?

And what happened to the SARS that should have destroyed China?

Nothing, nada, zip.

Do you know what China did to defeat SARS?

Very simple. China just remobilized old “socialist” command and control system, organized resource and put medical checkpoints in every village and neighborhood nation wide.

In 2-3 months, the SARS was defeated, piece of a cake, next please.

Now a quiz for you:

Why do you think China was able to mobilize resource and set up checkpoints allover China in a metter of days?

Here are multiple choices you can choose:
1) Because China has a democracy and people can argue and debate.
2) Because the US and the world have sent one million medical staff.
3) Because China used to have commune system so it was just a matter of remobilize the old system.

The answer is of course is 3.

In China, we call this kind of capability the “Socialist Advantage”.

If you really want to understand China, especially China’s crisis management capability, pay very close attention to this “Socialist Advantage”.

Socialist Advantage is what keeps China alive when crisis hits China.
Socialist Advantage is the hidden weapon that defeats China Collapse prediction every time.

So what exactly is this Socialist Advantage?
Well, this can be a very complicated long story, but in a nutshell, it has a lot to do with Chairman Mao.

This current healthcare initiative is actually another case of Socialist Advantage at work. The central government pulls all the resource in case study and research of the healthcare needs and problems, in piloting solutions, in setting agenda and goals, in device policies and plans, in overall budgeting and in directing the actual implementation.

The healthcare initiative involves 14 ministries in government of all levels, central, provincial and local, all the way to villages and neighborhood committees. This is Socialist Advantage in full display.

So, in the time of crisis in China, forget about Roubini, remember Socialist Advantage and remember Chairman Mao.

April 12, 2009 @ 3:05 am | Comment

“Socialist Advantage”.

Small correction. Totalitarian advantages.

It has its advantages but also big disadvantages.

Remember the great leap forward? The cultural revolution? The colectivization?

What about wasting time since 1949 till 198x? Where would be China now if the had started earlier? At what human cost? Very very very much lower.

One of math teachers used that argument when I was school. The URSS was to bury the decadentcapitalistic societies……

April 12, 2009 @ 6:51 am | Comment

If US is not going any longer to overconsume, if EU is not going to consume, where is CH overcapacity going to be exported?

Other provinces, developing markets, etc.

And if the overcapacity is not going to be exported, from where are the millions jobs CH needs be produced?

Even if the entire export sector vaporized it would be 48 out of 800 million jobs lost. Not as bad as some people wish it was. Many of these jobs were extremely low pay, heavily polluting and inefficient industries (33% of “China’s” co2). The destruction of American demand is a godsend to the whole world, Americans especially. Now if only Americans would prefer healthier/cleaner stuff, that would be great for everyone.

Hard times ahead.

But not as hard as some would like, and not as hard as it will be for America. China will just go from 3rd world poverty to 3rd world poverty (albeit a bit cleaner). America will experience some serious withdrawal symptoms, but it’s probably for the better (10-20 years later of course).

There are a lot of political ramifications for China, too, neighboring countries aren’t so keen on China-containment any longer. Japan, Korea, Taiwan, and Australia are all shifting closer.

China is also getting lots of raw materials for a low price right now when most other economies are paralyzed.

What would happen if there was not such legitimacy need?

This is a pretty open ended question. Silly, really, because if China wasn’t poor that means that there never was a Japanese/European/American invasion. Don’t think there was any chance of that.

@PB

Good post.

@Richard

At issue in the Rich China, Poor China section of my post is the way they schizophrenically claim either devastating poverty or staggering wealth,

I don’t think you should be so surprised, Rich. America claims China is rich when they want China to shoulder the burden of the problems industrialized countries have created for the world, and they say China is poor when they want people to take short positions or to feel better about themselves. By comparison, the CCP has actually been much more “moderate” or “stable”, predicting in 2006 or so that the economy would grow 8% over the next 5 years. Surprising how Communist propaganda wings can be more informative than “free” news corporations.

Unfortunately, it is simply too tied to the developed countries now mired in recession.

This is a myth. Again, 4-5% of China’s growth is exports to Europe/America, another good 1-2% to Japan. About 3% of employment is in exports. China has major problems but this isn’t the main one. Most of China’s “exports” is just foreign companies exporting stuff assembled with cheap Chinese labor. It’s Japan, Taiwan, Korea that are taking the brunt of this “export” meltdown as you can see (-10 to -6% growth, though I believe these are overly pessimistic).

