Page 12 of 13 FirstFirst ... 345678910111213 LastLast
Results 166 to 180 of 188

Thread: China overtakes Japan as No.2 economy, US next by 2025.

  1. #166
    Staff Emeritus
    Military Professional
    Contrary by Nature.
    zraver's Avatar
    Join Date
    22 Oct 06
    Location
    Arkansas
    Posts
    14,550
    Quote Originally Posted by gunnut View Post
    . But I'd argue that "environmental" itself does not lead to higher efficiency. Profit does.
    Which is why the rivers and lakes were so clean and future superfund sites were not being created through the 60's? Profit often seeks the cheapest not the most efficient way to do things.

  2. #167
    Administrator
    Lei Feng Protege
    Defense Professional
    Join Date
    23 Aug 05
    Location
    Arlington, VA
    Posts
    13,059
    gunnut,

    I'd say efficiency gains are mostly from lowered cost. Businesses cannot control revenue, but they can control cost. Efficiency leads directly to higher margins. Waste is not good for any business.

    Of course in the quest of being "environmental," it is possible to discover more efficient way of doing things. But I'd argue that "environmental" itself does not lead to higher efficiency. Profit does.
    of course, because environmental protection isn't about creating profit, it's about first protecting the environment, lol.

    there ARE happy coincidences where both are achieved, and I'd say that generally speaking there's more of these coincidences than where it's environment VS profit.

    and that's more true when we consider long-term vs the short.
    There is a cult of ignorance in the United States, and there has always been. The strain of anti-intellectualism has been a constant thread winding its way through our political and cultural life, nurtured by the false notion that democracy means that "My ignorance is just as good as your knowledge."- Isaac Asimov

  3. #168
    Senior Contributor
    Join Date
    09 Oct 10
    Posts
    1,074
    Quote Originally Posted by zraver View Post
    Profit often seeks the cheapest not the most efficient way to do things.
    Exactly, especially at the expense of long term losses that apply to other aspects of the economy.

    Quote Originally Posted by astralis View Post

    I'd argue that there's elements of both. there's some environmental practices that will drive long-term economic gain, IE greater energy efficiency.

    then there's some practices that are going to be harder to calculate economically. for instance, regulations on smog. the main economic gain would be fewer air-related health issues, but scientifically it's going to be difficult to pin down exactly the number due to a million other lifestyle factors.

    so it's not necessarily true that lax environmental regs will lead to greater economic growth.

    as with most things in life there's few absolutes. some environmental regs will improve long-term growth; some environmental regs may retard it (but may still be worth it in terms of quality of living); some will have hard-to-estimate economic impact.
    Quote Originally Posted by gunnut View Post
    I'd say efficiency gains are mostly from lowered cost. Businesses cannot control revenue, but they can control cost. Efficiency leads directly to higher margins. Waste is not good for any business.

    Of course in the quest of being "environmental," it is possible to discover more efficient way of doing things. But I'd argue that "environmental" itself does not lead to higher efficiency. Profit does.
    Its a complex topic, one element of the economy may see major growth at the expense of environmental issues, ultimately the cost may get passed onto someone else. I set up a thread on the subject previously, going to put a generalisation from that thread from a paper that starts the painting of a picture on the issue...

    The services of ecological systems and the natural capital stocks that produce them are critical to the functioning of the Earth’s life-support system. They contribute to human welfare, both directly and indirectly, and therefore represent part of the total economic value of the planet. We have estimated the current economic value of 17 ecosystem services for 16 biomes, based on published studies and a few original calculations. For the entire biosphere, the value (most of which is outside the market) is estimated to be in the range of US$16–54 trillion (1012) per year, with an average of US$33 trillion per year. Because of the nature of the uncertainties, this must be considered a minimum estimate. Global gross national product total is around US$18 trillion per year.
    http://www.worldaffairsboard.com/sho...902&highlight=

  4. #169
    Official Thread Jacker Senior Contributor gunnut's Avatar
    Join Date
    27 Jan 06
    Location
    DPRK, Demokratik People's Republik of Kalifornia
    Posts
    23,782
    Quote Originally Posted by zraver View Post
    Which is why the rivers and lakes were so clean and future superfund sites were not being created through the 60's? Profit often seeks the cheapest not the most efficient way to do things.
    Cheap is efficient, profit wise.

