China Thread

#476
#476
Long-range projections (more than a decade hence) often aren't worth much. Is there much basis upon which to predict fertility rates 25 years from now?

In the 1970s, when people where fearful of the population bomb, were many people predicting negative population growth that we now see in Europe?
 
#477
#477
Velo Vol said:
Excuse
Excuse
The currency move is real news.
Click to expand...

UT football is never an excuse. And to me, honestly, a lot of the finicial stuff goes over my head. I try to follow enough to recognize terms and have an opinion but I really don't know that much about it. And right now I don't have the time to dig for the explanations I need.
 
#478
#478
The coming population shift in china is one of the things that really intrigues me and has me paying attention. It's a social engineering experiment the likes the world has never seen, and I should live long enough to see the fallout.

I am pretty sure most developed nations have negative growth rates. So the US being there doesn't worry me too much.
 
#479
#479
Velo Vol said:
Long-range projections (more than a decade hence) often aren't worth much. Is there much basis upon which to predict fertility rates 25 years from now?

In the 1970s, when people where fearful of the population bomb, were many people predicting negative population growth that we now see in Europe?
Click to expand...

The field of population statistics and prognostications is relatively new to the scene. Yes, it probably has some problems, but I also think it can tell us quite a bit about where we're going.

Who knows. China may have 3 billion people by 2100, despite a deficit in females, and the US may contract to 250 million.

You just never really know.

Edit: In a rush, I initially misread your post, Velo. Sorry for any confusion.
 
Last edited:
#480
#480
LouderVol said:
i just wonder why China wants in? they have an alternate system already, IMF has largely been a net negative for the countries, and if they are wanting the dollar to go down it seems like this is the result they wanted. curious as to why China wants in.

as far as the IMF goes, seeing china have its own system raises eyebrows, and seeing a nation that recently went through a drastic economy troubles would have me hesitating as well. and as far as US over China, pretty sure the US is already in, so there is no comparison unless the US was up for renewal or something????
Click to expand...

I can take a stab at this, but when it comes to international banking intermingled with politics, I don't think anyone knows what the plans are. Even the "experts" are guessing IMO.

China, as an exporting economy has a problem with their currency constantly being pressured to increase in value. If they lift the peg to the dollar, the cost of their exports goes up... killing their economy. They don't want the reserve currency because of the Triffin paradox, which essentially means the country with the reserve currency has to run a negative trade balance. I think they're trying to get their currency into the SDR basket because they believe the SDR would make a good reserve currency.

If the IMF wasn't planning to let China into the SDR, it would have told them to wait until the next currency review 5 years from now. Instead, the IMF told them to wait 6 months. Maybe they're giving the US six months to get our crap together. Congress has still not passed the 2010 quota reforms that were part of the Basel II agreements. But like I said, who knows what they're planning.
 
#481
#481
red butler said:
I can take a stab at this, but when it comes to international banking intermingled with politics, I don't think anyone knows what the plans are. Even the "experts" are guessing IMO.

China, as an exporting economy has a problem with their currency constantly being pressured to increase in value. If they lift the peg to the dollar, the cost of their exports goes up... killing their economy. They don't want the reserve currency because of the Triffin paradox, which essentially means the country with the reserve currency has to run a negative trade balance. I think they're trying to get their currency into the SDR basket because they believe the SDR would make a good reserve currency.

If the IMF wasn't planning to let China into the SDR, it would have told them to wait until the next currency review 5 years from now. Instead, the IMF told them to wait 6 months. Maybe they're giving the US six months to get our crap together. Congress has still not passed the 2010 quota reforms that were part of the Basel II agreements. But like I said, who knows what they're planning.
Click to expand...

to your second paragraph, hasn't china been operating under the dollar model already? And if I have read correctly SDR isn't actually a true unit of money, even more so than the ones and zero based we have. Its a ratio, so how is it a reserve? I can understand wanting their yuan to be part of that ratio, seems like that could swing things a bit towards them, and I guess in international economics a few percentage points is a lot of money.

didn't know we were up for renewal (or whatever). I probably spend too much time looking outward.
 
#482
#482
LouderVol said:
to your second paragraph, hasn't china been operating under the dollar model already? And if I have read correctly SDR isn't actually a true unit of money, even more so than the ones and zero based we have. Its a ratio, so how is it a reserve? I can understand wanting their yuan to be part of that ratio, seems like that could swing things a bit towards them, and I guess in international economics a few percentage points is a lot of money.

didn't know we were up for renewal (or whatever). I probably spend too much time looking outward.
Click to expand...

Like I said before, I think even the "experts" are guessing about what the central banks are planning. Only the insiders know and they aren't telling. This is my take based on listening to several "experts"

1. Yes, China has been working under the dollar model... the whole world has been, due to the fact that the dollar has been the most stable currency and the US the largest economy. China pegs their currency to the dollar, some countries float their currencies. This gives China an advantage in exports (because their labor is always cheaper) but it also causes issues because the balance of payments has been so off-balance that they've accumulated over $1T of US debt. That may have been fine as an investment, before the financial crisis, but since then China has seen the US create trillions of dollars to prop up the banks in a very short time.... essentially devaluing that investment.

2. The SDR is a basket of currencies that can be issued by the IMF (the Greek bailout and Ukraine aid has been issued in SDRs). As a basket of currencies, it should be more stable than any single currency. Think of it more like the gold standard instead of what we have today. A central bank's currency would be valued against the number of SDRs they have in reserve instead of the amount of gold in a vault.

3. The US isn't really up for renewal in the IMF. In fact we pretty much run it since we have the largest percentage of the vote on the board. Congress hasn't passed the 2010 quota reforms agreed to at the Basel II meeting. The reforms give higher voting percentages to the emerging economies (along with some other things, like higher capital reserve requirements for banks). I don't know why they haven't, because there hasn't been a public debate. Maybe Congress simply likes the status quo.
 
Last edited:
#483
#483
red butler said:
If the IMF wasn't planning to let China into the SDR, it would have told them to wait until the next currency review 5 years from now. Instead, the IMF told them to wait 6 months. Maybe they're giving the US six months to get our crap together. Congress has still not passed the 2010 quota reforms that were part of the Basel II agreements. But like I said, who knows what they're planning.
Click to expand...

They are kicking the can down the road trying to run out the clock.
 
#486
#486
Not sure if real or fake.

CM0Yk3vWsAAWw7y.jpg:large
 
#489
#489
#491
#491
Velo Vol said:
It's possible, but doesn't make economic sense with the enlarged Panama nearby.
Click to expand...

been saying it this whole thread. China is trying to make shovel ready jobs, and eventually (maybe this is part of it) they weren't going to be able to outgrow their issues at home. they were using these worldwide projects to pump up their home economy and there for be able to pay for these projects. now that the home economy is trying to fix itself I bet you see a lot of these projects get put on hold. and again China has had a lot of these false start and abandoned projects.
 
#492
#492
Remember this?

[youtube]https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=OTSQozWP-rM[/youtube]

Anyway, an argument that it's bunk.

Interesting.

The odds are against China ever becoming a rich nation by U.S., European, or Japanese standards. Since World War II, South Korea is the only large country to get rich for the first time.
Click to expand...

061715china.jpg
 
#499
#499
  • Like
Reactions: 1 person
New posts
You must log in or register to reply here.

VN Store



Back
Top