Roubini has a better track record and I think he’s quite smart.

I also predicted the financial meltdown, but that doesn’t make me an expert 😉

The problem with that public relations approach is they are also puffing their chest and proclaiming riches and power simultaneously.

Rarely. When it happens on occasion, the “Western media” jumps all over it to fuel the “China scare” mongering. Same thing happened to Japan, other shifty and dangerous “yellow people”.

Want to show a climate change negotiator why China is “too poor” to stop building ten coal power plants a minute? Fly them to rural Henan. What a deal! 🙂

The various provinces of China in themselves are analogous to whole countries by population. Henan has 14 million more people than Germany if I’m not mistaken.

@Conscience

the flood of laudatory reportage of Western media

LOL. You must be from a different planet.

@Dror

Korea, Japan, and others – and become a prosperous country, ruled by democracy with Chinese characteristics.

You mean a puppet state whose ruling party is funded by the U.S? That’s unlikely to happen.

You do know that the LDP received huge funds from the United States from the 50s and on, right? And that the U.S encouraged Japan to militarize and deny WW2 atrocities?

Maybe when China is a “democracy” it can find WMD in Central Asia.

April 12, 2009 @ 7:48 am | Comment

Tom, you are a dangerous guy. I was here during SARS. You are either completely ignorant or plain lying. Seriously, it has to be one or the other. And who ever said SARS was going to destroy China? You are a propagandist, fact-free.

Thomas, I get to decide. It’s my site, sorry. Ownership has its privileges.

Jxie, I’ve always said China’s financial discipline might serve it well in coming out of this crisis better than most of the big powers. I still think it will. I have always said this seems to be “the place to be” during the crisis, and I’ve taken some heat for it. So don;t make the mistake that I am negative on China and its opportunities ahead. Its just that I see a hard anding being very painful for a while, maybe a year or two. The Chinese people are impatient and they had their plans, and they will not be pleased at the interruption and the broken dreams. That said, they’ve also known a lot more hardship than the US, are probably more flexible and more willing to chi ku than Americans.

Lisa, everything that you said.

April 12, 2009 @ 7:54 am | Comment

How about the socialist advantage that allowed hospitals to refuse treatment to those who cannot pay? How about the socialist advantage that allowed the dismantling of what little in terms of universal health care that China had to begin with, to be replaced by a profit driven laissez-faire medical industry where the hippocratic oath and the basic human values of the medical profession means nothing?

April 12, 2009 @ 7:55 am | Comment

Small correction. Totalitarian advantages.

What about wasting time since 1949 till 198x? Where would be China now if the had started earlier? At what human cost? Very very very much lower.

Definitely true, but it’s not unlikely that America would have nuked China by now if not for the alliance with Russia (that arguably sped up China’s nuclearization).

When debating these theoreticals you have to understand cause and effect. America simply had zero sympathy for China (as evidenced by the paucity of American aid to the Nationalist) during the late Qing, Civil War, Japanese Invasion, or during the Communist Era. They have zero sympathy now. They happily vaporized 200,000 faceless “non-whites” in Japan and would have had no qualms about doing the same 10,000 times over in China. If and only if they could get away with it.

Part of the reason why China took the development path it did was because of a combination of insanity provoked by human misery and because of pragmatism. If China did not have nukes Asia would have been strangled by Euro-American imperialism.

So a better way to pose the question would be “what would have happened if America gave China more than 1/50th the aid it sent to Europe?” (via Lend-Lease, Marshall Plan, etc) I’d say we’d all be living in a much, much better world by now.

The myth of American generosity towards Republican China explained here:

http://www.republicanchina.org/American_Aid.html

American complicity and connivance in helping the LDP in their cover-up of war crimes and revisionism, as well as violent ultra-nationalist attacks against Japanese moderates and leftists:

http://www.users.bigpond.com/battleforAustralia/JapWarCrimes/Denying_truth.html

If anything, there is a “poor America” excuse going around. America is so mighty and the worlds pre-eminent super power but they can’t spare 1% of GDP for the environment or the world’s poor.

April 12, 2009 @ 8:26 am | Comment

And who ever said SARS was going to destroy China?

Well, nanhe and his ilk… they’re not exactly a fringe minority either, PNAC and Blue Team are not fringe but more a sizable minority.