    However, when the consumers demand "cleaner" solution, or else they vote with their wallet, then the cheapest route may not be to dump everything into the river. Brand loyalty and product image come into play.

    Why do people pay more for "organic" food and "free range" chicken? It's not efficient. Not for the producers nor for the consumers. But some will pay more for less because of whatever values they prefer over cost.

    Where do the left over parts of a pig or a cow go after all the prime cuts are taken? They are sold to those with specific needs. For example, I just saw a lot of animal organs on sale in packages at an Asian market. I have never seen these in American supermarkets. Butcher shops, maybe, but not Walmart or Smith's. These parts aren't dumped into the river because why dump them if we can sell them for a profit? Very little goes to waste, because of profit.

    Do you know the history of Kingsford Charcoal? It came from reprocessing and selling the wood scraps left over from building Ford automobiles in the 1920s. Again, why dump when we can sell for a profit?

    These are efficient processes, more efficient beyond any government mandate, which arose from the capitalist profit seeking model.

    I'm not saying we should have any rules at all. We can't just dump shit into rivers and lakes. The Chinese will have to learn this on their own. And only after they have achieved certain prosperity. After all, poor people don't have time to worry about their environment. They're busy with their next meal.
    "Only Nixon can go to China." -- Old Vulcan proverb.

  5. #170
    Official Thread Jacker Senior Contributor gunnut's Avatar
    Join Date
    27 Jan 06
    Location
    DPRK, Demokratik People's Republik of Kalifornia
    Posts
    23,782
    Quote Originally Posted by astralis View Post
    gunnut,



    of course, because environmental protection isn't about creating profit, it's about first protecting the environment, lol.

    there ARE happy coincidences where both are achieved, and I'd say that generally speaking there's more of these coincidences than where it's environment VS profit.

    and that's more true when we consider long-term vs the short.
    I agree with you. And I cited the examples of the meat industry and Kingsford Charcoal as the ultimate example of profit seeking model leading to clean and efficient usage of raw materials.

    But still, people need to achieve a certain level of prosperity before they have time to worry about clean air and water. I believe China is on the cusp of this development. The demand will lead to higher cost of stuff. Higher cost means less growth.
    Last edited by gunnut; 06 Jan 16, at 20:19.
    "Only Nixon can go to China." -- Old Vulcan proverb.

  6. #171
    Administrator
    Lei Feng Protege
    Defense Professional
    Join Date
    23 Aug 05
    Location
    Arlington, VA
    Posts
    13,059
    I agree with you. And I cited the examples of the meat industry and Kingsford Charcoal as the ultimate example of profit seeking model leading to clean and efficient usage of raw materials.
    OTOH that's certainly not a guaranteed across every field. short-term profit, especially when you're trying to placate stockholders, will often times trump long-term efficiency concerns-- that's true even if you're not talking about an environmental issue.

    and environmental benefits are much more diffuse.

    companies being efficient and environmentally-friendly are great, but one can't depend on company foresight/goodwill/etc alone.
    There is a cult of ignorance in the United States, and there has always been. The strain of anti-intellectualism has been a constant thread winding its way through our political and cultural life, nurtured by the false notion that democracy means that "My ignorance is just as good as your knowledge."- Isaac Asimov

  7. #172
    Official Thread Jacker Senior Contributor gunnut's Avatar
    Join Date
    27 Jan 06
    Location
    DPRK, Demokratik People's Republik of Kalifornia
    Posts
    23,782
    Quote Originally Posted by astralis View Post
    OTOH that's certainly not a guaranteed across every field. short-term profit, especially when you're trying to placate stockholders, will often times trump long-term efficiency concerns-- that's true even if you're not talking about an environmental issue.

    and environmental benefits are much more diffuse.

    companies being efficient and environmentally-friendly are great, but one can't depend on company foresight/goodwill/etc alone.
    Capitalism solves that problem by finding profit in environmental causes. Why discard if you can sell for money? Of course we can't always rely on government dictates. Those usually have unintended consequences, sometimes the exact opposite of what we want.