The UN, however, did estimate that China would have around 10 million infected with AIDS by now. Which is overestimated by quite a lot; 89 page called “HIV/AIDS: China’s Titanic Peril”

http://premium.europe.cnn.com/2002/WORLD/asiapcf/east/06/28/china.aids/index.html

The UN had good intentions, but Ivan and other “netizens” and “china bloggers” used the report to gloat and predict an immediate collapse of China (and Hong Kong 10 years after the handover).

The true figure is closer to 1.5 million according to foreign experts.

Do you see how dangerous it can get for the Chinese people when expat laymen such as nanhe, N_a_S, Lindel, or Ivan start to use reports of grave significance for nationalist and anti-Chinese dick-waving?

A lack of transparency over epidemics for the sake of CCP “face” will naturally result.

April 12, 2009 @ 8:35 am | Comment

The link you quoted in the last part of this post can be found here:

http://markschinablog.blogspot.com/2009/04/conundrum-that-is-china.html

April 12, 2009 @ 8:48 am | Comment

This is getting way out of hand.

Ferin, UNAIDS revised its AIDS prediction numbers for China years ago. No one ever said SARS was going to destroy China, or if they did they were nuts.

Ferin, once more you’ve highjacked a thread. See me in my office.

April 12, 2009 @ 9:02 am | Comment

Makes – thanks for pointing that out – it was a typo, I’ve added the link.

April 12, 2009 @ 9:19 am | Comment

yourfriend

Come to think about it, if it wasn’t for all those doomsday prediction for China, where would the CCP gets the motivation to invalidate those predictions? Or even pinpoints their internal problems. I say China needs more doomsday prediction from the international community, the prospect of instability and eventually losing power is the best motivation for CCP to get their jobs done.

If everyone around the world would say that export led growth would eventually come to end for China, then this financial crisis originating from USA would not have affect Chinese export industry so much. Chinese elite was getting too comfortable making money using disadvantaged rural migrant as low cost labor to drive profit growth. Had they restructured their economic model earlier during the boom time, the situation would have been a lot better now. I think this is one area the majority of the international community did not bitch too much about.

Hell, CCP thrives on doomsday prediction. The day when foreigner stop making doomsday prediction against China, it is the day China will go down the drain. It is easier for other people to find out your mistake than for yourself to find out.

April 12, 2009 @ 9:50 am | Comment

@yourfriend: “…a puppet state whose ruling party is funded by the US….”

1. There’s no shame in receiving assistance and support or in learning from your mistakes with the encouragement of others. What counts is the bottom line, and the bottom line is that China’s GDP per capita is on par with El Salvador, Bhutan, and Angola.

2. Japan and Korea are not the only ones that received assistance. Western Europe was rebuilt with American money.

3. Speaking of puppet states – do you have any idea what role Stalin and the USSR played in establishing modern China (both the Nationalist and Communist versions of it)? They did not only provide money and guns, but they practically appointed most of the senior leaders, and those leaders took orders from soviet agents. Give me a break.

April 12, 2009 @ 10:29 am | Comment

@yourfriend: I just read your second post. I think this type of attitude is pathetic. Now you are blaming America for not forcing China to receive its financial support??!

You seem to live in an interesting world, one where China’s every good decision is a source of pride, and every bad one is always someone else’s fault.

Also, as @Fobtacular pointed out, the CPP’s ability to manage expectations is exactly what has kept them in power. That fact that they can make their citizens (and some of the commenters here…) so proud that their country did not fall apart due to a viral disease is a fine example of how this works.

April 12, 2009 @ 10:41 am | Comment

Dror, I’ve had to rescind Ferin’s posting privileges again. I can’t tolerate the way every conversation gets turned into an angry discussion of how bad America is. (And I complain about how bad America is all the time, where it’s relevant.)

April 12, 2009 @ 11:03 am | Comment

Your post is NOT the mess. One cannot discuss these issues without meandering. I think you are onto something. Not sure just what, but something….

April 12, 2009 @ 12:23 pm | Comment

Quote Richard: “I get to decide. It’s my site, sorry.”

Indeed. I was naive and immature to assume that an economist could participate in a serious economic discussion on your site. In case anyone is still reading this and happens to be interested, he can continue reading here:

http://miscellaneous-economic-ramblings.blogspot.com/2009/04/does-china-need-to-grow-at-10.html

April 13, 2009 @ 3:24 am | Comment