    India had a problem with cobras when the Brits got there. The Brits thought "hey let's pay the locals 5 rupees for each head of cobra they turn in." Guess what the locals did? They raised cobras in farms and sold them to the Brits for 5 rupees each. There were more cobras than ever before.
    "Only Nixon can go to China." -- Old Vulcan proverb.

  8. #173
    Official Thread Jacker Senior Contributor gunnut's Avatar
    Join Date
    27 Jan 06
    Location
    DPRK, Demokratik People's Republik of Kalifornia
    Posts
    23,782
    So....how about that China market?
    "Only Nixon can go to China." -- Old Vulcan proverb.

  9. #174
    Senior Contributor GVChamp's Avatar
    Join Date
    26 Aug 06
    Location
    Chicago
    Posts
    1,306
    Quote Originally Posted by DOR View Post
    China's main growth issue today is the lack of the rule of law. When party cadres have to be kicked out before they can be subject to the law; when no one in their right mind would sue the government; when land rights are subject to the whims of officials; when financial investors trade on inside information, without fear of reprisal; and when bureaucrats fear their bosses more than the courts, the cost of uncertainty soars.

    As for financial crises always being temporary, tell that to the Japanese.
    Japan's financial crisis is Japan's fault. But most of their issues at this point are related to an insufficient number of Japanese people, not to mention they were never anywhere near as productive as people gave them credit for.

    I agree that China's problems are most effectively lumped under "rule of law."

    Also China is spitting out money like crazy to support their stock market, which I guess is politically necessary, but economically a black hole.
    "The great questions of the day will not be settled by means of speeches and majority decisions but by iron and blood"-Otto Von Bismarck

  10. #175
    Senior Contributor DOR's Avatar
    Join Date
    08 Mar 11
    Location
    London
    Posts
    2,467

    The Visible Hand: The Role of Government in China’s Long-Awaited Industrial Revolutio

    Fed Working Paper 2016-016A by George E. Fortier and Yi Wen


    Highly selective highlights—

    In one year, China can produce 50 billion T-shirts (more than seven times the world’s population), 10 billion pairs of shoes, 800 million metric tons of crude steel (50% of global supply and 800% of the US level of production), 2.4 gigatons of cement (nearly 60% of world production), and close to 4 trillion metric tons of coal (burning almost as much coal as the rest of the world combined). China is the world’s largest producer of passenger cars, high-speed trains, ships, tunnels, bridges, highways, machine tools, cell phones, computers, robots, air conditioners, refrigerators, washing machines, furniture, fertilizer, agricultural crops, pork, fish, eggs, cotton, copper, aluminum, books, magazines, television shows, as well as college students. Moreover, China is now the world’s number one industrial patent applicant. For example, China’s industrial patent applications were more than the sum of those in the United States and Japan in 2014.



    Life expectancy increased from about 35 years in 1952 to 68 years in 1982, and infant mortality fell from about 300 deaths for every 1,000 live births in 1952 to 31 in 1999; rates of infection and disease, such as malaria, as well as deaths from floods and drought, also fell precipitously. China’s literacy rate reached 66% in the 1960s.



    China’s industrialization can be characterized by the following key steps:

    (i) Solve the food security problem. The Chinese government established basic food security through a primitive agricultural revolution based on small-scale farming and collective ownership of land. Government officials encouraged commercialized farming and supplementary (sideline) work to generate additional income for farmers.

    (ii) Start a primitive rural industrialization based on township-village enterprises. This stage was critical because it channeled local surplus labor in rural areas into simple industries; this process would ferment the mass market needed to support mass production that would emerge from China’s forthcoming industrial revolution.

    (iii) Initiate a true industrial revolution of mass production of light consumer and industrial goods based on obsolete or imported technologies, with a well-fermented domestic market from the previous stage of rural industrialization as well as an international market for these goods.

    (iv) Engineer a boom in the “industrial trinity” of energy, motive power, and infrastructure (especially transportation) based on the savings accumulated from the rural industrialization and the first industrial revolution. This boom in the industrial trinity naturally initiates a second industrial revolution, featuring the mass production of the means of mass production and mass distribution: These means (goods or tools) include steel, cement, and other intermediate goods used in buildings, highways, and railroads and the machinery used in light industries. The industrial trinity is the flagship industry during the initial phase of a second industrial revolution and a linchpin between the first industrial revolution and the second industrial revolution. This initial phase of the second industrial revolution becomes feasible, affordable, and profitable because of the thick market (enormous market demand) for energy, motive power, and infrastructure created through the earlier development stages, especially the first industrial revolution stage. Also, a later phase of the second industrial revolution (featuring mainly the mass production of various types of machine tools) naturally follows because an industrial trinity boom broadens and deepens the market for heavy industrial goods and machinery created through the earlier stages and especially through the industrial trinity boom itself.

    Read the entire paper here
    : https://research.stlouisfed.org/wp/more/2016-016





    There is plenty to criticize in the way the CCP managed China over the years, but their accomplishments need to be given a fair airing as well.

  11. #176
    Military Professional
    Join Date
    06 Aug 03
    Posts
    29,353
    I'm actually surprised by your subscription to this bullshit. China's economy crashed after Tienanmen. Tienanmen was NOT planned nor was it reaction! DXP's bargin basement firesale was what saved China but by no means was China's economy robust during this entire period. There was a lot of begging, scrounging, and fire sale to the rest of the world.

    DXP saved China by getting rid of the Iron Rice Bowl and you and I both know, that hurt China a hell or a lot.
    Chimo

  12. #177
    Defense ProfessionalSenior Contributor tbm3fan's Avatar
    Join Date
    01 Nov 09
    Location
    San Francisco Bay Area
    Posts
    3,155
    An interesting read on the new Silk Road being built by China.

    China is building new roads, railroads and pipelines from Central Asia to Europe in an effort to build new connections to the rest of the world. The results may be good for the Chinese -- but less so for the other countries involved.
    http://www.spiegel.de/international/...a-1110148.html

  13. #178
    Senior Contributor DOR's Avatar
    Join Date
    08 Mar 11
    Location
    London
    Posts
    2,467
    Quote Originally Posted by Officer of Engineers View Post
    I'm actually surprised by your subscription to this bullshit. China's economy crashed after Tienanmen. Tienanmen was NOT planned nor was it reaction! DXP's bargin basement firesale was what saved China but by no means was China's economy robust during this entire period. There was a lot of begging, scrounging, and fire sale to the rest of the world.

    DXP saved China by getting rid of the Iron Rice Bowl and you and I both know, that hurt China a hell or a lot.

    China was suffering mid-20s inflation in the winter of 1988-89. The solutions – cutting spending and credit growth – brought inflation down by the Summer of 1989, but at a price. Slashing student subsidies was a key part of the anger that emerged in the Spring. Credit growth slowed by half in the year to Q-3 1989. Inflation fell from 28.4% in Feb 1989 to 6.6% in Dec (if you believe the numbers).

    Throughout the first stage of reform (1980s), the economy repeatedly boomed and busted. Over and over. Each time, the economic managers readjusted their thinking and tried something different. In between, the political managers sniped at each other and their (economic management) subordinates.

    Liberalize.
    Over heat.
    Rein in.
    Over do it.
    Repeat.

    No, Tiananmen wasn’t planned. But, economic developments and policy responses played a very important role in stoking the anger.
    And, in comparison to any other previous post-1949 period, China’s economy was indeed robust.
    Hell, it was booming beyond all expectation.

  14. #179
    Senior Contributor DOR's Avatar
    Join Date
    08 Mar 11
    Location
    London
    Posts
    2,467

    40 Years After Mao

    Forty years ago, on September 9, 1976, Mao Zedong died and China began its long road to recovery. The process was not easy, and required a coup d’état to remove the surviving supporters of the disastrous Great Proletarian Cultural Revolution. But, with the imprisonment of the Gang of Four, and the removal from power of their followers, the process began.

    When Deng Xiaoping was once again rehabilitated (in July 1977), China’s standards of living were no better than in the 1950s (for many, the 1650s as well). Foreign investment was nonexistent and international trade minuscule. Less than 18% of the people lived in cities, compared to more than 50% today.

    Not until the 1980s would bicycles, sewing machines and wrist watches – the “three things that go around” –become the highest aspiration consumers dared to dream of owning. Today, nearly every urban household has a washing machine, refrigerator, color TV, hot water heater, computer and telephone. In rural households, ownership of these indicators of prosperity are above 65%, and in many cases universal.

    Over the past 35 years (data prior to that are more problematic than usual), real economic growth has averaged 9.7% per annum, and 8.7% p.a. on a per person basis. When Mao was alive, agriculture represented more than twice the share of the economy as did mining, manufacturing and utilities combined. Now, the farming and fishing sector is one-sixth that of industry.

    China today is the world’s top consumer of aluminum, iron ore, copper, platinum, steel, nickel, zinc, lead, motor vehicles, coal, hydroelectricity, chickens, tobacco, meat, beer, mobile phones, Swiss watches and rare earth metals, among other things. Its consumers are relatively new to international brands, which levels the playing field somewhat between top brands and second tier labels (KFC beat McDonald’s in China).

    It is no exaggeration to define the post-Mao era as the greatest increase in standards of living for the largest number of people in all of human history. Measured by caloric intake, infant mortality, longevity, literacy, access to clean water and sewage or any of a myriad of other indicators, the process begun by Deng and his colleagues raised a larger share of the world’s population out of poverty than any other effort ever recorded. The process was not always smooth or easy, and many decisions taken along the way violate accepted notions of human rights, freedoms and fairness. But, the results cannot be denied.

  15. #180
    Military Professional
    Join Date
    06 Aug 03
    Posts
    29,353
    Quote Originally Posted by DOR View Post
    China was suffering mid-20s inflation in the winter of 1988-89. The solutions – cutting spending and credit growth – brought inflation down by the Summer of 1989, but at a price. Slashing student subsidies was a key part of the anger that emerged in the Spring. Credit growth slowed by half in the year to Q-3 1989. Inflation fell from 28.4% in Feb 1989 to 6.6% in Dec (if you believe the numbers).

    Throughout the first stage of reform (1980s), the economy repeatedly boomed and busted. Over and over. Each time, the economic managers readjusted their thinking and tried something different. In between, the political managers sniped at each other and their (economic management) subordinates.

    Liberalize.
    Over heat.
    Rein in.
    Over do it.
    Repeat.

    No, Tiananmen wasn’t planned. But, economic developments and policy responses played a very important role in stoking the anger.
    And, in comparison to any other previous post-1949 period, China’s economy was indeed robust.
    Hell, it was booming beyond all expectation.
    Slave wages! There has to be a give. The Iron Rice Bowel was gone and slave wages took it's place.
    Chimo

Thread Information

Users Browsing this Thread

There are currently 5 users browsing this thread. (0 members and 5 guests)

Similar Threads

  1. From Moscow to Beijing: A journey from past to future
    By Luke Gu in forum East Asia and the Pacific
    Replies: 56
    Last Post: 19 Oct 09,, 13:05
  2. How China Loses The Coming Space War
    By HKDan in forum East Asia and the Pacific
    Replies: 19
    Last Post: 02 Oct 09,, 07:23
  3. The most Neglected front of WWII
    By beansprout in forum The World Wars
    Replies: 80
    Last Post: 08 Sep 09,, 19:03
  4. The Pentagon Plays Its China Card
    By Deltacamelately in forum East Asia and the Pacific
    Replies: 14
    Last Post: 21 Nov 08,, 04:21
  5. Top Ten Chinese Military Modernization Developments
    By oneman28 in forum East Asia and the Pacific
    Replies: 96
    Last Post: 23 Jun 08,, 07:49

Share this thread with friends:

Share this thread with friends:

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •